One question that I sent in wasn't answered re the contracts of our assistants and whether they were getting renewed or indeed needed renewing. Forgot all about it until I was driving home!

To be honest, to me it was a load of flannel. There was no answers given really. Didn't tell us anythint we didn't know but put a nice positive spin on it all.

Two things that struck me though:
1. Potter is actually quite scary.
2. Duffy could have a pretty decent career as a stand up comedian.

I felt really sorry for Andrew Bennet last night. He is clearly committed to the club, came up with the original very successful pledge scheme which in my opinion was let down by our lack of recruitment options due to us buggering about with Matt Orford.

I could not believe the barracking he got when he said the £60 membership was excellent value for money, even with poor results it was clearly an outstanding offer. £60 for 14 home games and free entry to a challenge cup match how much better could it be? It got me thinking about the money I have spent at away games, £20 at Wakey, £19 at Cas and £19 at Warrington (I think). So to put in into perspective we got a full season of home games + a challenge cup game + a fiver off your shirt + £30 I got back from my teampoints for the price of three away games, how can that not be value for money regardless of some of the poor performances?

He seemed to me genuinely quite upset and far from happy afterwards about that. As I said earlier, I think (probably because he says it how he feels) that was why he fell into the trap of arguing back at those who had a go. Totally understandable IMO but I wish he'd been able to bite his tongue. Not that I could have.

To be honest, in his position I think I would have been very tempted to say "Sod it then, if you know a better deal go find it. I'm doing all this for nothing, why should I bother? See if one of you fancies trying to do a better (unpaid) job?"

I think some people need to remember that his opposite numbers at the likes of Wigan, Wire, Saints, Leeds and Hudds are all full-time paid marketing professionals and with a load more resources to play with. Indeed, the Marketing Director at Wigan used to be marketing at Bradford, in the days when we could afford to pay someone to do the job. When I asked Bennett before the meeting about his marketing budget, his reply was "I don't HAVE a marketing budget".

Andrew Bennet did not deserve the flack he got. The ones near me clamouring for higher prices and more success just did not get what he was saying though.

However, had I not already pledged and paid, nothing I heard last night would have encouraged me to do so.

I was sat with Adey and commented that some of the things been said were a little contradictory from what we had been told before.

Medley's slating of Joe Wardle made me chuckle.

What was it medley said about wardlE?

He said he did embroidery in his spare time and smelt of wee.

Can anyone tell me what the supporters around the far side were saying to poor Andrew to get him arguing back at them?

The wall to my right blocked out the sound

It wasn't really anything specific, more a hubbub of incredulous disbelief over his contention that people should pledge because 'it is value for money'.

He then tried the argument of 'You get value for money, win, lose to draw' and something along the lines of 'there's more to an afternoon of Super League than winning' - to an increasing crescendo of catcalls and comments.

Lol, Adey. Seriously, what did he say?

That he went to Hudds fill his wallet and that the Bulls want players who want to play for them, who have pride in the shirt. It's not all about the pay.

Something Mick Potter mentioned was the role of the loose forward has changed over the last few seasons and the days of the "ball playing loose forward" have gone. Maybe this gives us a clue as to next years pack line up.

I thought Donno was a ball playing loose? Where does this leave him?

Chris Bridge seems to be doing pretty well as a ball playing LF.
Are you sure this wasn't just a cover up for the fact that Langley is incapable of throwing a pass?

I think any of us would do well at LF in that team

I think MP might be referring to the Paul Gallen type lf that is not far removed from the prop type role - hence his easy transition to front row in the state of origin

Is he right, who knows? I think LF is a position where you can change things up

And Danny Addy.

I dunno. You don't have to play another front rower type player at LF but it appears that most clubs play a big damaging running type player there. Langley and Elima are the two best suited to that role at the club. I'm not sure where Addy and Donaldson fit in really. Both need time to come through but they need to bulk up I think if they're to make it - if we're to play with this plan.

I honestly thought the point made about loose forwards was a load of tosh

You don't see Leeds playing Peacock at loose forward, or Wigan playing Fielden there. OK, you might go for a rampaging, hard running 'extra' second rower to charge down the middle - but that's not the same as putting a plodding prop forward like Bryn Hargreaves there!

Besides the whole argument of 'everyone else is doing so we have to' (even if it were true) doesn't really hold water. We should be playing to OUR strengths (assuming we know what they actually are) rather than just trying to ape other teams - and failing.

I agree that Hargreaves and Kopczak are a million miles from being a Paul Gallen type player. So I agree with you that this approach doesn't suit our current squad.

What are our strengths? Dunno. When Langley is fit and Elima is on form we look a bit better. If Whitehead can cut out the indiscipline and errors he'll be fine. After that all our players have flaws, Addy is too shaky in defence, Donaldson offers nothing in attack and both are a bit on the small side. Hopefully time will see them come good but it depends on how much they want to make it. After those two there's nothing much to choose from but hopefully Bateman and Olbison will develop further.

You've missed the point, I've not said play a prop at LF, I've said the roles could be seen to be moving closer together. Plenty of people on here think Langley is playing more like a prop

Edit you're on about MPs response aren't you ?

I'd like to see what Bateman can bring tbh

Yeah, I'm talking about Mick Potter's point, enthusiastically backed up by Stuart Duffy

As for Langley, if he's playing like a prop then play him as one of the four props in rotation. I don't see the need to have a fifth one rotating. I don't think Elima is the answer either, I think he's better running out wide, same goes for Whitehead.

To be honest, given our current squad, I think we'd better going for a more creative player at loose - someone like Addy, or Donaldson if he could develop. Sammut is another possibility

Still rekon Langley should move to Prop should Lynch leave then Elima/Whitehead at 2nd row with Addy/Donaldson at LF depending on who we are playing.