: Wed Apr 29, 2009 8:46 am  

Marsdengiant wrote:

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.

I'd bet a lot that the phrase "sugar daddy" has yet to be used in any of the world's playgrounds, even less probably by a "half wit" (sic) but each to his own amusement.

: Wed Apr 29, 2009 8:59 am  

tigertot wrote:

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.

Bullseye in particular has indicated this on several occasions.

: Wed Apr 29, 2009 9:00 am  

Adeybull wrote:

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.

pretty sure there were comments in media from both mcnamara and hood at beginning of season that should the right player become available then funds were available. since then the non-appearance of bird and release of tupou would pretty much confirm that we have cap space available. Short term deal for rinaldi wont have cost much ( and I suspect caisley is providing his legal services for rinaldi's case against the RFL at a reduced rate as part of the deal).

agree about the off-field cutbacks,which whilst looking bad are necessary to offset running costs of odsal,settlement with leeds and reduced crowds.
Until performances on the pitch are more consistently positive then can't see benefit of throwing money at marketing budget at the moment.

: Wed Apr 29, 2009 9:35 am  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

:?
I'd bet a lot that the phrase "sugar daddy" has yet to be used in any of the world's playgrounds, even less probably by a "half wit" (sic) but each to his own amusement.

Wow, what a super bet!

I think it is great that the Chairman of your club resorts to such childishness. Does he have some problem with wealthy people putting money into the game? Would he extend his opprobrium to wealthy corporations? If Tordoff or Morrisson wanted to put a few million into the Bulls would he call them sugar daddy to their face? Or do you think they might find such a description peurile?

: Wed Apr 29, 2009 9:50 am  

I haven't read the LE for years so haven't read any of this. How does use of the phrase "sugar daddy" translate into childishness?

: Wed Apr 29, 2009 10:35 am  

vbfg wrote:

I haven't read the LE for years so haven't read any of this. How does use of the phrase "sugar daddy" translate into childishness?

God knows

: Wed Apr 29, 2009 10:39 am  

vbfg wrote:

I haven't read the LE for years so haven't read any of this. How does use of the phrase "sugar daddy" translate into childishness?

People will classify the use of this phrase as they wish. Hood seems to use it in a pejorative way. It smacks of envy. He could refer to wealthy backers / supporters / investors. I doubt he would call any potential wealthy invetsor in the Bulls a sugar daddy - and rightly so, it would be an immature thing to do. Refering to other clubs in this way is graceless.

: Wed Apr 29, 2009 10:40 am  

vbfg wrote:

I haven't read the LE for years so haven't read any of this.

Me neither, until yesterday when I bought one on spec. Will never again, cos reading it reminded me why I stopped reading what was then the media organ of Leeds Rhinos in the first place.

vbfg wrote:

How does use of the phrase "sugar daddy" translate into childishness?

More like it translates into "hit a bit of a raw nerve"?

: Wed Apr 29, 2009 10:42 am  

Marsdengiant wrote:

People will classify the use of this phrase as they wish. Hood seems to use it in a pejorative way. It smacks of envy. He could refer to wealthy backers / supporters / investors. I doubt he would call any potential wealthy invetsor in the Bulls a sugar daddy - and rightly so, it would be an immature thing to do. Refering to other clubs in this way is graceless.

I bet if you did not have Ken Davy and we did you would not practice what you preach?

: Wed Apr 29, 2009 10:48 am  

Marsdengiant wrote:

Hood seems to use it in a pejorative way.

I've seen him use the phrase before and never really had that impression. It always struck me as talking his own club up for having achieved success without those advantages than talking other clubs down.

As you say though, all in the eye of the beholder. Clubs with wealthy backers and a long history of failure will likely take it as a childish snub at themselves.