Yes but its by the Bulls isn't it. Apologies in advance if I'm wrong.

The Salford Scene (John Gilbert Reds on here, I believe) is suggesting on twitter that we could potentially face a 20 point reduction.

Go back to supporting Wigan.

You've contributed absolutely nothing on here for months. Since the last 'wobble in fortunes' the Club went through in fact. You're a tiresome, horrible individual with no redeeming features that I can see from the guff that you post on here.

I've read the article and it's basically just Bradford having a pop about nothing that really has anything to do with them. There's some irony that it should come from Bradford, but that's another story...

If true the RFL have a dilemma. If 20 pts deducted now then Reds simply focus on the Challenge Cup in pt 1 of season and then start the 8s with a clean slate. RFL could wait and see if the reds drop to the middle 8s THEN deduct the points condemning the reds to certain relegation.

The suggested delay could be due to no case to answer or more cases to answer.

This is exactly what I thought when I heard that a points deduction could happen. The RFL will need to think carefully about any points deduction these days unless the team are pretty much certain of getting past the 0 mark. If not then I'd have to suggest that they start with the amount of points they have on the board if deducted.

As per us, middle 8's make it redundant anyway. Your season would be like ours last year, but a few matches earlier. All you lose is a pop at the top eight and crowd revenue.

Unless Bulls are clamouring to take your place, and that is why they are angry, because the delay (if there is one) has made it impossible.

So someone from Bradford has dragged up an old case where Salford were already found not guilty in a court of law? Hardly HUGE. Hardly bringing the game into meltdown or rocking it to the core, as suggested on Twitter yesterday. Absolute bobbins.

Koukash returns fire at Green www.loverugbyleague.com/news_205 ... green.html

Koukash returns fire at Green www.loverugbyleague.com/news_205 ... green.html

Its whats come out from the case thats the issue. As quoted regarding Tony P he had a 2nd contract for around 40k paid by a company. If this is the case for all players and not declared on cap(if it was why the need). As an example of this. Say 25 players all paid 40k by a 2nd contract could be a breach of 1mill. Could also explain why players are chasing club for money.

Courts do not investigate Salary Cap issues. It could take the RFL a while with the myriad of MK companies that have been started up and dissolved in the past 2/3 years. I assume they will also have to speak to all the players, especially the ones who have moved to a lower salary despite being offered more to stay at their previous club.

The RFL must come out and say that everything is hunky dory and they have not found anything untoward or announce the conclusion to the investigation along with punishments before the new season starts.

i'd think that there are certain other clubs watching this rather nervously, there are a couple of current SL squads who must have creative accounts much along the same lines we apparently have.

I might be wrong but I've read numerous times that the salary cap is a gentlemans agreement at best and if challenged really wouldn't stand up in a court of law, guess this is something the RFL/SL would be most worried about.

The Salary Cap isnt "a gentlemans agreement" - its a terms and conditions to the application for a club to join a competition run by the RFL. In the exact same way you agreed to a set of rules when you registered an account on RLFANS, Salford agreed to follow a set of rules when they applied to the RFL to run a club in the SL for 2016.

Now, whether those rules are abiding the laws of the land is the real argument. Lawyers would love to take on the case because the "restraint of trade" argument can go round and round in circles for years and years and years (meaning their fees go up and up and up) - simple fact is it isnt, because any club can go out and pay £2m for GI if they wanted, they simply couldnt enter him into the competition. The RFL could impose any arbitrary rule on how clubs compose the squad they register to play in their competition.

Any claim against the RFL for their rules will be met with a simple answer "don't apply to compete in our competition then".

Isn't that the basis for any club being a member of the RFL. If you don't agree to abide by the ruling bodies' Operational Rules then you will not be accepted as a member, or you can be suspended from membership if already a member. I don't think this has anything to do with courts of law.

I was just talking generally in relation to the RFL and operational rules and not directly referring to your club.

As for your 'grasping at straws', Marwan has stated he has been co-operating with the RFLs investigation since October, so that would suggest that A) there is an investigation and B) it is not yet concluded. There is also no rumour or hearsay re Puletuas employment by 2 MK companies. If there is no issue for the RFL then that is what they will announce. No one knows what has gone on other than what was made public in Puletuas hearing, and it clearly has raised questions regarding the business side of things.

If nothing is forthcoming from the RFL then unfortunately because of the information that is in the public domain some people will speculate etc etc