I'd echo most of that. I'm ok with 3-5 years as long as the club has no more winding up orders, staff not being paid and threats of administration. Each year finishing top 4 and getting some games against SL opposition would be enough for me as long as the long term plan was there and the club was stable.



I agree though the club will have a great difficulty selling tickets if we get hit with a 12 point penalty. Whilst I'm not worried about relegation, as I think we have a good enough squad to overturn that deficit, we are not going to be challenging for anything other than the Championship Shield again. Whilst the hardcore will accept that and still turn up, any remaining floaters might just sack this season off and come back the year after when we start on 0 again.

Even with a 12 point deficit if we're playing good rugby and challenging the top 4 teams it may not be the disaster in attendances we fear.



I can see where you're coming from though. It'll be a test to motivate players to excel when there's no incentive other than personal pride.

You could see some players lost a bit of motivation as soon as we were in the Championship Shield in 2016 (understandably in some cases). Imagine what it'll be like if they're essentially playing for it from Day 1.



I think the fact we're probably down to mainly the hardcore fanbase already may mean the fans don't take too much of a hit, but again it may depend on ticket prices. It's going to be a hard sell for a £230 (or whatever Green's set price was, I forget now) season ticket when you know you're playing for Championship Shield at best. Same for a £20+ matchday price. A very hard sell.

The idea of a heavy deduction, like that before and taking our sky money only damages the well being of the club, in the supporters and players..



I'm sure its been covered before but the owner who incurs the debt just walks..



Another point that rubs me up a bit is the last 2 owners have been rubber stamped by the RFL so shouldn't they shoulder a bit of the blame?

The Hood admin was down to our own poor management.

Each admin was our own fault but I agree that giving a new guy a job to do with one hand tied behind his back is only going to increase the chances of it going wrong again.



Rules is rules though, and we'll get nowhere fighting the RFL no matter how bizarre those rules seem.

Taking to Twitter, @Rod_Studd said, "Bidders shouldn't have to convince an administrator. They should have to convince the Bulls fans. The fans should be interviewing bidders."

Pretty sure if we looked at the rules in 2012 there would have been nowhere that "said a club will be fined 50% of sky money and shared amongst other clubs"

Everyone is worried about getting a 12 point deduction. But that is only 6 games. This year we dropped a total of 18 points at least 10 of which we shouldn't have.



Assuming we come out of administration in tact and hold onto our squad, then I do not believe a top 4 spot is beyond the ability of this team.

Where do they sell these cups that remain steadfastly half-full? Mine are always half-empty.

As much as I want to make sure the right person is in charge, I can also happily admit that this Pettit bloke and his company are probably better qualified to know who can run the business properly than I am.



Rod's sentiment is a good one, but I don't think he necessarily thinks before he tweets.

I'm certain rod thinks before he tweets. Its just that all his thinking revolves around his fan ownership model. Quoting barcelona fc is fan owned is a red herring as they have massive income from commercial side and a much bigger fanbase, Where in a situation where we need a massive cash injection immediately with much smaller commercail opportunities and a much smaller fan base not many of whom can afford to put any money in above their season ticket/merchandise spend. His idea is a total non starter IMO.

I disagree. He thinks too much.

Anyone listening to what Rod Studd has to say needs to give their head a shake. He's rugby league's equivalent of Katie Hopkins - saying anything it takes just to get bites.

Thinking requires a brain...

Also, I believe that both Barca and Real Madrid received HUGH sums of money from the Spanish government too, which is the main reason they're the two biggest clubs in Spain.

Can somebody please clarify exactly what went on here? I hear this 50% sky money "fine" being banded about all the time as though some injustice has occurred...



But my understanding at the time was that it was OK himself that came up with this idea. We were in danger of being voted out of super league by the other clubs, and so Ok offered this as a sweetener to persuade them and the RFL to let us remain in super league.

Therefore in my opinion there has been no injustice, we offered those terms, they were not forced upon us.



Was that not the case?

Correct that OK offered to forfeit 50% of the money.



I think the injustice part was what the clubs then voted to do with that money. Rather than "give it to Bradford, they're struggling anyway" (which admittedly is wishful thinking), or the more likely "pump it into youth development" or something community related, they decided to share it amongst themselves like the fat kid woofing down the leftovers rather than giving to the homeless bloke sat outside.



The other clubs getting that money meant they had an extra leg up on the steps down that forfeiting the money had already cost us.

For Rod’s information, the behemoth that is Barcelona FC, apart from paying a huge number of seven-figure and six-figure salaries to the legion of people who run it, are sponsored by

Nike

Qatar Airways

Beko

Gillette

Konami

Estrella Damm

Audi

Gatorade

Stanley Black & Decker

Allianz

Toshiba

Movistar

Coca Cola

...among others.



What with that, and a paltry average attendance of a mere 70,000 plus, I have no idea where they get their money from. I am sure however that this is exactly the model we could put in place at Odsal, and it is just a mystery to me why we can’t immediately go with Rod’s advice, indeed why doesn’t everybody do it?

Pfft. What have Qatar Airways got that Beds R Us haven't?

No it bloody wasn't. He was on the point of signing, and after 5pm that condition was sprung on him. Had he said no, and walked, as anyone except someone desperately and genuinely intent on saving the club would have done, we would have had no club. It was late in the evening and there was nobody else, no second chance, take it or leave it.



To have people years later madly claiming it was his idea is typical of the shoite which passes for comment on social media. The deal had all but been done, and then that curveball came in.



I have been asking rhetorically ever since we went tits again if the new buyer is going to get the same half money penalty for 2 years, but I suspect it was just a personal dig at Omar. They knew it was bollox and grossly unfair, they knew (or must have known) that it made keeping the club going at any normal level pretty much impossible - yet they did it anyway.



And of course the other SL clubs in their disgusting greed decided to help themselves to the money, adding insult to injury by actually stealing additional money, by using a bogus method of calculation, and everyone pretending not to notice.

Not quite correct. It wasnt 50% off the sky money. It was 100% of the sky money. But they spread it over 2 years so we got 50% funding two years running.

Beds R us guy is a joke...I would have kept a low profile if I was him put my bid in and kept myself to myself...

Where are our barriers!

In fairness, I did mean 50% over 2 years, which is essentially the same thing.

Quote Ferocious Aardvark="Ferocious Aardvark"No it bloody wasn't. He was on the point of signing, and after 5pm that condition was sprung on him. Had he said no, and walked, as anyone except someone desperately and genuinely intent on saving the club would have done, we would have had no club. It was late in the evening and there was nobody else, no second chance, take it or leave it. To have people years later madly claiming it was his idea is typical of the shoite which passes for comment on social media. The deal had all but been done, and then that curveball came in. I have been asking rhetorically ever since we went tits again if the new buyer is going to get the same half money penalty for 2 years, but I suspect it was just a personal dig at Omar. They knew it was bollox and grossly unfair, they knew (or must have known) that it made keeping the club going at any normal level pretty much impossible - yet they did it anyway. And of course the other SL clubs in their disgusting greed decided to help themselves to the money, adding insult to injury by actually stealing additional money, by using a bogus method of calculation, and everyone pretending not to notice.'" Thank You FA, I stand corrected. And for the avoidance of doubt, I have found this article from the T&A which pretty much backs up your claim, I hadnt seen this article at the time... www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/n ... nding_cut/

Quote Ferocious Aardvark="Ferocious Aardvark"No it bloody wasn't. He was on the point of signing, and after 5pm that condition was sprung on him. Had he said no, and walked, as anyone except someone desperately and genuinely intent on saving the club would have done, we would have had no club. It was late in the evening and there was nobody else, no second chance, take it or leave it. To have people years later madly claiming it was his idea is typical of the shoite which passes for comment on social media. The deal had all but been done, and then that curveball came in. I have been asking rhetorically ever since we went tits again if the new buyer is going to get the same half money penalty for 2 years, but I suspect it was just a personal dig at Omar. They knew it was bollox and grossly unfair, they knew (or must have known) that it made keeping the club going at any normal level pretty much impossible - yet they did it anyway. And of course the other SL clubs in their disgusting greed decided to help themselves to the money, adding insult to injury by actually stealing additional money, by using a bogus method of calculation, and everyone pretending not to notice.'" Thank You FA, I stand corrected. And for the avoidance of doubt, I have found this article from the T&A which pretty much backs up your claim, I hadnt seen this article at the time... www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/n ... nding_cut/

Irvine in Former Cronulla chairman Damian Irvine is being lined up to run Bradford if a supporters group takes over the club. Irvine did a great job at the Sharks and now he is UK-based with the necessary knowledge to operate a rugby league club successfully. If fan ownership via Supporters Direct gets the reins, and that is no guarantee considering the interest in the Bulls, then Irvine will be involved. www.loverugbyleague.com/news_241 ... ip-63.html

Irvine in Former Cronulla chairman Damian Irvine is being lined up to run Bradford if a supporters group takes over the club. Irvine did a great job at the Sharks and now he is UK-based with the necessary knowledge to operate a rugby league club successfully. If fan ownership via Supporters Direct gets the reins, and that is no guarantee considering the interest in the Bulls, then Irvine will be involved. www.loverugbyleague.com/news_241 ... ip-63.html