Not ginger though.

Gareth Carvell is a very good signing, and I am delighted. Get Tuson in and our pack's shaping up OK.

Delighted with this welcome back Carvel, some grunt with pea and feka, if the halfs click we are shaping up a bit better not expecting top 4 but top 6 could be makeable now, bit of a transition year this I think

Thats the key bit for me, Carvell objected to the transfer and effectively resigned from his contract of employment

The constructive, unfair dismissal element is irrelivant unless Carvell was looking to make a claim against the Bulls which he isn't. If Bulls did change his conditions i.e reduce his salary that would just have lent further weight to his case.

Have you sent them their car back yet Gaz? Roll on Friday.....

That is the truth he was my coach at the time, loads went on even stuff that happened to Paul I don't agree with, but like people say its happened so move on.

Was jason crookes in it,assault of the earth,so to speak?

The end is nigh.

Oh great dipstick Deslawson is back on not sure I can stand all the intelligent posts we will get now.

HDM must be slow today

I informed you all at 1145 yesterday carvell was in the 19 man squad, and got shouted down for that ! Its a tough school.

Having just done some reading up on this it sounds like that is right on the TUPE front.

Reading the statement it sounds like Bradford are claiming he was contracted to the club rather than the parent company of OK Bulls but if the parent company went into administration then that means any companies they own also went into administration surely?

Not exactly. The Bulls club is not a legal entity and cannot go into administration. It's effectively a brand/product owned by OK Bulls and now owned by the newco. As such, their assertion that Carvell had a contract with the Bulls club and not the parent company is patent nonsense.

Thanks for clearing that up for me Kosh. Can't see a case for Bradford here myself.

Just seen an article that I saw yesterday that looks as if it's been reworded to say they're suing carvell whereas yesterday they were suing Hull FC. Seems like a total mess from the Bradford end and either way they can't have much of a case.

They have no case against FC and never did, much like we never had a case against Rovers when Cooke left. I very much doubt that they can build a convincing case against Carvell either - or at least not one that makes any commercial sense to pursue.

It's just bluster. Much like our threats following the Cooke fiasco.

They need to get some proper lawyers. Their so-called "HR experts" aren't even solicitors. They may be ok for dealing with employment tribunal claims but they can't handle this sort of litigation.

I'm sure that HUll FC have nothing much to worry about and doubt Carvell has either.