Don't see why. Wigan survive quite well without it?

this is what should happen - a clean slate withot developers looking to make a quick (or even sloe) buck.

Someone e mailed this to me

Its 16/1 the field ... and there off!

Its Caisley taking an early lead with ABC coming up on the inside
rails... Bradford Council jumping up and down,with No Money making up
the rear. They're now taking the canal road turn and the next fence is
the 'Wastefield' ditch ... oh and Caisley is a faller ... ABC now in the
lead, but some stray Bulls in the field next to the racecourse causing
concern to both runners and riders ... Eric Pickles is still near the
back, but remember he's carrying a few stone overweight and unlikely to
make the chase. They're now going through broadway and the bookies are
having a field day with Retail Competition having unseated his rider and
Charity Shops taking over the lead. Its looking like No Jobs is going to
stay the course though and Benefit Lad is looking good. Guilfoyle is
into the final furlong now, but it seems the rest of the field can't
quite see through the fog at the moment and its not clear if all the
field are heading for the same winning post.

Its neck and neck but the winner is Guilfoyle, who had nothing to lose
and picks up a big winners cheque."

quite simple really, the lease is sold to them with a specific condition that the ground has to remain a fit venue to host rugby at a super league level for a certain lebgth of time ( say at least 10 years or more..??). Failure to comply with it and the lease reverts back to Bradford Council. So they can develope it how they wish as long as Rugby league at top level can still be played there. If they can't agree to this then they obviously want Odsal for some other purpose than playing Rugby

That would be the ideal solution. But it might come down to a choice between the developers making a buck or no club at all.

Except the RFL buying the lease out stating that Odsal is an Iconic RL stadium and nothing else so they have backed themselves into a corner and probably a mess here.

Had a good laugh at this until I realised it was a factual statement

Spot on IMO. The council could not let a situation happen where Akbars or whoever ended up in sole control of Odsal without it being primarily a Rugby Stadium. Forget the audit committee they would no doubt end up in court under some form of competition rules.

If the lease were to be transferred back to the club it would be on the proviso that it was a Rugby Stadium otherwise the lease would become null and void allowing the Council to find the most advantageous bidder for the land.

don't have a problem with developers having the lease as long as it's developed with a top class rugby league stadium as part of the developement if it forms part of the rescue plan.

The Council HAS let the situation happen. The Council is an expert at letting situations happen. Our hole in the ground is but a part of the scandal of its shameful portfolio of holes in the ground, though it is the longest running.

You seem to somehow forget the Council's prime responsibility for why we are ultimately here. For many decades, the Council has spurned chance after chance after chance to develop Odsal into a stadium for the 21st century, and they have scandalously and miserably failed time after time.

Yes the short term blame for the insolvency of course lies with the recent boards, but if we had had a competent Council then we would already have had a superb stadium in which to play, an asset to us, the other users, and the city, instead of a massive drain on resources, and very likely we would never have got into this scenario.



The administrator can transfer the lease (ie the Bulls' underlease) to whoever he wants. The terms that are in it are the terms that are in it. People are getting confused with the head lease (Council / RFL) and the underlease. It is the head lease that we hear ABC want back, from the RFL. Again, what provisos and conditions are in it are those that are in it, the Council could not change them.

The soap opera keeps on rolling - so next week is our latest 'last game'
Suppose I'm glad that in Potter's terms 'the fat lady hasn't sung yet', but really feel like we're

seems clear that the head lease allows development/ground improvements i.e. we added coral stand under that lease. wonder if underlease only allows use of the ground but not improvement?. If ABC want to make physical modifications to coral stand to make it more useful on non-game days (improving/extending kitchen facilities springs to mind) or want to add a new building (restaurant where old clubhouse is) then that would explain why their getting head lease back is a integral part of any deal, although it doesnt explain their not just clarifying that to the RFL.

obviously there must be something in their plans for Odsal that they know the RFL wouldn't accept, so they can't give the clarification needed

Bradford has been blessed with a spectacularly inept and visionless council for decades, but to suggest it is their responsibility to provide a state of the art stadium for a professional sports club is going a bit far. The only redevelopment plan which stood a realistic chance of coming to fruition was torpedoed by the then government. Yes the council as ultimate owners can certainly help facilitate developement but they have no duty to fund it.

That definitely has a ring of [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truthinesstruthiness[/url to it.

Guessing by Elliott Whiteheads tweets they haven't been paid today as yet.

Whilst I don't necessarily disagree, sometimes blaming the council is an easy way out.

We at Saints blamed the council time after time for stadium plans stalling and falling away, what it took was a man with determination, drive and nouse to make it happen and the council support followed.

I don't think Bradford Council have been turning town viable development opportunities time after time, and this suspicion is not helped by the way the club itself appears to have been run in the past - I'm not sure I trust that those guys were putting together particularly compelling business cases?

All the things I read about Odsal development were always massively ambitious pie in the sky developments, rather than a seemingly rational assessment of what the club needs and how it can reasonably be delivered.

Andy Wilson, under the 'Roughyed' moniker had this say on Set of Six blog

"evening all. been off today, just seen the latest offering from pr company working for bradford administrators. don't trust a word they say anyway, as you've probably gathered, but they're now blatantly playing the race card, or rather gary tasker is, which makes me even more suspicious. it would be great to have bradford's asian community heavily involved in the club, but i'd want to be sure there weren't a few former directors involved too, if you know what i mean - especially given this determination to buy back odsal".

Accusing Tasker of playing the 'race card'?

According to Sky Sports News Brendan Gulifoyle says the ABC Consortium represent "the only hope for a Bulls future"

Been quite a variation in Mick's and Gulifoyle's accounts of what's been happening these past few weeks.

To be fair, they are playing "a" race card. All the reports are about meeting with a group of asian Bradford businessmen, which is a bit odd. It's not like they would say they were meeting with a group of white British businessmen would they? What does that description add? They're a group of businessmen regardless.

Payday is the 14th of the month. It would therefore appear in accounts early Monday morning.

RFL only had meeting that cleared releasing the sky money last night IIRC so would expect time for bank transfer from RFL->bulls->players to mean they probably won't see it in their accounts til monday at earliest TBH

true but its normal practice if payday falls on a weekend/bank holiday that you get paid the last working day before. Although I expect it to not reach players accounts til monday for reason in my post.

If you read what guilfoyle actually says it mentions he's 'focused' on ABC bid in at least one report. He doesnt actually come out and say there are no other bids.

When a payday falls on a weekend the date is brought forward not put back. So today would have been the day unless otherwise agreed. It may well be that the pay won't hit the accounts whilst monday because of meetings with the rfl etc but i think the players would like to have been told that rather than having to chase it up themselves. Seems the lines of communication have broken again. Maybe they are all on O2.