i agree with you on this in regards to bradford starting in the next league down but if the rfl want bradford in super league what would stop them giving bradford a franchise next time around?...with a franchise system in place the rfl can in reality pick and choose its teams

I hate to say this for Bradford fans, But the club should have their SL license revoked if they are liquidated.



I wouldn't put them in Championship 1 though, Just drop them to the Championship, And they can re-apply for a license again, Back when Cas got relegated, We actually made profit in the National Leagues. So it would also give Bradford the chance to, If their fans remain loyal, They will easily make profit down a division, And be a much stronger club for it. Then when they apply for their license, They can be safe in the knowledge, They didn't get special treatment, They did it the hard way.



Albeit, They may lose some players, Many of their stars. But they have spent money they couldn't afford signing these players up, And the players could try and work with the new clubs, To have a clause in their contracts, That if in 2 years Bradford returned to SL, They could leave to Bradford only on a free (Or for the same fee paid by the club, If they pay one now), If the Bulls wanted them.



It has to be done this way for me, Cas lose money every year, Jack Fulton has a small fortune in loans owed by the club, But we lose less than most, And still own our own ground, Yet we are at risk when the SL licenses come around, Due to the RFL been retarded, And forcing clubs into a financial mire, Just to try and achieve new stadiums.

Back on topic.

Rangers not being in the SPL means crowd averages down = less revenue for clubs

Rangers not being in the SPL means less TV money in they are not there when the TV deal comes up for renewal = less revenue for the clubs.

In 2 years time go and ask the Scottish clubs whether they regret it or not.

Don't forget there's a lot of bitterness at Rangers in Scottish football. And Scottish football isn't known to be the most forward thinking of leagues.



In the end even a newco Bradford will be a stronger club than any of the alternatives. Plus, the clubs will decide what happens anyway.

Errrrrr.......wasnt part of Bradford's problem brought to the forefront due to unpaid taxes?

The SFL/SPL would never recover from Rangers being forced to start at the bottom. It would destroy the game north of the border. There is not much integrity in that.



Rangers will be out of the top flight for one season and one season only, even with the creation of a brand new league to achieve that.

What I'm saying is that its no good SPL clubs moaning about lost revenue, which will happen until Rangers return to the SPL.

They have voted not to have Rangers in the SPL, which is there choice. The end result of that is that there will be less money overal in the SPL for the clubs due to their actions. To think they can make up the shortfall is stupid, they can't. The winners in this will be the 3rd division clubs who can look forward to sell outs when Rangers are in town.

the rfl certainly have some big decisions to make especially with the proposed new investers wanting several conditions to the bulls buy out including buying back odsal and a guarenteed super league franchise.



neither in my opinion should be given especially the guarentee of a super league licence,the rfl should consider selling them back odsal at the price they aquired it for and not a penny less.



i think the rfl should also be questioning the motives of the newco has it seems they are more interested in turning the coral stand into a giant curry house rather than a smooth running rl club.other questions they need to answer is why have they never taken an interest before

Some people are nuts i am not a Bradford supporter but don't they realise it could happen to them, lets punish Bradford by all means drop them to the bottom of the league now and points deduct next year but don't demote them

But ultimatly points deductions mean very little in a franchised competition, which strictly speaking should have been considered when the system was introduced, so all the arguments of what has happened previous to that arent really relevant, and whatever punishment is given will be used as benchmark in the future



So essentially if Bradford arent ' relegated ' , then no club will ever be removed for financial failure, whatever happens here will set the precedent for the future

I don't buy into this 'removing Bradford will weaken the game' line. There's no proof of that. In fact, in my opinion the complete opposite will happen.



With new teams coming in like Hemel Hempstead, Northampton, a team like Bradford would be a godsend to the Championships in the current state of the game. Big team, big crowd. The fans of Bradford have proved they care about their team so no doubt will get decent crowds down there and take decent followings.



It may be for one season only but financially to clubs that could be a big bonus and be a big marketing pull for the Championships too.



The difference with previous clubs are that they haven't gone into administration at the beginning through a licence cycle (i.e. year 1). Crusaders went into admin at the end of year 2 and Wakefield beginning of year 3. With only one year left - and half-way through that year licences were being decided, it was futile to kick them out for someone else particularly when there was no guarantee that those respective clubs would remain in the licensing system.



If Bradford come out of administration without forming a new club then they can continue with their licence with the admin as big black mark on their next application.



If they don't and a newco is formed, it should be that they are demoted. A new team then has two years of SL grace to build a side and put forward a deliver a decent business plan ahead of the next 3 year licence period.

Am I missing something here but Bradford haven't been liquidated yet.



If the club are liquidated the club ceases to exist so there won't be a club to demote end of. A new club stting up would have to start in C1.



If we are bought out of administration why should we be made a special case of and knocked down? It sets a nice precedent for when the next club gets into trouble.



The OP is nothing more than a miserable bitter Fax fan with a massive chip on his shoulder. It's our fault their licensing application wasn't good enough last year you know. For Fax fans to try and sneak into Superleague through the back door is pretty cheap to be honest. Put a decent bid together.



Similarly the absolute rubbish from Wakefield fans about special treatment is laughable. Remind me of what you told the RFL about upgrading your ground after you won that Grand final against Fev. If they stuck to the rule book you wouldn't have even been in Superleague in the first place. The fact is that the RFL have bent over backwards to keep Bradford in Superleague but they've done the same for every other club that's got in trouble.

It would be interesting to see if Bradford could actually survive in the Championships and pay the ' market ' rental on Odsal

And what about all that investment which has gone into developing the academy and community work? Getting rid of that wouldn't weaken the game? I can't agree with that. Losing the Bulls would risk undermining the work that has been done in those areas and set the game back years there, possibly even decades. I understand the viewpoint of putting them lower down the league but this isn't football. We don't run our sport on football's rules because [iwe are a very different game to them[/i. We are not a sport where, if one teams goes to the wall, there's an abundance of replacements available.



Sure, we can't afford to save every club and it is tragic that we can't but, as harsh as it is to say this, some clubs are more valuable to the sport than others. On what grounds does it make sense to purposefully undermine our premier competition? If we were a sport awash with money and resources then sure there's an argument to support demoting the Bulls. At the moment, I don't see what purpose it serves to demote the Bulls. The sport's focus should now be on ensuring that what has happened there does not happen again. If we want to move away from the mismanagement of clubs then that is done via infrastructure and policy not punishment. The Bulls have been managed poorly and you can even say they have undermined the credibility of the licencing process but that management team has gone and we can't allow unfocused moral outrage to force us into decisions which could seriously harm the game. It is, to me, an unnecessary risk.

I don't think any Bradford fan can moan about Wakey's ground. Normally when you have a big hole in the ground you call it a quarry but you call it Odsal home of the Bradford bulls

The thing thats makes us Wakefield fans mad is the fact that you still have your team together. No one has been sold the free up money, nobody! At the start of last season before we conceded defeat and called in the administrators, we slashed our wage bill dramatically. We cut our cloth to avoid administration. Even then the administrators still sold players well below value, we were against it from then on. Even getting rid of the back room stuff is not that damaging because they can be set back on tomorrow assuming you come out of admin. Did Bradford actually do anything to avoid admin except double your bets up?

That's up to the administrator though it's his decision. He may still sell players who knows.



Yes they tried to avoid administration they 'honestly' took 500K off the fans. Not forgetting Andy Lynch, Burgess, Fielden etc. all going in recent years for big bucks.

Not complaining about Belle Vue am I? Just pointing out that the RFL are generally accomodating to every club.

Isn't rangers situ down to bad management then? who runs the club? and why havent any players been sold yet?...they've had offers

Why hasn't the administrator sold off Bradford's players, you mean? Because he's cut costs in other areas and, as of right now, has no need to sell off players.

I think that one of Bulls creditors is the taxman, so if they cannot pay the tax its the same as Rangers, but it has already been pointed out, the RFL has no spine for such matters.

The administrator sells the players no the RFL so don't see your gripe.



I can see fans championship fans frsutrations, they virtually have no way of getting into SL, even when an SL clubs goes belly up, they still probably won't get in.



The problem is the licensing system. We have 5 teams who don't have anything to play for since May! Fans aren't going to pay to watch a friendly game. We hear all the time on SKY "Team X are preparing for next year" What about this year? Teams should have something to play for the entire season.



It should be decided on the pitch if a team should be in SL and i have always said this.

Every club has to invest in their academies - it's part of the SL criteria. There is absolutely no reason why the Bulls cannot remain a big side in the Championship and utilise their youth structures. The loyalty of the fans will be key and they'll be able to afford to keep those structures. Will it weaken the game? I don't know - it's all hypothetical. Can you imagine the immense pride a full-time team of Bradford born local youngsters playing with pride and ripping up the division below and getting them back into SL? There is absolutely no reason why Bradford can't operate a full-time team for two years on their crowds and build a solid foundation ready for SL in 2015 potentially.



Sure, it may mean that some of the better youngsters are picked off by Leeds, Huddersfield, Cas and Wakefield (and Halifax if they go up) as they look for SL. But I don't think that the Bulls stepping down for two seasons will do any long-term damage on the scale of say Cas going down to the Championship with the chance of no return.



No, we don't model ourselves on football but we shouldn't have a system which encourages the same teams to sit at the top table even if they fail financially. Otherwise, what is the point of the 20 odd teams below existing if they can't get into SL? The Championships don't get the same incomes and are part-time. It is impossible to say how a Halifax or Featherstone would cope in a SL environment if they're never given the opportunity. Otherwise, let's tell them other 20 teams that there's absolutely no chance of them becoming SL clubs, shut up the drawbridge and let's just have ONE professional league of 14 teams? That seems to be what you're advocating?



If Bulls were demoted it would set a precedent - harsh I know. But it would mean that if clubs do go down the path of spending what they don't have they're in effect dicing with their own future. If we were to set a precedent that Bulls remained in, it would mean that other clubs could go down the same route and in effect be kept in. It's morally wrong.



As I said in my previous post, if Bulls come out of admin the hard way - they should remain in SL.

Money.







I'm in favour of franchising and don't have a problem with it because it forces clubs to be professional about their operation which is essential in a professional sport. I'd prefer twelve teams as well.

im sure you would just out of interest im sure the bradford bulls would be one of your twelve teams.





no reason at all that the bulls couldnt run a full time squad for a couple of years in the championship and keep hold of its youngsters given that they wouldnt be part of the salary cap.



in our last year in the championship we mannaged to bring through both joe westerman and richard owen whilst also keeping hold of michael shenton and craig huby so it can be done but like most bulls supporters you just want the slate wiping clean and carrying on has normal.