: Thu Apr 09, 2009 6:08 pm  

Adeybull wrote:

Hiding behind?

That's disappointing, and I thought better of you than that.

How can it be "hiding behind..." to point out to some people - its seems you have to do it repeatedly - that the answer to the performance issues cannot lie just in the chequebook? Its not the fault of those of us conveying the message that some people seem unwilling to face up to that inconvenient truth.

The real problem is that once you recognise that you can't make that much use of the chequebook, which tends to restrict your scope for significant management changes/enhancement in the short term, the remaining options are somewhat limited AND harder.

And that presents a bit of a problem to the mass of people whose proposals for solving the problem primarily require the chequebook. And surely its some of them that are hiding? From financial realities?

But never mind, its dead easy to shoot the messenger.

TBH I should be flattered that you are disappointed, it suggests my previous posts must have had some credibility. We seem to be saying essentially the same thing - that the problem is not one that can easily be rectified by the chequebook. Where we differ is that you suggest there is no alternative as it is finanially unviable to replace Mac (providing you (not you personally) accept Mac is the problem). Apart from Salford, who probably think they would struggle to attarct anyone with a better calibre than Bomber, I can't think that any other SL club would tolerate the results the Bulls are. Also, I don't think the majority of clubs are in a much different plight to Bradford & I don't believe their coaches are on lesser contracts than Banana.
I'm not shooting you, I just have a different view.

[Bullseye]

: Thu Apr 09, 2009 6:10 pm  

Adeybull wrote:

Or maybe we are, more or less, but we - for example -

1. No longer have the scope some other clubs may have to secure players who can secure significant external image rights?

2. Have not utilised the cap-enhancing schemes that maybe a number of other clubs have used, which are now attracting the attention of HMRC?

Whether any of that helps explain the player recruitment of late can only be speculation.

You've put it better than I could but it adds up to the same thing - that the club doesn't have the cash or the contacts or sponsors with the cash to compete with the other top clubs.

That's why the backline is Platt, Sheriffe, Sykes, Nero, Tadulala, Jeffries and Deacon and not Withers, Vaikona, Harris, Hape, Vainikolo, Pryce and Paul.

: Thu Apr 09, 2009 6:14 pm  

Bullseye wrote:

That's why the backline is Platt, Sheriffe, Sykes, Nero, Tadulala, Jeffries and Deacon and not Withers, Vaikona, Harris, Hape, Vainikolo, Pryce and Paul.

Makes depressing reading, doesn't it?

[Bullseye]

: Thu Apr 09, 2009 6:26 pm  

Adeybull wrote:

Makes depressing reading, doesn't it?

I just hope we haven't any further to fall but I fear for the furture if OSV doesn't come off.

If that were to happen we'd be stuffed within no time at all. At least if it came off we'd not have massive costs crippling the club (£75k on a blocked drain) and would be able to compete without a massive handicap (are you reading this bit tigs?).

: Thu Apr 09, 2009 7:48 pm  

Adeybull wrote:

Jammy Bugger!!!

Where you staying?

Hostel in Katoomba, first internet access for a week and a bit though I was kindly informed of last Sunday's events by a text message from a gloating Haligonian.

Bit baffled by Tigertot's logic - just because getting shut of the coach after a run of poor results is the done thing, does it make it the right thing? And as for ambition, RER... it is there, clearly. The efforts with youth development and the OSV demonstrate that. And even if it wasn't, eventually the buck stops not at McNamara's door but Hood's. He's the guy ultimately in charge and if you don't like the way he's doing things who are you going to replace him with?

: Thu Apr 09, 2009 8:00 pm  

af wrote:

Hostel in Katoomba, first internet access for a week and a bit though I was kindly informed of last Sunday's events by a text message from a gloating Haligonian.

Bit baffled by Tigertot's logic - just because getting shut of the coach after a run of poor results is the done thing, does it make it the right thing? And as for ambition, RER... it is there, clearly. The efforts with youth development and the OSV demonstrate that. And even if it wasn't, eventually the buck stops not at McNamara's door but Hood's. He's the guy ultimately in charge and if you don't like the way he's doing things who are you going to replace him with?

Me jealous! Stayed in a motel there a few years ago. Was in July so was the quiet season. Transpired I was about two blocks away from the most incredible viewpoint - the famous one you look out over the three sisters (they called that?). I wandered down early evening just after arriving, not knowing what all the fuss was about. Walked across a bit of a car park, through some trees, and suddenly that view was there. Sort of...wow!

And yes, back to topic, I'd agree that ultimately the buck stops at Hood and the rest of the board - as some have rightly said. Trouble is, its not a democracy and we don't have a vote to chuck them out and replace with a different lot. And, given that they all do the job for free - and give of their own time to do it and historically some have put money IN - there hardly seems to be a queue of would-be replacements. Hood indeed sought an external new Chairman (with money) for a while, before he reluctantly took the role when no-one came forward. My guess is that there MIGHT be some interest if the club was moved well away from Bradford, but there seems little appetite locally in this rapidly-plunging city.

: Thu Apr 09, 2009 8:47 pm  

Adeybull wrote:

Me jealous! Stayed in a motel there a few years ago. Was in July so was the quiet season. Transpired I was about two blocks away from the most incredible viewpoint - the famous one you look out over the three sisters (they called that?). I wandered down early evening just after arriving, not knowing what all the fuss was about. Walked across a bit of a car park, through some trees, and suddenly that view was there. Sort of...wow!

Echo Point is quite remarkable... there you are just a stone's throw from the centre of a largeish conurbation and there's this huge void...

Just a couple more thoughts for Eddie:

1, even though it might feel like it you haven't been personaly humilated on national tv, it is possible to support a struggling rl side and maintain some human dignity, just as many of our rhino visitors demonstrate the reverse.
2, calling SM a fraud is a bit strong.
oh and 3, welcome back.

: Thu Apr 09, 2009 9:43 pm  

Bullseye wrote:

As I've said before I think the present side is nowhere near top three standard. Our backs are average at best and our halfbacks are almost non-existent. As for our so-called super pack they've not bullied anyone yet this season. If they're top three standard then I'm Lesley Vainikolo.

It's obvious that we're not using the full weight of the cap this season. Why we haven't is open to debate but it doesn't take a genius to think that maybe things are starting to bite a bit harder financially and we're making savings on the playing side?

It's obvious mistakes have been made with player recruitment. Most of the players recruited over the past three years have been poor and for that McNamara needs to take the blame.

IMO we do need a new coaching setup and soon. However unless the OSV comes off it'll only be a short term fix.

So your accusing Peter Hood of lieing at the fans forum then after stating that we are spending to the full cap.

: Thu Apr 09, 2009 9:59 pm  

Adeybull wrote:

How can it be "hiding behind..." to point out to some people - its seems you have to do it repeatedly - that the answer to the performance issues cannot lie just in the chequebook? Its not the fault of those of us conveying the message that some people seem unwilling to face up to that inconvenient truth.

The problem a lot of people have is that a vast number of posters on here seem to to use the money excuse to cover up the under performance issue. They seem unwilling or unable to accept that the team is not performing to an acceptable level with out trotting out the were are skint line.

Adeybull wrote:

The real problem is that once you recognise that you can't make that much use of the chequebook, which tends to restrict your scope for significant management changes/enhancement in the short term, the remaining options are somewhat limited AND harder.

And that presents a bit of a problem to the mass of people whose proposals for solving the problem primarily require the chequebook. And surely its some of them that are hiding? From financial realities?

So OK let the mes just grow and grow shall we. So in 18 months time when we really will be knee deep in $hit and sinking fast and the job of rebuilding is even harder we ca say thank good we didn't spend that unnecessary money.

: Thu Apr 09, 2009 10:00 pm  

Adeybull wrote:

Me jealous! Stayed in a motel there a few years ago. Was in July so was the quiet season. Transpired I was about two blocks away from the most incredible viewpoint - the famous one you look out over the three sisters (they called that?). I wandered down early evening just after arriving, not knowing what all the fuss was about. Walked across a bit of a car park, through some trees, and suddenly that view was there. Sort of...wow!

And yes, back to topic, I'd agree that ultimately the buck stops at Hood and the rest of the board - as some have rightly said. Trouble is, its not a democracy and we don't have a vote to chuck them out and replace with a different lot. And, given that they all do the job for free - and give of their own time to do it and historically some have put money IN - there hardly seems to be a queue of would-be replacements. Hood indeed sought an external new Chairman (with money) for a while, before he reluctantly took the role when no-one came forward. My guess is that there MIGHT be some interest if the club was moved well away from Bradford, but there seems little appetite locally in this rapidly-plunging city.

The only reason they do that is to get money back out.