I've read this about 8 times and still can't fathom the logic.

So in the Super League era St Helens and Bradford are the only clubs with a better trophy winning record than Leeds. But you bring in financial criteria to state that Leeds (as third best) are underacheiving but ignore that one of those clubs is in a mess financially while the other had a major bailout in 2002 (even after which they were operating at a significant loss).

So we could easily turn your statement on it's head and say that since the Caddick/Hetherington takeover (i.e. 1997 - SL II) Leeds have been the most successful [ifinancially stable[/i club in SL.

I haven't been following the South Stand redevelopment, so genuine question:

Was the plan for the redevelopment to be contracted to Caddick companies?

I ask because the obvious plan of action, if that's not a factor, is for a cash-rich business to undertake any Capital Projects which add value in the future *now* when materials and labour are at a low, and when you'll be getting sod all on any investment market with your cash reserves. Unless it's unacceptable to pay current market-rate to the planned contractors, and the artificial rate is too expensive...

In my view GH has been losing the plot for the last 3 years.

I acknowledge and give him credit for his earlier achievements. However so much of our success on the field came from the good fortune of having a unique set of talented youngsters become stars at the same time. This factor was the key to so much of the increased revenue and finanancial stability which so many attribute soley to GH.

It is this same set of players that have been allowed to grow past their prime all at the same time. I am not sure how much credit is due to GH for having recruited such a good accademy squad, or was it really the coaches and scouts or was it just a purple patch of good fortune.

GH did recuit well with Ali, Webb, Ellis and Peacock to add to the home grown talent but then all the other top SL sides also recuited well. Buderus is certainly up there with the class players but what was GH's thinking because at the time we did not need a hooker but we did need a centre and a prop.

What is clear over the last few years is that GH has shown a management weakness with his failed succession policy and has allowed the other sides to recuit the limited number of quality players that are now available and leave us with a 5th place side

which former hull chairman put his in his boot?

GH what was ever to be expected of a big daft lad of a forward

It's probably a good job he wasn't sacked straight away in the 90s and apart from arabs buying football clubs has anyone of made a suggestion where extra funds can come from @ the moment?

He also put his money where his mouth was on and off the field with sheffield.

Was it Roy Waudby? I vaguely remember the story but perhaps it was before Waudby's time.

Have to agree with all of this.