Did they mean it was £2m reduced to £1m or £3m to £2m?

Considering the cap for the whole squad is £1.65m, this must go back years and cover a long period of time. As Jake says, wonder how many other clubs have similar liabilities? Can't for a minute imagine we're the only club that's used this mechanism, but if any had this sort of liability it could tip them over the edge. Crikey.
Most clubs reference the image rights point as a potential liability in their accounts - anyone know whether there's been a decision on that one? Seem to think Leeds were a test case?

Normally, they are pretty much the same thing as any agreement would be conditional payment within an agreed (and normally short) time frame and if you fail to adhere to the terms of the agreement then you end up paying the full whack.

It appears to me listeneing to Humberside that it was a bill of £2m which Pearson knew about and took into consideration in his offer for the club and the reduced amount the previous board accepted for it. He has now reduced it to around £1m and got that scehduled over time, and told Humberside that the money he has saved would be reinvested in training and other facilities, whicxh makes it clear that he knew about it allowed for it and now has it as surplus to spend on re investment. Just as I heard it though! Several other clubs have indicated though over the weeks that they are in stuck with this. Good job we have Pearson really I suppose!

That's my understanding too, and bear in mind the players we've had in the last ten years and compare them to the players L**ds, Saints, Wigan, Bradford et al have had, ours will have been at the lower end of the liability scale I imagine.

there could be some squeaky bums over t'pennines.

Just about every SL club is my understanding, although the degree varies considerably.


The Leeds case is still ongoing AFAIK.

Love to see them Ba$tards come a cropper. I hate them more than Rovers at the mo.

maybe not. But it's close call.

The problem is that if Leeds lose this case it's going to cost every club in RL a fortune - in some cases it may be enough to put them out of business. So just this once I'd like to see them win.

I see your point.
Now I know how that bloke felt in that film 127 hours, just before he had to amputate his own arm.

A good deal By Adam Pearson by the look of it, his experience with the football side of it has helped. Football have been dealing with this for some time and seem to have reached "arrangement" with the Inland revenue. The cost of these debts was I understand reflected in the lower price paid by Mr Pearson to the outgoing board, so he has once again proved his business skills by saving a decent wedge.

I await to see what happens with the other clubs now as the inland revenue have a legal duty to maximise the amount of money they collect in taxes. The can and do excercise some degree of latitude as ti would we appear to have taken full advantage of .

Fair play Adam

we have also set a precedent by which other clubs cannot wriggle out of it completey, be interesting to see how Wakey, Cas et al cope.

Its interesting to see if other clubs follow the example and get a deal whilst they can because if Leeds lose the case the Inland Revenue will be knocking on every clubs door for the full whack.

Just change their names to Vodaphone Tigers/Warriors/Rhinos etc. they'll be fine

Failing that, they could always threaten to play their home games in Monaco - problem solved

No they're not. If I agree to pay you a million quid back over 12 months and you accept then we've come to an agreement but I still owe you the money

Interesting that blunderside reported pearson has again mentioned "years of under investment" by the previous owners. I'd love to know how much they milked out of the club

Wakey are the only superleague club that don't have any liabilities do to the administration earlier in the year (the same would have applied to the Crusaders). There was talk of a virtual league-wide mass adminstration call if Leeds lost their test case to stop most of SL going under. Be interesting how it pans out.

10 years according to the Pearson statement.

Jesus if Rovers having being paying all there Aussie's the same they must be millions in debt to the inland revenue.

Lets hope so. As with all matters financial, it is something the ambulance chaser is remarkably reluctant to discuss. More rejects, reserves and lower division players on the way for the dobbins as they struggle out of this?

If our liability was £2m over the last 10 years, I would expect Rovers' to be less, seeing as they've only been in SL for 5. Althought I reckon they're still not in as strong a position to pay theirs off.

Say £1m then? How much did Allam loan them?

still the same trading company, isn't it, it wasn't liquidated?

and believe all us FC fans, Wakefield have a HUGE liability, he's sat in the coaches office reading a book cod'ead sent him!

Nope, totally new company, spirit of 1873. Its was confirmed at the time of the takeover that the liability was wiped out with the death of the old company.

As for the second point, yeah your probably right though we can't be much worse than this year!

at least one positive came out of administration then.

I'd be careful, llok what Fubar did with our squad who, without being rude, were much better than Wakeys for next season (as it stands).

Not Hull KR, according to Rob... I mean Hartleystash.

Where is Hartley's stash?

Or do you think he actually meant 'tache?