I like Wakey v Cas slagging matches in threads I really do, but perhaps on a Bradford forum in a thread about Bradford we could give it a rest? Ta

Cas are still in front in the stadium marathon. However, they are now crawling with lead feet whereas Wakefield are now lacing up their new trainers ready for the sprint.

Unbelievable that The RL have final say choose what the clubs vote. It should be up to the clubs and their decision is final

If Bulls exit admin correctly they will remain in SL just like other cubs who have been in admin have done.

If they are liquidated and form a newco, the just like Rangers in Scotland all history of that club has gone and the new club has to start again.

Rangers have been voted out of the of the Scottish premier league by a vote of 10 - 2. one of those 2 clubs being rangers themselves and the other refusing to vote.

Its daft to even start assuming who the 5 RL clubs maybe because all will have their own reasons. Losing Rangers from the SPL could kill some teams but they still voted against. Celtic and Rangers are one of the biggest rivalries in the world but Celtic still voted against.

The rest of the Scottish football league are now going to decide which Division rangers will start in next season the 1st or the 3rd with the 3rd looking most likely.

The RL wont do themselves any favours if they go against the vote of the clubs, but as usual they'll probably do what they like.

In my opinion if Bradford are liquidated and form a Newco they should be demoted. Not because I think Fev should replace them but because its wrong to over spend be managed badly and get away with it.

I have read in this thread that fax made 20k profit , not sure if the OP had gotten mixed up but I know for certain Featherstone have made 20K profit. In a league where most teams bring between 50-100 away fans, its a fantastic achievement. Why should teams like Fev and Fax struggle to make a profit and develop youngsters while super league clubs spend money they haven't got buying crap aussies.

I'm curious about the difference then between liquidation and administration because both represent exactly that.

Doesn't it depend on what Sky vote?

Basically

When in administration an administrator is appointed to run the club until a buyer / further investment can be found or until the club can no longer operate. If its the latter then it will be liquidated and cease to exist.

Obviously if a buyer is found and they can agree a deal with all the creditors the Bull would exit admin still as Bradford Bulls. if the are liquidated then Bradford bulls in its present form would no longer exist and a brand new company would need to be formed.

I understand the difference between them. My point is that if demotion to a lower league is punishment for failure then why not do it for admin? Liquidation is admin plus a failure to attract a buyer within the necessary timescale. The club has already failed if it's got to the point of admin.

because the RL has already set that president by not demoting other teams who have entered admin, but choosing to dock points.

also if a team is liquidated then the new company is no longer that original team. therefor they should apply to join the league like any other new team would have to do

Well durgh!!

I believe the point that vbfg was [itrying[/i to make was that administration and liquidation both occur due to poor management and overspending. But you said that if we escape administration 'the right way' then we should stay in SL, but if we are liquidated, we shouldn't. So care to return to the drawing board and try again with the old 'having an opinion' thing?

Anyway, speaking of liquidation, haven't you got a flood to clean up?

yeah I misread what he posted but I think i have answered that now. Its obvious If liquidated bradford bulls no longer exists so the newco should start again. I suppose demoted is the wrong wording because there will be no team to demote



Flood????

So was there club votes to see if Wakefield and Celtic were allowed to remain in SL?

We weren't liquidated. We went into admin and were bought when in admin. We received the penalty for going into admin (which I note you haven't received yet) but the club never ceased to exist. A new owner simply took over from the old owner, sorted out by the administrator. In between, he lowered the outgoings of the club by dispensing of staff and some expensive players. You are hanging onto all of your players. If you liquidate, you cease to exist, and so I presume the clubs will decide whether to admit your fresh application for a new club.

For me, the difference is a bit technical and I would vote to keep you in.

(edited to make sense. note to self: don't post when drunk).

I think Cru for sure.

Not so. After the cru and wakey embarrassments RFL/SL changed the rules and all team signed up to it......punishment is 'unlimited'.

Quote ="Slugger McBatt"We weren't liquidated. We went into admin and were bought when in admin. We received the penalty for going into admin (which I note you haven't received yet) but the club never seemed to exist. A new owner simply took over from the old owner, sorted out by the administrator. In between, he lowered the outgoings of the club by dispensing of staff and some expensive players. I note that you are hanging onto all of your players. If you liquidate, you seek to exist, and so I presume the clubs will decide whether to admit your fresh application for a new club. For me, the difference is a bit technical and I would vote to keep you in.'" Neither have Bradford yet, but this report seems to suggest Bradford have forfeited membership of SL from entering administration, and even if Liquidation is avoided it would be for the RFL in consultation with other SL clubs.(I thinking the consultation as a vote here) www.sportinglife.com/rugby-leagu ... over-bulls I was just wondering.

Quote ="Slugger McBatt"We weren't liquidated. We went into admin and were bought when in admin. We received the penalty for going into admin (which I note you haven't received yet) but the club never seemed to exist. A new owner simply took over from the old owner, sorted out by the administrator. In between, he lowered the outgoings of the club by dispensing of staff and some expensive players. I note that you are hanging onto all of your players. If you liquidate, you seek to exist, and so I presume the clubs will decide whether to admit your fresh application for a new club. For me, the difference is a bit technical and I would vote to keep you in.'" Neither have Bradford yet, but this report seems to suggest Bradford have forfeited membership of SL from entering administration, and even if Liquidation is avoided it would be for the RFL in consultation with other SL clubs.(I thinking the consultation as a vote here) www.sportinglife.com/rugby-leagu ... over-bulls I was just wondering.

Quote ="Bulls4Champs"Neither have Bradford yet, but this report seems to suggest Bradford have forfeited membership of SL from entering administration, and even if Liquidation is avoided it would be for the RFL in consultation with other SL clubs.(I thinking the consultation as a vote here) www.sportinglife.com/rugby-leagu ... over-bulls I was just wondering.'" Yeah, reading that, the points are automatic but the clubs and RFL can decide whether anything else should happen. My only thing is that something different from the rules shouldn't happen. If the rules allow that, fine. Maybe the biggest player is the taxman, because don't creditors have to agree to a certain pence in the pound towards their outstanding liabilities, and if they don't, bang? Beyond that, the difference between being bought when in administration or starting again in the same place and doing the same thing seems more a matter for insolvency lawyers than a sport. Deduct the points, maybe six if you go bust completely, and carry on.

Quote ="Bulls4Champs"Neither have Bradford yet, but this report seems to suggest Bradford have forfeited membership of SL from entering administration, and even if Liquidation is avoided it would be for the RFL in consultation with other SL clubs.(I thinking the consultation as a vote here) www.sportinglife.com/rugby-leagu ... over-bulls I was just wondering.'" Yeah, reading that, the points are automatic but the clubs and RFL can decide whether anything else should happen. My only thing is that something different from the rules shouldn't happen. If the rules allow that, fine. Maybe the biggest player is the taxman, because don't creditors have to agree to a certain pence in the pound towards their outstanding liabilities, and if they don't, bang? Beyond that, the difference between being bought when in administration or starting again in the same place and doing the same thing seems more a matter for insolvency lawyers than a sport. Deduct the points, maybe six if you go bust completely, and carry on.

The clubs don't actually have a vote in this according to Nigel Wood. The clubs can vote on how many teams are in Super League, but our membership to super league will be decided by the RFL board, not the clubs.

It is a joint decision. If the clear majority of clubs want an option there is no way the RFL board will go against it.

Since the rfl bought the odsal lease without any consultation of clubs they have been put on the back foot for their decision making. The Bulls going bust 'despite' the purchase has weakened the rfl board.

Somebody might want to tell Nigel Wood, he seems to disagree!

Why bother? The SL clubs know how the decision will be made. If it goes t*ts up for the Bulls then the Nigel gets the flack.

The statements after the SL meeeting were very interesting. Cast iron assurances that the Bulls will finish the season. Not an inch given after that.

the RFL only have so much money they can throw into the black hole called Odsal. They already own the lease of the ground I think 13 other clubs will be asking serious questions if much more money is used to prop up another member club that has little chance of paying it back

Exactly. Many SL clubs are struggling financially. They are not looking kindly on the RFL offering excessive assistance to one SL team. Furthermore if the RFL allow the Bulls to easily stay in SL after administration then they may face 2 or 3 other clubs taking the same route...causing the game to appear even more ridiculous.

btw if Bradford are liquidated rather than come out of admin with new owners etc. then all their players are free to walk away and sign for whoever.

A newco would need their permission to transfer their registration to the new club.

Have a word with yourself, you've never brought 500 never mind that figure in 6 years of us being in superleague.

It's not our fault that our support is dwarfed by the 20,000 you bring to odsal every year.