Re: Points deduction decision : Wed Jun 04, 2014 10:16 pm  

martinwildbull wrote:

one of the partners is a specialist in employment and trade union issues, the other covers a broad range of commercial matters in the areas of technology and communications; restrictive covenant High Court claims; injunctive relief, corporate disputes (shareholder issues, warranty claims, directors duties and joint ventures) and PFI contracts so hardly sports lawyers depending on the RFL for their fee income.

and the only reference on the website to the rfl is advice on buying odsal stadium, which neither would have been directly involved in. So lets think, destroy my professional integrity or risk tuppence ha'penny of fees from the RFL? difficult choice even before considering the third member is an expert in the subject matter of the appeal.

Just because you aren't intelligent or informed enough to know of the 9 year link between the RFL & Pinsent Mason is no excuse for such pointless posts

Re: Points deduction decision : Wed Jun 04, 2014 10:28 pm  

LeagueDweeb wrote:

pointless post

Re: Points deduction decision : Wed Jun 04, 2014 10:39 pm  

I think I preferred the noble way he used to write his prose, I feel it was more honest.

Re: Points deduction decision : Wed Jun 04, 2014 10:40 pm  

Give me strength...I really should not bother replying to this troll, but it is hard to avoid an open goal sometimes...

LeagueDweeb wrote:

I merely provided the information that Pinsent Mason are contracted legal advisers to the RFL since 2005. That it is two of their partners who are on the independent appeal panel looking into the legitimacy of the punishment handed down by the RFL is not something I have commented on.

The whole world can see what you were implying, sunshine. You fool no-one.

LeagueDweeb wrote:

You never did come back about the capacity in which you had access to OK Bulls accounts, or the NDA you claim you had to sign?

Did I not? What an amazing thing. Set against the long list of matters you never responded to. But no matter.

In fact, regulars on here already know the answer to that, since I have stated it on here on a number of occasions. Although I never said "accounts" - I said "financials". Which may or may not extend beyond just accounts. I COULD tell you to go trawl back to find the answer out for yourself. Since the answer IS there. In fact, on this occasion, I think I WILL tell you to do precisely that. Since there are quite a few responsible posters on here who know the particulars.

By the way, I do not "claim" to have signed a NDA. I DID sign one. As some on here know for an absolute certainty. Are you calling me a liar? And I did not "have" to sign anything. I elected to.

LeagueDweeb wrote:

I wonder if Ryan Whitcut has been around Valley parade lately?

Your point is?

Re: Points deduction decision : Wed Jun 04, 2014 10:45 pm  

Yes, I read the "since 2005" bit, please address the point that I am making, that it is the size of the relationship compared to their other clients that make it unlikely they would risk losing them. If it was just those two on the panel I would agree with you, but with another expert on the panel that can shout fix I believe the balance is in favour of an evidence based decision not a corruption based one. Or are you accusing him of being corrupt too?

Re: Points deduction decision : Wed Jun 04, 2014 10:52 pm  

Martin, it has shown its true colours on the other thread, and has basically asked the mods to put it out of its misery. It has had its fun, but I think we've battered it enough. Not worth wasting any more time on now, amusing though it has been blasting an open goal repeatedly.

Re: Points deduction decision : Thu Jun 05, 2014 7:03 am  

Ave It! wrote:

Of course you would, you're a Cas fan and your mob are obssesed with us. Wheldon Road in few weeks time will be quite tense I imagine, the hostility from your fans against Salford and Dr Koukash is unreal.

Can't speak for all cas fans but I can honestly state that Salford used to be one of my favourite other clubs and I was, initially, delighted when you came into big money and looked like you would provide a genuine new challenge at the top.

The ignorance and arrogance your chairman has shown towards the rest of the sport makes me want to see him fail.

Would I like such money invested in my club: absolutely. But never him or his influence.

Re: Points deduction decision : Thu Jun 05, 2014 10:32 am  

Adeybull wrote:

Give me strength...I really should not bother replying to this troll, but it is hard to avoid an open goal sometimes...

The whole world can see what you were implying, sunshine. You fool no-one.

Did I not? What an amazing thing. Set against the long list of matters you never responded to. But no matter.

In fact, regulars on here already know the answer to that, since I have stated it on here on a number of occasions. Although I never said "accounts" - I said "financials". Which may or may not extend beyond just accounts. I COULD tell you to go trawl back to find the answer out for yourself. Since the answer IS there. In fact, on this occasion, I think I WILL tell you to do precisely that. Since there are quite a few responsible posters on here who know the particulars.

By the way, I do not "claim" to have signed a NDA. I DID sign one. As some on here know for an absolute certainty. Are you calling me a liar? And I did not "have" to sign anything. I elected to.

Your point is?

I find the volte face amazing. On one hand it's the RFL's fault, then when I reveal that the RFL's own contracted legal advisers comprise two of the three independent appeal members, I'm seemingly suggesting the independence of the panel is in question??

The 'financials' you have seen? Why do you have a problem in saying how you arrived in such situation now you've alluded to it?

Just thought I'd throw Bradford City into the mix, given his previous involvement there and his ultimately disastrous efforts to try and emulate it at Odsal with his best buddy.

Re: Points deduction decision : Thu Jun 05, 2014 10:35 am  

martinwildbull wrote:

Yes, I read the "since 2005" bit, please address the point that I am making, that it is the size of the relationship compared to their other clients that make it unlikely they would risk losing them. If it was just those two on the panel I would agree with you, but with another expert on the panel that can shout fix I believe the balance is in favour of an evidence based decision not a corruption based one. Or are you accusing him of being corrupt too?

How is detailing the composition of the independent panel in any way suggesting any agenda? The agenda pursued by many Bulls fans is that this whole mess is the RFL's fault. Now, after vehemently defending the RFL, I'm apparently suggesting they are influencing the appeal outcome? You really couldn't make this up!!

Re: Points deduction decision : Thu Jun 05, 2014 11:18 am  

There was a degree of ambiguity in your statement, but you have clarified that your belief is that they are independent, fair enough.

I cannot speak for all of this forums posters, but yes the mess is nobody else's fault than the owners (or not) of the Bulls. On the face of it the RFL have, as they reserve the right to do in the Operational Rules, done their best to help us and the other troubled clubs out according to the circumstances at the time. But if the bulls owners despite initial best intentions make a mess of it, then so too can the RFL. I remain neutral until theres evidence either way. Moving to the new structure of P and R is from the recent press release a big relief for the RFL, who should be focusing on promoting the game not micro managing the clubs. And thats what I would rather be discussing, what the current Bulls regime would do regarding restructuring the squad etc should even 6 points back be insufficient.