At least they have the guts to stick to thier agreed rules, whereas RL doesnt, we just make a new rule to fit some kind of masterplan.
Of course nobody wants to see any club disappear, or struggle financially, but neither should there be a clique that can do as they please.

If the rules aren’t achieving what they were meant to, then only a fool would stick with them.

Its not pass the parcel, when the birthday boy has to win !

No, it’s a multi-million pound business which employs real people, with real lives and real jobs. Compared to the people who have been made redundant, people who have lost their livelihoods, the players and their families who don’t know if they will be paid next month, Mick Potter using his own savings to keep the club together, frankly I couldn’t care less about the rules and the needs of those feeling slighted by the efforts to save Bradford.

Good job we've never been afraid to or we'd all be following Rugby Union clubs.

...and that says it all really, doesn't it, but more appallingly the SLE/RFL echo your sentiment.

What rules are the RFL not following?

They're not following the rules where Bradford a gutted, hung, drawn and quartered and Halifax are promoted by default.

Smokey was making the point that they shouldn't be relegated, even IF they had broken the rules, because they are too important to SL.

Oh so we're talking hypotheticals? Do the RFL actually have any crimes that would instigate removal of a license?

This might help.

“The RFL’s independent Board of Directors reserves the right to revoke any licence awarded for the period 2012 to 2014 if it feels a club is failing, or not fulfilling, its obligations to help the competition meet the objectives of investment and growth,” he said.

“This is not a new provision, but the RFL will be subjecting those clubs whose applications are largely predicated upon future undertakings or with variable performance against past promises, to more rigorous assessment during the next licence period. Membership of the Super League demands high standards.”

Vague enough to be pointless, didn't expect much different.

None of which says they should, or would be relegated, simply that they could. Relegation is a possible punishment, it isn’t the punishment.

As we have come to expect this statement is not in plain simple English. However, it's difficult to imagine how a club could have a larger degree of financial failiure than the Bulls.

Its also difficult to see how replacing a club currently averaging about 14k with a club who will average maybe 5/6k at best [iis fulfilling, its obligations to help the competition meet the objectives of investment and growth[/i

The scenario is like running a corner shop succcessfully and looking after all of your customers even though they may be relatively few in number, or opening up a large superstore, employing plenty of people and losing money hand over fist and then not paying your suppliers for goods which have been sold in the superstore.
Although the superstore is paying many peoples wages (with someone elses money ??) and they may have a shiny sign above the door, sooner or later the superstore will close down because it is not sustainable and nobody will want to invest.
So should we encourage them to keep trading and take money which is not theirs or should they close thier doors ?

I hate it when people drop in numbers that they have made up

Bradford havnt had 14,000 on a regular basis in a long time

To be honest if the stay in Super League it will be back down below 10,000 in next few years

They should go down, dosnt matter how well they have done in last 10 year, they messed up

You cant have one rule for one and not for another

Except in Super League !

Which clubs have been relegated for going into administration?

Bradford got 5 out of 13 attendances above 14k last season, including one above 19k, they also got another 2 above 13k and not one below 12k.

If you hate people making things up, why did you do it?

Im sorry but your analogy is nonsense

That is the number of tickets sold , at a cost that is completely unsustainable , and has partly led to the mess we are currently witnessing , so what figure do they need to be able to operate without financially collapsing ? , 20,000 - 25,000 ?

Was going to look on Bradford web site but can't find it, if you put Bradford bulls in google it dosnt list it, have they not paid for their domain name

Haha how skint ????

Anyone know a link to website

Nobody knows, although some like to pretend they do.

We have nowhere near enough information to know.

And without knowing their running costs, how much was historic debt and how much efficiency there was to squeeze out of the club, we don’t even know if that price was unsustainable. We know their business model as whole wasn’t sustainable, not the pledge scheme in isolation.

Quote ="Eadie"Was going to look on Bradford web site but can't find it, if you put Bradford bulls in google it dosnt list it, have they not paid for their domain name Haha how skint ???? Anyone know a link to website'" So you didnt know that Bradford werent getting 14k, you are only now checking? So in other words, you dont know and you made it up? here are the 5 14k plus attendences for you news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 400211.stm news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 425905.stm news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 463717.stm news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 469334.stm news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 510990.stm I look forward to your apology

Quote ="Eadie"Was going to look on Bradford web site but can't find it, if you put Bradford bulls in google it dosnt list it, have they not paid for their domain name Haha how skint ???? Anyone know a link to website'" So you didnt know that Bradford werent getting 14k, you are only now checking? So in other words, you dont know and you made it up? here are the 5 14k plus attendences for you news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 400211.stm news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 425905.stm news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 463717.stm news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 469334.stm news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 510990.stm I look forward to your apology