Re: FANS STRAW POLL - OPTIONS FOR THE BRADFORD BULLS FUTURE : Thu Oct 25, 2018 6:36 pm  

So Mr Irvine you have gone quiet.

Us fans will be in touch soon with news of the Twitter vote, and more.

Re: FANS STRAW POLL - OPTIONS FOR THE BRADFORD BULLS FUTURE : Thu Oct 25, 2018 8:11 pm  

Zzzz

Re: FANS STRAW POLL - OPTIONS FOR THE BRADFORD BULLS FUTURE : Thu Oct 25, 2018 8:23 pm  

belcki wrote:

So Mr Irvine you have gone quiet.

Us fans will be in touch soon with news of the Twitter vote, and more.

I'm sure he's quaking in his boots

[Bulliac]

Re: FANS STRAW POLL - OPTIONS FOR THE BRADFORD BULLS FUTURE : Fri Oct 26, 2018 9:40 am  

Twitter vote? Sounds definitive - they'll probably vote to blow up an airport...

[Bullseye]

Re: FANS STRAW POLL - OPTIONS FOR THE BRADFORD BULLS FUTURE : Fri Oct 26, 2018 9:51 am  

Bulliac wrote:

Twitter vote? Sounds definitive - they'll probably vote to blow up an airport...

Re: FANS STRAW POLL - OPTIONS FOR THE BRADFORD BULLS FUTURE : Fri Oct 26, 2018 11:59 am  

also wonder why belcki is popping up on the Halifax board asking about new signings?

Re: FANS STRAW POLL - OPTIONS FOR THE BRADFORD BULLS FUTURE : Fri Oct 26, 2018 4:53 pm  

belcki wrote:

So Mr Irvine you have gone quiet.

Us fans will be in touch soon with news of the Twitter vote, and more.

Does Belcki actually stand for the most Boring Embarrassing Laughable Clueless King sized Irritant that ever walked the planet.

Re: FANS STRAW POLL - OPTIONS FOR THE BRADFORD BULLS FUTURE : Wed Oct 31, 2018 7:20 pm  

Shut up you Top Hat.

Re: FANS STRAW POLL - OPTIONS FOR THE BRADFORD BULLS FUTURE : Fri Nov 02, 2018 3:44 pm  

belcki wrote:

...

Bradford Council sources, who for obvious reasons cannot be named, recently leaked that a capacity of say 6000 for a new Bulls Stadium should do just fine for us. But what about when we get back in to the Super League?

...

Meanwhile, back in the real world, the terms of our lease are that if we are moved then it has to be to a suitable minimum capacity 16,000 stadium within 4 miles.

So no.