Caisley wants back in according to this. Interesting many people blame him for the clubs financial plight... thesun.mobi/sol/homepage/sport/r ... html?mob=1

Caisley wants back in according to this. Interesting many people blame him for the clubs financial plight... thesun.mobi/sol/homepage/sport/r ... html?mob=1

I'm sure there's many people who wouldn't be too happy, we've headed in the opposite direction ie. focusing on youth rather than solely the first team.

Not sure what to make of the article tbh.

NO WAY - IF HE COMES BACK ITS A BACKWARDS STEP SCREW HIM

I heard about the likelihood of this a couple of weeks ago but I kept my counsel on it.

As an outsider I always rated him.

Got to be better than Macca

Well Hood & co managed to stem the £1/2m annual losses that arose on his watch, which if they had continued would have seen us out of business several years ago. And settled the disastrous financial consequences of his signing of Harris in the face of his contractual situation with Leeds, and rebuilt the academy that seemed to have faded badly on his watch, so I guess now would indeed be a good time to want back in...if you were him?

I'm sure the board would prefer to see someone able to inject a load of cash though...

Is he a multi-millionaire?

You do realize Caisley isn't a coach, but a former chairman, right?

There are a lot of posters on this forum that remember Caisley, who came across as a pleasant and easy to talk to person, but was indeed economical and disengenuous with the truth to keep us fans on his side. No way would I want him back others might but I wouldn't!



We still get a few whinging about Peter Hood but if he went it would not bode well for the future of this Club. as Adey has pointed out he has along with others turned the Club round financially made sure that Macca had a base to start with, initially it was to get a strong Academy system up and running and then finally getting a reasonable financial base from which Macca can now start on a more level playing field to get a Team to challenge for honours once again!

Caisley has seen the bandwagon is ready to roll again and wants to jump back on!

If he wants to reinvest, let him.

Dont let your view in him be lighted by what has happened in the last 5 years. look longer term:

He employed Peter Deakin. He employed Brian Smith, he presided over a period that saw us go from the brink of relegation to being world champions three times.

He got rid of Peter Fox at a time when many fans thought he was the only man for the job, and he brought in Robbie Paul.

Withou his vision, we would only be where we are now, but without 10 years of success, or perhaps we would be even worse off?

One thing that has always puzzled me has been how people seem obliged to see Caisley as [ieither[/i the visionary architect of the Bulls [ior[/i the near-wrecker of the club. The truth is that - at different times - he was both.

I reckon that we could do with a visionary to shake up what has become a somewhat stale offering. If Caisley has learned the lesson of his hubris, I don't think his return would be a bad thing. However, the idea of Caisley learning lessons in such a way strikes me as slightly unlikely, and the return of a vendetta against Hetherington (a man who - whatever else you think of him - clearly [idoes[/i learn lessons) might just complete the wrecking job!

I don't disagree that Caisley indeed did buy into Brian Smiths and Peter Deakins vision for the Bulls at the start of SL. My problem is that he overeached himself by trying to buy more success that the Bulls had by breaking the SC and more damagingly getting into a p!ssing contest with Caddick at Leeds and costing the Club even more financial damage which is still being paid for!
So no I don't want him back (Batams fans probably would feel the same way about a certain Geoffrey Richmond coming back, and there are parallels of delusional grandeur with both of them)

Caisley did more than buy into those visions. Without Caisley, there would have been no Smith or Deakin.

Caisley also did overreach himself and get into the said "p!ssing contest".

As I said above, both are true. If we could be confident that he had learnt the second lesson, I'd welcome back the man who - more than Smith, more (I would suggest) even than Deakin - created the Bulls. If we can't be confident of that, we would be better off trying to continue to fight our way back with a safe pair of hands, rather than a visionary.

However, while we have the current set of circumstances in place, it's going to be a long hard road back, and I can't help wishing for the sort of vision that has allowed us to achieve the unthinkable once already.

If Caisley is our major shareholder, has he ever really been "out"

He's got plenty of experience we could draw on and if he could fit into the long term plan the current board have without pulling that off track he could certainly add something for example his role as players agent certainly gives him the contacts to advise of the right players to look at. He's certainly a strong personality who, I think, could eloquently put forward the Bull's case in dealings with the assorted bodies we need to move forward (Bradford council springs to mind).
Given the caveats of not repeating previous mistakes I'd say anyone with relevant skills and the best interests of the Bull's should be welcomed.

Anything that will spark the now mostly dormant Leeds-Bradford rivalry would be a good thing from my perspective.

I'm sure El Presidente will relish locking horns with his former rival, especially now that the boot appears to be well and truly on the other foot (at the moment at least).



That said, Hood & co have obviously done a very good job rebuilding the core strength of the club. It's a shame for Bradford that the first team has slumped so much during their tenure though.

I have plenty of doubts. Diplomacy has never been his strong point and he's got plenty of enemies as a result. I think there's probably too much baggage really. He's no moneybags and certainly couldn't attract anyone like that to the club during his tenure (some might say he put people off!).

He may have attracted Brian Smith, but Brian Smith has said he came on condition that Peter Deakin came too. Could Caisley repeat the trick again? We had the benefit of a large amount of Sky money then which we don't now.

What he does have is a lot of experience, but as has been said it's not clear if he's learnt from the larger mistakes he's made in the latter part of his tenure. We don't know the full facts about his departure either. So many unknowns.

I do wonder about this story and if there are rumblings behind the scenes. What price a Caisley and Noble return?

It's not a question of "re-investing" as he never sold his shareholding. As has been pointed out he has had both good and bad influences on our fortunes but the disastrous consequences of losing the legal battle over the Harris signing will forever hang over him.

This all comes from the Sun, btw. I wouldn't accept the date on the Sun without checking.

without Caisley we would not be talking about Bulls now, they would be long gone!

1996-2005
2 wembley finals and one at twickenham
2 challenge cup wins
5 grand finals in a row and one more, winning 3
3 world club championships
1 old style super league!

versus
2005- 2009
no finals
no playoffs last year

mmmm.... what would you choose?

ok perhaps a little simplistic, but point is Caisley did not buy into Deakin's vision, Deakin bought into his and took it on.

a chairman brings in good people and delegates.

ok, his spat with GH was embarrasing and expensive, but that is one error that he made. The academy etc.. bringing through home grown players was the job of the Football department, headed for most of the time by Noble or Duffy!

DUFFY OUT!!!!!!! its all his fault!

The Harris debacle should never have happened, Caisley is a lawyer ffs. Its hard not to blame him totally for that.

A little simplistic and then some mate! If you look at the accounts it's obvious that we were living beyond our means under Caisley. The slump from 2005 til present would have happened anyway as the cash was running out. It's not a case of choosing at all.

Add in Harrisgate and we have an enormous poop sandwich. Caisley was largely responsible for the situation we're in now (financial losses and the move back to Odsal costing the club the earth). If anyone thinks his return will transform the club again they're mistaken (unless he's become a multi millionaire recently!)

is caisley the biggest single shareholder or the majority shareholder? If the latter then if he wants back in the board will have no say.

personally wouldnt want him back, as he played a large part in causing the underlying problems that lead to the slump post 2005. We're on the up again now and it wouldnt be very fair on the current management, who've had to take all the abuse and criticsm for last 4 years whilst sorting out the mess they inherited, If caisley took charge again and got all the credit.
On a similar note can't see a way to bring noble back either. If he came as director of rugby it would totally undermine macca and we all know noble's answer to everything was to sign a aussie. We're just starting to see the benefits of the work done to resurrect the youth system which macca and medley have put in place and they should be around to reap the benefits.

I think it's the former, but there will be a couple of people on here that can confirm or refute that.

yep Adeybull and FA will certainly know. I suspect he's largest single shareholder too. IIRC he was forced to re-sign by board over harris fiasco and they wouldnt have been able to do that if he held majority of shares.