Quote Ferocious Aardvark="Ferocious Aardvark"Why do you keep peddling these myths on here, is it some form of OCD? www.howtocleanstuff.net/how-to-polish-a-turd/'" Heh heh. Good website. I will pass it on to the missus so she can tart herself up for the upcoming Christmas party.

Quote Ferocious Aardvark="Ferocious Aardvark"Why do you keep peddling these myths on here, is it some form of OCD? www.howtocleanstuff.net/how-to-polish-a-turd/'" Heh heh. Good website. I will pass it on to the missus so she can tart herself up for the upcoming Christmas party.

Honest answer is I haven't a clue.



He's a very wealthy bloke though, by just about anybody's standards so he can do pretty much what he wants. In fact, the first question I asked myself was, why did he choose rugby league? Why not soccer or union? There are far more kudos and headlines to be gained in both of those than RL and, as I said, he seems to have the money to do what he wants. I can only guess he is happy to be the 'big fish' in a relatively small pool and will buy his way to the top and then probably leave when he achieves his ambition or gets fed up - but who knows, I don't.

Why the hell are we losing half of our Sky money this season? we are 650k short, even more when its shared out between the rest of the clubs!



My understanding is that the "clubs" voted on it when deciding our fate but how did the RFL let it happen? as the governing body of the sport they are meant to veto decisions are they not?



Unless anyone can tell me other wise and enlighten me, its an f in disgrace.

I don't know if or how a "vote" was taken but it was certainly the case, because it was widely reported, that the Bulls agreed to a deal whereby we got 50% money for 2 years and so that was (part of) the deals that were done. It was clearly one part of the price to be paid to get the SL licence, whoever was buying was not in a position of much choice, the choices being take it or leave it.



It is however my understanding that the decision to then distribute the resulting surplus between the clubs themselves was a separate thing altogether. When and how that deal was done, I don't know. The Bulls wouldn't have been a party to it, since they hadn't yet got the SL licence, so if there was any meeting of SL clubs to discuss this, it presumably follows that as a not-yet-member, the Bulls wouldn't have been in attendance. Presumably it must be recorded in some document or minute or something somewhere.



Couldn't agree more that the decision to divvy was and remains a disgrace, but even had they been aware of it, there was obviously nothing the Bulls could have done about it. IMHO it is a shame and a scandal that that money was not used towarsd creditors of the old Bulls, or, failing that, put to good use for the growth of the game in general, and I am disgusted that it was taken as a Brucie bonus by the remaining clubs. I don't know if the vote was unanimous, (assuming there was a vote) but it doesn't matter as anyone who voted against it has still taken the money so can't be that troubled by it.

it's probably recorded in the same minutes as the RFL decision to buy the lease on Odsal which more than likely is the start of the whole mess that just went from bad to worse

1. YOU HAD YOUR HANDS OUT BEGGING FROM FANS

2. YOU HAD DIRECT FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE FROM THE RFL

3. YOUR OWNERS AGREED TO THE REDUCED SKY CASH



....and now you whine about how that Sky cash was spent/distributed

We've moaned about it from the start so get up to speed, you really are coming across as the type of Kiwi the Ozzies take the P out of!

We were also docked 6 points as opposed to the 4 points previously dished when entering administration. Oh and where in the "rule book" does it state that by entering administration you are ejected from Super League? or that all the other clubs cast a vote on your fate, with strings attached!



How the hell as a club without a wealthy benefactor are we supposed to compete whilst losing 650k which is shared out amongst all the other clubs?



I'll say it again, its crippled us and its a f in disgrace.

You're lucky you even kept your SL license in the first place.

So if London get the same, you will not complain in the slightest then?

If you can't afford to be in the top league you should drop down and rebuild like Many other clubs have done (or tried to do) in the past. Simples

As by misfortune someone rashly quoted your nasty bilge,



Yes. The fans gave, and as a result, whatever else happened, we still have a SL club, which we wouldn't otherwise have had. But WTF does that have to do with the Sky distribution?



If you mean "The RFL gave us money" then of course, no they didn't.



Yes, 50%, but only in the same sense as a Chicago offer they couldn't refuse.



Yes. As it was never agreed by us that it would be divvied up amongst the other clubs. We agreed to accept less money. We did not agree to make big cash donation to every other SL team - they did that all by themselves.



You are, I entirely agree. Credit to your screen and keyboard for saliva-resistancy though.