Re: Bulls v Fax v Leythers v Fev. Referee The RFL : Mon Sep 03, 2012 12:39 pm  

Telling the RFL to get lost will work against the current suitable clubs when a real upportunity presents itself - who knows when another club will fall over? I don't think the current clubs have a choice apart from submitting a bid.

Re: Bulls v Fax v Leythers v Fev. Referee The RFL : Mon Sep 03, 2012 3:30 pm  

SmokeyTA wrote:

Some clubs bring more to SL than others.

If the smaller/lower SL clubs want the same protection as the likes of Bradford, then its easy, get the crowds, get the youth, get the success and visibility Bradford have. ........

This may just be the view from a numbnut on the VT but sadly it is also the thinking at RFL headquarters and unfortunately amongst SL Chairmen..

This is the problem. This is why Bradford have been allowed to do what they've done.

In the previous round of licensing Widnes were told that, having gone into administration and effectively expunged their financial history they could not then draw upon their more positive history (cup kings, decent attendances, etc ...) to obtain a license. This is EXACTLY what Bradford have done (or will be allowed to do).

That is the inequity and injustice that the game faces from those running it. One of those voiciforous Chairmen made his feelings clear at the time. Now he's sat at the top table his silence is deafening. The people that matter are so insular - so club orientated. So much so that we haven't a hope in hell of getting within a million light years of the Aussies or of the game flourishing over here.

Re: Bulls v Fax v Leythers v Fev. Referee The RFL : Mon Sep 03, 2012 3:47 pm  

A joint statement from Fev Fax and Leigh, read by the 3 chairman stood proudly outside the venue of the Play Off \Final (is it Widnes or Warrington? no one seems sure) Saying that they don't wish to be a part of this game and that all 3 clubs are looking forward to the playoffs we're currently participating in would be fantastic, but wont happen

Re: Bulls v Fax v Leythers v Fev. Referee The RFL : Mon Sep 03, 2012 4:20 pm  

If by some miracle of insanity , the ' independant ' licencing committe awarded the ' vacant ' SL place to one of the Championship clubs , it will potentially cost the RFL several hundred thousand pounds , I cannot see a situation where the new owner at Bradford is going to pay back the RFL the money they have spent keeping the Bulls going till the end of this season out of income generated in the Championships

It really is a pointless exercise , they will publically praise us if we apply as long as we all keep our gobs shut afterwards , but as you well know , ask 1 difficult question and your bid,BOD and club will be ridiculed

As long as the Championship Club Chairmen continue to accept this rubbish , then they dont deserve anything better

Re: Bulls v Fax v Leythers v Fev. Referee The RFL : Mon Sep 03, 2012 5:14 pm  

Starbug wrote:

If by some miracle of insanity , the ' independant ' licencing committe awarded the ' vacant ' SL place to one of the Championship clubs , it will potentially cost the RFL several hundred thousand pounds , I cannot see a situation where the new owner at Bradford is going to pay back the RFL the money they have spent keeping the Bulls going till the end of this season out of income generated in the Championships

It really is a pointless exercise , they will publically praise us if we apply as long as we all keep our gobs shut afterwards , but as you well know , ask 1 difficult question and your bid,BOD and club will be ridiculed

As long as the Championship Club Chairmen continue to accept this rubbish , then they dont deserve anything better

I think you are being hugely unfair, honest.

You are probably referring to things like this, from Halifax's recent SL application:

The club business plan was inadequate, figures presented by the club as the budget and performance forecasts for the 2012-14 Licence period were speculative and the club did not provide sufficient information for KPMG to complete their assessment procedures.

The reason no such criticisms of incumbent clubs have been made is that they haven't submitted speculative plans, ever, as Peter Hood, former chair of Bradford appeared to confirm recently when he said:

There is a cashflow model that shows that, if nothing happened to generate new monies, based on a full salary cap spend and other substantial football costs, then the result would be a loss of more than £1million.

Re: Bulls v Fax v Leythers v Fev. Referee The RFL : Mon Sep 03, 2012 7:38 pm  

Ask yourself, if Halifax's licence application was so poor, why let us go through to the next round of bids up against the other super league clubs? The RFL made it sound pitiful eh? We should never have got as far as we did! (we made a profit over the year!)

Ask yourself, how come Bradford got a grade B licence and no statement was ever made about the speculative nature of their application?

The answer - none of the bids were ever considered in any detail. When our chairman hit back at the RFL the RFL lashed out like a spoilt kid in the playground.

When it became apparent to the RFL that the bulls were struggling financially we had all the shenanigans about buying Odsal and making it "the wembley of the north". All a smoke screen. The RFL knew people would ask about the quality of the licence inspection and the validity of the whole process and began to lie themselves out of a big hole. And people still fall for it

Hope that helps

Re: Bulls v Fax v Leythers v Fev. Referee The RFL : Mon Sep 03, 2012 7:47 pm  

Some people fall for it ............ most choose to ignore it because it's embarrassing.

One or two posters on the VT steadfastly refuse to EVER find fault with the RFL, from the Crusaders debacle to the Stobart sponsorship deal. These same people are the ones that seamingly NEVER comment on actual matches or performances of their club. That's because they don't attend matches.

Re: Bulls v Fax v Leythers v Fev. Referee The RFL : Mon Sep 03, 2012 7:57 pm  

Our lot are the same , they readily admit the RFL are bent as a 3 bob coin, but they cant help themselves , they blind themselves with ' but what if? ' , and well they said they like the LSV

Re: Bulls v Fax v Leythers v Fev. Referee The RFL : Mon Sep 03, 2012 8:04 pm  

There's always that nagging doubt that in a round of licensing one SL club might pull out - as Crusaders did. So, imagine the horror as London pull out and you haven't applied. This is why all three clubs will partake in Blake Solly's Championship Club Massacre.

Re: Bulls v Fax v Leythers v Fev. Referee The RFL : Mon Sep 03, 2012 8:31 pm  

Sorry Starbug a bit late with the reply.

I suppose all I am suggesting is that the Championship Chairman put forward an "independant" person picked by themselves to be a part of the process the RFL so desperately wishes to keep behind closed doors on their terms and with people they pick. Why do you think they want it done so quickly?

I had in mind a respected individual ie an ex judge, barrister, senior ex policeman,respected polititian (there are some still left) not affiliated to any of the clubs in question but whos job is to actually see that a fair and transparent process takes place. ......and not be afraid to speak up if it wasnt( I initially thought of Harry Grashon actually because he caused Wood to spit so many feathers last time with his questions on how the decisions were made!! )

The bottom line is that it is never going to be an exact science but at least if the "independant" felt that a fair process had taken place it would appease some. The alternative is Nigel and Co pick the Bulls because they just decide whats best for them fullstop. You have all done very well Championship people BUT WE DECIDE!

Its about the best we can ask for and I would submit is a very reasonable request that is hard in an "open and transpartent" process for even the RFL to refuse but no doubt they would probably try.