I'd get some more expensive crackers this year if I were you.

Looks that way.

Lesson 3 - don't make a fool of yourself with statements that do not stand up to scrutiny.

Re lesson 3:

1 - When your lot went bust, Glover seemingly said he would pay off SOME creditors (I gather it was maybe 10%, and NONE of the £750k debt due to HMRC), so - within days - the RFL mitigated the 6 points to 4. I understand well before Glover actually paid anyone.

2 - When OKB went into administration, Moore & co had stated they intended to settle with the creditors. Subsequent documentation and statements strongly indicates that the intent was to settle with ALL the trade creditors. And I have seen nothing to suggest the RFL knew nothing of this. Indeed, I was personally told this was the intention ON THE DAY. HMRC were owed about 1/3 of what you lot owed HMRC, btw. Yet the RFL took several weeks, not days, and then deducted 6 points ANYWAY - even though material had been issued stating creditors would be paid.

3 - After the administration, BB2014 did not spend a CENT on players. So, can you explain what "We paid off some of our creditors rather than spending it on players" means? In the context of why you were decucted only 4 points, days after the adminstration order? Whereas bulls were deducted 6 points, weeks after?

Dont stand up to scrutiny? You are the one still banging on after an independent review has gone against everything you have been saying.
How did the independent panel view all your misgivings? By ratifying the RFLs ban.
I.e they have acted accordingly and you had no proof to the contrary.
Seriously you need to take time out, because you and a few others are starting to embarass yourselves and your other supporters who can accept some reality.

No I didn't if I had I'd be replying to myself



What I replied to is your accusation that Wakefield fans are paranoid. You then follow that up with your own paranoia - have you got any of this yet.

The Tribunal were asked to rule on whether Force Majeure applied or not. Green's statement that they determined there was not any evidence to rule on is the decision they made, not whether 6 points was the right penalty. They had a yes/no question to answer, if they answered yes, the discussion MAY have gone to what was the appropriate penalty, although in my view if they had ruled a Force Majeure situation existed, it would have been all 6 back.

Yep but remember we are the paranoid ones not the [i[size=150world owes us a living because we used to be good[/size[/i Bulls.

I've never seen a human being more in denial than Adybull, it's quite sad.

Think that scenario only exists in your mind, please show me any public documentation to back up this claim - thanks.

In fairness, IIRC Wakefield were shafted to an extent by the RFL's complicity in the Crusaders fiasco that was happening around that time, which resulted in their agreed repayment plan with HMRC being cancelled and a demand made for the full amount immediately.

And I agree, if they hadn't bought the lease (to reinforce, they bought an asset, they didn't hand over cash as a gift), the outcome would have been very different, would it have been better, who the f**k knows! As in comedy timing is everything, and probable relegation along with new promotion play off system means our timing stinks!

Kinleycat: Just answer my question, please?

All you have said there has no bearing whatsoever on what you stated, to explain why you were deducted 4 points and Bulls were deducted 6. Just answer the question please?

Btw, Green has stated that, far from ratifying the RFL's decision in the face of evidence supplied by the Bulls, the panel actually ruled that there was not enough evidence for a case for appeal on the grounds of [iforce majeure[/i. Nothing to do with the level of the points deduction.

I wonder how many other people, over the years, who have fought for answers so they can see if justice has actually been done, were told - by people in whose interest it was - to just "accept some reality"? You lot went apoplexic when there were suggestions that an injustice might be done across YOUR club. But you would deny the right of supporters of THIS club to continue to question what has happened, absent any definitive proof that an injustice has not been done? Hypocrite.

Rumours eh, we heard that your club were getting all the six points' back, just goes to show that you should not listen to all you hear on the Bulls board.

At the same time as you show me any public documentation to demonstrate anything different to what I said.

The real emotion in this debate is caused by promotion & relegation. Seen lots of notes about Cas, Hudds, Wakey going down and surviving, even prospering, along with notes about Union teams, but in those days to get back in the top league, you needed to be the best team amongst your peers (or win a play off game). The system for 2015 is so stacked against the top 4 from SL2, you also have to be a better team than the worst 4 in SL1, who coincidentally, can pay players substantially more than you're allowed to and employ more overseas players. Well we come back stronger, personally don't see how it can happen over 7 games.

I have intended to give Bradford Bulls £1m and here is the subsequent documentation to prove it


[url=https://imageshack.com/i/muu66kj[/url

How much is £1m poweds?

I know we beat you twice, but god knows how, there's only been 2 games where we had fire in our bellies (Cats in cup and Warrington in league) all season, what makes you think we can start now!!

Someone tell this muppet that the statements to which I referred were in:

1 - The Administrator's proposals report

2 - The letter the administrator sent out to creditors.

Note how, true to form, when they cannot carry an argument they resort to derision?

Commiserations guys. Keep fighting, plenty of games left and who knows - there could be a few more twists and turns yet on the rollacoaster.

Sorry I have a blocked nose today due to the hayfever

Is that wording what you meant to say? Anyway, whatever the question means, at the first fans forum after OK quit, someone asked why BB2014 had been set up and was told it was nothing sinister, the club would be continuing as before, and Robbie Paul went to great pains to repeat "we are NOT going into administration".


They didn't pay the agreed price for the shares and are being sued. What "financial issues" do you suggest they could have "known nothing about"?


Not so, BB2014 were accepted by the RFL. It was however on terms including 6 points deduction and special measures. BB2014 stated they withdrew because they had (a) been seriously misled (b) were not prepared to accept remaining in special measures.






Only an idiot would believe that BB2014 withdrew BEFORE the decision on sanctions was made. Why on earth would they do that? Whatever dates any announcements were made it must be beyond any sensible dispute (thus not excluding you, of course) that the chicken of the decision prompted the egg of the withdrawal. Your implication that BB2014 withdrew the day before they would have known of the decision is frankly nuts.

Several pages after your most pompous post, you now make your most ironic. Keep it up!



BTW my views on Adeybull are exactly like my view on my countrys' First Minister Mr Alex Salmond. I am deeply embarrassed that the two of them seem to think that they are representing the views of a group and keep pedalling a load of boring claptrap.

Just like Mr Salmond does not represent the majority view in Scotland over the Independence debate, Adeybull does not represent the majority of Bradford fans. I just wish he could be voted off.

He is, as usual, lying and presenting his lie as fact. No change. At least everybody else knows the Bulls were on half money of the other clubs for 2 years, so what the troll's motivation for this strange claim is, I couldn't even begin to guess.

Of course, the troll insists on sworn statements and copies of notarised documents evidencing everything anyone else ever says - yet never backs up its own weird claims with anything. Wonder why?

Thank you. You hadn't made a post reiterating your personal issues with another poster for at least 5 minutes, and so I had almost forgotten that you don't like him. Please could you repeat the above, or something similar, at least once a page, as it isn't fair to leave the thread just to discuss the subject at hand, we need more sniping.