Well there's certainly going to be competition for places next year.

As well as a number of players who'll feel that they have something to prove.

But the question marks over Orford remain and, as I'm sure the club are aware, it needs to be resolved ASAP

Or, it's already been resolved and they don't want to mention it until after pledge deadline?

.. and like that silly Des Hasler, who picked him all year for the NRL championship winning Sea Eagles, ending with him winning a champions ring in a record 40-nil Grand Final thrashing of the Melbourne Storm Bank. What a mug that Hasler must be.

He did win us the game against Wigan.

What, all on his own?

I mean, at least to player who passed to him for his one yard blunder over the line must have contributed in some way.

B4C is spot on. Hall is pants.

He is also rated by bumbling oafs like you.

Yin and Yang.

Ignoring your routine gratuitous personal abuse, (what is your problem?) let me think; whose assessment of a player carries more weight; that of -
(a) Des Hasler, the coach of the NRL winning Sea Eagles; or
(b) you
Mmm. Tough call.

"Bumbling oafs"? Listen, I'm not the one arguing that the NRL-winning Des Hasler picked all season a "garbage" player, rather than any one of the alternatives he could have picked, or for that matter, signed.

But you fellas stick to your shovels, and keep digging, if it makes you happy.

While Hall was part of that premiership winning Manly side he was there to perform a particular role. Like all good sides Manly were made up of stars, good players and steady pros. IMO Hall was the equivilent of Radford or Parker in our trophy winning sides. Hall was important to that Manly team but when put in the Bulls team his qualities were not what was most needed at the time. IMO we already had a few steady players and needed someone who could break the line. Back at Manly he did the tackling so the likes of Watmough, Stewart, Lyon etc had more space. Here we had very little flair so I'm not sure how he added to the blend of the side.

From what I've seen he's a steady sort of backrower who's there to graft. I would argue that's not the sort of player to use a quota spot on as we already had players to do this or could've got an English recruit to do the same job. We have gone on to use him off the bench. If he's going to be used it should be as a backrower who puts in the minutes, whether he's up to that now is open to question as he seemed to lose fitness as the season went.

At the time of him signing I didn't know much about him but looking back I'm not sure what McNamara saw in him or why he was targetted, it doesn't with hindsight look a very clued up bit of recruitment. I don't have anything against Hall I just struggle to see how he justifies a quota place given what he brings to the team.

My problem is that whenever people have a different opinion than you you feel the need to come on here and try to silence them. Your long winded quote-a-thon replies are only done to make you look good and bore others into submission.

What makes it worse is that your knowledge of the game appears to be tantamount to nil. Some of the stuff you come out with is simply baffling at times and it is embarrassing that people may think that you are an example of what Bradford fans are actually like.

Still, more and more people are seeing the bigger picture now that you have swapped your obsession with me for others. It is boring and hypocritical. After all, you NEVER produce one of your "War and Peace" style replies for one of your "friends" should your opinion differ on a certain matter.

Seems a reaonably balanced assessment, does that. I'll admit I'd sort of looked to him to be a decent Solomona replacement, doing some at least of the sort of things that Solo could do when he was minded to - including especially punching holes in defences, which we were pants at in 2009. Whether it was because we were using him out of position, or whether as you say he is more gratfer than line-breaker, whatever, he was a massive disappointment this year. We never heard much from the coaching staff about why, did we?

No we didn't and it's the key point I feel in a 'fair' assessment of Hall. A number of times last year Hall came on, knocked on, but invariably was starting to get involved when he was taken off. Was this a fitness issue because we'd asked him to add weight to play prop? The most bizarre event came when he was dropped to the under 20s because according to LSH he needed game time when the season was basically over. People saying he was pants at Manly are way off in my view - he was a 60-70 min second rower who 'could' do a job at prop. The totally predictable injury to Sculthorpe meant he was being asked to do 2 short spells at prop and carry a stone over weight and it seemed to sap his confidence and he got worse.

I think the lad may well have been a victim of a truly disastrous coaching regime who started the season without enough props (again) and being asked to do a job that just wasn't him. Slim him down, get him fit and give the lad a chance under a proper coach and we could easily see a totally different player.

He has a good step and can alter his direction pretty well for a big guy. If Potter can get him into shape and play him where he plays best (backrow) then he'll no doubt improve.

Despite what has been put on here, he was a much better player at Manly than he has shown so far in Bulls colours. He's had a pretty awful year but I don't think he is a lost cause just yet.