Is it right that we all sat back and let Bradford have the chance to get their house sorted, without wading in and cherry picking their players, when if the boots on the other foot, Bradford are first in and raiding Salford?
Not impressed by Bradfords morals.

it seems apparent that Salford feel the RFL will not support their situation the same as they have done with Bradford. Anyone facing administration would sell assets to try and stay afloat, of course unless your immune to everything (like bradford)

Really, he has a point IMHO.

Is he really??? Why?

For pointing out the complete disparity and bias shown in 2 very similar circumstances?

Or because poor old Bradford can't be accused of doing anything wrong as they were actually very hard done to by the governing body - allowing them to complete the season with a full team that they could not afford by paying the players for them - I bet Salford wish the RFL are as hard on them!

Show your workings!!
Without knowing the ins and outs of both situations (and i'm sure you don't either) on the surface of it, the bulls seem to doing unto Salford what was not done unto themselves!!!
I think most Salford fans will disagree with you.

Pot,Kettle jog on..

Salford Fan here. I have no problem with what Bradford have done tbh. They asked the club about it, Vievers said yes as he only had 1 yr left on his contract and I would have been very surprised if they were going to offer him another contract after that to be fair. So they let him take up a 2 yr deal at Bradford. Nothing underhand,all done in the correct manner and both sides are happy!! Hopefully he goes well at Bradford but he never pulled up any trees with us so would be surprised. Means we get an average player off the wage bill and hopefully can replace him with someone better once budgets get agreed!!

Its rather obvious he can't debate in a sensible reasoned manner without breaking the AUP, so don't wait for a reply.

This. The Bulls had permission to speak with Sidlow and the deal has been in the pipeline long before Salford had a loan rejected by the Council. It seems the uncertainty has scuppered the Reds hopes of bringing in Platt though.

A little research on this subject from the OP would have prevented them starting a nonsense thread.

yeah i think this thread is a little OTT - Bradford still have the right to sign players and if one comes available they are quite within their rights to do so.

I think the OP was more about what wasn't done to Bradford, rather than wether or not bradford are in the right now.
Clearly a club in trouble is likely to lose their better players in such times, we know only too well that this is the case.
The fact that rather than let players go (and clearly they were unaffordable players) the Bulls hung on and made all the other staff redundant and were dependent on supporter and RFL hand outs, staff working for nothing, etc etc should IMO be remembered by all.
If Salford have allowed this sale that is fine, i can't honestly see how else they could act when they are struggling and they need to off load players/reduce costs/generate some money, however this clearly wasn't the case when the boot was on the other hoof!!
I haven't yet read how this would be a disaster for RL either, if Salford were to go belly up.............

Just saying

I think this is where the gripe is - At the minute Salford look like they're going to struggle to put out a decent side. I understand Salford gave Bradford permission to speak to Sidlow and Bradford have not really done anything wrong, however given where Salford are in terms of playing staff do we think they would just release players if they thought that the governing body was going to look after them in the same way as they did Bradford??
It's only my opinion, so may well be completely wrong (it quite often is), but I think Salford believe that they will not be treated in the same manner as Bradford were and as such have probably had no choice but to let players go.

As KC said - where are the quotes from the governing body or pundits saying what a disaster it would be to lose a club like Salford and encouraging supporters/businesses/other clubs to get behind them and prevent that happening??

Don't see what the issue is to be honest. Salford as far as i'm aware aren't in administration so the decision is completely theirs and they've taken the proactive decision to reduce the wage bill by allowing the Bulls to take Sidlow. It's a pity in previous situations, those clubs also didn't attempt to reduce the wage bill.

If the club were in administration and the RFL didn't apply the same rules that they did to Bradford then that would completely unfair but as far as i can see the decision is completely Salford's and they've made the right one

Well if you took a little time to "read" the OP you will see he is asking a question rather than making a statement, therefore conducting some research

My point is now clearly valid.

Yep clearly valid at being wrong

The administrator wouldn't sell players because they were the only assets the Bulls had. The RFL buying Odsal meant any potential buyer would be buying the `team` only. We didnt own anything.

`The Bulls` didnt hang on and make staff redundant. This was done by the administrator, Who was independent. He did this because otherwise we would have been liquidated and it bought time to find a buyer.

Siddlow was linked to Bradford months ago & Salford didnt want him.

Bradford fans / some other fans did raise a large amount of money doing various activities and pledging which is was Salford are attempting to do at the moment. Most fans would do this for their club & I'll certainly by pledging to help Salford myself.

The RFL did put on transport to matches at the back end of the season and advance sky money ( already due to the club in 2012) to help pay wages. But the money was already Bradfords so to speak it was just released sooner & was done IMO to ensure fixtures went ahead. As Bradfords administration was mid season for them to be liquidated would have caused a headache for the RFL.

People are moaning about the help Bradford received which is understandable if the RFL dont help other clubs in the same way. However, both situations are completely different.

Bradfords new owner has taken a huge risk because he has no assets other than the players/staff & for the next two seasons to stay in SL he wont be paid SKY money of over £1,000,000 that will be given out to the other clubs in the league over the next two years.

So although people are asking for the RFL to step in to help Salford, I would have preferred Bradford not to have had the help of the RFL and for them to have sold the club with Odsal intact earlier in 2012. The new owners wouldnt have been penalised then and would have had something for their money ( Odsal )

Let's see if that remains the case in 2 years time; I have a suspicion that the mysteriously 'withheld' Sky money could see the new owner of Bradford suddenly in possession of a large, Odsal shaped hole in the ground.

That's because you've already had it in advance in loans to run the club and keep the team together last season, what don't the blubbs fans understand about that?

Is that really true? I'm skeptical due to the previous lies we've been fed about this sorry saga. Ever since the lie about buying Odsal to "protect the iconic ground".

If the withheld money is reality I suspect something will be coming in return. Like Bren says, it wouldn't surprise me if its part of a deal to return odsal to the new owners. Or maybe it's a down payment for cut price rent your paying which I'm lead to believe is half what we pay for BV. This, despite the fact it has double the money generating potential. Of course I'm just speculating here as we'll never know the truth to all this. As we've seen nobody can really be trusted to give the fans a clear picture.

1. Bradford actually refused to sell any players during the administration period. We was offered £300,000 from Warrington for Bateman, both player and the club refused.

2. The Bulls have a hardcore base of around 6,000 fans but have an average of 10,000. Each supporter was willing to donate to the club. Hence the £500,000 was raised. With all due respect to Salford they do not have this man power or the motivation to save (no disrespect intended) if I am wrong please correct me.

3. Yes the RFL did help us....but at what cost? 6 point deduction which cost us a playoff place (which provides more money) and also half the sky money for the next 2 years (so we are at a disadvantage over the next 2 years with less money than the majority of clubs).

Is this something you know as fact or have you just made this up? Are you seriously suggesting the RFL advanced us Sky money running into millions of pounds?

Our share of Sky money has apparently been distributed evenly between the remaining SL clubs. I would have thought better uses could have been found for it but that's what the SL clubs voted for apparently. So no, we won't be receiving Odsal back for nothing in two years time.

As I understand it the administrator is legaly obliged to generate what income he can on behalf of the creditors the club has, refusing to sell any players got the creditors what exactly?
Has any income actually gone the way of any of the (then) clubs creditors?
Where did the (new) club benefit from the £500k?
If the RFL had not held your hand throughout this saga (including before there was any admission of financial trouble) you would not have a club at all to support now, so I would consider that a huge advantage, anything else is irrelevent.

I do not know all the legal things associated with the administrator but I do know he refused to sell a few players. I can't remember if Sykes was sold to you during this period or after :/
Again I don't know if any of the creditors have been paid but I'm sure some sort of payment will have been made to them, our administrator was more bothered about lining his own pockets rather than helping out creditors (we all hated him at the Bulls, although he did find us a quality owner).
The £500,000 was used to sort out short term cash flow, it paid off the HRMC (spelling?) and this essentially bought us time or else they would have wound us up earlier.
The RFL may have 'held our hand' through the saga and we as supporters appreciate that, they obviously knew about our impending financial situation as they bought the lease to Odsal so it couldn't be sold during the administration period. We were always going to get bought out it was just a matter of the administrator sorting it which he took the mick doing. One of the reasons the RFL helped was because we were very productive as fans to keep the club going......Salford have none of this. I do hope they get sorted but it must start from within like we did.

Wakefield had to survive the first 2 years in SL with no money from RFL or Sky. No one worried about us then!