: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:36 am  

Whatever legal recouse might be available to the Buls I agree with FA that Stevo
"Would still leave it a cheap shot, and still leaves him a total tossing post"

League Express should consider the contents of Stevo's submissions and assess whether they want to be associated with such non-informed. non-attributed and non-researched articles in their publication.

If they do then it questions all of their editorial policies and belittles many of the genuine journalists on their staff

: Wed Apr 29, 2009 6:53 am  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

Stevo has clearly defamed the club (unless we are in "financial strife").

As much as Stevo is a pr1ck & what he has said, in his position, is not excusable, for a number of posters on here to feign hysteria & claim you are not in financial strife is a bit rich (!). Perhaps he has read the thousands of posts on RAB blamimg your league position squarley on the financial situation at the club. Depends on your definition of strife I suppose.

: Wed Apr 29, 2009 7:04 am  

tigertot wrote:

As much as Stevo is a pr1ck & what he has said, in his position, is not excusable, for a number of posters on here to feign hysteria & claim you are not in financial strife is a bit rich (!). Perhaps he has read the thousands of posts on RAB blamimg your league position squarley on the financial situation at the club. Depends on your definition of strife I suppose.

if we're in 'strife' whilst operating at a profit for several years and with assets, how do you describe the situation that the majority of the other superleague clubs are in where they have no assets and post a loss every year only surviving due to handouts from their sugardaddies?. And this is public knowledege, the accounts for all clubs are available for a nominal fee from companies house so are easily checkable by any responsible journalist. The only 'strife' we find ourselves in is not money spare to spend on transfer fees which is a bit different to the impending insolvency stevo suggests.

: Wed Apr 29, 2009 7:11 am  

The League Express once published a full page account from the bloke who Leon Pryce was in court for attacking the first time. It was during the trial and therefore legally prejudicial to the case. That’s when I stopped buying it.
They don't really care about their journalistic responsibilities.
Let’s face it, fewer and fewer people read it so soon enough it won't really matter what they print because nobody will be reading it!

: Wed Apr 29, 2009 7:16 am  

mat wrote:

if we're in 'strife' whilst operating at a profit for several years and with assets, how do you describe the situation that the majority of the other superleague clubs are in where they have no assets and post a loss every year only surviving due to handouts from their sugardaddies?. And this is public knowledege, the accounts for all clubs are available for a nominal fee from companies house so are easily checkable by any responsible journalist. The only 'strife' we find ourselves in is not money spare to spend on transfer fees which is a bit different to the impending insolvency stevo suggests.

I didn't say you are in strife, it was a number of posters on here that might lead a casual observer to believe you are, HTH. The parlous state of most pro RL teams in the country is largely irrelevant. Yes, a repsonsible journalist would check his/her facts before printing tosh. And you think it is only transfer fees at Bradford that have been cut back?

: Wed Apr 29, 2009 7:38 am  

tigertot wrote:

I didn't say you are in strife, it was a number of posters on here that might lead a casual observer to believe you are, HTH. The parlous state of most pro RL teams in the country is largely irrelevant. Yes, a repsonsible journalist would check his/her facts before printing tosh. And you think it is only transfer fees at Bradford that have been cut back?

we're fully aware that we're not spending full cap but this is largely due to there not being any halves/centres available who would be an improvement on what we have and theres no point signing other positions where we have plenty of cover just for the sake of spending full cap. I'd call that sensible rather than a problem. likewise we may have cut back on gameday entertainment but we still provide more than a lot of SL clubs.

: Wed Apr 29, 2009 8:00 am  

tigertot wrote:

I didn't say you are in strife, it was a number of posters on here that might lead a casual observer to believe you are, HTH. The parlous state of most pro RL teams in the country is largely irrelevant. Yes, a repsonsible journalist would check his/her facts before printing tosh. And you think it is only transfer fees at Bradford that have been cut back?

The only posters on here that suggest we are in financial difficulties are visitors who do not wish us well. Many posters on here seem to think the club has plenty of money, which of course it does not and as the chairman acknowledged. Some of us try to point out the same financial realities as he did - no sugar daddy so money is tight - and express concern for the long-term future if crowds fall and the OSV does not go ahead. Nothing there from us to suggest the club is in "financial strife" or, as that tösser wrote means "financial difficulty" right now.

: Wed Apr 29, 2009 8:07 am  

mat wrote:

we're fully aware that we're not spending full cap but this is largely due to there not being any halves/centres available who would be an improvement on what we have and theres no point signing other positions where we have plenty of cover just for the sake of spending full cap. I'd call that sensible rather than a problem. likewise we may have cut back on gameday entertainment but we still provide more than a lot of SL clubs.

I'm not sure we are actually "fully aware" of any such thing, even if there may be indications that that might be the case.

I suspect TT was anyway referring more to areas such as off-field staff, marketing and pre-match entertainment where it is clear that severe cutbacks were made - almost certainly following the Gareth Davies business plan, and the disappointing fall-off in attendances plus of course the fiasco with Leeds.

The key point most observers miss though is that those cutbacks were necessary precisely to prevent the club getting into financial difficulties, since we can't go running to a Moran or a Davy or a Lenaghan or a McManus or a Wilkinson (or even a Caddick, at need) if we get caught a bit short.

I suspect somebody who does not wish us well has again been doing what we saw clear evidence of happening but could never prove, several years ago - planting malicious and unfounded rumours in the right ears.

: Wed Apr 29, 2009 8:28 am  

Adeybull wrote:

The only posters on here that suggest we are in financial difficulties are visitors who do not wish us well.....

Nothing there from us to suggest the club is in "financial strife" or, as that tösser wrote means "financial difficulty" right now.

If I had the time or the inclination I am sure I could find a number of posts from loyal supporters on here whose posts do suggest financial difficulties. Anyone wishing ill on another RL team I put with G W Bush.

As I said previously, it depends on your definition of strife. Stevo likes to make cheap, not thought through, controversial remarks, usually bollox, in his commentary. This is another of those.

: Wed Apr 29, 2009 8:41 am  

Four pages so far on Stevo's comments! Grist to the Stevo mill.

I find it amusing that whenever commenting on these issues Hood, in theory an intelligent adult, uses phrases like 'sugar daddy'. He sounds more like some envious half wit in a playground.