Nah.In 23 months time all will be forgotten and by then a 'less important' club will have had money troubles and the spotlight will be on them.

That's exactly true. Who cares now that Wakey went bust?

Bring on the next laughing stock . . .

Seems he was referring to a 'mini round of licencing'. Apparently the Bulls will be put up against a few Championship clubs to see who presents the best case for a licence for the remaining two years.

Sounds like a fudge to me.

Jeez, anybody with a modicum of intelligence knew that Bradford would be saved.

All the media articles, Sky debates, good luck messages from other clubs supporters & the nihilistic predictions from Bradford’s “long suffering” supporters – Aghhhh.

Finally the little caveat as to whether they will be S.L next season.



[size=200Please make it stop - of course they will![/size

As if! Why would any championship club be mug enough to fall for that? Another RFL attempt to give credibility to their farce of a licencing system. Just keep the Bulls In super league and you can all get back to play happy families!

I wonder if they will try and make the most of Odsal itself- i.e. will BPA move in and even see speedway come back?

Would Super League tolerate curly corners?

You're rambling, mate. Deep breaths. I reply to posts, not posters, so don't worry about being stalked as honestly I have no designs on you at all



As for the RFL, I'm not sure what the point of any meeting would be if they weren't going to listen and take into consideration the views expressed at the meeting. So far as I can see, the RFL have been pretty consistent throughout.

Oh and ta for pointing out this is an internet forum. I had thought it was a pilchard.

Do the RFL EVER stop lying?

BLAKE SOLLY:
=#0000FF"However, he said it was “too early to say” if the club would remain in the top-flight next season.

Asked what it would take to enable the side to stay in Super League, Mr Solly replied: “Once the transfer of the ownership is complete, the hard work of retaining the club’s Super League status will begin in earnest.

“The new owners are going to have to put the hard yards in.”

[size=200Stop it.

Stop it now![/size

Well, to listen to some, the RFL don't worry about anything that's bent.

Ho ho. Ha ha!

I am 99.9% certain that Mr. Khan will already have been promised the retention of Bradford's SL license. The "no conditions" stance is simply the RFL's public sabre-rattling.

I don't believe for one minute that he has bought the Bulls without assurances and no-one will ever convince me otherwise.

As to the mini-licensing round - purleeeeaaaassseee!!!

Now that the Bulls have been bought there is not a snowball's chance in hell of a license being given to Fax, Fev or Leigh in preference to the Bulls so just give them the bloody license and stop wasting everyone's time!

He's not really lying.It is too early to say.That is,too early to say yes,the club will remain in the top flight next season.Got to go through all the charade first and in a couple of months time,say it then.

The question that really matters, IMO, is:

Have they bought the old club (taking on the historic debt) or have they only bought the assets? If the latter, then handing them a licence would be borderline paradoxical. A mini-licensing round could well be the most embarrassing thing EVER. Worse than calling your primary school teacher 'mum'.
I really hope (if it is a newco) they (the governing body) bite the bullet and put licensing out of its misery. Interesting experiment, but this would mean it has failed. Why would anybody ever take it seriously again?

Has anybody ever taken it seriously before ?

P+R isnt the default position for the game, however much the vocal minority with their vested interests pretend it is.

Shame on any of Fev, Fax and Leigh if they participate in the farce of a mini-license bid. Why waste much needed money to give the RFL the veneer of going through due process, knowing full well that there is even less chance than ever of being awarded the franchise.

The RFL would probably state that the teams were unsuccessful in their application because of the short time-frame needed to step into SL (i.e. 2 years early)

Surely, even the most blinkered of VT'ers would admit that there is no prospect of Bradford not being awarded the license?

The trouble with this sort of conspiracy rubbish is that the conspiracy theorist has a 50/50 chance of the outcome being what he or she said, but would take that outcome as being "proof" that the conspiracy was correct.



The alternative of course, that the RFL will actually consider the matter and actually make a considered decision is a touch too radical for conspiracy theorists.

But with regard to this poster, what comes across loud and clear is that GSF obviously feels that the only sensible decision is for the Bulls to remain in SL. Well, he is probably right, and I hope they do, though I am by no means confident, I don't think anything is cut and dried. No behind-closed-doors decision has already been made, and no conspiracy exists.

The RFL's main problem is that - for obvious reasons - they really do need to push on and announce their decision urgently, in fairness to all. Just for one example, people have been asking about season tickets; how can we even start that process before we have confirmation in which league we will play?


If you mean does the decision almost make itself, yes, it makes far more sense for the Bulls to be in SL than any of the clubs mentioned. But that would only mean that a right and "obvious" decision had been made, not that there was a conspiracy!

At some level im pleased about this, but mostly i stopped being interested about 2 months ago.

Cracking post, and I'll bet you managed not 1 single giggle, smile or grin while you did it

There are other options and variations. Which is good, because we're going to need one if they let a newco Bradford into SL. You can abandon your principles [ior[/i you can stand by them, you [ican't[/i do both simultaneously. Sometimes you have to make a choice. They could [ipretend[/i that they'd retained licensing but it would be untrue and the worst choice available.

I've had reservations - but P+R wasn't working so it was worth a go perhaps. [iAssuming a creditor-ignoring newco[/i, this is the first time, [uIMO[/u, you could say [iincontrovertibly[/i it isn't as advertised.

Celtic Crusaders

Fair point - but they only got a 4 point deduction, so I assume creditors got and accepted something. Or that was the plan at least - subsequent events meaning maybe not, I guess.

The change of rules that meant admin wasn't an automatic revocation of a licence was ropey as, admittedly. Personally I was willing to hold my nose while the rules were 'adapted'. That, if you squint and are feeling generous could be considered a compromise - this would be putting up the white flag in a very obvious way.
It might go widely unnoticed in the short term, but those in positions of influence at clubs in both SL and Championship will see what it means, making the system untenable.

The three year time period was the major mistake in licensing.

If they get rid of that, and admit and remove clubs as and when it is the right thing to do, then that is simply a change in the franchising process, it isnt an abandonment in the principle.

I would have thought the 3 year time frame was always temporary, simply because it is an entirely arbitrary period of time, as was shown by Bradford.