Re: Ownership and twists : Sat Feb 15, 2014 10:14 pm  

Omg did a 6 year old write that? Anybody fancy translating it?


2 more Lamb bhunas please.

Re: Ownership and twists : Sat Feb 15, 2014 10:20 pm  

Bulls4Champs wrote:

Omg did a 6 year old write that? Anybody fancy translating it?


2 more Lamb bhunas please.

It's like the written version of a magic eye puzzle

Re: Ownership and twists : Sat Feb 15, 2014 10:21 pm  

It hurt my eyes.

Re: Ownership and twists : Sat Feb 15, 2014 10:44 pm  

But it's the "gods honour truth"

Re: Ownership and twists : Sat Feb 15, 2014 10:57 pm  

Adeybull wrote:

Again, you are seeking to shift the argument, having failed so spectacularly to gain any traction with your original one.

Your "soft option" comment was quite clearly referring to the recent going into administration. Not what happened 18 months ago.

I repeat - again - anyone buying a club that has had £1.3m Sky money confiscated - and who was totally uninvolved and totally blameless in the stupidity that led up to the problem - is hardly "taking the soft option".

At least, unlike so many others from over your way, you are making an effort to support your arguments. But, on this one at least, I really think your argument is unsupportable.

I'm not seeking to do anything of the sort.
I said you had chosen the soft option and that is a fact.
You seem to think that because SL saw fit to hit you with a penalty this is in some way you taking the tough option - it isn't.
You didn't choose, it was issued, you had no part in the decision making.
This (if it's about spin) is about your spin.
This was issued because SL chairmen saw through the sham.
Why else would it have been given?
Would you have chosen it if hadn't been handed out?
Of course not, I'm not looking at making this a personal attack on Bulls apologists as some have, I remember how helpful you were in suggesting help towards the trust before it got off the ground.
But it's not hard to look through all this and see a few advocates of the bulls party line.
Anything not in tow gets shot down, even from within your own support.
I posted a few days back that carvel was a test case and that others will follow, I was mocked.
Sammut has followed, and as I pointed out others will follow him.
The board is on chaos, layers want out, and people like you say "there is nothing to see here" maybe you're prolonging your own death...who knows? To be honest I've got past caring
Blind optimism is a common trait within sports supporters, but it is exactly that in many cases...blind.
I wish you no ill, I'll be narked if we suffer because of what I see as favouritism of course I will, but please don't try spinning your situation to make others seem stupid because it doesn't wash.
It didn't with the SL chairmen, it doesn't with me, I can't speak for the "RL family".

Re: Ownership and twists : Sat Feb 15, 2014 11:00 pm  

Indeed.It is the truth.
I fail to understand it either.
Can anyone interpret it for ME.
For 2 points difference why did Mr Ok bankrupt the club.

What was gained?love by the other clubs?

Don't blame the RFL the suggestion came straight from good old Omar.

Re: Ownership and twists : Sat Feb 15, 2014 11:03 pm  

steadygetyerboots-on wrote:

Some people on both sides really need to take a few days away from the forum, this is all getting very unpleasant and some are really starting to show themselves in a bad light.

That's not quite the case. Trolls from other clubs are showing themselves in a bad light.

Most Bulls fans (and lots of decent fans from other clubs) are absolutely fine.

Re: Ownership and twists : Sat Feb 15, 2014 11:15 pm  

kinleycat wrote:

I'm not seeking to do anything of the sort.
I said you had chosen the soft option and that is a fact.
You seem to think that because SL saw fit to hit you with a penalty this is in some way you taking the tough option - it isn't.
You didn't choose, it was issued, you had no part in the decision making.
This (if it's about spin) is about your spin.
This was issued because SL chairmen saw through the sham.
Why else would it have been given?
Would you have chosen it if hadn't been handed out?
Of course not, I'm not looking at making this a personal attack on Bulls apologists as some have, I remember how helpful you were in suggesting help towards the trust before it got off the ground.
But it's not hard to look through all this and see a few advocates of the bulls party line.
Anything not in tow gets shot down, even from within your own support.
I posted a few days back that carvel was a test case and that others will follow, I was mocked.
Sammut has followed, and as I pointed out others will follow him.
The board is on chaos, layers want out, and people like you say "there is nothing to see here" maybe you're prolonging your own death...who knows? To be honest I've got past caring
Blind optimism is a common trait within sports supporters, but it is exactly that in many cases...blind.
I wish you no ill, I'll be narked if we suffer because of what I see as favouritism of course I will, but please don't try spinning your situation to make others seem stupid because it doesn't wash.
It didn't with the SL chairmen, it doesn't with me, I can't speak for the "RL family".

Wrong.

The punishment (or appeasement of anger attempt) was made By Mr OK in his meeting to put a creditable plan forward to take control of his beloved Bulls.In those far off heady days you could see his abundant joy at achieving his lifetime ambition.
From Chappati walla to respected Bulls owner in 53 years.He"d finally made it.
The chairman simply ratified it and said "thank you very much for that kind £100 grand Mr Omar.

Doubt many will be jumping to pay it back right now as the creditors stand to lose another million.

Madness.
The numbers simply could NOT add up with an act like that.

And that is precisely as things have turned out.

One of the Other creditable bids ,whose projections have turned out to be entirely accurate therefore withdrew.

Not prepared to match OK"s magnanimous and self destructing gesture.

Will the chairmen be ringing him up to help him now?I doubt it.

Naieve and stupid.

Just as Robbie is to put Gale on a 2 year contract when we could be playing championship next year.He"s the director.

These are big contracts by the way.

And you get not much brass in championship.

Wonder if they will bring in parachute payments like the premier league?

To help with precisely that situation

Re: Ownership and twists : Sat Feb 15, 2014 11:16 pm  

Just when things couldn't get more bizarre everyone switches to writing in verse.

Re: Ownership and twists : Sat Feb 15, 2014 11:28 pm  

In verse do I write