Glad to see gordon was as bigger hit at leeds as he was at glasgow. ! maybe hawks could put a deal together for him their 2nd's are quite strong?!

Ooooohhhh the maggots are crawling out the woordwork again!

Seventy five full Scotland caps, five Scotland A caps, nine Scotland U21 caps, 56 appearances in the European Cup and two British Lions Tours.

The record speaks for itself.

HB 75, Yes the record speaks for itself, but it should be confined to the history books. Bulloch was poor for his last couple of seasons at Glasgow and poor for the tykes as well this season past.

At his best he was a good player, but his best days are long gone!

Agree, water under the bridge...old news...but still the maggots crawl out the woodwork.

Yeah, guess he was lucky to pick up seventy-five international caps and return from the last Lions' tour as one of the few who could hold his head up.

Do not forget that Gordon was very LOYAL with Glasgow.
When he was so good he could go abroad for more money and experience.
But he preferred to stay and fight during the bat time of professionnal Scottish rugby.
And stay in Glasgow he loves so much as he said in an interview.

the only thing gordon was loyal to was money. he was paid over the odds for yours for not doing much and left as soon as his cash was cut. loyal?

As for 75 caps. kenny got 60 odd!!!

Quite frankly there's alot more who are paid over the odds for not doing much in Scottish Rugby at the moment.

Gordon Bulloch had the chance to join Saracens three years ago and at the same time receive a much bigger wage packet for his rugby but decided to stay with Glasgow.

Seeing your all talk on loyalty and money was Sean Lamont loyal to Glasgow? Did Sean Lamont head south to further his playing career or was it all money based? Same as Gordon Bulloch or different?

I'll let you decide!

I don't think you can compare the two. sean was on crap money and was offered more crap money when his contract was up hardly the way to treat your standout player. Then along comes northampton. cha ching. can't blame the guy more cash better comp and team. Balloch was on great money offered less he left. and that was considering he wasn't first choice at glasgow or as it turned out leeds.

Why can't we compare the two?

Both were part of the Glasgow setup, weren't they?

Both headed South for more money, better competition and to further their careers, didn't they?

Both were part of an organisation which is in financial diffculties and has a possible axe hanging over it, weren't they?

Ahhh I see the difference Sean was a "standout player".

So Sean was bigger than the team then? Where did the fringe players or other memers of the team stand? Just forget about them eh?

Can't agree what your saying with the money situation though. Bulloch was offered a deal with Saracens three years ago he decided to stay at Glasgow.

Your saying Saracens offered him less money to head South and sign for them? Your not making sense mate.

Agree with one thing you say though...The offer from England came in with more cash, more prospects and more media attention and they BOTH decided to take it!

Can't really fault either for that!

Sean was our first choice winger. Gordon was, by that time, our second choice hooker - some would say third choice. While not wishing to take away from Gordon's achievements in the game, he had not been playing well for Glasgow. Sean had been playing well but the SRU wouldn't get their finger out to OK the deal Glasgow wanted to put to him.

I don't think anyone is saying Sean, or any other player, is bigger than the team. Rather, they are saying that Glasgow should try to hang on to their best players.

3 years ago going to saracens.. he would of had to play outside his comfort zone week in week out be required to play 35 games a year and live in london a very very expensive place. you add it all up it isn't much of a decision for the slight increase in cash and also safe in the knowledge he would be found out. just as he was when he went to leeds 3 years later. Sean as a young player going for better cash as his talents weren't being recognised up here is a totally different thing. if they'd paid him what he was worth he would have stayed. Glasgow paid bulloch more than he was worth for years. Thats the false economy of scpttish rugby and 23 million of debt!

Actually that's a pretty funny posting. Makes no sense at all. lol

I can just hear GB now..."Let's see I have a chance to move to the English Premiership, yes here I come, one of the biggest leagues in the world.....naaaa bugger it it's pretty expensive in London!" lol Are you being serious?

The false economy of the SRU and £23 million in debt? Believe me the debts due to a lot more than a player getting a few more pounds a week in his wage packet. lol

Yes it is very funny when a guy would rather stay up here and get paid over the odds for doing bugger all. than go down south and earn his money. and its supporters like us that pay for the honor of watching him do it.!

Your dislike for the players clouding your judgement mate. I'll be pretty blunt and say your talking through your starfish.

As a matter of interest how many supporters are paying for the honour of members of the current Glasgow side doing bugger all or does the "bugger all" category just fall within certain players you dislike? lol

Your highest paid player should be a standout every week if not then every other week. Bulloch was a standout on the sideline. Look at other clubs their highest paid players on the whole do it week in week out. if you want to defend substandard performance go right ahead. Does that make you a TRUE fan? If i wanted to support a team that wins every week i'd move to christchurch and support canterbury. I'd just like to get a level of performance out of players who are at the high end of the pay chain, not watch them get upstaged by youngsters on a fraction of their earnings. As this is the case why waste the money on them? Now can you debate without the name calling. we're all grown ups.

23 million of debt!
I'm not sure if it is linked with the top Scottish players salary.
The crowds...
Some International games with less than 20000 people.
All Blacks, under 50000 people to see the best side in the world.
Not full for France...
Glasgow less than 1500 people for Leinster.
Hard to say, but Rugby is not popular enough in Scotland.
But hopefully that will change soon,
Best wishes for the Glasgow

if my first post didn't come across right i was saying that at the end of last year when glasgow cut bullochs money he left for leeds.

The SRU cut his pay so he decided to leave? Where did you hear this one mate? lol

He was out of contract with Glasgow and his agent, the same agent who had a few of the Scottish lads at Leeds, got him a deal with Leeds Tykes who were interested in signing him at the time.

Nothing sinsister going on behind the scenes with pay cuts or leaving becasue of pay cuts whatsoever.

have a wee dig thru your back catalogue of newspaper clippings and you'll see hugh stating publicly that they are unable to offer gordon what he was currently on in the current market.

Newspaper clippings, deary me. lol

So what did Hugh Campbell say about Sean Lamont's non-contract talks then? By the way where is Hugh Campbell now? The SRU held him as a bit of a patsy didn't they?

Everything that's reportedly said by rugby connected faces in the media world here in Scotish rugby circles must be true then eh?

Hugh also said it was regrettable that Glasgow were unable to offer sean enough money to keep him. The union always plays the percentages. they offer guys poor money in the first instance as a few will except it. the other few who were keen to stay get pissed off and have a look about. then they discover their real worth. by this time the unions back with a second offer, and offer the player would have accepted in the first instance.... but now its to late he's found out he's worth a lot more so he's off! and they never learn.

Ok here's my last word on the issue as it's going round in circles here...

Firstly, ou say the SRU "are unable to offer gordon what he was currently on in the current market." Then go on to say Hugh said "it was regrettable that Glasgow were unable to offer sean enough money to keep him".

It's the same argument being played with use of words mate. Bottom line is you dislike one of the players and like the other. It's clouding your judgement on what your writing.

Secondly, your saying "The union always plays the percentages. they offer guys poor money in the first instance as a few will except it."

The reason the players are offered poor money is because there's a crap budget for playing contracts which is why we're seeing so many players head out the door in pro rugby and which is why we've seen the pro sides dipping into Premiership club rugby for "fill-in" players.

Glasgow were cutting gordons money. they didn't think he was worth it. sean they wanted to keep but couldn't afford to. its not a case of liking one player to another its just a fact we got a lot more out of sean than we did gordon in the last two years and for a fraction of the price. if he was on gordons wages and producing the performances he is for northampton for glasgow i for one would be thrilled he was still here and it would be money well spent. circle finished.

Ok the full facts....

Gordon Bulloch was at the end of a playing contract with Glasgow and the SRU. Gordon therefore, was free to hold re-signing talks with Glasgow or talk with other sides elsewhere.

Gordon had a meeting with Hugh Campbell but said straight off that he wanted to move away from Glasgow for a new challenge. Gordon and Hugh didn’t even get round to mentioning money, contracts or the like.

Hugh Campbell at the time, was also working on re-signing out-of-contract players John Petrie, Joe Beardshaw, Dan Parks, Andy Hall, Graeme Morrison and Sam Pinder plus trying to find extra funding to offer Sean Lamont more cash to stay a Glasgow player.

Hugh Campbell, at the same time of trying to re-sign out of contract players, and keep Sean Lamont a Glasgow player was also trying to sign NZ player Xavier Rush but again didn’t have the proper funding to bring the player to Glasgow.

Hugh at the same time as the other dealings was attempting to bring Ulster lock, Tim Barker to Glasgow and Ben Hinshelwood from Worcester Warriors.

There was no extra funding available for Hugh Campbell to keep all the players he wanted to keep at Glasgow, re-sign all the out of contract players AND bring in new faces.

So the inevitable had to happen. Players needed to leave.

A few sides from the English Premiership, London Wasps and Saracens plus a French side, Brive enquired about him.

Then Leeds Tykes announced their interest and invited him down to have a look round the place. Talks took place with Gordon and with Leeds Tykes which meant he was on his way to becoming a member of the Leeds Tykes squad.

Gordon finally signed for Leeds Tykes and brought an end to ten years of his rugby career at Glasgow.

The move was simple. Gordon had been ten years with Glasgow. Here was a fresh challenge for him, a chance to play in a more prominent world-wide league and a chance to step up in his playing career.

So there you have it. Simple, straight forward and straight down the line.

No skullduggery, no shenanigans about offering up players wages or offering lower players wages. No having favourite players, no holding guns to foreheads for more wages and bigger, juicier contracts.

The circle is now complete.

you seem to miss a rather large point glasgow offered him a contract. in the first place. which he turned down. i think your going around in a square.

No I didn't miss any large point.

In case you missed it I'll write it again...

Gordon had a meeting with Hugh Campbell but said straight off that he wanted to move away from Glasgow for a new challenge.

Gordon and Hugh didn’t even get round to mentioning money, contracts or the like.

I'm dealing in FACTS not FICTION.

incorrect. unless i'm talking to gordon Bulloch here or ringers from the village people are ask to join in contract debates so they invited you along. why would hugh lie. why would players lie? you seem to think you know a lot more than people a lot closer to the Warriors organisation, how can that be unless your making it up?

Ringers from the Village people? lol

I have some sources, this particlar source is as close as you can get. Real close. I was talking to him the other day in fact, Monday if you really want me to pinpoint when exactly!

More info on players within the pro setup coming shorty too. So wait and see if my sources are correct or incorrect.

Choose to believe or choose not to believe, it's your choice.

Lifes too short to argue over a computer mate! Espcially when one of the parties hasn't a clue what he's on about and is peddling untruths...and that person's not me! lol

I know what's the truth, like many other people, and I know what isn't the truth. All I'm saying in this particular matter is your talking from your starfish on this issue.

It's pretty much obvious that you don't like GB...he's left Glasgow, he's no longer a part of Glasgow...he's been away from Glasgow for a while now...time to get over it.

OH someone very close no in fact the top of the Warriors organisation told me..... you sound like some little school kid. name your sources. Your calling Hugh Campbell a lier and a patsy. front up. why should we not believe what we are told by these people and believe the accounts of a guy called Highland Brave who knows someone who heard someone? Don't have a problem with Gordon. did an Ok job for Scotland played well for Lions not worth a penny for what he did for Glasgow in the last 3 years and you dress him up like this fantastic servant to the glasgow cause. give me a break he was rewarded well over the odds for his efforts don't make him out to be this guy who put his team first you'd struggle to find an x team mate who would believe you.

Whooo!! Calm down mate!! Your gonna burst a blood vessel!! lol

Your digging yourself deper and deeper. ;o)

This site is for debate, not works of fiction. back your stuff up or don't write it. it must be hard to type your posts then wipe your lips with toilet paper as you talk a lot of Cr*p.

This is all good stuff but do we need to be so...er, scatological?

Come on mate, your acting like a teenager here who bears a masive wrighty grudge because his favourite warriors player wasn't offered a new contract.

Let it go.

Your wanting evidence to back up the truthful postings...where's your evidence to suggest your writings?

The debates been held here but your clearly out your depth on facts, figures and reality.

Your also out your depth with being able to have a sensible debate without acting like a teenager with a grudge so there's little more can be debated nor said on the matter.

Sorry Gordon, but I get sick of the "someone told me" lines that some people use to back up their works of fiction. its a Fact that Hugh said what he did in the paper re no budget to offer gordon the money he wanted. I'm not saying that a close source said.... sounds like something in the sun newspaper. or i've got special friends in the warriors who i can't name told me..... If your going to say you know something as the base of your arguement back it up with something not nothing more than hearsay. other things may have gone on there not publicly documented anywhere so how can you base your arguement on them?

guys stop this whats the point. Bulloch has gone. he's not our financial burden or Leeds! anymore. who cares if it was your fired i quit. Or i quit your fired. That money if there was any should of been spent on keeping sean lamont here thats the real debate.

I tried to post earlier in this thread about the juggling of re-signing contracts, bringing players in and letting players go with hardly and money to have room to move much...Don't think the kid seems to take it on board.

To Hell with it lets get rolland reid back!!!!

get real here--there are three pro teams in Scotland at present but only one owner even the OFT seem to accept this concept --the SRU in financial trouble-- so the one owner will simply move the players round the chess board as suits the budget