Re: Administration 3 - now in technicolour : Wed Nov 23, 2016 2:02 pm  

HamsterChops wrote:

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.

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.

Re: Administration 3 - now in technicolour : Wed Nov 23, 2016 2:20 pm  

HamsterChops wrote:

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

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!

Re: Administration 3 - now in technicolour : Wed Nov 23, 2016 2:25 pm  

mat wrote:

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.

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

Re: Administration 3 - now in technicolour : Wed Nov 23, 2016 2:28 pm  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote: 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... http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/n ... nding_cut/

Ferocious Aardvark wrote: 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... http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/n ... nding_cut/

Re: Administration 3 - now in technicolour : Wed Nov 23, 2016 2:43 pm  

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. http://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. http://www.loverugbyleague.com/news_241 ... ip-63.html

Re: Administration 3 - now in technicolour : Wed Nov 23, 2016 2:50 pm  

I really hope this fan ownership stuff doesn't get anywhere near being the successful bid. You may as well send us part time straight away it if it happens.

Re: Administration 3 - now in technicolour : Wed Nov 23, 2016 2:53 pm  

madasmcmadammcmad2 wrote: 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. http://www.loverugbyleague.com/news_241 ... ip-63.html Would expect anyone coming in with possible exception of lowe lot would need to appoint a CEO with rugby league knowledge and hopefully wouldnt accept anyone RFL foisted on them ALA ferres. Suspect this is more a case of irvine getting his name in frame rather than any serious intent from supporters direct group. AFAIK they arent even having a meeting til next week and theres been no mention of how they plan to fund anything. Suspect Brian smith might be in with a shout in a CEO type role too

madasmcmadammcmad2 wrote: 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. http://www.loverugbyleague.com/news_241 ... ip-63.html Would expect anyone coming in with possible exception of lowe lot would need to appoint a CEO with rugby league knowledge and hopefully wouldnt accept anyone RFL foisted on them ALA ferres. Suspect this is more a case of irvine getting his name in frame rather than any serious intent from supporters direct group. AFAIK they arent even having a meeting til next week and theres been no mention of how they plan to fund anything. Suspect Brian smith might be in with a shout in a CEO type role too

Re: Administration 3 - now in technicolour : Wed Nov 23, 2016 3:18 pm  

I hope we get Lawn. Didn't i see earlier in the thread the Seabrooks guy linked? Where did that come from? Any substance to this?

Re: Administration 3 - now in technicolour : Wed Nov 23, 2016 3:20 pm  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

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.

Totally with you on the injustice done to OK, and amazed that the RFL allowed it to happen. There again on the last point, maybe not. You would have thought that the deduction would have been used to pay creditors, but no the SL clubs abdicated the moral high ground, took the cash and ran

Not so sure about the calculation basis though, can you email me the written agreement of how the deduction was to be both calculated and deducted over the two years?

Re: Administration 3 - now in technicolour : Wed Nov 23, 2016 3:56 pm  

HamsterChops wrote:

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 disagree - his sentiment is 95% gloat and 5% crap

He is a complete dick head.

Unfollowed long since