I wonder whether he had a deal in place for more money with the expectation that SL Europe would secure the club. That would have meant he was free to take up his new improved deal elsewhere. Now OK want to transfer his existing contract and terms over and he isn't happy.

One thing's for sure we don't want to be paying lawyers any brass trying to sort it out.



If he wants to go, let him go. One less on the wage bill.

Spot on. Wonder how much his agent is to blame in all this. Why not wait till the dust has settled to leave, or is it done this way to get Hudds out of paying a transfer fee! this leaves a nasty taste particularly him being a Bradford Lad.

Is there a plus side hiding in this though? If he has had to cancel his contract (or probably more accurately not have it transferred to OK BullS) before todays game, does this mean that those with 2013 contracts who are playing have already transferred over? Would they have to have contracts signed up with OK Bulls to play?

What time is kick off today?

3pm UK time.

Cheers dude.

This is comical. I am not saying this because I support the Giants and I haven't seen enough of this lad play to make an informed decision however if you read the T & A piece its little more than conjecture and assumption by the guy that's written it (Ross Heppenstall) and the Bradford backroom staff who seem to be crying foul because has decided to make a decision and jump ship. If you read the article "it is our understanding' and 'it would appear that' quite why the lawyers think an y of the players owe them anything after the way they have been treated is beyond me. I couldnt care less who the lad signs for but what is he supposed to do wait until he doesnt get paid and is able to put food on the table.



Poor piece of journalism. Stick to the facts when they present themselves

You mean by being paid full amounts of their salary on time?

OK I need some help here. Adey?



As BG was charged with getting the best outcome for the creditos I fully understood, and valued, his stance in refusing offers for our playing staff, even considerable ones such as that for Bateman. I assumed this was to protect the company's assets in the result of making the business a more valuable and attractive proposition for investors.



So, given that the method of transfer to OK appears to have made void all contracts what was the point in turning down income by selling players earlier in the "process?"



I'm utterly bemused by this but wonder if there was a reason why.

You should stick to the facts, No Bulls player has not been paid.

Interesting.... disappointed to hear this but i suppose they have to look after number 1! I just hope we dont see many more follow!



Something of interest though.... If the RFL hasnt ratified the purchase by OK as has been mentioned then surely we cant offer a TUPE for the contracts yet so i would assume he hasnt turned down the TUPE but forced his way out in an almost football style.... I could be wrong but thats how it seems to me!