you said it in reply to Kosh asking "under which rule?"

james

Sorry, I should have explained it better.

IMO, any club entering administration should have their license revoked.

Bradford knew what was coming and they should have cut their cloth accordingly, they didn't. They overspent to try and compete, then they've been held up by the governing body until new owners are found and nobody (potentially) faces any punishment for it, except their creditors.
Why should people like Pearson & Hudgell underwrite debts while they try to make their clubs sustainable when they see this going on?

I'd hoped they'd survive and it appears they have, but I don't see why they should keep their license when financial prudence is an important factor in the whole system.

Even after it's been explained, it's still a ridiculous opinion.

Is that your argument against?

Completely agree

No.

It's such a poor and ignorant 'argument' that, quite frankly, isn't worthly of debate.

Ridiculous.

bradford should have to give us bateman and whitehead to punish them

Was told earlier that Hull have made a move for Sammut from Bradford.

Ah right, so you have no argument then? That's fine, I wasn't expecting you to be capable.

Sounds about right.

So to recap, your predictions are Tom Briscoe to Leeds and Jarrod Sammut to Hull FC?

No, i speculated that Tom Briscoe may have been the player that Andy Wilson was talking about as a major Leeds threequarter signing. A parent of a Skirlaugh under 8s player told me that Hull had made a move for Sammut. I havnt predicted anything.

Graeme Horne?

Which is odd, as I specifically asked "under which rule".

Opinions are great and all, but sports operate with rules. The rules have been followed.