Well, I had a nice weekend.

History (and a partial history at that ) cannot always be used to predict the future and on that basis I too would judge Whitcut by what he has done for the Bulls rather than his past record with other organisations. As far as I an determine, he has helped to put a board together that has satisfied the RFL, and then quietly disappeared to pastures new. Compared to the actions of some of his predecessors with influence, a pretty good record.

There's a gig going at Wibsey methodist church if he is out of work.

Surely they can't sack a man for unorthodox outreach and evangelism? Reformation deniers!

And seeking spiritual enlightenment, surely?

Except I never said that [ithis[/i quote contained lies or made up facts. I was going to go trawl up where you HAVE made up facts, ignored other pertinent information or just plain lied but then I realised that

(a) I've better things to do with my time than show you your own hypocrisy.

and

(b) You've just MADE UP A FACT that I said this quote of yours included lies and made up facts. Or to put it another way, you lied. Not got a strong grasp of irony, do you?

There are plenty of examples of your other ignoring/editing/making up of facts around these forums, but I think my point has already been made, BY YOU, that anything you say is basically suspect.

Also, you've still not responded as to exactly WHY I'm wrong when I say Mr Whitcut's involvement with the Bulls was either harmful while he was in charge, harmful to getting new owners or continues to be harmful to the future of the club.

You could have just posted that you refuse to admit you were wrong and I was right......other posts have no place in the debate regarding mr whitcut...... Who has turned out to be as dodgy as I said.

But you've still not said what is wrong with my contention that Mr Whitcut has not nor is a bad influence on the Bulls either during his time in charge or so far with the new board/owners he helped bring in. You just keep saying I'm wrong, but don't explain why. If I am wrong, then please explain it to me. I'm big enough to admit when I'm wrong. But so far you've not shown how I AM wrong with that contention.

Oh, and YOU brought up other posts. Sorry if I've shown you to be someone who makes up facts or just plain lies, but the fault is yours not mine.

Why is it you continue to ignore my first post on the matter...what I posted before you decided to accuse me of agendas, anti-Bradford campaigns and shooting Kennedy?

Here it is again...with no mention of the "influence" of Whitcut on Bradford Bulls....just a questioning of his fit and proper standing to run a SL club with the proof as to why questions should have been asked......



why are you terrified to admit I was spot on about this guy whilst you were wrong?

Still not said why I'm wrong by saying "Mr Whitcut was not or hasn't been detrimental to the Bulls".

Tbh, you're not going to come up with anything because you have nothing other than your rather childish "I'm right, you're wrong nah nah na na na na" attitude.

I like how you try to once again try and deflect from what I've asked you to prove by saying I'm not allowed to bring up old posts, even though you do that. Then make up more facts and try and brush over it when I call you on.

You went out of your way to put forward an anti-Bradford bias in your posts. I called you on your ignoring of facts that didn't fit your bias and you continued to ignore the facts that don't match up with your argument. You then consistently made up facts to back up your argument or belittle anyone who doesn't immediately say "Wow, you're the most knowledgable poster ever, I shall stop thinking for myself and just believe anything you make up"

Oh and you had a real hissy fit when I used your own argument and use of that website against a London director. Didn't like the tables being turned, did you?

that's not the point under debate.......you said I was wrong about his fit and proper standing to run the bulls....I wasn't.

Seriously, no-one gives a f*ck.