Re: Dane Chisholm : Tue Jan 31, 2017 9:01 am  

Time to get over it and see what the next few weeks hold...
There was mass Hysteria when Rohan was gone only to get a world class proven coach as a replacement,

Who knows we might have a few nice surprises to look forward to.

me been ever the optimist!

Re: Dane Chisholm : Tue Jan 31, 2017 9:14 am  

Blotto wrote:

You would think that with the quality he is supposed to have even an SL Club would have taken him on board, would have thought Rohans Uncle Tony might have needed a backup re Sandow leaving!

That's what they signed Kevin Brown for. To replace Sandow.

Personally I expected Chisholm to end up at Widnes who look desperately short of quality halves especially with Mellor injured for the start of the season. Sheffield doesn't seem good enough for him, but I suppose he has to take what he can get at this late stage too. (And yes, I know we weren't good enough for him either!). I wish him good luck and I won't pretend I'm not disappointed we don't still have him, but we are where we are and no sense crying about it.

Re: Dane Chisholm : Tue Jan 31, 2017 9:41 am  

The only positive I can take from this is the hope that he seems to have so much resentment (rightly or wrongly we've only had his side of the story at the end of the day) that he might try too hard to stick one up us when we play them and end up having a mare haha. On a serious note glad I got to see what I feel is the best half we've had in years play in our shirt

Re: Dane Chisholm : Tue Jan 31, 2017 10:08 am  

Decent player no doubt, but wasn't structured enough for what the Bulls require this season. My opinion anyway

Re: Dane Chisholm : Tue Jan 31, 2017 10:51 am  

king benny wrote:

Decent player no doubt, but wasn't structured enough for what the Bulls require this season. My opinion anyway

Agreed, not sure he would fit in with Toovey's approach to the game either. Shame because when he was good he was a fantastic player. But also went missing a few games. Good luck to him

Re: Dane Chisholm : Tue Jan 31, 2017 5:42 pm  

Think they are just following on and expanding Jimmy's theory of not needing a scrum half. This year we are trying the 'don't need a team at all' route

Re: Dane Chisholm : Tue Jan 31, 2017 5:49 pm  

rugbyreddog wrote:

Think they are just following on and expanding Jimmy's theory of not needing a scrum half. This year we are trying the 'don't need a team at all' route

Ha who needs players when you have good support?

Re: Dane Chisholm : Tue Jan 31, 2017 5:52 pm  

bowlingboy wrote:

Ha who needs players when you have good support?

Albeit that we don't sing.
Ooh I remember the days when all opposition fans could throw at us was that we don't sing. Now they know why.

Re: Dane Chisholm : Tue Jan 31, 2017 8:00 pm  

Dave Chisholm was nowhere near good enough to generate 9 pages of posts on RAB or for me to correct his name when my auto spell checker changed his name to Dave.

Re: Dane Chisholm : Tue Jan 31, 2017 8:30 pm  

he couldn't win us the game against Fev when it mattered. Yes he was a good player for Bradford but if he was all that, he'd be in super league next year. Big fish, little pond.