Re: bradford bulls vote : Fri Jul 06, 2012 6:08 am  

Slugger McBatt wrote:

My only concern is that the new strict rules could be seen as a moveable feast, depending on which team is involved. Wigan/Leeds/Huddersfield/Saints/London/Warrington/Bradford/Hull FC can do whatever they want. Breach any rule they fancy and it won't be a problem. Salford/Wakefield/Cas/Widnes/Hull KR better not or you're out.

Another weird and wonderful conspiracy theory. Please explain for the benefit of the ignorant among us.

Re: bradford bulls vote : Fri Jul 06, 2012 6:14 am  

Asgardian13 wrote:

Another weird and wonderful conspiracy theory. Please explain for the benefit of the ignorant among us.

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.

Re: bradford bulls vote : Fri Jul 06, 2012 6:23 am  

I'd keep them in.

They could end up losing fans, players and youth players.

Some of them they'll, and the game, lose will never get back.

This isn't football, we aren't big enough to lose clubs with such big followings.

Re: bradford bulls vote : Fri Jul 06, 2012 6:31 am  

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.

I'd agree with you there slugger

[Kosh]

Re: bradford bulls vote : Fri Jul 06, 2012 6:38 am  

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.

AFAIK the rules only deal with a points deduction for entering admin. There is no mechanism for expelling a club from SL other than by majority vote of the member clubs. I understand that at the moment the voting may not be as clear-cut as I had thought it might be.

Re: bradford bulls vote : Fri Jul 06, 2012 10:50 am  

No - Salford fan - we are in a tricky position it seems as well so would expect to be treated the same and all future Admins/Liquidations must start afresh. Consistency is what we need - if allowed to carry on then that sets the standard and all clubs in the same boat can point to that decision.

Re: bradford bulls vote : Fri Jul 06, 2012 11:03 am  

SmokeyTA wrote:

Believe me, the SPL will come to regret the short-sighted decision they took there.

Nonsense, they cheated and will pay the price. Smaller clubs will get good attendances, Rangers will have a good run of success for the fans and they will give great "press" as they come back.

The problem at Bradford is that RL, can't afford to kick the fans, because there would be no obvious route back to the top table. Coupled with the fact that the RFL own Odslum!!! No way will they be kicked out.

Incidently, if this was Wigan instead of Bradford, i wonder how many would want Wigan kicked out? Point is that many could be looking at this with biased eyes.....

Re: bradford bulls vote : Fri Jul 06, 2012 11:35 am  

Wigan Peer wrote:

Nonsense, they cheated and will pay the price. Smaller clubs will get good attendances, Rangers will have a good run of success for the fans and they will give great "press" as they come back.

And when Sky and ESPN renegotiate their contract, pulling millions of pounds out of the game?

Re: bradford bulls vote : Fri Jul 06, 2012 12:06 pm  

Bradford fan and if the club goes into liquidation and ceases to exist, I don't think they should be allowed to take their place back in Super League as if nothing had happened. I would be happy for the club to start again at the bottom and work their way back up into Super League. But then, if they don't come back in - are we left with 13 clubs? Why should someone take their place? Not sure how the licensing system works here, I guess the objective of the licensing system was that this situation would never arise. But yes, hopefully it won't come to that.

And maybe in the SPL teams will start to get real in terms of what they can afford to pay players etc, it will make for a more level competition and supporters will come flocking back to watch teams outside of the Old Firm (or Celtic, as they are now known in the SPL!).

[Mild Rover]

Re: bradford bulls vote : Fri Jul 06, 2012 12:18 pm  

I assume we're talking about if they were to be a newco rather than a rescued oldco. In which case, it is arguably about letting them 'enter' rather than 'stay'.

And it depends on the alternative - a 13 team SL? Unlikely.

Fairest (well best, at least) IMO, if SL stays at 14, would be to allow applications for the 14th spot from New Bradford and any Championship club that wants to throw its hat in the ring.
If New Bradford got themselves sorted they'd have a very good chance of being the best applicant.