I see that on the list last Friday both the Bulls and Featherstone Rovers were to have their petitions heard this morning in the High Court. I haven't heard anything so I assume we are still in business. Does anyone know whether the petition was withdrawn or heard and dismissed or indeed is still hanging over our heads?

Nobody knows yet.

Was looking earlier, and it appears it took almost 2 weeks for the dismissal to be posted last time

Any chance you can clarify what that means?

Hearing was on 27th of November, dismissal was posted on the 9th of December.
[urlhttps://www.thegazette.co.uk/notice/2424577/[/url

(Spotted that the critical last 2 words were missing from my original post, sorry)

Petitions can't be "withdrawn". And if we were no longer in business, then how could we have played on Sunday?

London Welsh were due to be wound up yesterday as well, but they confirmed they had been 'saved'. Why do we have to wait if it was dismissed? Which I assume it was given the lack of any bad news, don't get it. www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/37259590

London Welsh were due to be wound up yesterday as well, but they confirmed they had been 'saved'. Why do we have to wait if it was dismissed? Which I assume it was given the lack of any bad news, don't get it. www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/37259590

Are we waiting? What for?

Didn't would be Bulls saviour Richard Lamb end up at London Welsh or did he fail to put up there too?

Isn't it Rotherham RU?

I thought he was at Rotherham Union Club (yeah I have no idea what they're called).

Richard Lamb seems to be keeping himself quite active.

He has only been there a couple of months.

[url=http://www.thestar.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/rotherham-titans/two-more-plays-ande-a-sevens-coach-for-rotherham-titans-1-7965158Press Report[/url

Isn't Lamb more of a gateway to investors rather than a particularly wealthy man in his own right?

The case was adjourned on Monday.

Can you clarify what this means please?

It's been put on hold. Which makes sense as I believe the original reasoning behind it was a dispute between the Club and HMRC over VAT payments with the club providing evidence as to why they had paid, in their opinion, the correct amount of VAT and HMRC throwing their toys out the pram and issuing a WUP

So why not dismissed if it is as clear cut as you say

I don't think the poster ever said it was "clear cut".

As I see it, the quibble was with the HMRC attitude of shooting first and only then asking questions.

I am still perplexed as to how Bradford and Featherstone can register players while both clubs had/have winding up orders against them.

Back in 2013 you were in 'special measures' but this year you bring in an Australian coach and players from the NRL.

[url=http://www.bradfordbulls.co.uk/news/post/bulls-move-to-clear-up-concerns2013 - A Different Ball Game[/url

I have heard rumours that the RFL lack consistency,though

I thought it was the build up and start of the 2014 season when we were in 'special measures'.Whilst we were in administration waiting for Green to take ownership which was announced (IIRC) at the end of March that year?

No sky money and no signing new players.

The High Court, in dealing with the WUP, are there essentially as a debt collection vehicle. They would not make any decisions on whether or not the liability was actually correct (That would be a Tribunal). If there's still an ongoing dispute, the Court may adjourn a hearing in order for the dispute to be settled or for HMRC to consider some argument/evidence put forward by the club.

I'm sure I saw a tweet from Mick G the other day saying everyone had been paid (in relation to a question about the WUP). Though with all due respect to you Mick, I'll wait to hear something official before breathing a sigh of relief.

Well, that would be because they have actually NOT had winding up orders against them.


No. We weren't. Sadly, the company went tits and is now in liquidation. A new buyer bought the remains of the business and the club started afresh, with a huge handicap. It may be skint, but has never been in special measures, either.


And?? Do you have a point in there somewhere, trying to get out?


Wow how interesting. No, really

Ah, the above poster getting his daily pedantry out the way!

Come on FA. You really do like to put people down at every opportunity.
It is possible to explain things without appearing all high and mighty.

That last line is what I mean. Was that needed. I expect that from teenagers not a wise, older person.
You write very good points but there is no need to pick apart every point to get one over someone.

The last line is the worst though. Having said we have had a winding up order made, and that having been in special measures we shouldn't be allowed to get an Aus coach etc., it finished off by inferring that we have been allowed to "get away with it" by the inconsistent RFL.

I would "explain" if I thought it was needed. IMHO the OP was plain malicious and I just set it straight. If you're happy with false claims, and bagging us for getting Smith then it's a free country but I don't feel the need to be all lovely dovey with stirrers popping up and having a go.