Oh jeez.

From the threat of liquidation to a new Wembley of the North in one paragraph. Can't we just have a quiet couple of years?

Welcome aboard, Mr Khan and thank you.

People keep quoting the Rangers situation but Scottish law isn't the same as English/Welsh law, so maybe, even if the situation is identical, the law surrounding it may not be.

Wasn't it also the case that Rangers have moved into another competition and players are signing for clubs under different FA's rather than the SPL, Bradfut players will be trying to move to another club under the same "Governing Body" if they stay in SL. If the Bulls move to the Championship the SL contracts (for those that are still in contract) are void.

I would have thought, though don't actually know, that all the divisions in Scotland would be affiliated to the Scottish FA?

Got to say, I don't know the difference in the relationship between the RFL/SLE and Scottish Premier and the SFA - you can throw in the Premiership and the FA in England too. I think the biggest difference between the two sports though is that there is a salary cap difference between SL and the Championship, whereas, I believe that Rangers can continue to pay the same wages in any division, assuming they can afford it of course, so can keep any and all their star players they have the cash to pay.

The only thing that Mr Green (rangers new owner) was complaining about was that the players decided to not transfer their contracts 2 weeks after the newco had agreed to transfer the contracts under TUPE rules.

He was stating that if players wanted to become free agents they should have made that clear within 48hrs.

The time frame seems to be what the solicitors are arguing about. I don't know who has the right of it.

The players who have left have scattered to several English & European clubs.

FIFA/UEFA & the SFA are discussing what to do about registrations for some of them (whose clubs have not paid anything)

Some clubs (Everton for example) have paid a nominal transfer fee just to keep themselves out of this mess.

I don't know how much of this will apply to Bulls players & the RFL.

That part about "mini-licensing" is interesting; who else would be in the mix? Faz, Leigh & Fev?

The Bradford Super Dome has a nice kind of ring to it

or maybe the Bollywood Bowl

Not going to happen , those clubs along with Toulouse will have already refused to accept a 2 year only licence , stipulating a guaranteed 5 year tenure as the only option , thats why you are back in SL , staying there now will be the problem

Or maybe the Bradford Begging Bowl.

I said it wouldn't [ilook[/i good. The [iperception[/i would be that if there was money available then maybe the buyout offer should have been higher and more compensation offered to creditors. How justified that might be is another thing altogether and would depend on details I don't have and TBH aren't that interested in.

Yeah a business man paying more than he had to for something. Yep that would make him look really good.