He's not being punished, he bought a business on the cheap that had a 6 point penalty which came with it.

Because Rugby League and the Bradford Bulls don't exist in a bubble and rely both in the past, present and future on local and small businesses, he's now being incentivised to mitigate that 6 points down to 4 by paying some of the businesses that have suffered as a result of the Bradford Bulls being a farce.

At the moment he seems to be choosing to ignore those local small businesses and instead he's crying foul over the points deduction which he knew all about when he bought the club on the cheap.

As I said before, he wants all the benefits of buying a Club on the cheap from the Administrator and he also wants to have the benefits which would have been associated had he bought the Club pre Administration.

Yes, I've been telling you this for years, now all of a sudden you agree



RFL = second hand car dealership

RFL leadership = second hand car salsemen

Is this something you have knowledge on, because I've not seen any information released, or just something you're assuming?

So increasing the chance of relegation and a big drop in revenue, sponsorship, and attendance does not affect the price. Pull the other one, it's got bells on.

Richard Lewis is a vastly superior administrator to Nigel Wood, one was a man prepared to be dynamic and put his head above the parapet, one is desperately scuttling back just claiming it's not my fault guv.

no which is why I said "he seems".

based on the 6 points not being reduced to 4 as with previous cases where creditors have been paid and also on the lack of any statement suggesting that some creditors have been paid, making it a fair and logical assumption.

I'm of the opinion that if Mr Khan chose to run the Bulls by running up debt to him, then that's his choice and any loss to himself is down to his actions. Any other creditors (HMRC, Bradford Council, suppliers) haven't made that choice.
I'm agree he doesn't deserve being vilified for making mistakes.

So you agree, he bought ' sold as seen ' knowing full well the consequences, now he wants a warranty?

Ding a ling, you're right it has.

Is it fair that Wakefield should suffer a loss of revenue, sponsorship and attendance because of Marc Greens inability to read what it said on the tin when he bought his bargain bucket Bulls club?

The uncertainty created by this ridiculous Force Majeure appeal has had a detrimental affect on a club which has done all it can to behave ethically in the face of much the same issues as the Bulls.

Yes Mr Lewis brought the hugelly successful Celtic Crusaders to SL, well done Richard

Not seen any business plan of Marc Greens so I can't assume he has or hasn't settled with any creditors.

Apparently the Moore/Watt/Calvert plan offered to repay all trade creditors (what was a trade creditors was never publicly defined) over 5 years but the RFL didn't believe the numbers so applied the 6 point deduction.

Your sudden concern for the welfare of the creditors is somewhat ironic, because the increased chance of relegation, drop in revenue, sponsorship and all could be lessened if efforts were made to reduce the penalty by doing what? Go on, guess. That's right, repay the creditors.

But then we end up at, "but he isn't obliged to", and we end up where we started.

If the appeal is based on "these are the efforts made so far, and here is a ring fenced sum to do more, if our survival is made more certain, and we promise to pay", I've no issue with it, as it then boils down to a simple reconsideration. I haven't seen a single post or article or press release that suggests this.

The Bulls could have had 3 more sets of owners over 5 years, not surprising it wwsnt accepted really

Can't wait for this circus to end, if only to shut off the ramblings of Smokey. We can also put to bed Bradford dragging the game of RL through the sheet. What's it been now? Two years?

The end is nigh.

The penalty is applied after the RFL has met to consider it and can't be changed after that on an adhoc basis. The process for reconsidering it is the appeal.

I've always thought that the RFL won't want the appeal to be successful as it will be saying that they got it wrong in some way and played a part in derailing Bradford's season. But equally, they won't want to be the bad boys.

My guess is that the crucial game next Sunday will become pointless. If Wakey win, I reckon Bulls will get some points back, or else the tribunal is in the position of relegating the Bulls and ruining a business. Would take a cold heart to do that. If Bradford win, I reckon the points will stay the same, for the sake of the integrity of the game.

Put simply, whoever gets the two points next Sunday will lose them in the appeal in some way, if you know what I mean.

Nope me neither, but then given how he's acted so far I'd not expect Marc Green to give away any information. Seems to play his cards very close to his chest.

No, Wakefield's initial 6 points were reduced after Andrew Glover submitted his plan to repay and made a number of those repayments all done without the aid of an appeal.

But can't you infer things from the silence? If he was doing things that would present the Bulls in a positive light, as a business the local community can trust again, wouldn't he be shouting it from the top of the town hall? It would be safer to assume that no news is just no news, rather than good news.

So he appealed the following week? , supplying proof of confirmed funds to pay the required % of creditors?

Or was it " We'll use some of next years SKY money, IF we dont get relegated " ?

I think the point of his legal challenge was that there was no appeal process, so as The Avenger says, the reduction for Wakefield was done on an ad-hoc basis. It was decided that there must be a right to appeal, its a rule of natural justice, so he has been given one.

Which I think was one of the problems with the bid of the consortium, as it was based on monies they hadn't yet received and might not receive if things didn't go right for them.

Which will not instill confidence from the creditors or the RFL

I actually think it'll be all the points back or nothing. The appeals panel is supposed to include legal representation and a working knowledge of insolvency practice which suggests to me it's based on the RFL's legal handling of the situation not on any application of their own rules.

Can I just change one thing though? "or else Peter Hood/Omar Khan/Ryan Whitcut is in the position of relegating the Bulls and ruining a business"