Yes that's what I think too.

And whilst seeing both sides of signing him it is ironic people are complaining about lack of spend and apparent willingness to sign players that give us a chance of staying up

If we can keep Lilley then we don't need him at the moment. If we can get him for free, then yes absolutely but not if we have to spend loads to get him.

What's ironic is that we have got ourselves into a situation similar to the Iestyn Harris one that has done for the club.

I'm looking to be positive.

This is the first weekend for yonks that we haven't lost - is this the turn round, the new dawn, a period of renewed optimism? In the absence of of any contra indications I'm going for a resounding YES!

You cant be a Bulls fan - you've found a positive!!!

Stop it with that optimism stuff - it might wear off on to the rest of us

You've got to admire Bulls fans. We've generated 48 pages out of the fact that the owners haven't said anything.

Sometimes silences can be quite meaningful. I have always assumed that their remit is to see out the season and ensure that the fixtures are completed. I admit to being confused as to the requirement regarding the academy.

Maybe its just putting them in the shop-window for other clubs to sign when we collapse at the end of this season?

I think assuming that there is some sort of rationale behind events at the club is where we're going wrong.

The academy is interesting. We are the only club which had to have an academy as part of the winning bidders plan. Every other club it is optional. It costs between £150k (us, the lower end) and about £300k, Wigan, Leeds, the upper end of the scale.

We do have a top 8 graded academy though.

Which is pointless if we can't keep them.

We can only keep them if we can provide wages & a plan to get to SL. Which is obvious we don't have.

The other factor is that an academy & academy kids in the first team keeps the support happy for longer.

Coincidentally, grassroots & development are 2 (of many) factors in determining how much money the RFL got from Sport England this time round.

So, the cynic in me suggests that we are paying out £150k for an academy so that the RFL don't have to lose money from Sport England and to keep the fans onside for this year.

Or the conspiracy theory could deepen when the RFL come up with their new plan and Bradford is dragged into SL2 like dobbin to the knackers yard simply because it has an academy and the other dross at the bottom of the table didn't?

I'm a big supporter of the academy, the whole youth setup has been a beacon of professionalism at the club in spite of the various owners. Without it we'd have been history - look at the young players we've relied on to fulfil fixtures.

However a youth set up is just that. What it is not is a group of players that can be used as a first team squad.

I've been told (on twitter admittedly) that the RFL are paying for our academy this year.

I can't see any other clubs having an issue with this of course, especially our banjo-playing neighbours from over the hill.

Huddersfield certainly wouldn't complain, it'll be providing their next crop of first teamers.