Pity the players and majority of staff found out through things like twitter and Sky Sports News this morning.
Smoke and mirrors for years from the RFL. So this is what was behind that smoke. How many other clubs are in the same situation I wonder. Oh, and well done to the Royal Bank of Scotland for backing out despite what appears to be a massive overall reduction in their debt.

For years we have had complete idiots (you know who you are, muppets!

) coming on this board on SC threads and telling Wigan fans that we were wrong about the failure of the SC to control financial mismanagement by clubs, that it was all in our imagination.

Here is yet another example of the failure of the SC and indeed of the ludicrous franchising process.

What we need is a system of financial controls that incentivise success and prevent failure.

Without wanting to turn it into the inevitable salary cap thread that the usual suspects would love to, this situation doesn't have anything to do with the salary cap. It has everything to do with mismanagement by the Directors of Bradford. If anything the cap would need to REDUCE for some clubs. The cap is a complete red herring.

I know I sound like a boring old sod, but it's the COMPANY that's in trouble. Bradford Bulls as a brand is massive in RL circles, and I would be very surprised indeed if the assets of that company (i.e team, brand and right to play at Odsal) was not purchased by another company, and no one would notice the difference apart from the team being docked the usual 10 or so points.

The cap was originally brought in to prevent clubs overspending on players, which was and still is thought by many to be the main/sole issue around financial mismanagement of clubs. If people thinking it can do a job it can't do is a red herring, then I agree.

I agree that the cap on player pay for some clubs needs to be reduced, but spending on players is only part of the equation. A comprehensive system of financial controls is needed; as well as preventing failure a good system would also encourage success.

That one of the biggest and most historic clubs in the game has been allowed to get in this state when all the warning signals have been there for the last 5 years or so is appalling.

In a sense I agree, with regard to the absolute cap, but the 50% of income rule should never have been scrapped.

Bradford were left in hopeless debt when Caisley departed.
The Harris case cost the Bulls a fortune.
How the current BOD have coped is beyond me yet there were issues going on that it appears had to be kept confidential.
For some strange reason I thought their major financial problems were behind them but they hadn't been resolved one bit.
If they do fold it will be an absolute tragedy for the club and the game of Rugby League. Like most on here I do think they will re-form and start again under a different title.
How many times will this have happened to Bradford? When they were Northern they went bust more than once and re-formed.
What a bad day for Rugby League!

One of the reasons of the cap originally was suppose to be to help with financial management in that it helped set a cap on spending on player wages. But just because Bradford and other have been in trouble doesn't mean the cap has failed in this respect. You could limit spending on player salaries to 20% of income and some clubs will still be mismanaged and live outside their means on a load of other costs. It doesn't mean the cap has failed, the management of the club has.

It's the franchising system and criteria that have failed more in my opinion to have not picked this up properly.

This. Which as I said above is why they sold the long term lease on Odsal to the RFL so the New Co. has somewhere to play and can't be sold off to pay any creditors.

There was a rumour doing the rounds at the beginning of the season that 'fax had been put on standby to replace Bradford in SL, I laughed it off at the time, it's starting to look a little more concrete now.

Surely to god even the RFL can't just swap teams halfway through a competition!?!

I don't think we are actually in disagreement.

The issue for me with the SC is that many people are not willing to engage in a debate on ongoing financial controls because they think (or claim to think) that the SC is there to do that job.

The franchising system is an utter failure in terms of the assessment of a club's financial position at the outset - there should be a detailed and thorough examination of each club's internal financial controls and business plan (I suspect many club's business plans are almost literally on the back of a fag packet - I doubt many clubs produce anything as fancy as cash flow projections...).

What's needed as well as a more rigorous assessment at the outset are ongoing financial controls and monitoring by the RFL/independent auditors, backed up by a system of penalties for non-compliance.

It would be nice if the system could encourage and incentivise growth, but in reality the priority given the parlous state of many clubs' finances must be to prevent further instances of clubs going bust.

Replace before the start of the SL season.

Bob on Ted. Since the Harris case Leeds have gone one way both financially and playing wise and Bradford the other. Hetherington must be dancing on their grave, but what is the point of the Super League concept if one of our main city clubs gets stronger and stronger and the other gets weaker and weaker?

What's the betting that Leeds are the first vulture in to pick at the Bradford playing staff?

Seriously its about time some heads rolled at the RFL. They seem to leap from one fiasco to another and everyone there seems to just fumble along regardless. The licensing process is supposed to be robust and yet a number of clubs have got into difficulty. Its a poor reflection on out sport. I understand its the Bradford board that has created the mess but they are supposed to be subject to due diligence as part of the franchise award surely ?

I feel sorry for their fans and none of us should take any pleasure in seeing one of our bigger clubs at risk of going to the wall. There were over 11,000 at Odsal on Sunday watching a side that has been struggling and all in one of the most horrible places to watch a game, who would we replace them with at current that would pull in more than about 4000 fans ? Its a big city with no credible football team and you do wonder what they could achieve with a nice stadium and a decent team.

Not the first time the Bradford club has gone to the wall though is it, before my time but pretty sure it happened in the 1960's ?

Hopefully they will pull through.

I do think the bottom line is that the players are simply paid more money than the game can realistically afford. I have been saying this for years and it cannot go on forever. If we lose some top stars to the NRL or RU as the game has to cut its cloth accordingly then we might have to live with it or accept the fact more clubs will face extinction.

Bradford going bust wouldn't do Leeds or Hetherington any good any more than Saints disappearing would help Wigan.

The Harris case, as well as the rest of Bradford's problems, was down to Caisley not Hetherington.

In terms of picking the bones, I can think of maybe one Bradford player who would get into Leeds's best 19-man squad.

Other than that your post is spot on.

The very fact the RBS have been named and are reducing the clubs facilities adds to the inevitability that the club will not survive in its present format. The RBS are going through turmoil themselves and are pulling or calling in facilities left right and centre irrespective of how the business is managed or run

The Bank will have you believe they are lending to businesses but all they are doing is calling in other companies debts and then lending that out again and it looks like the bulls will fall foul of this

So whoever sold the ground has made a smart move indeed

Maybe not now, but you would be daft not to take a longer term punt on Burgess, Whitehead, Kopjack(sp?) or Bateman at a knock down price.

Very true and for Bradford the only logical way to go. It's not very nice, especially if you're a tradesman owed money but administration is almost painless for the company. Quite impressed with the RL in covering their backsides by buying the ground.

They do have some good prospects, and personally I'd rather see them stay with a healthy Bradford. If they can't stay at Bradford, I suppose I'd rather have Bateman at my club than at someone else's.

But which way do you want it? In your last two posts you say either you're daft (if you don't try to sign them) or you're a vulture (if you do).

I'd rather see Bradford pull through without having to gid rid of star prospects. However, if they must sell players, I'd like us to go in for Bateman, maybe Whitehead (although, that'd be another second rower).

Bradford got any good, young centres?

Royal Bank for fecking Scotland.

Say no more. Idiots.

There are arguments for and against administration, I feel.

The cons are that creditors won't get back everything they are owed, and the owners take a financial hit.

The pros, however, are that it protects employment. protects customers and protects goodwill, which is precicely why it exists, is legal and is not (if used correctly of course) immoral.

What you have to weigh up is whether it's worth creditors getting an extra few quid at the expense of a load of jobs lost.

Would you invest your hard earned money in the current climate to the Bulls when the same people are going to be running the club? This should highlight what a god send IFL was when he bought us, a few years ago i was having a pint with McManus from Saints and he said nobody takes over a SL club to make money but it needs someone with money who loves the game to keep pumping money in, as it stands there only a few clubs who are profitable, long term its not good for the game.

It was the salary cap that was supposed to stop teams going bust not the franchise system!

However because everyone blew a gasket about Wigan breaking the cap they made it "live" which meant they had to scrap the 50% of income maximum bit. All teams can now spend to the level of the cap whether they can afford it or not.

You are also forgetting Bradford lost a court case to Leeds over signing Harris and had to pay compensation and have been fined for salary cap breaches themselves.

In other words there is probably a combination of factors (some of their own making) all conspiring against Bradford financially so to suggest they are in this state just because of the franchise system is a joke.