Can someone clear one thing up for me? In buying Odsal did the RFL do this because it genuinely believed it was somehow an important asset to the game? No offence intended, but as a spectator I find it an atrocious ground. Not because of the dilapidation or anything, just the lack of atmosphere and distance from the pitch. If Bradford left Odsal, good riddance to the ground I say. It's always an emotional wrench, but look how much better Saints and Warrington's set-ups are since they moved. As it happens, as a Wigan fan, I'm not the biggest fan of the DW TBH, it doesn't cope well atmospherically when it gets much below full, but Odsal is by far the worst of the lot.

FWIW I agree with you.
There are 2 things that are disappointing.

1) the way in which the RFL informed the wider public that it was taking on Odsal "to save an historic and iconic ground", when it now appears that it took on the lease in lieu of non-payment of loan(s)
2) the fact that the RL world (and in particular the fans of the Bulls) were asked to pledge £500,000 (plus a further 500,000)to save the club when it now appears that this figure was grossly short of the figure needed.

The Bulls application may well have been perceived as one of the 14 strongest applications but the RL world appears to have been taken for a bit of a ride with how this situation has been "sold".

So in effect everybodys applications are ' speculative ' ? , and yet only Fax were publically cruxified over theirs , I'd have thought that the Bulls giving out STs at £ 90 should have raised alarm bells to an organisation such as KMPG , it certainly raised concerns as to its viability among amatuer financial ' experts ' on here , maybe they ' speculated ' that they would bring in 20,000 per game , and the RFL believed them

No argument from me there. I understand that complete openness is not always possible or even desirable when it comes to commercial matters, but there's been a sad lack of honesty and transparency over this case.

The only caveat I'd make is that the information currently being put into the public domain is coming from a source with a vested interest in making the last BOD look as bad as possible. I expect it's been spun to within an inch of its life.

All business plans are 'speculative', and Fax were 'crucified' because they whined like bitches and claimed it was all a fix. In public.

If the Bulls put forward a business plan that showed that any shortfall in ST revenue due to the cut price offer could be made up elsewhere, and it was credible [igiven the information available at the time[/i, then why would KPMG flag anything up?

You don't have much of a clue about how these things work, do you? Have you lived in a cave all your life?

Were you under the impression that the laws time and space would allow it to be anything other than 'speculative'

or were you thinking that the business plan that the RFL asked for was just a list of things which have happened in the past

So basically clubs can put any old shiiiite down and this then gives the RFL scope to deny crap clubs (Halifax ) and give the nod to "great" clubs (Bradford).

Who said the RFL was stoopid?

Indeed. What they should have done was go quietly to the Bradford BOD and ask for guidance on how to produce a strategic document which would get them a grade B license. Spend beyond their means, screw the fans out of £500k and not pay the VAT man.

I hope the Fax directors are communicating with Mr Hood right now.

Hmm, looks like Halifax had something to whine and bitch about all along regarding the RFL terms of reference, are you ignoring the knife edge of existence that the Bulls are on? Fax were crucified for actually making a point publicly - and I believe now that they have been proved right about the licensing debacle

Yes, that was the initial spin from Red Hall, it was all about saving an ‘Iconic’ Rugby League stadium from falling into the hands of despicable property developers.

However, it came to light not long after, that the RFL had lent Bradford a fair few quid before the season began (not unusual) the problem was, Bradford hadn’t paid any of it back.

So they (The RFL) then gave Bradford some more dosh & Bradford gave them the lease.

Unfortunately, when Bradford’s bank found out the lease was gone they pulled the plug.

No. Only an idiot or someone with an axe to grind would think such a thing.

Nope. The lease had never been used as security for the overdraft facility - the bank admitted as such itself. They withdrew the credit line simply because they wanted to reduce their exposure to sports-related debt. It's about the one thing in the whole fiasco that nobody from RL is to blame for.

Halifax had nothing at all to whine about. They knew the parameters they had to work within and the type of bid that KPMG/the RFL were likely to look favourably on and failed to produce one. Despite warnings and advice.

Nobody is ignoring the Bulls situation. It has precisely zero relevance to Fax's failed application though.

It is simply awful news about Bradford and there really seems to be no way out now. I cant see any interested party spending a fortune clearing debts when they can just start afresh as a newco. I really feel for the fans because they do not deserve this particularly after all of the efforts they went to.

Wow. Kosh reveals that something is actually wrong with the Bradford situation. Shat me.

advice from the rfl on finance - didn't they lend £700k to bradford and now own a hole in the ground which doesn't pay its way at odsal?

So you are suggesting the RFL are vindictive to the point of publicaly trying to humiliate a member club and its BOD just because they dared to question a decision, how very mature of them

Do you work for them, ? Your last sentance shows a ' childishness ' they seem to display time and time again, maybe its time they grew up , and you as well

The £700k was "lent" to Crusaders

Wow. Littlerich reveals that he doesn't actually read posts. Imagine my surprise.

No. Advice on how to write a successful application.


Nope. They loaned Crusaders £700k and now own a substantial share of The Racecourse Ground. I can't recall the exact figure lent to Bradford but the RFL have clawed back 100% of the money owed PLUS they now own the lease on Odsal. Not the ground itself - that's still owned by the council.

It's occasionally useful to find out the facts before entering into a discussion.

Nope. I'm saying that had Halifax not chosen to go public with their paranoid fantasies there would have been no need for any of the detail of the bid to become public and hence no 'public humiliation'.

As usual you fail to read posts and just make stuff up inside your head. Mind you, you seem to be in good company on this thread.


I've little patience with wilful stupidity.

I think Kosh came out of Smokey's womb.

There hasnt been any detail made public, a part of their bid was speculative, just as obviously a large part of Bradfords must have been, and no doubt several others, Celtics bid was all speculation, if not outright lies

I've little time for idiots like you who believe anything they read in a press release

The RFL released information on all bids apart from the Crusaders who withdrew theirs. So why would the RFL not have released the summary of Faxs bid if the chairmen hadn't made those ridiculous statements about stadiums etc and clubs breaking the rules?