Sorry PopTart, but you're way off beam on this one.

All that the fans want is a fair and transparent system where ALL clubs are treated fairly.

This didn't happen at the time of the last Bulls debacle (remember the utter nonsense that was "saving an iconic stadium" from predatory forces) and this was on top of the Bulls being given a 3 year SL license, (which in part was down to sound finance))only to go pop within a matter of months.
And this has been followed by more unbalanced treatment.
MC informing the Wakefield fans, that if we entered admin then, we would be relegated and subsequently selling our top 5 players (excluding Kirmo) just to survive.
This was followed by the Bulls entering and coming out of admin just a couple of weeks before the start f the season AND stating that not only was their SL spot safe, but that there would be no points deduction (this comment was subsequently removed)
Personally, I couldn't give a damn what happens to Bradford, my only concern is for the game and in particular Wakefield Trinity and if the administrators are not both even handed and more importantly, publically seen to be even handed, then our game appears to be corrupt.
This appears to have been the case for much of the SL era, starting with the relegation of the bottom section of the top flight when SL started and followed by the mergers of Hudd/Sheff, Gateshead/Hull, the promotion of certain clubs instead of others etc, etc, ....I could go on.

The cynics amongst us still worry about the spectre of relegation and IF the doomsday scenario of Catalan and London finish in 13th & 14th this season, how many people would expect both clubs to go down ??

As I said at the outset, the problem is not directly with the Bulls, it is with the perceived unequal treatment.
There should be no favourites and if we are expanding the league, for the long term good of the game, then this should be made clear for all to see an not fudged and changed to suit which way the wind is blowing.

Rant over

by the end of the season, them stones should of been thrown now

we have been too honest for are own good and could of left us with a weaken side, last years team would of waltz this season away from the bottom, instead some of them players could come back to haunt our club,
we have still to gel with the new players lets cross fingers eh

just like to add that I don't fear the new system but I do this season as it will have adverse effect the season after

A lot of posters with very short memories on here. Whilst MC is doing a good job of straightening the pig's ear left by your last owner you cannot complain about Bulls playing with a team they cannot afford - WTW have done it all before and got the T-shirt to prove it.

and now the club is paying for it now!! are Bradford paying for it? not at the moment...

The thing is Wrencat, we weren't in a position for the RFL to help us like Bradford.
I did feel unfairly treated but equally that damage had been done by ourselves.

Same as lots of clubs helping out with gate receipts etc. Unfair possibly as we didn't get that support but did we ask?

Same as us having to sell Ferguson etc.........they don't seem to need but part of that is someone came in to buy them. It was ages before ours was sorted.


So please don't think I'm trivializing the problem. I just think Bradford have had the same issues and managed to handle them better.
No MC is here we seem to be more sensible and they seem to be on the edge of the cliff.

If when they go before RFL they get a deduction then so be it but no one in the know has said either way so I don't see how we can feel badly done to yet.

I'm usually not this controversial so maybe people know more info than I do.

And the Bull and Tiger support is not helping my case either.

But I want to get our house in order and leave them to theirs.

now you do surprise there after cas finishing in 13th place and still getting relegated so you was happy that there was one ruling for one and another for the other, that's not to mention the back handing help Wigan had that season

clarity and level playing field (that rules out fev and batley) that's all what the fans of the game want

Isn't your tea ready?

When we did it all before as you put it, we went into admin, we were punished and docked points. Like when the Bulls went into admin last time. They've done it again and we haven't, simple as that. MC did the right thing and started to live within our means, so I'm not sure what you're point is because I can assure you no ones got short mmeories round here.

Personally haven't really spoke about the Buls and I certainly don't want them kicked out of the league. All I want is Admin to carry the same punishment it has before and everything is al above aboard and fair to all clubs.

This is why some Wakey fans have started to get personal.
How many of last seasons top 6 players have Bradford sold to balance their books ???, now that is a short memory

I agree. Apply the rules fairly now and I have no problem

I'll help your case out then by disputing what you said there!

"Lots of clubs..."?

One club - Leeds - paid a proportion of their gate receipts (the amount paid by away fans, IIRC?) to the administrator. In mid-season. After the club had gone bust. Without which, the administrator said he would likely have shut the club down for good. Don't think you were ever in that situation?

Two other clubs - Wire and Hudds - paid about £10k in total (mostly from Wire) to our Supporters' Trust's Hardship Fund. This was used to pay coaching etc staff who had all been sacked by the administrators and were carrying on working for nothing. This enabled some limited donations to those guys to be made - still a fraction of what their normal salaries would have been. Don't thing you were ever in that situation? And pray you never are.

As always - and if the likes of Bren2k and their warped recollection of what actually happened don't like it, well there is only one version of the truth - all I seek to do is set the facts out and the record straight. However unpalatable the truth might be to those who would like to think it was otherwise.

Not putting you in that category, btw - far from it. I WOULD say that you have consistently been a voice of sanity and reason in a sea of distortion, misinformation and downright vitriol. But I realise that comments of that nature would destroy your credibility with most on here, so I won't.

So you agree that when Bulls went bust in 2012, we should only have been docked 4 points? Or maybe not had £1.3m Sky money confiscated, £100k of which came to your club?

Or that maybe you should have had £1.3m confiscated too?

No?

Well if the response is "our circumstances were different to Bradford's then" - and probably with full justification - then that's fine. They doubtless were.

But you surely cannot then object if anyone was to seek to apply a similar differentiation of circumstances now?