Re: Ownership and twists : Wed Mar 19, 2014 5:00 pm  

remember he had to make a bid to administrator that was unconditional so there was no guarantee the Bulls would be in SL

Re: Ownership and twists : Wed Mar 19, 2014 5:04 pm  

It seems to me that there's three options as to why the half Sky money thing was offered.

1) It was an empty gesture from Omar who believed that the rest of the league wouldn't take the money
2) Omar believed that there was a lot more money to make from the Bulls and Odsal and that the club would be able to cover the short fall
3) The club was told in no uncertain terms that to not offer up half the Sky money would mean they would not be allowed into SL for that season.

Re: Ownership and twists : Wed Mar 19, 2014 5:13 pm  

it wasn't an offer........... the deal on the table was accept reduced central funding as voted for by Majority of clubs and keep SL licence on provisional basis or reject the deal and Bulls will be starting life in lower league

Re: Ownership and twists : Wed Mar 19, 2014 5:17 pm  

My mistake. Looking back through articles from the time it seems clear it was a demand from the other clubs.

Re: Ownership and twists : Wed Mar 19, 2014 5:20 pm  

vbfg wrote:

It was SLE as I recall, the RFL is just one member as each of the clubs are. As far as I'm aware they're not sat at the head of the table. A member proposes, the other members vote and then the beer and sandwiches come out.

The RFL arent at the head of the table for SLE, however by what i am sure is sheer coincidence Nigel Wood is the Chairman of SLE whilst also being the CEO of the RFL.

Re: Ownership and twists : Wed Mar 19, 2014 5:39 pm  

vbfg wrote:

It was SLE as I recall, the RFL is just one member as each of the clubs are. As far as I'm aware they're not sat at the head of the table. A member proposes, the other members vote and then the beer and sandwiches come out.

Thats not correct, Beer and sandwiches are served at point 1 on the Agenda, you are confusing this with the serving of cakes pastries and other sweets!

Re: Ownership and twists : Wed Mar 19, 2014 5:51 pm  

SmokeyTA wrote:

The RFL arent at the head of the table for SLE, however by what i am sure is sheer coincidence Nigel Wood is the Chairman of SLE whilst also being the CEO of the RFL.

There is no such coincidence. Wood is not the chairman of SLE.

The Bulls actively supported Wood in SLE versus the rebel SL clubs.

Re: Ownership and twists : Wed Mar 19, 2014 6:13 pm  

[quote="pie.warrior"]it wasn't an offer........... the deal on the table was accept reduced central funding as voted for by Majority of clubs and keep SL licence on provisional basis or reject the deal and Bulls will be starting life in lower league[/quote]

That's the top & bottom so I am informed

Re: Ownership and twists : Wed Mar 19, 2014 7:03 pm  

Bullseye wrote:

Aye, it was the other SL clubs that insisted that OK accept certain conditions i.e. a fine in practice. I’m not sure which clubs voted for it or if they all did. They then also voted by majority to share our allocation amongst themselves. Another great move, thanks to all that did that. However not all voted for that. Again I’d like to know how they voted. I know Leeds were one that voted against sharing our money out between clubs.

OK was a fool to accept those conditions (He obviously thought he could make up the shortfall with concerts with obscure past it 80s pop “stars” on the bill but these proved to be huge loss makers) but it was a case of accept it or have no club. A wiser man would have walked away then. Going into 2013 on half money was never going to work out. It might all have gone wrong anyway with OK in charge but it may not have happened so quick.

That there was such a “fine” when the RFL had got their money back irks me somewhat. Sure, the RFL bent over backwards to help the Hood regime and should have kept other clubs informed but they in the end didn’t lose any money. They gave the club a massive loan and got the lease in return. Had the RFL informed other clubs and a fuss ensued then fine. The Hood regime could’ve gone into admin earlier and all the OK episode avoided.

The SL club vote only served to punish the new owner for the sins of his predecessor. Had Hood or his cronies still been involved I could’ve understood the punishment. As it was it just served up another guaranteed administration.

Nobody comes out of this well.

My reading of it is that it was more a case of 'They are clearly one of your favourites so we will punish them to make sure you WON'T be making any secret pacts in future'.
Not exactly the best of RL moments. One in which no one comes out exactly smelling of roses.

Re: Ownership and twists : Wed Mar 19, 2014 7:25 pm  

As I've said before, the half distribution was to OK an almost literally last minute imposition. It is ludicrous to suggest he "offered" it. He should have said no but agreed rather than have the deal collapse.

The later vote by the clubs to make a divvy between themselves was a nullity as there was nothing to be divvied, but was waved through regardless. The cost to the Bulls over 2 seasons of this raid would have exceeded 40k even without this year's increased distributions.