But that's the NRL not super league. A Super league which has had only four different winners in thirteen years hardly comparable to the NRL.
But it's not just this season is it. A record of eleven wins from twenty-nine games shows it's more than just this season.
But likewise we could have easily lost at Saints, Catalans and to Wakey at MM.
I think it depends on the results from the next four games.

We are heading to a more even comp though, no?
Although I accept it has probably levelled down, rather than out.
Hull KR (so far) are testiment to that. It won't be long before someone else lifts the SL crown.
I still think the point is a valid one, different comp or not.


I can't really argue with that stat.
Out of interest, how many of those loses were <12points?


And Leeds, Saints, Hull KR could have lost at x, y,z. We could go round and round with this one.
Again, I still say it's a valid argument to say those 5 wins would have put this season in a different light.



Agreed, we certainly need to start putting some form together.

But Steve McNamara hasn't had to build a club from bottom down. He tookover the Super League champions that were still in a very good position at the time he was promoted to head coach. It's only since Steve McNamara's appointment that we have diminished into the bottom of the league team that we are now.

We may have been champion in 2006, but you can hardly say he took over a champion squad.

IMO the club wasn't left (and isn't in) the greatest shape on or off the field.

No but you can say that the 2006 squad is a far better balanced squad than the current squad.

Does it matter how many we lost by it's still a loss and they are still building up far too regualry.

World Champions? Granted, it wasn't the squad that he we finished 05 in but it was still jam packed with stars and talent right across the squad.
We had strike power all across the board then and we were still as dangerous as ever leading up to Nobbies departure.

Ten years from now, Bulls bottom of Championship 1 playing in front of crowds of 63 in Wibsey Park.

Mystic Eddie et al: "McNamara out now, it has gone too far, that's just 7 wins in 267 games"

af et al: "You have to give him time, he is the man to turn it around in the long run, look at his relationship with the juniors - this was only his third crop to have come through the system and he deserves the chance to hone his techniques and prove he is the right man for the job"

Everyone else will have given it up a long, long time ago.

Don't forget the impeccable logic of 'we've lost some games by less than 12 points', meaning we nearly won them, and as such we're really close to the top 4. So you see, losing by less than 12 points is really a success, and in this other parallel universe everything is fine and dandy, if only we ignore th fact that we DID lose and we are not going to end up in the top 4.

Same logic as - SM is hardly brilliant but then there's no saying anyone else would do better, a bit like saying 'well flu is unpleasant but then you could always get pneumonia, so let's learn to live with the Flu - who knows it might just end up as a bad cold'.

Much the same as all the arguments about not being able to get rid of SM because it'll cost us too much, at the same time as our gate income drops through the floor as a direct result of SM, meaning we've even less likely to get rid because we have less money to do so. Indeed if SM were to follow this line of reasoning he'd have us losing every week and have a job for life as Asim suggests!

I despair, this is club I love, like most of the posters on this board and yet some people seem resigned to failure and to viewing such resignation as somehow consistent with the moral high ground.

Tha's a point I've been making for months .Yes we may not be able to afford to sack McNamara but if the crowds continue to drop it will simply get to the stage where we can't afford not to sack him.

Well, as we will not know until if/when it happens, it is kinda hard to answer that question is it not? You know as little as I do into whether it would be a success or not. Sadly, I have no crystal ball and neither do you so I reckon this is an odd argument. Are you honestly saying that we should not sack someone because we do not know whether a new face would do the job any better? If so, then no-one would ever get sacked in your world.

Perhaps you should become our Chairman - offering a no sacking guarantee would attract all the top bosses.






Yet you still posted last week that you would be happy with him? Why is that then?

Anyway, the above point also seems a bit odd because it is merely your opinion that you are peddling as fact.

But we could also have lost to Leeds and Saints and been sitting on 5 points and completely out of the picture.

But we didn't.

Personally, my feelings are that if you point was,



Then I would have agreed.

Sorry WB, but points such as, "We could have won more than we had" or "How many losses were by less than 12 points?" are smacking of desperation I am afraid.

No one picked up on this yet? Disappointing.

I saw the point. I assumed it was a typo and left it be. After all, trying to correct spelling/grammar/wording mistakes on here usually leads to condemnation and moans about "English lessons."

I would be happy with him. You wouldn't.



This isn't about moral high grounds. This is about balance of probabilities. I think SM is a better bet than AN Other. You disagree. But at least my bloke exists.

Appreciated, very civil of you - though I could hardly have complained if anyone had suggested Freudian overtones.

I think I would TBH.



And I never made that point so I am unsure why it is being used in conjunction with a post aimed towards me.

I think the argument that "we're only losing by a few points" had some validity early in the season, particularly when those defeats were against the likes of Huddersfield. The argument is becoming more and more difficult to sustain as the season goes on.

Our last two narrow defeats were against the newcomers. Admittedly Celtic played a bit better than their record suggested and we're in good company losing to Salford, although I thought they were very ordinary for an hour against us. But I dont think we can take much comfort from the fact that we only lost those matches by a few points.

I'm not suggesting BM should take over at Bradford, quite the opposite. A successful team in London is far more important to the game than a short term problem at Bradford; Bradford will eventually rise again.

If all these future world-beating youngsters are only at Bradford due to Mac & he is converting them in a Dead Poets Society stylee perhpas the job for him is Director of Yoof Development. And I am semi-serious.

I agree, but the thread is about Bradford's interests.

1. If he replicated his Quins' record, albeit graded up for the relative underlying strengths of the club, you would not be happy. His sides have still been pretty abject on frequent occasions, and he has yet to even get very near the play-offs with them. We will see how this season pans out, but he has yet to put anything on his cv of the equivalent of SM's 2007 minor premiership challenge. As far as I can see, BM's main advantage is that he has commited his coaching 'crimes' with a side most Bulls fans know and care little about.

2. You haven't named a replacement for SM, only stated he should go. When pressed you've suggested people we won't or wouldn't have got. AN Other is your candidate until you come up with another.

And I will ask a serious question to anyone who knows a bit more about it. (af, RER etc. )

If McNamara DID go, do you honestly think that all these young players would simply "take their ball home" and leave the club, and that the work that he is doing would simply be left to rot?

After all, it is widely believed that the board are passionate about the continuing youth development and surely such an ability would be a pre-requisite for any possible new coach?

Also, I worry about this youth development anyway if it is to be at to the detriment of the side. Cherry picking will always go on (we have done it often enough in the past) and what is to say that in two years time that we are so far out of the picture that our best young stars get snapped up by sides at the top of the table?

Don't get me wrong, youth development is hugely important but there has to be a happy medium so that it is not to the detriment of the first team, which looks to be the case at this time.

Dear me.

I have mentioned the likes of Tony Smith, Justin Morgan and Mr McDermott himself over the last year or so. Fair enough - we will not get Mr Smith or perhaps Mr Morgan now but we may have done when I first mentioned them as possibles, I don't know and cannot say.

However, I doubt it really matters to you WHO I say because you will just keep on saying that there is no guarantee that change would be for the better anyway so the whole exercise is futile.

Maybe.

I was just trying to point out that we've hardly been the whipping boys of the comp, we just seem to have had more than our fair share of narrowly losing out.

I'm desperately searching for the answers, as we all are. Being ever the optimist means I'll always try and find a positive, much as others (with their glass half empty) will always find the negative. (That's not a dig btw).

I still persist with my view that we're not too far away and SM is the right man.