: Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:59 am  

Duckman wrote:

[hissyfitselfimportantmode] . . SNIP . . [/hissyfitselfimportantmode]

: Thu Apr 23, 2009 8:06 am  

Bullpower wrote:

:roll:

yourself. Maybe I should have put a to indicate I was not being entirely serious?

: Thu Apr 23, 2009 8:41 am  

mystic eddie wrote:

Very possibly this is the case.

It is just the case if I wanted to defend my teams coach in the face of adversity amongst a growing number of dissenters because I think he is doing pretty damn well under the circumstances, then I would state my case for the defence.

The problem is, that assumes you felt some need to "defend" the coach. Many people do not lay all the club's problems at his door, but rather think it is a combination of a wide range of factors. To mix some metaphors, s coach he may well ultimately carry the can, but for many people, if we were to have a trial, then the coach would be by no means the only person in the dock, and not at the front.

A case for the defence only needs to be put if a person has been charged and put on trial. He may have been charged (even convicted) by some, but not everyone accepts either the validity of the charges, or the jurisdiction of the court.

Such people are happy to discuss the fortunes of the club, the performance of the team, individual players, referees, whatever. Some may misinterpret this as being 'apologists for the coach' etc etc., but that is imho generally because they are blinkered, see everything in simplistic terms, and either do not see, or will not recognise, a wider picture.

PS The above is a pleasant, reasoned and logically argued post. It is not 'having a go', giving offence, seeking to upset, stir etc and does not contain any sarcasm, 'tone', or other 'between the lines' crap and anyone who reads anything else into it than what it says is a twa.t and will not be responded to.

: Thu Apr 23, 2009 8:51 am  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

A case for the defence only needs to be put if a person has been charged and put on trial. .

I think somebody should put a case for the defence because at the moment it is awful.

: Thu Apr 23, 2009 9:03 am  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

The problem is, that assumes you felt some need to "defend" the coach. Many people do not lay all the club's problems at his door, but rather think it is a combination of a wide range of factors. To mix some metaphors, s coach he may well ultimately carry the can, but for many people, if we were to have a trial, then the coach would be by no means the only person in the dock, and not at the front.

A case for the defence only needs to be put if a person has been charged and put on trial. He may have been charged (even convicted) by some, but not everyone accepts either the validity of the charges, or the jurisdiction of the court.

Such people are happy to discuss the fortunes of the club, the performance of the team, individual players, referees, whatever. Some may misinterpret this as being 'apologists for the coach' etc etc., but that is imho generally because they are blinkered, see everything in simplistic terms, and either do not see, or will not recognise, a wider picture.

Fair enough. It is a valid discussion point and a fair assessment.

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

PS The above is a pleasant, reasoned and logically argued post. It is not 'having a go', giving offence, seeking to upset, stir etc and does not contain any sarcasm, 'tone', or other 'between the lines' crap and anyone who reads anything else into it than what it says is a twa.t and will not be responded to.

brilliant!

: Thu Apr 23, 2009 9:32 am  

Bradford are in a rut this season, and the biggest problem isn't the chairman or coach, it's Odsal. Yes I appreciate the ground doesn't lose games but crowds are falling so revenue streams are suffering.

Bradford Bulls, combined with a new stadium and a new approach to bring back the days of Bull mania, sounds chessy I know, would soon see the Bulls reclaim thier place at the top of the Super League. Thing is where would the funding come from for such a development at a time such as this?

: Thu Apr 23, 2009 10:43 am  

CHURCHILL wrote:

Bradford are in a rut this season, and the biggest problem isn't the chairman or coach, it's Odsal. Yes I appreciate the ground doesn't lose games but crowds are falling so revenue streams are suffering.

Bradford Bulls, combined with a new stadium and a new approach to bring back the days of Bull mania, sounds chessy I know, would soon see the Bulls reclaim thier place at the top of the Super League. Thing is where would the funding come from for such a development at a time such as this?

So in other words we are quite literally "in a hole"

: Thu Apr 23, 2009 11:23 am  

Wigan Bull wrote:

So in other words we are quite literally "in a hole"