Lulia get him signed we need a centre a.s.a.p mellers is a total plank of wooding joke ! Cockyne makes stuff hapoen the dulls will be in admin this week MARK MY WORDS AS I AM ALLWAYS CORRECT SIGN LULIA UP class act ! We need a centre quick time. He will do us for 3 years.

Rather look at ainscough for a wing spot and cockayne to move to full back tbh.

Wouldn't take many from bulls on todays showing but ainscough and maybe elima could add to the team.

I have yet to see what Mellars brings to this team, don't like picking any one player out but can someone tell me why he gets picked.

NGBC please remember that Mellars is not a quota player and Lulia would be. What I would be tempted to do is if Southern has done himself in for rest of season and he's wanting away end of season I would be tempted to de-register him leaving a cap space.

Im sure he played most of his rugby at crusaders on the wing, a la Pat Richards styleee!
I'd be tempted to try this option before binning a quota player on a three year contract, who is perhaps just played out of position.

Never mentioned binning Mellars as he could be a squad player. However recent turn of events at Bulls we should looking at options like this as a lot of Talent could become available at short notice. Would be tempted to use Mellars as a winger and have Cockayne as a full back.

Mellars is a winger not a centre, he scored for fun playing on the wing at Crusader's, its hardly his fault he's asked to play in the centre, but that won't stop the OP spouting his usual bilge about players' that does not fit into his personal thoughts' on how the game should be played.

That's quite an over statement there

I don't buy into the idea that Bradford players will be available in a massive free-for-all; the man steering that particular ship is a solicitor and will understand perfectly well how best to manage administration in such a way that he safeguards the players he wants to keep and offloads the ones he doesn't.

If they've had the green light from the RFL to do the newco shuffle, he's hardly going to allow them to emerge with a squad of players that will make them next season's Widnes; it's important to remember that our players were sold by the administrator to cover his own fees - that won't happen at Bradford.

Caisley won't be "manageing" the administration, the Administrator will - his job is to get the best deal for the creditors. If he wants to sell players, he will.

No player will have to stay with the Newco.

I understand your sentiments Bren, but this guy will still want his costs and although Administrators all have their own way of doing things and they will usually try and "help" the new owners, they still have certain obligations to fulfil and if there are "assets that can be used to pay certain debts and in this case the only assets that they have are the players.
Equally, as with the Glasgow Rangers situation, some players may not wish to stay with the new club and I think that in the circumstances, they will become free agents ?

The administrator is appointed by the creditors and his job is to ensure they are paid as much as possible after his own fee is paid. If he can realise value by selling players he will.

I understand the technicalities of it and I know what is *meant* to happen - the point I'm trying to make is that Mr Caisley is a slippery customer and I can't see him being powerless in all this.

Now - watch Bradford go into admin tomorrow and their players disperse all over SL in a puff of smoke - if you're going to be proved wrong, may aswell go the whole hog!

I'm with you on this
I think out of those options Mr Caisley has quite a bit of influence over all except the creditors option, which costs the creditors to instigate, only a "Large" creditor is likely to do that and I am making the presumption that the largest Bulls creditor will be HMRC, but if a deal is made in a "Pre-pack" (which is what I have thought has been happening since the start) then HMRC will stand back

Not as simple as that I'm afraid, there are good reasons to do it and good reasons not to.