yes, the RFL have a lot to answer for. The result of a poll "Do the RFL know what they are doing V does Chalmers know what he is doing" is so obvious I cannot be bothered putting it up.

Chalmers and us the fans paid for the misdemeanours of previous owners in the 12 point deduction, season start with no team no fax no nothing and being forced to play in the Championship rather than C1, honouring season tickets that previous owners had received the cash for, etc etc etc. To me its either the 12 points or the other penalties, not both. Chalmers honoured the season tickets, paying for an academy etc etc, so we should have had a 6 point deduction not 12. and taking on the hole called Odsal we should have started the season with + 12 points.

So the reason for the delay is because the RFL are desperately racking their single collective brain cell for reasons to f**k C******s *p t*e a**e.

Chalmers is not responsible for the RFL's f**k *ps with previous owners, , the RFL are. And yet they want to blame him. Someone mentioned the RFL are not fit for purpose: yes, by a mile.

So the delay is a measure of the RfL's incompetence, not Chalmers.

Unless you have borrowed so much money against future central funding payments that the RFL can't see how you will be able to continue. Lets face it if the RFL didn't have genuine reasons then Chalmers would be making sure that people would know about it. I mean he's not one for not speaking his mind is he?

If this is the case and the Bulls are untenable with ANOTHER owner hand-selected by the RFL, sure their competence cannot be ignored any further?

However I can't see why the RFL have stipulated that the Bulls must be back in Bradford after 1 year. I think that is probably the issue here, and that requirement is unrealistic, unfair and petulant from the RFL (unless the Bulls can get them to pony up the improvements much needed at Odsal before moving back?)

And maybe Chalmers is keeping his head down as he doesn't want to aggravate further a ruling body who are pretty p1$$ed off with him already? Discretion being the better part of valour etc. etc.

I don't know. No-one apart from the RFL and AC know. All we know is that we don't know. And that isn't good for us Bulls fans looking previous history. Although I suppose it is closed-season fun for rubber-necking RL fans from other clubs again....

I don't think this is the reason why. I don't believe the RFL would allow us to do that, especially with what's gone on in the past.
However, I do agree with you that AC's silence speaks volumes. If there was any sort of perceived injustice here, he'd be the first person shouting from the rooftops.

My guess is the stand roof or crush barriers are going to need major work in the not too distant future hence they need a tenant in before the work is critical and end up stumping up the money. Thus they avoid a potentially bankrupting event for the RFL who've already borrowed against it?

How often is the safety certificate renewed and if so when is it due? Will CBMDC demand it's kept up to standard? If so the RFL are phuqqed without a tenant

Up the creek without a paddle gets replaced 'You're knackered there son! You're owning the Odsal lease without a tenent! Good luck'

No. It's not going to be money now. We've got in enough ST cash to pay wages this season, easily. Then from 1st November, our squad reduces from about 30 to 14 players. I would expect our wage bill to halve then as well. It's going to be a legal issue that he's refusing to commit to.

Remember, it's nearly 3 yrs since AC took over with Lowe alongside. They both had to take out a 3yr financial bond with the RFL. Lowe's illness must have been a blow and I'm sure it's been a struggle.

I think AC has had enough. The special measures are obviously the RFL's idea, but AC can use them, blame the RFL whilst allowing it to trim the squad and reduce ongoing liabilities, which, along with the stadium move, will make the club much more attractive to a buyer. But AC will sell on his terms, not the RFL. And he definitely won't sign any long term commitment on behalf of the club with the RFL whilst he's keeping his options open.

This season has been an eyeopener with regards to Fev & Leigh starting January with thin squads and building through the year. I expect we'll do similar.

The 3 year commitment from Chalmers runs out January 2020, I believe Chalmers is negotiating a sale behind the scenes, 50% of the club was up for sale since Lowe left.

Except they didn't. If I could be arrised I'd find the link where it's confirmed that they didn't stump up a bond despite it being on the same requirement list as running an academy.........

Could you find this link please?

I can find lots of links to where the RFL stipulate that any prospective buyer needed to pony up a bond (as well as taking the 12 point penalty, academy, etc.) but nowhere to say that Chalmers and Lowe definitely haven't paid it.

That's not to say they have paid, but I would have thought that if the RFL made these demands ([urlhttps://www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/jan/05/new-bradford-bulls-owners-have-to-make-three-year-fixture-pledge[/url) and then didn't enforce them AND it was in the public domain I'm sure we would have heard about it by now.

I'm sure that it will cheer you right up making us Bulls fans even more miserable too.

Quote ="Fr13daY"Could you find this link please? I can find lots of links to where the RFL stipulate that any prospective buyer needed to pony up a bond (as well as taking the 12 point penalty, academy, etc.) but nowhere to say that Chalmers and Lowe definitely haven't paid it. That's not to say they have paid, but I would have thought that if the RFL made these demands ([urlhttps://www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/jan/05/new-bradford-bulls-owners-have-to-make-three-year-fixture-pledge[/url) and then didn't enforce them AND it was in the public domain I'm sure we would have heard about it by now. I'm sure that it will cheer you right up making us Bulls fans even more miserable too.'" Just for you...... https://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/sport/r ... -1-8343876 [i"Although the new owners have not provided a financial bond as a guarantee to the RFL, the governing body was satisfied with their “comprehensive” three-year business plan while RFL chief executive Nigel Wood refuted a claim by failed bidder Richard Lamb that he would put £1m into the club if successful." [/i

Quote ="Fr13daY"Could you find this link please? I can find lots of links to where the RFL stipulate that any prospective buyer needed to pony up a bond (as well as taking the 12 point penalty, academy, etc.) but nowhere to say that Chalmers and Lowe definitely haven't paid it. That's not to say they have paid, but I would have thought that if the RFL made these demands ([urlhttps://www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/jan/05/new-bradford-bulls-owners-have-to-make-three-year-fixture-pledge[/url) and then didn't enforce them AND it was in the public domain I'm sure we would have heard about it by now. I'm sure that it will cheer you right up making us Bulls fans even more miserable too.'" Just for you...... https://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/sport/r ... -1-8343876 [i"Although the new owners have not provided a financial bond as a guarantee to the RFL, the governing body was satisfied with their “comprehensive” three-year business plan while RFL chief executive Nigel Wood refuted a claim by failed bidder Richard Lamb that he would put £1m into the club if successful." [/i

RFL in 'You're our chosen ones no need for a bond' shocker.

They loving trusted AC when they wanted him as their eyes and ears at the Bulls. Three year plan? That will do nicely. Bet you it included guarantees to stay at Odsal. Thorne's wouldn't have done they were petrified he's take the club to join Wasps.

So we are back to the huge (white) elephant sat staring at us. Why, as soon as he says he's leaving Odsal, do we see supersonic dummies heading from Red Hall and special measure in place faster than you can say lease.

Logically, crumbling stadium + no tenent + major repairs needed + no chance of further loans against the lease as there is an OS one already = Bankrupt RFL leaving SL take over the game you'd have to presume.

There was no stipulation that the new club had to play at Odsal.

You were in Special Measures long before Chalmers mentioned leaving Odsal.

Quote ="Mr Dog"Just for you...... https://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/sport/r ... -1-8343876 [i"Although the new owners have not provided a financial bond as a guarantee to the RFL, the governing body was satisfied with their “comprehensive” three-year business plan while RFL chief executive Nigel Wood refuted a claim by failed bidder Richard Lamb that he would put £1m into the club if successful." [/i'" Thanks smiler.

Quote ="Mr Dog"Just for you...... https://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/sport/r ... -1-8343876 [i"Although the new owners have not provided a financial bond as a guarantee to the RFL, the governing body was satisfied with their “comprehensive” three-year business plan while RFL chief executive Nigel Wood refuted a claim by failed bidder Richard Lamb that he would put £1m into the club if successful." [/i'" Thanks smiler.

Really? Negotiations with Dewsbury started April/May and allegedly we tried to sign a player in July which the Rfl says triggered us being recognised as special, as well as iconic

That would have been around the time that Bradford were unable to pay 2 clubs their share of the gate receipts from cup matches which the RFL consequently paid from an advancement of central funding?

The RFL wouldn't let any owner take over who wouldnt play at Odsal hence Chalmers agreed and tried to renegotiate but RFL refused.

Common practice for this to happen.

Well, that’s the RFL spin that they told Halifax & Leeds. In reality, when Hudds bought Olly Wilson, his transfer fee was going to be spread over the rest of the season, taken from Hudds central funding and allocated to Bradford.
So while the Rfl haven’t lied, they forgot to say that the central funding they advanced was basically part of the transfer fee that they were holding for Bradford anyway.
Bradford didn’t help themselves though, as gate receipts should be paid within 28 days. From what I’ve heard, Bradford asked RFL to pay it through central funding on the day that the Rfl pay clubs normally. This then built a delay into the process which, understandably, irritated Fax & Leeds. But Bradford followed the letter of the rules, if not the spirit.

'I'm hearing that Bradford tried to sign a Super League player but the RFL wouldn't ratify the contract' came from the twitter rats.

If we were in special measures long before where was it mentioned? First I saw was the RFL statement where they threw the toys out of the pram?

Depends how far in advance they already are I would guess. If the pot is already dry and the sale of next seasons season tickets are been used to pay this seasons wages then it must be a big worry.

Its not exactly something that either party would be shouting from the roof tops is it? I'd imagine that it was likely a player that leaked the news to a journalist, be that a current player unable to sign a new contract or a possible future player who got told that they could not sign him just yet.

Again, not really. As from last month, we have no stadium costs (which default to the RFL- conflict of Interest anyone?) and as from 1st Nov, our wage bill is significantly reduced.

It happened after 25th May, as that is when we signed Joe Brown. The Dewsbury deal was being negotiated before that. AC has also said he refused to sign the Odsal lease for the last time in June. Whilst your theory of a player leaking to a journalist is possible, the timings of the Odsal discussions could just be coincidental I suppose and I don't think journalists ever talk to the RFL....

The fly in the ointment with that scenario is that the RFL will only give a licence to their approved owners - without the licence to play in the competition it is pointless for anyone to buy the club.