Bullseye wrote:
Hood and co didn't say they'd made a dogs breakfast of it at the time of the pledge but quite obviously they had.
Checking with the RFL how much of the loan would be going back and with the bank as to how all this might affect the overdraft would seem to be fairly important things to do before proceeding.
All reasons why I'd be reluctant to see Hood back.
Isn't it accepted that the club were losing £100k a month by the time they entered administration?
Considering what had already entered the public domain, surely there was an obligation on the shareholders to call an EGM, oust the board that had brought about such a situation and examine the books.
The idea that Hood and his buisness plan, backed by a mystery Chinese billionaire were going to rescue the club from a fiasco of his own making is risible.
The 'we'll never know' theory is simply silly.
