[url=http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/sportbulls/sportbullsheadlines/4440970.Bulls_make_big_money_offer_to_Aussie_Test_star/Wing story, scroll down to comments[/url

Who's question got Medders up and Craven was there.

Why no story then? Plenty of interesting info seemed to come out there.

Exactly, he was quick with the doom laden article following the Celtic debarcle. Why not so quick with positive open stuff from the club?

Craven is a Rhino Na na na na!

You never know, maybe he wanted to cover it but the editor wouldn't give him the column inches. After all, was there anything substantial announced other than what would have been termed 'believist propaganda' on southstander?



The YEP is obviously pro Leeds but from what I've read differs little from the T&A in being a medium for identikit press releases about how the players aren't going to take the opposition lightly or reporting potential signings after reading southstander etc

Odd.

Usually the posters on T&A are derided by some on here for being little more than a "pack of idiots". Now when someone says something reasonably positive then it is worthy of its' own thread?

Gave it its own thread because I think it's a fair point. Why no story? Column inches can't be an excuse, given that there is at least one Buls article every day regardless as to whether there is any actual news.

The Fans Forum clearly made a big impact on here. Yet the T&A ignored it. That's worth a headscratch, surely?

I agree.

Someone that was there though might confirm this but I am sure that I read that a few mumbles were made about Mr Cravens' article after the Crusaders game. Maybe he was just in the huff and being a big child?

Yes. It was mentioned and I imagine Mr. Craven wasn't too happy about the comments made regarding his article.

I was at the forum and I could see that the club weren't particularly happy with the Craven article after the Celtic game. However they were quite diplomatic given that he was in the room with 300 fans. I suspect there was a more frank exchange between the club and Craven when the article came out.

there is an element of that (as there is at every local paper in the land, quite rightly), but the point af was making (I think) was that the piece after the Celtic game was not that. It was an accurate reflection of the prevailing mood of some following the club and it was a decent piece of journalstic licence, not provided by the club, quite obviously. So when the club outline a lot of issues in the background at the club at an open forum that definatley did turn some opinion/attitudes towards the club, on here at least...why did he not exercise the same licence and print/expand on some of the issues raised and how the club are addressing each and every one? other than the Lynch resigning which he did report.

Still no comment from the service crew then...............

How many were from HKR?

At least 200

500

surely they only travel in multiples of 1000.

Quite right, Bradford are obviously fudging the numbers to play down any earnings to the tax man. The real attendance of the event was 5719, 92 of which were not from HKR

we have no earnings. Don't you read the wild speculation, we're totally skint

It's mentioned in the last few paragraphs [url=http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/sportbulls/sportbullsheadlines/4431373.Macca_pays_tribute_as_Lynch_signs_new_deal/here[/url

Barely a mention really. If the club wants to get this message out they need to beat Craven over the head with a copy of it tied around an iron bar.

I was surprised to see Craven TBH especially after he wasn't present at the one in January.

It'd be funny if it wasn't true.

I used to like the T&A read.

Even Bill "RU" Marshall wrote more balanced, informative and substantially more professional articles than Craven.

Better without him, IMHO. He adds nothing to the image or interest in the Bulls, or GGG, at all.