Is there anyone that thinks that Cha Lowe ate actually an RFL
Management team put in place to fulfil fixtures at minimum cost?

They don't seem to be too bothered about avoiding relegation..

Would be interesting to see what other people think about the
New owners?

"conspiracy" is a bit far. Plainly obvious they were the RFL's chosen ones, no secret about it.

I think they were invited very early in the process as a team the RFL could work closely with for the next three years.

I still hope/believe there is more happening in the background in terms of the ground, leases and deals with the RFL and council involved meaning us finding a new home and the RFL moving to Bfd...

For that the RFL would need a very sympathetic ownership team with no ulterior motives of their own.

I guess the RFL will actually see it as a bonus if we survive. The fact we're still exceeding 4k every home game must prove there is still worth in a top flight Bradford club and any work actually happening behind the scenes is worth backing.

I'm frustrated as anyone that we seem in the dark but on the other hand it could simply mean that they are doing the utmost to make sure nothing (other than away shirts and Chishom) goes t1ts up?

Don't like the sound of this from the T&A:

Everyone knows this, but what are Cha-Low planning to do?



Well no, but we all have a damn good idea what will happen. How can Cha-Low not know?

But this is the bit that worries me:

We've just taken a trialist on from Hunslet. I think that should tell you all you need to know about available players right now.
If anyone has any suggestions on players we should sign, feel free to post them on here and enlighten us all. Who knows, maybe Chalmers and Lowe will read it and snap them up!

It might be worth revisiting this thread once the cup weekend is out of the way and teams can re-assess who they can afford to loan out.

All it takes is for Peltier, Murray and Oledzki to come back into the side and hey presto, we actually have a really good pack.
Put Chisholm/Pryce/Lilley in behind them with (hopefully) Moore at hooker and we'll be competitive in this league.

if they want to survive there is no if's and but's...
Bailey was available and was talking to Bradford but they wouldn't pay him..there in lies the problem,

there aren't any full time professional players willing to play for nothing.
But we are a full time team, pay for full time pro's and they will sign..

Someone who has a good job or business as well as playing championship rl isn't going to play for Bradford for nothing, neither are SL standard full timers.

I've not seen that anywhere. I take it you've seen the contract of us offering him £0 a month? Maybe we offered him what we thought he was worth and Toronto (who can offer a damn sight more than we can) offered him more. They can afford to take a loss on a player that doesn't work out. We can't. Bailey wouldn't have got a sniff in the line up when we had Oledzki, Murrary etc. Yes he would have been useful over Easter, but that doesn't mean i think it would be worth offering him way over the odds.

The "but" is maybe we can't afford. Overpaying for average Joes, was what got us into this mess in the first place.

Despite what people say, Cha-Lo have invested in the academy, Toovey, Moore, Smith, Chisholm. They will have had to have paid towards Larroryer, Murray, Oledzki, Lilley too.

Think some people are getting a little hysterical because we had a tough Easter. If we had been smarter against Fax we could have won. Fev we were totally outplayed against a good team with some crucial injuries coming.

I said at the beginning of the year props won't become available until after Easter when clubs decide they don't need certain players. Lets see what sort of team we have against Sheffield (forget Toulouse, a full strength side will still be getting mullered over there)

Has anyone ever actually seen Chalmers or Lowe at Odsal? Do they even exist?

What did we offer Bailey?
What did Bailey demand?
How much did Toronto agree to pay Bailey?

My guess is you can't answer any of those questions, so your comments become worthless.

Concerns aplenty from all and sundry but there does seem to be an unhelpful gap in the chain from pitch level to Owner.Much too one way imo.

Was Bailey available? - yes.

If we had offered him a billion pounds, would he have signed? - yes

If we offered a fiver a month? - No.

So the question isn't worthless, there is no reason to suggest he'd never have signed for us at any price. Of course, if Cha-Low had just made a short comment - like "Yes we spoke to Bailey but couldn't agree a fee" then we'd know.

But, whilst you may settle for us being mushrooms, aren't you worried when even the coach strongly hints that he's getting no feedback about the glaring need to strengthen the squad?

The lack of updates from those at the top is frustrating, but come on. In all seriousness you can't expect them to put out a statement saying that they tried to sign Bailey but couldn't agree a fee with him? When has any owner of a RL club ever done that before?! What purpose would it serve other than to appease a few nutters on a message board?

We've just signed a prop forward only two weeks ago, how about we give him a chance instead?

Chalmers is in the coral stand every home game and attends all academy games played at Odsal. So go introduce your self.

Bailey was never interested in coming out of retirement to the Toronto cheque book was waved in his face.

I think I see him going to watch home games with Toovey in the box behind where I stand. It took me a while to twig who he was.

Yep he did against Feath and Sheffield then went in coral after.

Thats where we stand too.

I did wonder about ex-Catalans prop Seb Martins but I think he got banned at the same time as Tony Gigot. Although I don't know if the ban was shortened like his.

Maybe with our recent history players just don't want to take the risk. And we did trial Walker which didn't work out.

Finally, I don't know what the ruling is but if we adjust a few sessions why can't we sign part time players?

Maybe one or two will hate the travel and leave Toronto...?

It was more of a tongue in cheek comment. But I am glad he is there. Has anyone been to ask him any of these questions?

Were I in the position of the owners ( whoever they may be ) I would not be looking to pay out a penny more than was necessary during this year. At this point in time we are on course to escape the drop. Should things change and results pick up for our main competitors then spending would increase by an appropriate amount to ensure we remain on course. This could also be related to crowds dropping off..... in that action may need to be taken.
Any spare money would be put on one side for next year. Obviously such an approach demands regular monitoring to ensure that the necessary targets are achieved at the appropriate intervals.
Just because they are not spending much does not mean it is not there. Why commit to extra contracts for more weeks than are necessary.

I assume you've only started following us this season?

No mate since about 1993..

"Expect"? You're barking up the wrong tree. The topic is that by their lack of signings coupled with their silence on the subject and now the clearly frustrated comment by the coach "("you'd have to ask them"icon_wink.gif fans have every justification to be very worried that the owners' eyes aren't on the ball.

The issue of Bailey is a complete red herring, he is just one example of someone who may have been available but there is no sign we made any effort. So nobody is asking for one specific 'announcement' about one specific player, but rather what the ferk, in general, is going on. And I wouldn't give a damn about being told, IF things were not going seriously wrong, but they are. I may only be a nutter on a message board, but the ferkin coach 100% agrees with me and many others in saying what he did. That's what I am talking about, and so is everyone else. Is Beattie a nutter too?


What chance would that be, then? Last time I looked, no opposing team nor the fixture list adds any extra chances. We just get one, each week and we are now pis.sing them away due to lack of enough experienced players. As the coach now confirms, in spades. So a "chance" is not in my gift. Nor is it relevant. The only relevant chance is the one to scrape together 2 league points when we play. If you're happy to see the young lads get whupped and demoralised as our "chance" disappears over the hill then that's your right.

Leigh Beattie has been initially employed by the club to be the groundskeeper and kit-man.
As at 2015 he was still just working with the juniors as he started trained to be a coach.
For the time being he is covering the role of interim first team coach while issues with visas are negotiated. This is not a situation that anyone wanted.
He is doing his best in a difficult situation.
That quote in the t&a can be read just as much to be a legitimate 'that's not my job to comment on recruitment,' as it can a thinly veiled criticism. It would make no sense for him personally to be critical of anyone on record.

I do not think it is right and fair on him to present him as being a voice critical of the ownership when he has no background in talking or representing the club to the press.

Cha & Lowe will be judged on whether we stay up or not.
The Bulls fans have been through the mill for enough years now so if we go down we know a lot of fans will (understandably) call it a day.
As long as it is still mathematically possible to stay up I'll accept Cha-Lo are managing their tight purse strings
Nothing I say or do will influence Cha-Lo to buy/loan more/better players
Beattie does seem to be frustrated like the rest of us - cant blame him for that.
Hopefully Tooveys visa will be sorted soon and we can start judging him on results
The people I feel sorry for are our partners - putting up with us whinging all through christmas when we thought our club was a gonner, now sharing a miserable easter cos we lost both games.
Its about time the Bulls fortunes started changing for the better.