I don't think he was signed for the future at all. Think he was signed as a stop gap that hasn't worked out. He was a bit of a gamble after the bull had failed to sign a major stand off. He's 23, not that young for an RL back. He should be first team now. I know the interest from Bradford came out of the blue for Briggs.

Potter must have a real issue with him though to not play him Monday, after we were told Sykes pretty much won't play stand off.

I assume that the "no mark" that you refer to so politely is Bulls4Champs2010?

If so, let me point out that he is considerably more clued up on all aspects of the game than you are and is correct far more regularly than he is wrong. So if you view him as a "no mark" it shows what plenty of people must think of you and your opinions.

(I am being generous by saying that you actually HAVE an opinion as it appears clear you have been brainwashed into saying whatever the club want you to say for some reason.)

Let me make this easy for you to understand shall I?

My opinion.....

Briggs is out of his depth at SL level. His all round game is woefully short of the required standard.

The fact......

He is being overlooked for a SO role despite being the only "specialist" SO in the first team squad. So far at least this season HIS role has been filled by, Kearney (full back), LeStrange (Hooker) and very probably Sykes (a centre/utility back who we were told would never play stand off again) as opposed to Briggs getting a game. Therefore the only SO we really have cannot get a game at SO despite being fully fit?

So where is the "spin"?

The spin is in the reason as to WHY he's been overlooked for a SO role. You're assuming that your opinion is the only explanation, when there could be a number of factors as to why Briggs is not getting game time. Could be his fitness level isn't where the club want it to be. Could be he doesn't know the plays as well as he should do so is unable to direct the game as well as he should. Could be that, following his injury, the club want to give him a little protection to prevent re-occurrence of his injury. Could be something else.

Given the fact that he is playing every week for the Under 20's I assume that fitness is not an issue.

But the fitness level for u20's is not as high as SL, is it?

No idea. I have never played either. Have you?

What I would suggest however, is that if he was still in line for a first team spot yet was an injury risk I doubt they would risk making it worse by playing in an Under 20's game.

Was it Potter's decision to sign Briggs? If so it makes it even more perplexing that he won't give him a shot!

He was as I recall. Ryan Duckett said upon signing him he was someone they had been monitoring for a while, but Potter had been in place for a couple of months so he had to have been signed on his final say.

No, I've not played either, however it doesn't take experience of playing at either level to see that it's a step up from u20 to SL.

As for the injury thing, that was simply something I suggested as a possibility as to why he wasn't being picked to play SL. Same way that football players tend to spend a couple of weeks in the reserves following an injury so they can get match fit in a less intense game environment.

Fitness wise Briggs is fine. MP just doesn't rate him atm.

Whether MP had the final say or not, i'm sure he'd not seen that much of him. I can't imagine he was a player on the Saints radar.

Don't care if it was Wayne Bennett, any professed Bulls fan who lays into Bulls players with relish, especially after they've only played three or four games, is a tw.t.

Let me give an example - DILLIGAF/Kev never thought Worrincy was any good and didn't make a secret of it. And as it turned out, he was right and I was wrong , Worrincy never kicked on like he could and should have. But there is still a massive difference in tone and intent between his posts and yours, and BullChamps or whoever. I make this point more in hope than expectation because you have previously refused to accept the existence of tone, let alone its importance.

You say brainwashed. I say the whole principle of supporting Bradford or any other team in any sport is ludicrous and doesn't hold up in front of cold logic. But if you're going to do it, support a side, why do it in such a miserable, mean-spirited fashion where you're just waiting for the blokes you're following to slip up? Life's too short, and most people have their own problems without wanting to heap on a load more imagined ones.

Like I said, it's the hanging judges who p.ss me off. I understand people's frustrations when a club goes from a trophy a year for a decade to outside the play-offs. But I can't see how relentless, wilful and insulting negativity do anything but sate some weird corner of your id. You're right to say you've toned it down this season, and I'm glad of that. But I'll still reserve the right to pull you and anyone else up when I think you're out of line.

Meanwhile, as if to make my point...

Unfortunately AF every site has people like this, they make these statements to get attention in a desperate attempt to get noticed.

You would think fans would learn to give players a chance when they are new to a club, it has been witnessed many times before that players take a while to settle in and find their feet.