The problem with the bulls is their defence - not their attack. They currently conced 32 points per game. if Potter listened to most of the comments on here, his game plan would have to be to score 36 points a game to ensure victory. Those who are critical of the attack are either relics from the 1980's who have no real concept modern attacking play, or they have a self interest in promoting players who have not been chosen.

If you ananlyse the replays you will see Bulls players not staying active once the ball has passed them (which sets them up for inside plays ), making very bad reads on dummy runners ( especially the left side defence ), failing to dominate the tackle therefore giving themselvs more time to get the defensive line set and in turn greater line speed. Once these stuctural issues are addressed along with the poor handling and silly penalties, then they will have greater possesion, better field position and an opposing defensive line that is retreating in front of them. Thats when good open attaking play starts to become evident.

St George are the Best team in the world, the best defensive team in the world and Wigan could not find a way through in the WCC. Try Telling Wayne Bennett defence isn't important. Great teams get their defence right first.

So, if you are looking for players who should not be retained start with the bad defenders first.

Only in so far as there's prize money paid out depending on playoff position. Finish outside playoffs and financially there's no difference between 9th and 14th as far as money from rfl goes. Obviously there's a knock on effect on finances from merchandise and ticket sales potentially dropping the following season too.

So, if the Bulls announce that they are also "looking at" Laffranchi, Waterhouse, as well as "looking at" Lockyer, Smith, and Uncle Tom Cobbley all will be viewed as spiffing? How does "looking at" work, then? It should suit us, cos it sounds pretty cheap.

The last bloke in charge couldn't pick a good player if he fell over one in the street despite apparently having the full cap to spend. That'd make any transition period last longer.

The current bloke can't turn it around overnight. It took him at least a season to make Catalans properly competitive.

Another one is Tony Smith's two runs at English clubs. At Leeds he took a team of runners up and turned them into champions and at Wire he took a group of superstars that never delivered and, so far, has got back to back Challenge Cups.

As for the club "looking at players"? Well ofc they are. I believe it was stated at one fans forum, that even though there's the anti tamper deadline you'll normally get agents touting their players to clubs at the start of the year. That's their job, to ensure their client has a club to play for next year. So IF a player is available then his agent will offer him round to clubs where he thinks he'll get the best deal for him. Which is another reason why it's sensible for chairmen to suggest they've got space to spend under the cap, after all, if an agent thinks he's more likely to get a good deal at club A rather than club B then that's where he's likely to recommend his client goes.

Thanks Guru for a bit of detail on the defensive issue that I have been on about for the last few weeks. seems to me that a lot of the posters on this blog are on the wrong one, they should be on a fantasy rugby league site where money and player availability is no issue. So in the real world, I absolutely agree with you, and thanks Mat on the next post in clarifying pay outs, that does make it even more important to keep the very recent improvements in defence going on for the rest of the season even if it means we win 9 games by just a few points. Assuming the funds are there, how do you attract a good experienced offensive/organising half back? If the defence is sorted by the end of the season, then a bit of ego massage would help the cash, as Potter can justifiably say to prospects that the defence is sorted out and the most important piece of the jigsaw is a half back to work off that platform in offence. Yes, lets walk, or rather tackle, before we run.

So far we've had two very bad performances and the rest have been pretty much what might have been expected at the start of the season. A bit disappointing that we didnt manage one "shock" victory against Wigan/Saints/Giants/Leeds.

As far as the new signings are concerned, I think we're getting what you might expect from the pool of players that are now our target market. Some decent performances but an awful lot of inconsistency. The players we've signed are available at a salary that we can afford because they have some talent but are unable to turn it on week in week out.

Despite our league position I have slightly more faith than this time last year, but until we can afford some genuine quality, or the younger players fulfill their potential, I cant see massive scope for improvement.

I would like to see Lionel Messi at scrum half.

This season was always going to be about reasonable performances at home and a good cup run. I think we signed a lot of players on one year contracts asking them to prove themselves. The fact that we signed so many always meant we had to be fortunate in having a lot of those gambles paying off. My worry is that we now have to replace most of them at the end of the year as they have not really impressed thus meaning next year will be another of transition making our seventh. This will then be followed by Potters departure after his two years meaning another coach and yet another transition year. After a while you have to start believing ypu are a mediocre club and no longer in transition.

The thing is, the club are in talks with OOC players and this should hopefully mean there'll be less of a player turn over this year.