TBF I don't think the club has pushed the "Noble bad, McNamara good", "Caisley bad, Hood good" line at all. Indeed while we've had years of rumours about Harrisgate, youth player issues, money etc. etc., it is only recently, and only to a limited extent, that comments have been made by the Club - under great pressure to "be open with the fans" so that a little light has been shed on the current regimes views as to the past setup as compared to now.

As Adey said, and we all know, you absolutely never get to find out all sides of the whole story, so have to form views on snippets. It isn't surprising for any new regime to advance (and presumably genuinely believe) that they are improving on / clearing up after the previous incumbents. It's normal. I'd say there's been much less of that at Bradford than there could have.

I reckon it is totally wrong to accuse the present regime of "trying to shift the focus away from Mac's short comings on to Noble and Caisley". I don't see that is fair at all. Where have they been doing that? The fans have been on at the club for a long time to say more and inform better, and it seems to me that if you asked for it, it's bad form to slag off when you get it.

On youth development, whether the problem was deficiencies in the system, or whether it was Noble/the club wouldn't give deserving cases a chance to the extent that they were even lost to the game in some cases - I've only directly heard that from RER, though I don't doubt it. If the Bulls were wanting to sling mud why would they not use this?

If the club [i]did/i] make these criticisms re failure to keep such promising youths, would that be (a) "trying to shift the focus etc" or just (b) the oft requested "truth"? If RER is right, surely you couldn't get a more damning indictment of the old youth setup?

And if he is right, what better ammo for a shift of focus could Hood & Co., have? Yet they have kept those bullets locked in the armoury?

In terms of other issues, we all know that Harrisgate was an utter financial disaster for the club and it was indeed 100% the fault of the previous administration, so no focus shifting required there. We also (I presume) all believe that selling Fielden and Noble was not unconnected to the state of teh club's cashflow so ditto; yet I haven't heard the present administration making a big song and dance about it and if they did then it would not be "spin" but the plain truth.

Of the two lists above I'll stick my neck out and say the Leeds players are generally speaking better than the ones we've brought through. It's ok bringing through lots of players but they need to be of a good standard, otherwise what's the point? As RER has stated we perhaps missed a trick at times with our own youngsters and didn't produce the quality, even if the quantity was ok. After all quality wins titles and trophies not quantity as we all know.

I guess Leeds are the best example because they've brought through their kids over a long period and kept it going. While the numbers produced might be similar there's a definite difference in quality over the SL years. Leeds have produced more test players than us, and that is what we should be aiming to do - bring through as many test quality players as possible.

Bradford: Deacon, L,Pryce, Peacock, Fielden, Langley, Burgess.

Leeds: Walker, Sinfield, McGuire, Burrow, Diskin, JJB, Bailey, Smith, Hall & Calderwood.

However all but 1 of theres is still at the club. Look how many we have still in our first team squad. Thats the difference

But that's nothing to do with development that's a retention problem.

Well they do say you are never more than 12 feet away from a Rhino. I don't know if that is specifically Rhinos or includes Pigeons as they are often referred to as Rhinos with wings.

Looking at your list I'd agree that Leeds's biggest success was keeping their side together. Shame we allowed Peacock to leave, he was our biggest loss IMO. We did seem to have a "lull" in producing real top quality or allowing players like Atkins to leave. Leeds of course have done the same with the likes of Fox, Carvell and Raynor but haven't struggled as a result.

Have you tried the macaroons in Betty's? They are the dog's.

Whatever people say about him now, we miss Fielden aswell. We will never know if he'd have gone downhill if he stayed at Bradford, but we have never replaced Fielden, Peacock or Big Joe properly in our pack.

He was already going downhill before he left. He had that one superb game in the World Club Challenge and then had a poor half season before going off to Wigan.

I know, but some players have a bad season then come back all guns blazing the next. I just can't believe that he went from the best prop in the world to what he is now.

There's a number of former Bulls that are good solid players:

Stuart Reardon
Chris Bridge
Richard Moore
Andy Smith
Robert Parker
Karl Pryce
Robbie Paul (Technically an academy product)

Ryan Atkins
Brett Ferres
Chris Bridge
Stuart Fielden
Stuart Reardon
Paul Sykes
Karl Pryce
Leon Pryce
Robbie Paul
Robert Parker
Jamie Peacock
Andy Smith
Richard Moore
Jamie Langley
Sam Burgess
Matt James
Matt Cook
Craig Kopzcak
Dave Halley
Jason Crookes
Paul Deacon


Not that far behind really mate?

Plus one of our players is now the England captain so that's worth 2