you mean the "scumbag administrator" that, in the process of making sure you had a club to keep following, was just doing his job?

he could have sold players, and then you wouldn't have been viable as a going concern.

Hope it's a good game tonight, safe journey if you're going.(all fans)

rlA good and honest assessment from one of our best last weekrl

And pretty much how many fans saw it and called it on here. PG should stick with last week's halves and start with Azza. If we implement the improvements up front as per the above article the halves then have the responsibility to cash in. The forwards have been out muscled two games in a row and I'd like to think that they wouldn't want that happening a third time.

This one has been done to death, but it looks like still not yet enough.

By sacking all BUT the playing staff at the start of July, the joint administrators effectively guaranteed that, unless there was some party ready and able to bid for the assets almost immediately, there would NOT be a club to follow. Tell me ANY other club placed into administration where that happened? At the time, it was widely assumed by many, rightly or wrongly only those involved will know, that there must be such a party waiting to step in. And I think most people were very surprised when it did not happen. It was and remains pure speculation that the best-laid plans may perhaps have been upset by agencies external to the administration.

It was also widely discussed at the time, on internet forums and elsewhere, that the joint administrators were not actually able to sell players - because of a seeming undertaking by the other SL clubs. Although widely reported, unless this is confirmed as fact I guess it must likewise remain as speculation.

In the event, we have a club to follow because the coaching and key other staff (and Gary Tasker) volunteered to work without pay for two months, and were supported in so doing by the Bullbuilder Hardship fund which raised £29k for grants to them and their families. This had nothing whatseover to do with the joint administrators. Indeed, we worked hard to ensure they had no way of appropriating the money. That gave time for a new bid to be put together. Even then, by all accounts the club would have been liquidated at midnight had OK Bulls not completed the deal that eveninhg.

I have yet to speak to a single person, involved with the club, who can point to anything positive the joint administrators actually did. Conversely, many can point to decisions or statements that they believe made little sense, even in the strained circumstances. I am very familiar with the administration process, and I have to say this one seemed to proceed in a very strange manner to me - from what I could observe.

Maybe one day we will all get to better understand the truth of what really happened? Until then, I think pretty well all Bulls fans are just happy we still have a club to follow, albeit financially hamstrung by confiscated sky monies in the way no previous phoenix exiting insolvency has been treated.

what crap, the money wasn't confiscated, it was voluntarily forfeit.

I though this new guy had squillions of pounds anyway?

Again, absolutely agree. Shaun Berrigan was/is a world-class rugby league footballer. He just came to us at the wrong time and wasn't utilised correctly.

Voluntarily forfeit and then shared out between the other 13 clubs.

Don't think the new owners agreed to make every other club richer at their expense

It was hardly "voluntary". OK and Gerry Sutcliffe have made it clear it was what was required of them to be given the Licence. I can assure you, from discussions with both of them, that they would not have done this through choice. Who would? And there was no-one else known to be waiting in the wings at that point, and he had till midnight to agree or see the club liquidated. OK said recently though that he had not expected the money to be divided up amongst the other 13 clubs, so further widening the funding gap.

And OK owns two average-sized restaurants and a small hotel, that we know of. He certainly is not know as a man with great personal wealth, and is likely worth a tiny fraction of the likes of Davy or Pearson or Moran or McManus or Hughes. Personally, I suspect he'll rank below the likes of Glover and O'Connor but that is only my speculation.

Houghton has already been talking in the press about leading the team out tonight. No chance Heremaia will start and hopefully Houghton improves.

You sell your granny to stay in the club, promise everything and then complain when you get what you agree too?

Bradford didn't seem to be complaining when the Rugby league community was handing out the help, buying the stadium, offing donations and winners medals memorabilia etc.

If it is that much of a problem i'm sure Halifax, Fev or Leigh will swap places with you.

They seem to have short memories in Bradford.

Looks like Heremaia is likely to start at scrum-half, can't say I agree with that personally. Yes Seymour had a poor game last week but we need to give him and Holdsworth some time to form a partnership. Holdsworth missed the majority of pre season and the two of them only played around 20 minutes together in the 2 trial games, it's fair to say that you'd expect them to be rusty in the opening few rounds. We need some consistency at halfback, throwing Heremaia in at 7 every other week is going to do is no good whatsoever, and from what I've seen of Heremaia at scrum-half, he's no world beater. Theres no doubt he is an important player to us, but at hooker, interchanging with Houghton...not dictating play in the halves. He was outstanding last week at Headingley, playing in his natural position! Why move him from there? We would be weakening ourselves imo, and I think its a mistake from Gentle if he goes with this.

Although Bulls fans greatly appreciated the help from certain other clubs and fans, none of that helped the current owner. It kept the previous owners in situ a bit longer.

It was not "the rugby league community" that bought the stadium, it was the RFL. As an asset, and for a commercial rent. One of these days, I would not be surprised to find that the RFL is able to surrender the head lease for rather more than it paid for it. But time will tell there.

OK has not complained about the confiscation of funding. ANd we fans know we don't have to like it, we just have to live with it. It was a condition of getting the licence. The only thing he (and quite a few fans) have taken issue with is that the funds went to all the other clubs.

This debate seems to be degenerating into challenging one item after another of selective recollection or understanding. I have not seen my response to Standee's initial assertion refuted in any way, just attempts now to divert attention onto matters unconnected with the original asertion. As so often happens in the face of a robust defence. Little more to be gained by playing that game.

The game that matters anyway is on the pitch tonight., and with Leeds doing us no favours last week, and what is bound to be a vociferous home crowd, I'd say it remains a mighty big challenge for the visitors.

To be fair, no previous club exiting insolvency had received significant financial support prior to the transfer of ownership.

Actually he has, although more about where the funds have ended up rather than the fact of the confiscation per se.