Re: Bulls Fans Forum - 12/10/17 : Fri Oct 13, 2017 5:59 pm  

debaser wrote: So where in the rule book does it say that we should be deducted 12 points? Has anyone found the rule yet? 6.2 - Dated 2015?

debaser wrote: So where in the rule book does it say that we should be deducted 12 points? Has anyone found the rule yet? 6.2 - Dated 2015?

Re: Bulls Fans Forum - 12/10/17 : Fri Oct 13, 2017 6:08 pm  

Angelic Cynic wrote: 6.2 - Dated 2015? yes that's the 12 point deduction that applied to the old club that was liquidated. Now explain why it was applied to new club which applied to join the RFL and was forced to enter in the championship with the points deduction and negligible central funding as opposed to league 1 with no sanctions where it should have entered. RFL wants to claim we're a new club on one hand when it suits them but apply sanctions as if we're the old club on the other hand. Case of having their cake and eating it too ( so suit big Nige down to the ground ).

Angelic Cynic wrote: 6.2 - Dated 2015? yes that's the 12 point deduction that applied to the old club that was liquidated. Now explain why it was applied to new club which applied to join the RFL and was forced to enter in the championship with the points deduction and negligible central funding as opposed to league 1 with no sanctions where it should have entered. RFL wants to claim we're a new club on one hand when it suits them but apply sanctions as if we're the old club on the other hand. Case of having their cake and eating it too ( so suit big Nige down to the ground ).

Re: Rimmer At The Fans Forum : Fri Oct 13, 2017 6:53 pm  

Bull Mania wrote:

For anyone who went, did Ralph Rimmer actually say the below regarding licnesing or is it just more lies...

"
Ralph said it would be based on four key areas: crowds, development of players, generated income and attraction to the broadcaster."

This is an interesting example of what has been mentioned about Gledhill twisting things actually.

In response to him tweeting:

AC: “We believe that by 2021 a new Super League structure and licensing format will be in place.”

a Jason Priestley responded with:

What’s the criteria going to be ? Cos if it’s crowds n money and the ground the bulls ain’t got a chance

Mick quoted that question and answered with

Ralph said it would be based on four key areas: crowds, development of players, generated income and attraction to the broadcaster/viewers.

Tonight, a Halifax fan questioned him over it and asked Aaron Bower and Michael Carter if this was correct. Mick then back tracked, saying that those four key areas were actually related to central funding, not licensing and that he never said it was licensing related. Even though he clearly did. Then he got on with deleting a lot of the tweets where he had clearly misled people. And then blocked the fan that had proved he was talking crap.

Full of it and dangerous when naive people consider him a reliable source.

Re: Bulls Fans Forum - 12/10/17 : Fri Oct 13, 2017 7:06 pm  

I wonder whether Wood and Rimmer have ever been to a Tribunal. I have, many times, and it can be a quite uncomfortable experience.

I find Rimmer's 'moral compass' comment frankly laughable. If an employee has been denied benefits to which his contract entitles him, there is absolutely no immorality in pursuing the employer who has broken the contract. Quite the reverse, in fact. The Tribunal will not concern itself with moral issues , only the legalities will matter.

The claimants will be represented by a barrister, possibly more than one, and the contradictions so apparent in the RFL's case will quickly be used to embarrass and discredit them. The only outcome I can foresee is significant costs and loss of credibility for the sport's governing body. I'd love to watch it, seeing those two squirm and bulls***t under oath would be well worth paying for.

But, assuming they are receiving some kind of legal advice themselves, it seems certain they will avoid this by agreeing a settlement, the terms of which will be confidential. Disappointing, but I can't see it going any other way

Re: Bulls Fans Forum - 12/10/17 : Fri Oct 13, 2017 7:13 pm  

On the subject of the court case, I think we can all now clearly see what the argument is. The simple fact that by starting the club in the Championship and on -12 points, it completely contradicts the idea this is a new club/entity. It's hard to see how this won't end in the claimants winning either by settlement or court case. I now just hope from a purely selfish POV that this doesn't cripple the club again and that the RFL or one of the others being sued are the ones that end up paying most of the money out.

Re: Bulls Fans Forum - 12/10/17 : Fri Oct 13, 2017 7:41 pm  

Stan Doffarf wrote:

I wonder whether Wood and Rimmer have ever been to a Tribunal. I have, many times, and it can be a quite uncomfortable experience.

I find Rimmer's 'moral compass' comment frankly laughable. If an employee has been denied benefits to which his contract entitles him, there is absolutely no immorality in pursuing the employer who has broken the contract. Quite the reverse, in fact. The Tribunal will not concern itself with moral issues , only the legalities will matter.

The claimants will be represented by a barrister, possibly more than one, and the contradictions so apparent in the RFL's case will quickly be used to embarrass and discredit them. The only outcome I can foresee is significant costs and loss of credibility for the sport's governing body. I'd love to watch it, seeing those two squirm and bulls***t under oath would be well worth paying for.

But, assuming they are receiving some kind of legal advice themselves, it seems certain they will avoid this by agreeing a settlement, the terms of which will be confidential. Disappointing, but I can't see it going any other way

Don't forget your own Club are also one of the defendants. Could end up being pretty embarrassing for them too if it does actually get to a tribunal. As the old saying goes caveat emptor.

Re: Bulls Fans Forum - 12/10/17 : Fri Oct 13, 2017 7:50 pm  

As the RFL is a member organisation, it could be argued that all 42 clubs are defendants.

Re: Rimmer At The Fans Forum : Fri Oct 13, 2017 7:58 pm  

HamsterChops wrote:

This is an interesting example of what has been mentioned about Gledhill twisting things actually.

In response to him tweeting:
a Jason Priestley responded with:
Mick quoted that question and answered with
Tonight, a Halifax fan questioned him over it and asked Aaron Bower and Michael Carter if this was correct. Mick then back tracked, saying that those four key areas were actually related to central funding, not licensing and that he never said it was licensing related. Even though he clearly did. Then he got on with deleting a lot of the tweets where he had clearly misled people. And then blocked the fan that had proved he was talking crap.

Full of it and dangerous when naive people consider him a reliable source.

No backtracking at all.

I can't be held responsible if Halifax supporters possess an inability to listen.

Ralph Rimmer quite clearly says (3.55 mins in) that it is for all clubs - Super League down.

It's quite dangerous to note your pathetic obsession with me. Have you tried professional help?

Re: Rimmer At The Fans Forum : Fri Oct 13, 2017 8:00 pm  

MicktheGled wrote:

No backtracking at all.

I can't be held responsible if Halifax supporters possess an inability to listen.

It's you with the inability to listen.

The question asked to you was in relation to licensing. You answered with those 4 criteria. When questioned on that, you said it was actually about central funding and you never said it was about licensing, which was a blatant lie. When questioned on that, you deleted all the tweets knowing you were wrong.

I saw the full conversation before you deleted it. You can't lie about it to me.


I'll give you chance to clarify. Are those 4 criteria actually about central funding and nothing to do with licensing? And if that's the case, why did you originally respond with that answer when asked what the criteria for licensing was? I'm more than happy for you to explain.

Re: Rimmer At The Fans Forum : Fri Oct 13, 2017 8:22 pm  

HamsterChops wrote:

It's you with the inability to listen.

The question asked to you was in relation to licensing. You answered with those 4 criteria. When questioned on that, you said it was actually about central funding and you never said it was about licensing, which was a blatant lie. When questioned on that, you deleted all the tweets knowing you were wrong.

I saw the full conversation before you deleted it. You can't lie about it to me.


I'll give you chance to clarify. Are those 4 criteria actually about central funding and nothing to do with licensing? And if that's the case, why did you originally respond with that answer when asked what the criteria for licensing was? I'm more than happy for you to explain.

If you have listened to what actually Ralph Rimmer said last night then you will know the answer that the criteria is indeed from Super League downwards.

I couldn't care less what the Halifax trolls I've blocked are saying. They had three opportunities to listen to what was said and yet they still came back with nonsense.

No doubt they'll appear on here again.