As far as I can see, NOTHING at least on the plus side; he has put nothing in, not even a pledge, but has been a catalyst in enabling (probably) vultures to take our assets(young players) away. Shame on you Mr Caisley.

So you think Peter Hood should have been allowed to continue doing what he was doing?

Second post on thread changes subject!

But the answer is, he has achieved administration.

Lets hope he has a plan to keep us in super league otherwise he has wasted his time. Lets hope he values his time more than this and isnt one for wasting time

Mike, you have repeatedly asked on here, over recent weeks, for people to explain to you what was going on and what some of the things that were happening really meant or entailed.

That does suggest to me that you maybe are not quite as well-placed as you would wish to be able to form an objective view?

Yeah and Im entitled to my opinion just as much as anybody else.

For a champion of objectivity, your pious condescending nature of that particular post is poor form.

Where was the money needed going to come from to stave off the winding up order & administrators without Caisley getting involved?

The most shameful thing in this whole sorry saga is Hood collecting peoples pledges knowing he was about the clear off, of his own will or not.

Whilst not arguing Hood's case it could be said that he may have believed Caisley had backers lined up in which case had he not collected the pledges the club would have folded. He bough Caislt time to put his plan into operation. Only Caisly knows what his true objective was.

If Hood did have a viable and realistic plan post pledge then he could have got on with it, Caisley et al would have looked a bit daft voting him out at an EGM if he had a survival plan in place.

So we over psnet and made £1.2million debts in the 2month Caisley was there?

No.

Who would invest in a house one party had told the world was bitterly divided, once that became clear?

Bull Man & Bull Boy - Buy one get one free

It was hardly a secret that the shareholders didn't get on was it? Even if Hood had found an investor who's been living under a rock and didn't know that I'm pretty sure they'd have done the diligence and found out before frittering their money away.

I.ve been telling you that for 3 years.

On that, we have violent agreement. You have.

Just a tragedy that one party chose to make that bitter division so very very public at the most crucial time, and with entirely predictable consequences.

And I've been telling YOU that for 3 months!



But what's done is done. We just have to hope that whoever owns the Bulls in the future (in whatever form the Bulls continues) demonstrates the same unity of purpose and commitment that the players have this season. In that, they have set an outstanding example not just to the fans but also to any prospective owner or owners. They deserve far, far better than the previous owners.

This tenfold.

In all fairness The Bulls fans have let no one down either

Absolutely. Indeed, quite the opposite.

The major shareholders should be totally ashamed of themselves for their despicable, petty and childish behaviour. History will record how they betrayed the players the staff and the fans, and will damn them to the rafters for what they have done.

If we get liquidated does that mean Caisley gets banned from running a business? A possible bright spot, albeit momentarily.

Caisley has not uttered a word on his proposals or ambitions. Has not told us why he did not contribute to the pledge. In short I can see his smirking smile looking on happily at our demise.But why Chris, WHY?

No.

Whether anyone bringing that about should be banned from the human race is a separate issue.

Personally I don,t believe it was even significant, let alone crucial but never mind. I,d also suggest that people within the club have briefed against Caisley for years. You;ve been around business and that stuff gives off a terrible smell that sponsors, corporate buyers etc don,t like or want to be associated with. They like success stories, not the wives of Chairmen approaching tables and telling them vocifirously that "noone knows the full story" etc etc or the employees of the club actively "getting the message out".

Caisley has been a divisive figure but his vilification through word of mouth and message board gossip has done the club huge damage. Alongside the performances on the pitch, the brand has become a toxic association.

What we have acheived under Caisley is a 100% accurate picture of exactly what is needed for this club to survive. Hood and Bennett's numbers were out by about half a million quid!

Possible time line:

1.Hood says we need £1m, but £750k will get us thru season. Pledge wont be called unless we can realistically get that, with £500k needed immediately.

2. pledge looks like being successful.

3. Caisley has his 2penneth worth about Hood and the board. pledge slows down.

4. pledge almost gets there, club call in the pledges (How much was actually given??)

5. Hood and Bennett leave 2 weeks after Caisley , Coulby et al call for an EGM

6. Caisley says he has the 800k needed.

7. Coulby / Caisley appoint Guilfoyle to oversee finances.

8. ( intent to enter admin ) Guilfoyle says club need another £1.2m to get thru season and then will have to cull the playing and non playing staff.

9. with no investment forthcoming, bulls enter admin and have about 10 days to live, unless a buyer is found.



5 and 6 could be in reverse order!

The point is, would Caisley have been so forceful in removing the former board if he'd known that he only had promises for about two thirds of the money needed top keep the club going? In his mind, he'd secured enough to make a successful go of it!

MB: whereas I believe it was highly significant. But we will never agree on this, so best let it lie.

All I can say, with absolute honesty, is that none of the previous board ever briefed against Caisley to me in any way. Nor do I recall seeing any such briefing in the media. quite the opposite, in fact. Indeed, on numerous occasions over recent years I have felt frustrated because it seemed clear there was more to be said regarding why we were where we were. I will repeat that in any discussions with me, Hood was always both gentlemanlike and unwilling to be drawn on personalities. So if there was any briefing going on from Hood, I can honestly say I saw none of it.

Caisley's statements in the media, by contrast, are a matter of public record. And it seems inconceivable that some of the stuff appearing on Internet forums cannot have originated in his camp, IMO, so it all reeks of hypocrisy to me.

And, as with Hood, my own views of Caisley were formed largely by personal observation, plus having felt very badly misled and let down having previously given him vociferous support in the face of very hostile criticism across the RL community.

But, between the lot of them and regardless of fault, The major shareholders - the whole lot of them - have brought the Bulls to their knees. They all should be heartedly ashamed of themselves, but the time to hold the inquests should not be now, when survival is what really matters. Sadly, the blame game is already well underway and seems set to get much worse. I just hope the Titanic deck chair attendants can sleep at nights.