Re: Whitcut Gone : Wed Nov 13, 2013 8:43 am  

Perhaps the gap between the ratification and yesterday was a handover and notice period.

Re: Whitcut Gone : Wed Nov 13, 2013 8:55 am  

M@islebugs wrote:

1, I didn't see any evidence of 'clear' or 'blatant' lies.

2, He was trying to minimise the fallout from something beyond his control, at the same time as selling the club to potential investors, sponsors (without which we are f***ed) and reassuring suppliers of all the stuff you need to run the club. What did you think he should say, "It's touch and go if I can keep the lights on"?

The players were paid within a few days and nobody died.

I would prefer them to say nothing than give us lies. I appreciate there may be reasons behind it, but if you want people to trust you, you don't come out and say one thing, then completely contradict it a couple of months (or even days/weeks) later. Which is what Whitcut did with the wages situation (the second month), and with the business plan submission. Don't preach about being honest with people and having transparency, then come out and give off a load of bull (if you pardon the pun).

Re: Whitcut Gone : Wed Nov 13, 2013 9:45 am  

HamsterChops wrote:

I would prefer them to say nothing than give us lies. I appreciate there may be reasons behind it, but if you want people to trust you, you don't come out and say one thing, then completely contradict it a couple of months (or even days/weeks) later. Which is what Whitcut did with the wages situation (the second month), and with the business plan submission. Don't preach about being honest with people and having transparency, then come out and give off a load of bull (if you pardon the pun).

You think there was a serious option to say nothing? Maybe I'm wrong but I'm guessing you don't know precisely what information he had, what events or circumstances he was trying to manage or just how things may have been changing from one moment to the next. On this basis, to call him a liar is going overboard. Faced with an impossible situation he made a call to say the least damaging thing possible in the hope it got sorted out. It did, bills and wages were paid.

Had he told the 'truth' as you see it and lost the confidence of creditors, sponsors and maybe even the input of one of the guys who came on board, he'd have been hanged on here. And rightly so!

Re: Whitcut Gone : Wed Nov 13, 2013 9:55 am  

Why are people speculating when the T&A already states, in clear terms, that RW is out "after failing the sport’s governing body’s fit and proper persons test".

Not much ambiguity there. However, if you were still struggling, it goes on:

RFL director of licensing and standards Blake Solly yesterday confirmed Mr Whitcut, who first joined the business as general manager last year during Omar Khan’s reign, had failed the mandatory test.

“He was afforded an opportunity to appeal or seek a dispensation from the operation of that test but declined to do so,” he said.

Other people suddenly coming on the scene and getting on board suddenly starts to make much more sense, though what makes no sense at all was the publicly announced official ratification just a short while ago, when it is not feasible that the RFL didn't already know then what they know now.

Re: Whitcut Gone : Wed Nov 13, 2013 9:58 am  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

Why are people speculating when the T&A already states, in clear terms, that RW is out "after failing the sport’s governing body’s fit and proper persons test".

Not much ambiguity there. However, if you were still struggling, it goes on:

Other people suddenly coming on the scene and getting on board suddenly starts to make much more sense, though what makes no sense at all was the publicly announced official ratification just a short while ago, when it is not feasible that the RFL didn't already know then what they know now.

Exactly

Re: Whitcut Gone : Wed Nov 13, 2013 5:32 pm  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

Why are people speculating when the T&A already states, in clear terms, that RW is out "after failing the sport’s governing body’s fit and proper persons test".

Not much ambiguity there. However, if you were still struggling, it goes on:

Other people suddenly coming on the scene and getting on board suddenly starts to make much more sense, though what makes no sense at all was the publicly announced official ratification just a short while ago, when it is not feasible that the RFL didn't already know then what they know now.

Broadly agree with your assessment FA. Perhaps the RFL were attempting to help us out for a change, as it seemed important for us to get a fairly swift answer re the ratification situation, assuming they knew of RWs lack of credentials, it may not have been relevant to the ratification process due to the other 3 directors being of sound mind and body, so to speak?

Couldn't see them missing that as that was/is part of the overall process of what they class as "Due Diligence" I think?

Re: Whitcut Gone : Wed Nov 13, 2013 6:26 pm  

Anyway, enough of shenanigans at the Bulls. Let me completely forget rugby league for a moment, and post a picture you might like

Re: Whitcut Gone : Wed Nov 13, 2013 8:54 pm  

Let me know if you guys that pm me got there replys

Re: Whitcut Gone : Thu Nov 14, 2013 6:29 am  

Explains the delay.

Doesn't help with the season ticket sales not that it should affect then. Judging by some of the comments on various things the general public are thick.

One in the T & A branding everyone one liars and suggesting fraud based on the pledge cash. Are people really that thick? Omar Khan bought the club out of administration after the pledge cash had been collected it's got shaft all to do with anyone at the club now or over the last year.

Re: Whitcut Gone : Thu Nov 14, 2013 6:30 am  

I hate people!