Cheers, that's very helpful. From what we know of such contracts are there not performance clauses, or other potential opt-outs. I'm presuming there is some form of performance review system that is in place. Frankly I'm also surprised to hear he is likely to be on £100k plus, I would have thought an untried coach who was promoted to that position would be on less. I'm also wondering whether appointing someone as Director of Rugby and effectively demoting him (without demoting him contractually), might precipitate his leaving. It doesn't seem impossible to imagine a scenario where we could get him to leave should that be the consensus. I realise a DoR would involve extra cost, but the trade-off between that and falling turnstile revenue must surely be worth consideration?

I'm not suggesting that we should fire the coach, but I dont think his payoff should be the determining factor. I dont think any coach should be fire proof just because it would cost £100k to get rid of them. The impact that the coach can have on the team is just too great for that to be an insurmountable barrier. Even if it meant in the short term sacrificing a couple of squad places eg not replacing Tupou.



As for the back up staff, again that just shouldnt be an issue. I cant see the Bulls recruiting a coach of such standing that he would expect or insist on a mass clear out. Any decent coach would be prepared to work initially with existing staff and, if necessary, replace them gradually.

I don’t think that Bradford are in a financial position to release McBanana which means you’re stuck with know-nowt chancer until his contacts up.



Compound this with a ‘vote of confidence’ (which, as we all know, really means we’re really p*ssed off but can’t do anything about it) from your board and he aint going anywhere for the foreseeable future.

TBH, if we have given this fraud a deal till 2010 then we deserve all we get. Showing no ambition leads to decline.

Lack of ambition really isn't this club's problem. Greetings from the Blue Mountains, btw.

Jammy Bugger!!!



Where you staying?

Well they have a funny way of showing this ambition.

Isn't it? What [iis[/i the problem then?

Lack of money. Isn't it obvious?????

Not to those pursuing a single agenda, who refuse to admit the existence of anything which does not accord with that agenda.

Well if we are that skint it further shows the stupid decision to award a rookie coach a four and a half year deal to be utter folly.

There's no "if" about it Eddie we are skint.

Compared to the more sensible option of someone we couldn't afford?

Well we've had these discussions before and your both telling us your opinion is fact even though it's not what senior management at the club are telling us Hood, Duckett.

The club is not about to go bust tomorrow - that's thanks to the actions taken by the current administration. (although I fear for the future without then OSV though). Nor is it awash with funds, and a very tight ship is needed. When you examine what "senior management" has consistently been telling people, its essentially that. And that's not inconsistent with what Bullseye and I have been saying. Bear in mind that directors have to be very careful what they say and how they express themselves - been there, done that, and its not easy.



But opinion? Leaving aside what we each might have picked up over recent times that is not necessarily in the public domain, and quite apart from when you go up to the club there seems hardly anybody there any more and all the other signs that are plain for all to see, you could maybe go have a good read of the latest (and previous) published accounts. If you work on the basis that those are "fact", then you've got the unequivocal fact you are asking for.



If you don't know how to read, and more importantly interpret, a set of accounts, you could always ask a professional who does, and is pretty experienced and good at it. You might even have come across one who posts on here.

Bulls may well be short of funds - I was at Cougar Park on Sunday, skint is relative. I think some on here are hiding behind the apparent lack of funds, Bulls have a very good squad, possibly the best pack in the league. They are performing far below what they should, I expected a top 3 finish for the last couple of seasons. ATEOTD performance has to end at the door of the management.

Spot on.

Hiding behind?



That's disappointing, and I thought better of you than that.



How can it be "hiding behind..." to point out to some people - its seems you have to do it repeatedly - that the answer to the performance issues cannot lie just in the chequebook? Its not the fault of those of us conveying the message that some people seem unwilling to face up to that inconvenient truth.



The real problem is that once you recognise that you can't make that much use of the chequebook, which tends to restrict your scope for significant management changes/enhancement in the short term, the remaining options are somewhat limited AND harder.



And that presents a bit of a problem to the mass of people whose proposals for solving the problem primarily require the chequebook. And surely its some of them that are hiding? From financial realities?



But never mind, its dead easy to shoot the messenger.

As I've said before I think the present side is nowhere near top three standard. Our backs are average at best and our halfbacks are almost non-existent. As for our so-called super pack they've not bullied anyone yet this season. If they're top three standard then I'm Lesley Vainikolo.



It's obvious that we're not using the full weight of the cap this season. Why we haven't is open to debate but it doesn't take a genius to think that maybe things are starting to bite a bit harder financially and we're making savings on the playing side?



It's obvious mistakes have been made with player recruitment. Most of the players recruited over the past three years have been poor and for that McNamara needs to take the blame.



IMO we do need a new coaching setup and soon. However unless the OSV comes off it'll only be a short term fix.

Or maybe we are, more or less, but we - for example -



1. No longer have the scope some other clubs may have to secure players who can secure significant external image rights?



2. Have not utilised the cap-enhancing schemes that maybe a number of other clubs have used, which are now attracting the attention of HMRC?



Whether any of that helps explain the player recruitment of late can only be speculation.

TBH I should be flattered that you are disappointed, it suggests my previous posts must have had some credibility. We seem to be saying essentially the same thing - that the problem is not one that can easily be rectified by the chequebook. Where we differ is that you suggest there is no alternative as it is finanially unviable to replace Mac (providing you (not you personally) accept Mac is the problem). Apart from Salford, who probably think they would struggle to attarct anyone with a better calibre than Bomber, I can't think that any other SL club would tolerate the results the Bulls are. Also, I don't think the majority of clubs are in a much different plight to Bradford & I don't believe their coaches are on lesser contracts than Banana.

I'm not shooting you, I just have a different view.

You've put it better than I could but it adds up to the same thing - that the club doesn't have the cash or the contacts or sponsors with the cash to compete with the other top clubs.



That's why the backline is Platt, Sheriffe, Sykes, Nero, Tadulala, Jeffries and Deacon and not Withers, Vaikona, Harris, Hape, Vainikolo, Pryce and Paul.

Makes depressing reading, doesn't it?

I just hope we haven't any further to fall but I fear for the furture if OSV doesn't come off.



If that were to happen we'd be stuffed within no time at all. At least if it came off we'd not have massive costs crippling the club (£75k on a blocked drain) and would be able to compete without a massive handicap (are you reading this bit tigs?).

Hostel in Katoomba, first internet access for a week and a bit though I was kindly informed of last Sunday's events by a text message from a gloating Haligonian.



Bit baffled by Tigertot's logic - just because getting shut of the coach after a run of poor results is the done thing, does it make it the right thing? And as for ambition, RER... it is there, clearly. The efforts with youth development and the OSV demonstrate that. And even if it wasn't, eventually the buck stops not at McNamara's door but Hood's. He's the guy ultimately in charge and if you don't like the way he's doing things who are you going to replace him with?