Re: Andrew chalmers : Sat Jan 14, 2017 4:55 pm  

Well, this group who've taken over the Bulls are the hand picked of the RFL.

The RFL said that which ever bid was successful, they would have to provide plans and funding to ensure 3 years of rugby at Bradford.

However, several players are still unhappy that they know no more than the general public and are still officially unemployed.

You'd think the RFL would have more concern over player welfare than is currently been shown. Especially if this whole endeavour goes tits up as the RFL will be left holding the bag with more than egg on their face

Re: Andrew chalmers : Sat Jan 14, 2017 5:57 pm  

exiledbull wrote:

True. I cant see the club being P/T really. I am upbeat. There is new hope with the new club. Drawing from the Administrators report the last management of the Bulls was woeful even pitiful. I, probably like many, can look forward to the new owners finding players and making announcements that will bring a healthy, successful club to the city.

Bulls supporters are not quitters, No it wont be easy but its all now quite exiting. I am glad and happy the haters are disappointed

I believe everyone is in agreement that we should wait and see what the new owners say before making further judgment. What is more concerning is that there are rumblings that they may use some of the previous management team in their set up. As has been pointed out by the administrators these people are seriously not fit for purpose. So a question for all Bulls fans is this, would you be happy to take back any of the previous management (Rohan excepted) or do you think there should be a full clear out?

Re: Andrew chalmers : Sat Jan 14, 2017 6:06 pm  

el red wrote:

I believe everyone is in agreement that we should wait and see what the new owners say before making further judgment. What is more concerning is that there are rumblings that they may use some of the previous management team in their set up. As has been pointed out by the administrators these people are seriously not fit for purpose. So a question for all Bulls fans is this, would you be happy to take back any of the previous management (Rohan excepted) or do you think there should be a full clear out?

It's tricky.

I think its high time we saw the back of Stuart Duffy - just too much 'previous' for him to ever really be trusted by the fans.

On the other hand, given the short time scales etc, there is a case for having some continuity. So maybe there are some people who it would be prudent to keep on. But as for who, I really couldn't say as I don't really know who still works in the back office

Re: Andrew chalmers : Sat Jan 14, 2017 6:12 pm  

Not knowing the responsibilities of specific individuals it's not for me to name names but my preference is for new brooms to sweep as clean as possible. I don't think it's as important to the restoration of the brand as just having a club but I suspect sadly it's probably a thing. The more of those who remain affiliated with the choices of the past the longer the toxicity of the brand remains.

Re: Andrew chalmers : Sat Jan 14, 2017 6:20 pm  

I'm confident the new regime will opt for their own staff.

Previous owners came in with no knowledge of what was required to run a club, and therefore relied on the experience of people whom were already employed. The new owners are a consortium, and if we are to believe rumours, have a decent Rugby League backing. As a result, I expect them to put in place their own team.

Given the NZ links (apparently....), I wouldn't be surprised if they call upon RHP to oversee some of the immediate jobs. I don't think he flourished under Green and part of me wants him to prove that he can be successful.

I still think there are a number of surprises around the corner. I'll feel a little more at ease when I see the list of names associated with the consortium.

Re: Andrew chalmers : Sat Jan 14, 2017 6:43 pm  

daveyz999 wrote:

I'm confident the new regime will opt for their own staff.

Previous owners came in with no knowledge of what was required to run a club, and therefore relied on the experience of people whom were already employed. The new owners are a consortium, and if we are to believe rumours, have a decent Rugby League backing. As a result, I expect them to put in place their own team.

Given the NZ links (apparently....), I wouldn't be surprised if they call upon RHP to oversee some of the immediate jobs. I don't think he flourished under Green and part of me wants him to prove that he can be successful.

I still think there are a number of surprises around the corner. I'll feel a little more at ease when I see the list of names associated with the consortium.

RHP? At £75 grand a year,and the rest ? I don't think so.

Re: Andrew chalmers : Sat Jan 14, 2017 6:54 pm  

Cassandra wrote:

RHP? At £75 grand a year,and the rest ? I don't think so.

How do you know how much Robbie was on or are you just guessing

Re: Andrew chalmers : Sat Jan 14, 2017 7:10 pm  

Hopeful that we can get the coaching and academy staff back in place as to how it was before liquidation.

It's going to be important going forwards and we want to limit the disruption as little as possible.

Hopefully we have kept hold of the recent first team graduates (Ryan, Lumb, Oakes, Kirk, Ricketts, Pickersgill, Trueman and I think Wilkinson) because they'll be real important for us these next few seasons. Hopefully we don't have to recruit a load more juniors and those that we highly thought of below last seasons first team graduates will be banging at the door soon enough. (Scott, Brown etc)

Re: Andrew chalmers : Sat Jan 14, 2017 7:11 pm  

Duffy is the only high profile management level staff left - so he's the only one needing a decision on

Re: Andrew chalmers : Sat Jan 14, 2017 7:50 pm  

roofaldo2 wrote:

Well, this group who've taken over the Bulls are the hand picked of the RFL.

The RFL said that which ever bid was successful, they would have to provide plans and funding to ensure 3 years of rugby at Bradford.

However, several players are still unhappy that they know no more than the general public and are still officially unemployed.

You'd think the RFL would have more concern over player welfare than is currently been shown. Especially if this whole endeavour goes tits up as the RFL will be left holding the bag with more than egg on their face

The remaining players are unemployed the RFL have no right to be telling them anything.