Like I said in an earlier post, these consultancy firms are often very quick off the mark in going to law as they have no other levers. If what redshed says is right, then clearly the club should fight their corner - if SG cannot show a purchase order for the work allegedly done then they cannot expect payment - simple.

So who is in the right here? Will we ever find out?

If that is the case then the club are justified in not paying and fighting this order?
I don't fully understand what a winding up order is but if the club were found guilty and wound up would that then allow someone new to walk in with no debts attached? if so could possibly be a blessing in disguise and make the possiblity of buying the club a much more attractive proposition.

While anything of this nature is not good news, there is no immediate danger of Salford going out of business. As aluded too, the amount is small in relative terms and in general terms (without direct reference to this case) any dispute can relate to a principle or refusal to pay based on the nature or quality of the work provided, as well as an inability to pay, or any number of other reasons.

Not quite as straight forward as that, any new company would have to apply for a rugby league licence depending on which division they applied for. it would then be up to the other clubs to vote them that licence, before they can even operate as a club. Yes the debts would be clear but the new company would need to build trust within the RL community.So whilst it could be a good thing it can also be bad.

what happend to the holdsworth money?

You ain't going to be wound up for a small amount. I can't see how the club can be confident of winning the case if that was so we would not got to a winding up petition in the first place as they would have sorted it by now. The must have a case against club or wind up order would not have been granted.

Good grief!!! There is NO winding up order granted. All that has happened is that Steur Greggson have had a winding up PETITION filed - if it goes to a hearing - 29th October THEN the court will decide. Anyone CAN file a petition if they pay the fee to the court. Many years ago I once issued a winding up petition for The Royal Bank of Scotland over an unpaid invoice - what it does do is concentrate the mind because if you don't respond then it is assumed that you are in the wrong and you just get wound up.

To say "you ain't going to be wound up for a small amount" is completely wrong - you can be wound up for any amount IF the debt is shown to be genuine and unpaid.

You have to agree it doesn't look good. Your correct that the amount is irrelevant other than just pay it or agree an out of court settlement. The worst part of all of this is that this is a club sponsor taking this action.

Yes of course I agree it doesn't look good - but just let's suppose that the earlier post regarding submission of invoices for un-ordered services is correct and the SG lot are just playing the bully - it may be in the club's interest to go to court on the 29th and argue their case - who knows?

Martyn Sadler tweeted me back saying there will be some key developments in the next few days, to which I replied good or bad. His reply was very non committal saying it all depends what happens in the next few days.

If this was Facebook I would like this comment!

If there is to be a takeover and a financial reconstruction,this could just be a tactical move.
Odd,if its a small amount,that he's appointed specialists to deal with it.

Hope that you guys can sort this out.

A very genuine best of luck.

The way I see it, no matter who is right or who is wrong, the club is once again in deep .
I have defended the club many times but we cannot keep defending our club at all costs, the club is f....d & just maybe this is the spark needed one way or other.