I can't help but think that the nomination of Coulby not Caisley is significant. As is the reduction in the minimum number of directors. I could speculate (several possibilities spring to mind), but I might keep my powder dry for now in the hope that something else relevant might manifest itself, to give a better pointer to what they are scheming.

Who is scheming, Adey?

Caisley or Hood? Who;s side is this guy or, is he neutral?

Im so confused.

I'd suggest that Mr. Coulby (I assume you mean him?), as a former director and current shareholder would have the cub at heart, but then I 'd guess that Chris, Andrew, Peter and Ryan [iall[/i have the club at heart and each would, no doubt, believe they were doing their best for the club. Let's be right about this, none of them went into rugby league to make their fortunes and none is the devil incarnate.

There are obviously differences in their opinions on what to do next; we wouldn't be in the current impasse if that were not so, but if they really do want the club to prosper, we need them to agree a formula to take the club forward and not indulge in Dallas type chicanery and board room games.

I don't know if anyone else has tried this, but to them all, I make a plea for them to put the future of the club first, put aside your obvious differences and work together for the common good. Despite all the rubbish which is getting in the way of an agreement, you and we, all want the same thing. Just do it.

And for Bulliac's next trick, having been nominated for the Nobel peace prize, he will set out to win the Nobel Prize for Physics for getting matter and antimatter to co-exhist without mutual anihilation...

Excellent post. Seconded.

Well, I'm not holding my breath....and generally I go along with the 17th chapter of the book of Jobe which (allegedly) says; "Blessed are those who do not expect....for they shall not be disappointed".

That said, if you don't ask you'll never know...

I suppose that, if you think about it, the one thing that actually stands out like a sore thumb is that instead of all the directors and main shreholders getting together behind locked doors and finding a way to work together to move the club forward, we seem to have two diametrically opposed camps, who will not speak, and even at the EGM in a month, seemingly all that's on the cards is to vote off Hood & co., appoint Coulby, and . . . er, that's seemingly it.

Talk about fiddling while Rome burns.

More like rearranging the shareholders...sorry the deckchairs, on the Titanic?

Its starting to make Glasgow Rangers look good.

To be fair, we don't have a former chief who everyone hates and can't understand why people would blame him.

No, wait. My mistake.

What we do seem to have are shareholders who would rather brief the press than speak directly to each other. I'm wondering what's going to happen at the EGM, will they speak then or have their solicitors reading out prepared statements?

Anyone remember that Frankie Goes to Hollywood "Two Tribes" video?

I think that maybe "relax, just do it" might be a better encouragement.....then again, when you look at the respect shown between two rugby sides after battering each other for 80 mins, maybe the shareholders need to get really physical for a while and then maybe, just maybe there may be some 'raprochement'?

I think the age of a lot them may precluse getting physical!

Can you get mentally physical or is that just an oxymoron?