Surely by enforcing its operational rules the RFL are protecting the integrity of the game...Bradford have received the max penalty for entering administration and the board and directors who allowed the situation to escalate have been removed.If they are allowed to stay in SL just because of their name and their recent history then the integrity of the game is compromised in my opinion. It will show the licence system to be just a boys' club for the ones on the inside.
Heh, I once accidently (honest!)found mah self in the middle of an FC/ KR flame war on another forum...By the way joe, Hull aren't a very good side they are a very average side. ;-)
Surely by enforcing its operational rules the RFL are protecting the integrity of the game...Bradford have received the max penalty for entering administration and the board and directors who allowed the situation to escalate have been removed.
I once accidently (honest!)found mah self in the middle of an FC/ KR flame war on another forum...
...never again :shock:
The two 'mergers' in the late 1990's and the decision to advance 2012 monies to a Championship club last October...plus a bit of lease buying and HMRC guarantor'ing inbetween.The RFL artificially kept Bradford afloat so that a buyer could be found. They have never done this with any other club to my knowledge.
The SL offer to the administrator achieved its purpose, which had nothing to do with sending a msg to Clubs outside of the Rugby Super League.Then the SL teams made an offer to buy them, again to keep them going so that a buyer could be found.All very philanthropic but also a sure fire way of telling the clubs outside of SL that their services aren't required and if the SL clubs see any value in you you'll be guarnteed a SL licence no matter what your business acumen is like.
I thought you were Hull but tbh, I'd forgetten which side...so I decided discretion was the better part of valour and hedged....:lol:I'm a Hull supporter joe ;-)
All teams DP?Merger money was available to all teams not just the chosen few.
I'm not sure...Acquiring part Leases has helped to secure a few Championship clubs...tho I suspect you are referring only to Odsal.Agree about the RFL buying grounds and leases though. A dangerous game that has, rightly so in my opinion, led to claims of bias.
Bit melodramatic there DP, the SL offer had no impact whatsoever on clubs currently below SuperLeague...All it suggested was that teh RSL clubs were determined the Bulls would see the season out.Yes the SL offer achieved it's aim but it's still sending bad signals out.
I think you'll find certain T&C's applied...What's RSL? The retired serviceman's league? A million pounds was available to any clubs who agreed to "merge".
Heh, what did I say about FC/ KR flame wars lol. It was down to more than KR's vote..the APC were pissed at clubs being denied promotion and totally blew the call...but you were right to say it wasnt a merger.Unfortunately it was never anything like a merger but a takeover (thanks to Barry Lilley, HKR chairman at the time who vetoed Hull FC dropping down into the NFP and forced them down the "merger" route).
Maybe it says the potential and abillity of the replacements is....limited.I'm aware the RFL also bought either the stadium or the leases at Keighley and Rochdale too. As I said a dangerous road to go down. Not melodramatic at all. Bradford have shown that they cannot fulfill the terms of the licence after less than one year yet still look like retaining their place at the top table. That to me says to the teams with ambition in the CC "don't call us and we won't call you".
How has the system been disregarded? Both Bradford and Wakefield were punished as per the operating rules.The SLE have a licence system that is totally disregarded if you are on the inside yet stringently adhered to if you are on the outside. Widnes were denied SLE status last time around due to them being in administration, exactly the same as Bradford have done but Bradford will still be in SLE come 2013 because the other SLE clubs want them there no matter how they run their business.
Pmpl, werent you the one decrying a lack of business acumen?Double standards
No sign of BODISGOD either saying that this is good news. f**king trolls.
Explain?I've been away so only seen this news. It is indeed great news, however the club should be forced into at least one year below Super League if this was purely based on competition fairness. Commercial ones usurp those obviously.
Explain?
Thanks BoD...no one has got away with anything. The ppl responsible for the situation at the Bulls have been removed and the Club sanctioned as per the op rules.I personally think the message that should be sent out is to keep your finances in order and not overspend. I don't think it's fair that a team can just overspend on their means (and you can argue about Harris ect till the day is long but they clearly spent more than they should have) and get away with it just because of a takeover.
I personally think the message that should be sent out is to keep your finances in order and not overspend. I don't think it's fair that a team can just overspend on their means (and you can argue about Harris ect till the day is long but they clearly spent more than they should have) and get away with it just because of a takeover.
Thanks BoD...no one has got away with anything. The ppl responsible for the situation at the Bulls have been removed and the Club sanctioned as per the op rules.
Not sure why you want to punish the new owners of the club (other than your union bias of course).
By 'step in' you mean buy the business from the previous owners who were making a hash of it...thats a good thing, isnt it?Spot on. Overspend, virtually give your season passes away to maintain five figure attendances and the illusion of a well run club. Let someone else step in and it's as if nothing has happened.
Aye, you do seem to forget a lot of things DP...Oops I forgot about the six point deduction. A real slap on the wrist in a league with no relegation.