Quote: Bulliac "In order to move forward more easily I can only reiterate my plea to the current board to end - with immediate effect - all the political statements about what did, or didn't, happen in the past. The only thing it serves to do, inevitably, is to elicit a response form the old board. The whole lot of them, old lot and new lot, have to realise that this slanging match does the club no favours and only makes any effort to find investment more difficult - would you invest in a club where the shareholders are having an open civil war through the media?
The ball is actually in the court of the new board; if they don't make provocative announcements there is nothing to respond to. If the old board then make statements without provocation then they stand to be, rightly, damned for it. At the end of the day I still, maybe naively, believe both of them actually want what is best for the club; maybe it's time to prove it.'"
Broadly agree with the sentiments but I think the last few weeks have shown there is little if any chance of this happening with the current shareholding as it is.
We can argue forever on the nuts and bolts but I've argued for years that the key problem could only be solved by administration. I disagree the ball is in the court of the new board as we can see an effective message board campaign has been mounted to undermine them. Personnally, whether justified or not, I think CC is simply too divisive a figure to take us forward. People really seem to hate him and there's just too much history I'm afraid.
I paid my pledge out of emotion but feel in retrospect it was the worst thing we could have done. Had we entered administrtaion in April we could have been shut of Caisley, Hood and the rest. I think the club would have been bought out of admin. We'd have lost points but those saying we'd lose our franchise are talking nonsense. The RFL have secretly lent the club money and bought a lease they probably didn't want to keep us alive.
We have ended up in the worst of all worlds.
