Bradford are simply in the same position Wakefield were in a few months ago. Heroic local businessman rides in to save the club, and then it turns out that ego doesn't run a club on its own. A few months of tough decisions and hard-nosed pragmatism appears to have helped us turn a corner. I'm sure Bradford will do the same.

Perhaps Bradford require a Hetherington to ride into town as CEO and sort them out?

One of the Hetherington offspring perhaps?

That'd be 4 crucial votes in their possession then

Edited for accuracy

According to reports Bradford need to cut 400k off the this years expenditure to balance the books. IMO it is therefore a complete and utter joke they are still only getting half the SL money when the other half would mean they don't have a problem. I don't get the logic of penalizing a club with money problems by taking away more money. www1.skysports.com/rugby-league/ ... ation-talk

According to reports Bradford need to cut 400k off the this years expenditure to balance the books. IMO it is therefore a complete and utter joke they are still only getting half the SL money when the other half would mean they don't have a problem. I don't get the logic of penalizing a club with money problems by taking away more money. www1.skysports.com/rugby-league/ ... ation-talk

I hope they get through this without requiring any salvation from Mr Caisley. He may have been at the helm during the glory years but he always came across as someone very unlikeable.

Gotta be careful what I say as I know he is keen on litigation against those with different views to his!!!

Hopefully, after reading the thread posted near the beginning the honesty of RHP and those left in charge will get them through. I reckon the players will want to stay but the RFL have got to stop this from happening to our game as it happens every single year to far too many teams. A professional sport cannot continue to be run by amateurs, and that is directed at both the clubs and the governing body.

If Mr Hetherington really wanted to find out if he is the ' real deal ' , he should offer his services to London

Quote ="Eastbourne Warrior"According to reports Bradford need to cut 400k off the this years expenditure to balance the books. IMO it is therefore a complete and utter joke they are still only getting half the SL money when the other half would mean they don't have a problem. I don't get the logic of penalizing a club with money problems by taking away more money. www1.skysports.com/rugby-league/ ... ation-talk'" Me neither. RL struggles to get rich buyers as it is. Most are local business men. To then expect them to have half SKY money just puts people off. The old regime who got us into this mess at the very start arent been punished its the people coming in trying to help been punished. I can completely understand people expecting us to receive a stronger punishment than a 6 point deduction, but taking our sky money away is just cutting the sports nose to spite it's face. It's not the sensible option. Have a hefty points ban. Don't then completely handicap them when they trying to get back on their feet. Those who think that we should have our sky money taken away and that the sport won't be affected by our problems, take a look at Sky and BBC websites. After a fantastic WC, the only headlines are Bradford and London. It's hurting the game.

Quote ="Eastbourne Warrior"According to reports Bradford need to cut 400k off the this years expenditure to balance the books. IMO it is therefore a complete and utter joke they are still only getting half the SL money when the other half would mean they don't have a problem. I don't get the logic of penalizing a club with money problems by taking away more money. www1.skysports.com/rugby-league/ ... ation-talk'" Me neither. RL struggles to get rich buyers as it is. Most are local business men. To then expect them to have half SKY money just puts people off. The old regime who got us into this mess at the very start arent been punished its the people coming in trying to help been punished. I can completely understand people expecting us to receive a stronger punishment than a 6 point deduction, but taking our sky money away is just cutting the sports nose to spite it's face. It's not the sensible option. Have a hefty points ban. Don't then completely handicap them when they trying to get back on their feet. Those who think that we should have our sky money taken away and that the sport won't be affected by our problems, take a look at Sky and BBC websites. After a fantastic WC, the only headlines are Bradford and London. It's hurting the game.

I reckon its lenagan and wigan warriors who are going to take on that roll.

Over Lenagan's dead body!

Quote ="Eastbourne Warrior"According to reports Bradford need to cut 400k off the this years expenditure to balance the books. IMO it is therefore a complete and utter joke they are still only getting half the SL money when the other half would mean they don't have a problem. I don't get the logic of penalizing a club with money problems by taking away more money. www1.skysports.com/rugby-league/ ... ation-talk'" Because clubs have to learn that they can only spend what they can afford. How do you think they've ended up in the boat they're in now? Do you honestly think that if they had another £500k they would only spend that? Like heck, they'd be spending another £1m.

Quote ="Eastbourne Warrior"According to reports Bradford need to cut 400k off the this years expenditure to balance the books. IMO it is therefore a complete and utter joke they are still only getting half the SL money when the other half would mean they don't have a problem. I don't get the logic of penalizing a club with money problems by taking away more money. www1.skysports.com/rugby-league/ ... ation-talk'" Because clubs have to learn that they can only spend what they can afford. How do you think they've ended up in the boat they're in now? Do you honestly think that if they had another £500k they would only spend that? Like heck, they'd be spending another £1m.

Its crazy that a large number of people dont understand this

From the outside that appears to be exactly what the new owners are trying to do. They've not come in with false promises and delusions of grandeur they've said expenditure outweighs income therefore we need to cut costs.

I'm in favour of punishing administration but i don't think financially punishing a club a couple of years on with new owners is the right way to do it. IMO it is making the situation worse.

The club is in the boat it is in now because the Ok administration was not competent, and produced budgets that bore little resemblance to reality. IMO, and in the stated opinion of the successor board.

And I am not just saying that. I had specific dealings with them, and I still have one version of the budgets. So I suggest that makes me more qualified than most to comment?

Do I honestly think that if they had another £500k, they would only spend that? Absolutely. Some staff would keep their jobs, and some things that would have to be axed would be reinstated. The new group look to be totally different to what has gone before. I have sat round a table with two of them, and we will be meeting with them anyway next week, so again I may be better-placed than many to comment? OK, the proof will be in actions not words, and I accept I have been rolled before by Hood, but they state they will not spend more than the business can afford, and I have no reason to disbelieve them. They have too much to lose.

The new board has stated they will have to cut £400k of costs to survive. If someone was to give them that £400k out of the blue, do you SERIOUSLY think they would go and spend it, and then say "oh dear, we have to cut £400k costs to survive"?

1. The Club was in the ter before OK rode in on his white charger.....
2. The reason they were in the ter before OM rode in on his white charger was chronic mismanagement and overspending....so it is a valid point about what they'd do if given £400k as history points to spending it and then some!

The people that spent the money aren't there anymore why don't you understand that?

Or as a matter of some sorted misguided principle do you want to see people made redundant three weeks before Xmas through no fault of anyone at the club now?

A couple of them stand to lose everything.

The other point with the sky cash is that since the club went into admin - and even worse now since Whitcut started to forget to pay people - they have to pay people up front for services. Tht means to run the club they need cash in the bank.

The half sky cash deduction is an unprecedented move that isn't repeated anywhere.

I can help but feel it's club rivalry driving it and I'm yet to see an argument for it tht I agree with.

If London go into admin they will have to do it now and probably go bust within a year again.

I suppose the money held back was in a licensed perood, now that P&R is perhaps returning its only fair the RFL should reallocate the retained funds. Short of that the Bulls could always ask their rivials for the £50k back, they only need 8 to agree to reach £400k.

Having said that the current board may find more debt hidden away if the experiences of Trinity is anything to go by.

People seem to think that introducing more money into SL club coffers from an increased Sky deal and sponsorship will miraculously stop these idiotic clubs going bust.

A more robust rule book can only stop that happening I'm afraid. Super League will never be "super" whilst you've got financial bad eggs like Bradford, Wakefield and London in it. Franchising failed in this regard. Taught no one any lessons and did nothing to punish financial mismanagement or lay down deterrents.

I wish some folk would come to understand that this is the fourth complete new board and fourth set of owners at Bradford in just over 18 months.

What any of the previous boards/owners did, and what financial and other mismanagement sins they may have committed, is about as relevant to going forward as e.g. those of Halifax under Wood, Leeds pre Caddick, Wakey under Richardson, Wigan under Lindsay, Widnes under that shyster whose name I can't remember...



That is precisely the worry. Indeed, it was apparently what they discoveed last Friday that precipitated the present crisis. We can only hope that no more skeletons like these fall out of the closet.

the problem with a points only deduction in a league where there was no relegation doen't punish a club for running up massive debts and then leaving creditors high and dry while the club starts again with a clean slate. The RFL basically had their hands tied by the fact they had a lease on a ground and needed a team to play in it, so short of demoting Bradford to a lower league they had to accept the new owners offer of reducing the Sky money to ensure a SL licence. Any less punishment would have set a precident and would hardly have been seen as a deterent to other clubs running up massive debts and walking away scot free.

was the bradford sky money penalty not because they had taken the money early so they could keep going till they could find new buyers?

It's not a repayment of loan.

No, no, no, no, rich, the next lot will be genuine experienced businessmen and will automatically know what is required to return the Bulls to former glory

Then surely the answer is a newco with no baggage starting again at the bottom as Crusaders did, with the fan base of Bradford it would be only a few years before they could apply to join SL again or even win a place if things change. We must cease this pain free mismanagement culture for the sake of the game and its reputation to potential sponsors

Has anyone actually stated what the purpose behind the new directors setting up "Bradford Bulls 2014 Ltd" is. And if the current situation only came to light last Friday. Why did they set that company up on the 12th of November?

Is this really a bolt from the blue for the new directors or did they know about it a while back?