M@islebugs: for sure yes, the seriously poor recruitment and retention policy is indeed all too self-evident, and Caisley is of course correct to point out that he was not in charge over these horrid recent years when the consequences hit home.

I think the really key issue - and its one I suspect we'll never really get to the bottom of - is to what extent that has been a consequence of the financial situation bequeathed to the subsequent administration, and to what extent the subsequent administration has been culpable on their own account? For my own part, I think it is a lot of both - as I think you do - although the financial situation must have had a cumulative corrosive effect on just about everything we have tried to do in recent years?

As for "spending the salary cap" - I think people know by now my views on the salary cap - and the aspects of it which IMO can amount to being optional in the right circumstances, should any club be so-minded. And, just as a taster for that: remember that Harris (or his company) was apparently receiving substantial payments from Publico for his image rights. Not from the club. Until the RFL ruled that - for whatever reason - those third-party payments (unlike those to e.g. Scully by Gillette) should count under the cap. And did anyone ever notice that Sam was reported as the new face of Bradford Lexus the day before his extended contract (yeah, right...! ) was announced...?

Agree with all that. Not sure if why Caisley chose to issue his statement really, bit narcissistic I think.

"Reading Bullette" has just posted it...

Well said Chris.

Well, I was told a rumour shortly after . . . . . . probably safest
IMO, if his letter had been a post on this forum, many would have dismissed it as trolling.

I left the variant on that that I heard out of what I have said, mindful of the rules on defamation...

I never had him down as narcissistic, more smug self satisfied teflon man.

There can hardly be a person left in south Bradford who somebody we know hasn't told that precise same tale to along with all that Reading Bullette has just spouted on the T and A message board.

No mention of the disastrously costed Odsal deal I note.

A fair bit of the RB post can be objectively verified or is self-evident though?

As for the variant on the rumour that I heard, it most definitely did not come from Duffy. With any and all due respect to the Duffster, my source was a pretty convincing one.

He's hardly likely to do that! Since in the 2004 Accounts he held the fans (or lack of) as being responsible for the deteriorating financial situation (the one he neglects to mention he was well aware of in his letter, yet expressed serious concern about in the 2004 Accounts in his last Chairman's report before he went...) and its the fans he is now trying to curry favour with.

His letter is highly selective in what he chooses to say and what to omit to say, I suggest?

ps. In "disastrously costed", do I take it you now admit the possibility that it might have been far from the terrible deal for council tax payers that the good burghers of Keighley alleged at the time?

How can the fact we recieved derisory sums for the Burgi be laid at CC's door and not at the door of the club who held their contract? When did CC have us start a season with one thirty odd yr old Aussie half back who didn't want to be here and then blamed not only that years debacle on him but the one after? We've been through this and as well you know we could list the atrocious decisions until tomorrow.

What is annoying in this is a series of people who cannot face up to the fact that between them they have ruined the club. McNamaragate is every bit as damaging as Harrisgate. RB states, 'He is a complete and utter joke and the club would be best served if he kept his bitter mouth shut and let the people who have kept it going for the last five years carry on doing it'. The first part of the sentence might be justified but anyone who has sat through the last 5 years can only pray the second half doesn't come true.

This, in my opinion is the most important question from a very good set you posed.

Whilst we can now accept in hindsight we were riding the crest of a wave that seemingly wasn't going to end, did Caisley know the limitations and resign in and around those circumstances? Or did he have as little idea as 90% of people in and around the club.



I'd be inclined to agree. Like you say, certainly seems he is trying to win over the people he once suggested were at fault, in expense of making the current regime look the villain in all of this, which I find slightly farfetched.

Maybe Caisley sees that day when he'll come back riding his shiny white stead on the horizon, hence a PR initiative to try to win the favour of the fans?