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!

The withheld SKY money is going to the other Superleague clubs.

I'm aware of that - I imagine it was the only way that the SL Chairmen could be persuaded to vote for the RFL's increasingly crackpot handling of the situation.

It doesn't have any impact on how I perceive the situation.

They didn't loan us SKY money two years in advance. Even if the RFL paid wages for 3 months of the season.. Baring in mind when Mr Khan bought us that would be nowhere near that amount of money. Unsure where you've got that from.

Of course not. Bradford Council still have the freehold of Odsal anyway and believe me many of Bradford's fans wernt happy with how everything was dealt with. I'm trying to point out that `RFL help` isnt always a good thing. It made finding a buyer more difficult and has left the new owner at a disadvantage.

Yes we have a new owner & everythings good but IMO If our previous chair admitted the problems initially with Odsal's leasehold intact the club/new owner would be in a better position now.

Yeah it would have been so much better without all that pesky RFL help!!!
I've never heard such disingenuous crap!!

Just for a minute I thought i'd pressed the Bulls forum by mistake !
There are 2 or 3 issues which still remain puzzling regarding the Bulls admin and re-forming

1, Why were the players not sold, whien it is usually the administrators duty to raise as much cash as possible to pay of the creditors, either in part or in full.

2, What exactly is the situation concerning advence monies and withheld monies from Sky and why would a sponsor be allowed to withhold any cash.

3, Finally, for the Bulls fans who actually think their club has been hard done by. Even with the RFL taking on the lease and this causing a subsequent problem with their security with the bank, there is no way in this world that the Bulls would have survived without the substantial help from the RFL and with this in mind, surely the RFL should be doing everything possible to ensure the survival of Salford along with any other club that falls into difficulty !

I meant if the RFL do what they did with Bradford and buy the lease to Salfords stadium... pay the wages for the rest of the season in advanced sky money and allow any debts to build up it may prove harder for Salford to find a buyer because a new owner would then need to pump more money into the club in the long run.

The above would be unlikely because we arent mid season anyway. Each situation is different.

The RFL helping Bradford was the only way for us to survive at the time but what im saying is in my opinion the old board should have made everyone aware of Bradfords debts sooner and then we wouldnt have been in the position where the RFL had to / wanted to buy the lease at Odsal and where SKY money had to be advanced because this has made things harder for our new owner.

I think the old board at Bradford delayed and delayed until we ended up in a mess.

I do think the RFL is partly to blame for every club that has got into financial difficulty since the licenses have been awarded. For the finances at Bradford not to have been noted when licenses were granted is unlikely. Very few clubs have broken even over the last few years & that needs to be looked at. Unfortunately the game is being run on quick sand at the moment and there's many clubs going through financial difficulties.

I know other forums suggest the SKY money from Bradford may have been put to better use going into some kind of `emergency fund` for clubs that are struggling. I hope that Salford get through the problem they have and that the fans there pull together and try and raise money ( but ensure it's safe and doesnt get swallowed up ) I know i will pledge to help them. I wouldnt want any club to get into that position.

If they hadn't been propped up with half a million quid of donations, they might have gone sooner.

For the record the RFL did not "Buy" the lease for Odsal, they took it in part payment for a £1.25m loan that still didn't manage to keep the club afloat (£700k of that loan related to outstanding monies from a previous loan which is effectively what the RFL valued the lease at) they then advanced the Bulls a further £550k to help them last them through closed season Dec 2011-Jan 2012, the £500k raised by fans cleared the directors liabilities and went nowhere to pay of any of the other debts, so all the Bulls fans did was help the numpties that put them in the mess. Without a shadow of doubt players should have been sold and the administrator was not independent and was clearly having his strings pulled, a 6 point deductions was more than fair as the club did not deserve their league position, as they were fielding a team they could not afford, which is what was causing the debt to increase weak in weak out

There is some coffee on the stove, may I suggest you wake up and smell it

In short bulls got help from rfl and other resources and so should salford.