Board index ‹ RLFANS MAIN ‹ The Virtual Terrace ‹ bradford bulls problems

[quote]Indeed you're not bothered. That would interfere with your preconceived ideas of right and wrong. RFL - wrong. Bulls out of business - right.

Fsck every one of you self appointed true fans of the game. Wallow in your irrelevance.[quote]

For all you Bradford fans that think they have a right to be in super league. We don't want you out of business, we just want a fair and level playing field for all rugby league clubs no matter what division you are playing in. Bradford should start again in the lower division and grow again. When they do that we will all be happy and say well done. You shouldn’t be awarded anything for failing (You’re not a bank). Before you start I don’t mean on the field . Although how many trophies would you have won if you had bought and paid players according to your finances and not over spent?

Slugger McBatt wrote:

I said in the following paragraph, do what the rules say. So what do the rules say? If there is to be a vote to do something other than what the rules say, they clearly are a moveable feast. The point I was making that it would look like a conspiracy if the RFL do something other than what the rules say. I said at the start, I'm happy with four points. If there isn't a rule, fine, take a vote, do what you want. If the rules are not applied strictly, however, it is clear that different considerations apply to different teams.

Are the Bulls bigger than the game? No.

Sounds like your chip is bigger than mine.

Maybe I should have spelt it out: what evidence do you have to back your assertion that your list of clubs can be divided into those who can do what they want and those who can't?

Always Travelling wrote:

For all you Bradford fans that think they have a right to be in super league. We don't want you out of business, we just want a fair and level playing field for all rugby league clubs no matter what division you are playing in. Bradford should start again in the lower division and grow again. When they do that we will all be happy and say well done. You shouldn’t be awarded anything for failing (You’re not a bank). Before you start I don’t mean on the field . Although how many trophies would you have won if you had bought and paid players according to your finances and not over spent?

Why should Bradford be made a special case and be forced to drop out of SL if they're able to find a buyer?

Wakefield weren't. London weren't. Crusaders got into this position every off-season they were in SL and only dropped out when told they weren't getting their franchise renewed. So why single out Bradford and say they MUST start again from the bottom?

For all you Bradford fans that think they have a right to be in super league. We don't want you out of business, we just want a fair and level playing field for all rugby league clubs no matter what division you are playing in. Bradford should start again in the lower division and grow again. When they do that we will all be happy and say well done. You shouldn’t be awarded anything for failing (You’re not a bank). Before you start I don’t mean on the field . Although how many trophies would you have won if you had bought and paid players according to your finances and not over spent?

That's not wallowing. That's flopping about like a demented seal.

Roofaldo wrote:

Why should Bradford be made a special case and be forced to drop out of SL if they're able to find a buyer?

Wakefield weren't. London weren't. Crusaders got into this position every off-season they were in SL and only dropped out when told they weren't getting their franchise renewed. So why single out Bradford and say they MUST start again from the bottom?

Crusaders were not told they were not getting a licence. They pulled out themselves a short time before D-Day,due not being able to sustain their place in SL. Otherwise Wakey. would have gone out.

Cassandra wrote:

Crusaders were not told they were not getting a licence. They pulled out themselves a short time before D-Day,due not being able to sustain their place in SL. Otherwise Wakey. would have gone out.

I believe they were told to pull out by the RFL. Besides which, it'd been all change every off-season for them. And without being privy to all the relevant information, you can't say for 100% that Wakey would have dropped out even if Crusaders had managed to put together a coherent bid.

But still, it doesn't change the question; Why should Bradford be singled out and be forced to start from the bottom?

Cassandra wrote:

Crusaders were not told they were not getting a licence. They pulled out themselves a short time before D-Day,due not being able to sustain their place in SL. Otherwise Wakey. would have gone out.

Please can you tell me where it was ever stated by the RFL that wakey would not get a franchise?

No, i didn't think so.


All of this Bradford should be punished but i feel sorry for their fans is enough to make you spew!
All it is is a load of fans from all the clubs who perceive they have been unjustly treat in the past by the RFL revelling in the possibilty of one of the big boys suffering. Why don't you just admit it, rather than prentending to be defenders of justice?

Roofaldo wrote:

I believe they were told to pull out by the RFL. Besides which, it'd been all change every off-season for them. And without being privy to all the relevant information, you can't say for 100% that Wakey would have dropped out even if Crusaders had managed to put together a coherent bid.

But still, it doesn't change the question; Why should Bradford be singled out and be forced to start from the bottom?

They shouldn't be singled out in any way, just apply the rules and benefits in a straight line according to the rules, without showing preference of prejudice ?????

rupert bear wrote:

Please can you tell me where it was ever stated by the RFL that wakey would not get a franchise?

No, i didn't think so.


All of this Bradford should be punished but i feel sorry for their fans is enough to make you spew!
All it is is a load of fans from all the clubs who perceive they have been unjustly treat in the past by the RFL revelling in the possibilty of one of the big boys suffering. Why don't you just admit it, rather than prentending to be defenders of justice?

If Crusaders had not pulled out ,who in your opinion would have been sacrificed to make way for Widnes then?

SIMMSFAXTEDDY wrote:

at what point was i laughing?

At what point did I say you were laughing?

unfortunatly its people like you that fail to see the some would say 'corrupt' actions of our governing body,

Ah, you mean the RFL were 'wheely, wheely mean' to your club....harden up lad.

and continue to belittle the situation that occurs right across rugby league from the Amateur game up that will be its eventaul downfall.

Taking the mickey out of one of your failposts is not belittling the situation....

ie.. lack of money/investment.

"Lets all sit back, they (RFL) seem to be doing an ok job dont they"

"they did really well to secure that multi million £ sponsorship with Stobart didnt they?!"

Who made the final decision on that deal?

oh wait! is that another club in admin??!!!

Sad fact is, the RFL cant save the Clubs from themselves...In a recent case, one Club found itself in difficulties partly because the directors had forcast reaching the playoffs...Luckily, the RFL were able to help negotiate the club out of the mire....I bet you were pleased.
....back to foaming about the RFL in 3....2...1..