Re: Ownership and twists : Wed Apr 30, 2014 2:10 pm  

This may be the last we hear of Lamb;

'It's with regret, after many attempts the new management @OfficialBullsRL @marcngreen don't want my assistance. Good Luck Bulls.'
And:
'@TheRFL @OfficialBullsRL Bulls; substantial investment with a team of professional business people was deemed not what the club needed.'

[Bulliac]

Re: Ownership and twists : Wed Apr 30, 2014 2:56 pm  

roofaldo2 wrote:

Mills and Boon more like

Definitely not Mills and BOOM....then!

Re: Ownership and twists : Wed Apr 30, 2014 5:57 pm  

martinwildbull wrote:

...
FA's question presupposes that the club was penalised at the time of OK's control. He is wrong. Byelaws section 4.7 states that it is the readmitted or admitted member that suffers such penalty as the RFL sees fit to apply, not the expelled member.

Wait a minute, so at last the penny has dropped, you now accept what I have always said is the case - yet mystifyingly try to pretend the opposite!

Part of my whole POINT is that the club was sanctioned at a time when (presumably) the RFL assumed BB2014 were fully committed, they prematurely announced the sanctions intended against BB2014, but BB2014 dropped out. My consistent argument is that at that moment, the RFL needed to suspend any sanction, wait until new owner was found, consider their plans etc., and then decide on the sanctions. Instead we have the absurdity of the present situation.

martinwildbull wrote:

...And as it is the readmitted or admitted member that has been penalised, then that very same member, has the right to appeal the penalty applied to it.

And then you go an spoil it all. BBNL were NOT penalised. The RFL purported to sanction BB2014. Please just think about that for a second It really isn't hard. If sanctions against BBNL have ever been reported or announced - then where?*

There is another question arising from that, though. Rather oddly, absolutely no announcement has been made about sanctions against BBNL. Indirectly, the RFL have commented through the press that the 2 year half-money distribution sanction will remain - but do not explain how, or how much has been paid/withheld. So, WHAT is the financial sanction on BBNL for the club they bought having had an insolvency event? If it was fair and just that last time round it was a year's Sky money, then why is that not happening again?

The RFL did mention that the points deduction "stands" - without explaining how, or why, or whom it is a sanction again. So has BBNL been sanctioned 6 points or not? Of course, I have also answered that question - the RFL realised their points deduction announcement against BB2014 was premature, but have fudged the matter to try not to loook any more foolish.

martinwildbull wrote:

...This of course covers both the points penalty and the withholding of Sky funding.

Incidentally, given we got an unprecedented whupping for a year's funding last time round, why have we (seemingly) got Nil this time round?

martinwildbull wrote:

...So FA has asked the wrong question, and I have provided the answer to the right question.

So as you can hopefully now appreciate, neither of the above are correct statements.

But on the question of the distribution, it seems that the RFL are both claiming every penny of distribution back from OKB and from OK personally - yet continuing to shortchange BBNL. Nice work.

* I accept it is possible the RFL have privately signed a sanctions agreement with BBNL - like they did with OKB - but both parties are keeping it secret.

Re: Ownership and twists : Wed Apr 30, 2014 7:15 pm  

Whatever the legal details a look at the leagur table shows -6 points.

As for the cash penalty when the rfl had their testosterone rush at the time of the first admin - which the other clubs gleefully accepted, perhaps now they have realised that such a massive cut back in funding effectively guaranteed tits-up 2 even if we had been "cutting our cloth" and not managed by a bunch of commercial and financial dopes.

Re: Ownership and twists : Wed Apr 30, 2014 7:38 pm  

Northernrelic wrote:

Whatever the legal details a look at the leagur table shows -6 points.

As for the cash penalty when the rfl had their testosterone rush at the time of the first admin - which the other clubs gleefully accepted, perhaps now they have realised that such a massive cut back in funding effectively guaranteed tits-up 2 even if we had been "cutting our cloth" and not managed by a bunch of commercial and financial dopes.

Well given they're implementing that very rule going forward, I wouldn't hold out too much hope

Re: Ownership and twists : Wed Apr 30, 2014 7:49 pm  

vbfg wrote:

Is he a bomb in a Bull?

Groan, gerroff, etc

Now that's comedy

Re: Ownership and twists : Wed Apr 30, 2014 9:14 pm  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

Wait a minute, so at last the penny has dropped, you now accept what I have always said is the case - yet mystifyingly try to pretend the opposite!

Part of my whole POINT is that the club was sanctioned at a time when (presumably) the RFL assumed BB2014 were fully committed, they prematurely announced the sanctions intended against BB2014, but BB2014 dropped out. My consistent argument is that at that moment, the RFL needed to suspend any sanction, wait until new owner was found, consider their plans etc., and then decide on the sanctions. Instead we have the absurdity of the present situation.

And then you go an spoil it all. BBNL were NOT penalised. The RFL purported to sanction BB2014. Please just think about that for a second It really isn't hard. If sanctions against BBNL have ever been reported or announced - then where?*

There is another question arising from that, though. Rather oddly, absolutely no announcement has been made about sanctions against BBNL. Indirectly, the RFL have commented through the press that the 2 year half-money distribution sanction will remain - but do not explain how, or how much has been paid/withheld. So, WHAT is the financial sanction on BBNL for the club they bought having had an insolvency event? If it was fair and just that last time round it was a year's Sky money, then why is that not happening again?

The RFL did mention that the points deduction "stands" - without explaining how, or why, or whom it is a sanction again. So has BBNL been sanctioned 6 points or not? Of course, I have also answered that question - the RFL realised their points deduction announcement against BB2014 was premature, but have fudged the matter to try not to loook any more foolish.

Incidentally, given we got an unprecedented whupping for a year's funding last time round, why have we (seemingly) got Nil this time round?

So as you can hopefully now appreciate, neither of the above are correct statements.

But on the question of the distribution, it seems that the RFL are both claiming every penny of distribution back from OKB and from OK personally - yet continuing to shortchange BBNL. Nice work.

* I accept it is possible the RFL have privately signed a sanctions agreement with BBNL - like they did with OKB - but both parties are keeping it secret.

That's a very long-winded way of showing you don't understand this.

In fact, it is very simple. Sporting sanctions such as a points deduction are applied to THE CLUB. Nothing to do with who owns the Club.

Re: Ownership and twists : Thu May 01, 2014 1:18 am  

Wooden Stand wrote:

That's a very long-winded way of showing you don't understand this.

In fact, it is very simple. Sporting sanctions such as a points deduction are applied to THE CLUB. Nothing to do with who owns the Club.

That is a short way of showing that you have absolutely not the first clue what the hell you're talking about.

Oh and although you are one of the worst trolls, in this case I do believe you aren't actually bright enough to understand the point. So best leave the discussion to the grown-ups.

Re: Ownership and twists : Thu May 01, 2014 1:20 am  

roofaldo2 wrote:

Well given they're implementing that very rule going forward, I wouldn't hold out too much hope

Implementing what rule?

Re: Ownership and twists : Thu May 01, 2014 8:18 am  

Wooden Stand wrote:

That's a very long-winded way of showing you don't understand this.

In fact, it is very simple. Sporting sanctions such as a points deduction are applied to THE CLUB. Nothing to do with who owns the Club.

You are wrong.


HTH