Has this guy got a hidden agenda or something? Every story now has a paragraph about our "mass exodus".

The latest one is on a positive article about a Chisholm-Pryce halfback partnership next season.

"A mouth watering prospect" that is tempered by the "biggest mass exodus in living memory" away from the Bulls.

He makes it sound like a humanitarian and refugee crisis not the club binning off a load of under achievers.

We are losing key men like Lee Gaskell, Dale Ferguson, Richie Mathers, Etu Uaisele, Jonny Campbell, Paul Clough etc etc. So good they couldn't get us any higher than 5th in the Championship.

TBF when about 20 of an actual squad consisting of mid to late 30's in terms of actual contracted first teamers, ,not loan players, missing squad numbers or raffle winners, leave then that is a mass exodus

It's not it's a mass clear out.
Also it's a squad consisting of the low 40's. About 10 of which are good enough to play for this club.

The performances in the shield (mainly down to lads here next year anyway) do not make up for an awful year of under achievement.

It's factually correct but it's the way he spins it. "A mass exodus" sounds like they are all walking away because they have had enough. However he could write "the club have acted proactively to move on the under-achieving members of the squad". Same thing but reads very differently.

Meh. It's a stock phrase and he's a sports writer for a dying local rag.

The word exodus means a departure of (usually) a large number of people. Whether they leave of their own free will, or are pushed, is irrelevant, the word 'exodus' still applies.

What an absolute load of toss.

"Local sports writer reports correct and accurate facts on local sports team". Well, he must be the devil incarnate mustn't he?

[list=[/list

Think you need to chill out. Try pornhub you might be a bit less
Frustrated then.

I'm not the one spouting conspiracy theories just because someone is doing their job.

Jonny Campbell isn't leaving, he's under contract for another year and is definitely staying.

Totally agree, the guy is a snake!

We have enough fans that bury their heads in the sand, pretend everything is peachy and constantly slag off anyone who dare to utter a negative comment against the club, without needed the local journalist to do the same.

If you want someone to pretend everything's amazing and not dare to utter a word to suggest otherwise, stick to the official Bulls website. Or certain social media sites that champion "Supporting the club no matter what and never questioning anything". If you want something more objective and accurate, read the T&A or this forum.

I think 'exodus' , whatever its actual definition, suggests its biblical interpretation [which, tbh is its most usual application or people leaving in the manner of refugees from North Africa and that just isn't case.

It may well be the biggest, 'exodus', ever at the club but that is only because, over the last two years, we've had the biggest squad ever and we're having a 'not before time reality check', on numbers. The number leaving is a positive imo, not necessarily some of the individuals, but certainly the sheer quantity of squad places disappearing is going to do nothing but good for our financial health, imo. Using the word 'exodus' suggests we should be worried about it, when, truth be told, the opposite is true.

I think the issue is that the phrase "mass exodus" is being worked into virtually every article about the Bulls at the moment regardless of whatever the story is about.

And the way it is being used denotes it as a herald of doom to come, however, this massive squad we currently have has certainly some fat to be trimmed from it along with players who clearly feel that they're too good for this league and therefore have turned in lackluster performances all season.

You don't need a 45 player squad and therefore taking 20 of those players out should be shown as a good thing as it means the club has a more sensible sized squad and as such there is a better chance of some of the younger lads getting some game time across the course of the season.

I reckon Ross is over negative at times and uses over immotive language when it's not really needed. Has he fallen out with the club for some reason.

I can see both sides of this.

On the one hand I think Ross sees a lot more than most of us by being close to the club on a daily basis. I guess he’s seen a lot of reason to be negative over the past 18 months. He’s fallen out with Lowes and with Caro and I know for a fact that Ferres had a problem with his coverage too. How that all started I don’t know or care really but obviously there are issues. Whether they are Ross’s fault we’ll never know. He could be a completely innocent party.

I also think he puts his spin on things too often but this may be a result of his fallings out with club officials. As a result he’s not an impartial reporter anymore because of the breakdown in relationship. Does he think he’s somehow doing us fans a service by not “toeing the party line”? I’d rather he kept a dignified neutral position and stuck to the facts. The club are perfectly capable of making themselves look daft on their own. The way he writes reminds me of some of Mick’s old posts sometimes when he alludes to things behind the scenes. The tone when describing Green as “sunning himself” or “jetting off” is a bit opinionated for my liking. It may be deserved but that’s a matter of opinion. Is he writing an opinion piece or reporting facts or jumbling up the two?

Despite the awful performance of the first team this season there are positives. We have a good young coach. We are clearing out the failures and the deadwood that got us in this position. We have some superb young players coming through. It’s not all gloom. Sure Ross has covered some of the positives but I think overall the tone is mainly negative. I think he could do himself a favour and cheer up a bit.

How's 'bradford new northern' progressing David? Would have thought you'd have been too busy with that rather than arguing dictionary definitions on here.

the article seems balanced to me, and remarkably similar in sentiment to a recent post on this site, ie that we had the creative spine of the team sorted, now the pack needs short. implicit in that is that a lot of the pack are leaving, whereas Ross with a required number of column inches to generate a day, had to put it in. As he also put in that chisholm isnt put out by the numbers leaving, etc etc.

Who is David and what is 'bradford new northern' a reference to?

Ross has done a good job of burying the inforation that not all players were paid yesterday, right at the bottom of hundreds of column inches about Pryce, Rohans comments about the refereeeing and how two refs (two bad refs???) would improve matters, but totally relevant, that refs need to stamp their authority right from the start, then couple of lines about it, that some paid some still waiting. so a big improvement on last month.

...exceot of course for those few, my sympathies to them for the wait, hopefully Green has at least communicated to them!

I think there is a mass exodus of drivel from the T and A's rugby league reporting department.

If rumours are right and certain players are refusing to be available, maybe it is them who haven`t been paid!!!

I’ve heard that Gaskell at least is refusing to risk playing as he has a weak hamstring and is worried about it going in “nothing” games when he has a future to consider.

If that’s the case I’d be studying the fine print of the contract. I’d be pretty unhappy about paying someone in those circumstances.

I'm surprised the same people who constantly criticise him for being negative aren't now on his back for not making a bigger deal out of the negative of some players not being paid.

I wouldn't do that job. I wouldn't be able to resist telling the wuckfits on forums and social media where to go, in nice colourful language.