Chalmers and Lowe the conspiracy : Tue Apr 18, 2017 12:04 pm  

Is there anyone that thinks that Cha Lowe ate actually an RFL
Management team put in place to fulfil fixtures at minimum cost?

They don't seem to be too bothered about avoiding relegation..

Would be interesting to see what other people think about the
New owners?

Re: Chalmers and Lowe the conspiracy : Tue Apr 18, 2017 12:11 pm  

"conspiracy" is a bit far. Plainly obvious they were the RFL's chosen ones, no secret about it.

Re: Chalmers and Lowe the conspiracy : Tue Apr 18, 2017 12:14 pm  

I think they were invited very early in the process as a team the RFL could work closely with for the next three years.

I still hope/believe there is more happening in the background in terms of the ground, leases and deals with the RFL and council involved meaning us finding a new home and the RFL moving to Bfd...

For that the RFL would need a very sympathetic ownership team with no ulterior motives of their own.

I guess the RFL will actually see it as a bonus if we survive. The fact we're still exceeding 4k every home game must prove there is still worth in a top flight Bradford club and any work actually happening behind the scenes is worth backing.

I'm frustrated as anyone that we seem in the dark but on the other hand it could simply mean that they are doing the utmost to make sure nothing (other than away shirts and Chishom) goes t1ts up?

Re: Chalmers and Lowe the conspiracy : Tue Apr 18, 2017 12:17 pm  

Don't like the sound of this from the T&A:

Beattie said: "We have loads of injuries and losing loan players kills us. We just haven't got that experience – fact!

"We need to be better, we all know that, but they are young kids. That's it. We have got no 'middles' whatsoever.

"They are young kids battling against some experienced players and big, strong, tough forwards. We can't do it. That's a fact."

Everyone knows this, but what are Cha-Low planning to do?

"You can't fault the effort but, at the end of the day, we lacked it in the middle. If we don't get any of these loan players back, I don't know what is going to happen."

Well no, but we all have a damn good idea what will happen. How can Cha-Low not know?

But this is the bit that worries me:

Asked whether the performance would send a message to the club's owners about the urgent need for team strengthening, Beattie added: "That may be a question you need to ask them."

Re: Chalmers and Lowe the conspiracy : Tue Apr 18, 2017 12:25 pm  

We've just taken a trialist on from Hunslet. I think that should tell you all you need to know about available players right now.
If anyone has any suggestions on players we should sign, feel free to post them on here and enlighten us all. Who knows, maybe Chalmers and Lowe will read it and snap them up!

It might be worth revisiting this thread once the cup weekend is out of the way and teams can re-assess who they can afford to loan out.

All it takes is for Peltier, Murray and Oledzki to come back into the side and hey presto, we actually have a really good pack.
Put Chisholm/Pryce/Lilley in behind them with (hopefully) Moore at hooker and we'll be competitive in this league.

Re: Chalmers and Lowe the conspiracy : Tue Apr 18, 2017 12:52 pm  

Nothus wrote:

We've just taken a trialist on from Hunslet. I think that should tell you all you need to know about available players right now.
If anyone has any suggestions on players we should sign, feel free to post them on here and enlighten us all. Who knows, maybe Chalmers and Lowe will read it and snap them up!

It might be worth revisiting this thread once the cup weekend is out of the way and teams can re-assess who they can afford to loan out.

All it takes is for Peltier, Murray and Oledzki to come back into the side and hey presto, we actually have a really good pack.
Put Chisholm/Pryce/Lilley in behind them with (hopefully) Moore at hooker and we'll be competitive in this league.

if they want to survive there is no if's and but's...
Bailey was available and was talking to Bradford but they wouldn't pay him..there in lies the problem,

there aren't any full time professional players willing to play for nothing.
But we are a full time team, pay for full time pro's and they will sign..

Someone who has a good job or business as well as playing championship rl isn't going to play for Bradford for nothing, neither are SL standard full timers.

Re: Chalmers and Lowe the conspiracy : Tue Apr 18, 2017 1:12 pm  

bowlingboy wrote:

if they want to survive there is no if's and but's...
Bailey was available and was talking to Bradford but they wouldn't pay him..there in lies the problem,

I've not seen that anywhere. I take it you've seen the contract of us offering him £0 a month? Maybe we offered him what we thought he was worth and Toronto (who can offer a damn sight more than we can) offered him more. They can afford to take a loss on a player that doesn't work out. We can't. Bailey wouldn't have got a sniff in the line up when we had Oledzki, Murrary etc. Yes he would have been useful over Easter, but that doesn't mean i think it would be worth offering him way over the odds.

The "but" is maybe we can't afford. Overpaying for average Joes, was what got us into this mess in the first place.

Despite what people say, Cha-Lo have invested in the academy, Toovey, Moore, Smith, Chisholm. They will have had to have paid towards Larroryer, Murray, Oledzki, Lilley too.

Think some people are getting a little hysterical because we had a tough Easter. If we had been smarter against Fax we could have won. Fev we were totally outplayed against a good team with some crucial injuries coming.

I said at the beginning of the year props won't become available until after Easter when clubs decide they don't need certain players. Lets see what sort of team we have against Sheffield (forget Toulouse, a full strength side will still be getting mullered over there)

Re: Chalmers and Lowe the conspiracy : Tue Apr 18, 2017 1:14 pm  

Has anyone ever actually seen Chalmers or Lowe at Odsal? Do they even exist?

Re: Chalmers and Lowe the conspiracy : Tue Apr 18, 2017 1:26 pm  

bowlingboy wrote:

if they want to survive there is no if's and but's...
Bailey was available and was talking to Bradford but they wouldn't pay him..there in lies the problem,

there aren't any full time professional players willing to play for nothing.
But we are a full time team, pay for full time pro's and they will sign..

Someone who has a good job or business as well as playing championship rl isn't going to play for Bradford for nothing, neither are SL standard full timers.

What did we offer Bailey?
What did Bailey demand?
How much did Toronto agree to pay Bailey?

My guess is you can't answer any of those questions, so your comments become worthless.

Re: Chalmers and Lowe the conspiracy : Tue Apr 18, 2017 1:53 pm  

Concerns aplenty from all and sundry but there does seem to be an unhelpful gap in the chain from pitch level to Owner.Much too one way imo.