: Sat Jan 03, 2009 4:42 pm  

knocker norton wrote:

Didnt we also miss out on big name 7's prior to his signing?

Nope Mimmis represents both Kimmorley and Dykes so he was playing them against each other when dealing with the club. When Sherwin was 'officially' available a time limit got put in place for us to offer Dykes a deal which we did.

: Sat Jan 03, 2009 4:42 pm  

Jake the Peg wrote:

I've followed the team through thick and thin for 35 years mate. Just because I don't look at the club through B&W tinted specs doesn't make me any less of a supporter

fair point mate.

you just seem very negative thats all,give agar and the lads a chance.a ball has even been kicked yet,i just think agar and sharp will prove many supporters wrong,your entitled to your opinions.

: Sat Jan 03, 2009 4:43 pm  

The Hollywood Frasier wrote:

We didnt rush into signing Dykes we got bullied into signing him by his agent who is the best in the business.

Sorry..i bow to your superior knowledge of the grat game that is played in OZ......where is Sherwin again...

: Sat Jan 03, 2009 4:43 pm  

The Hollywood Frasier wrote:

Nope Mimmis represents both Kimmorley and Dykes so he was playing them against each other when dealing with the club. When Sherwin was 'officially' available a time limit got put in place for us to offer Dykes a deal which we did.

Cooke had left and we went for Monaghan first didnt we?

: Sat Jan 03, 2009 4:44 pm  

fc baldy wrote:

Sorry..i bow to your superior knowledge of the grat game that is played in OZ......where is Sherwin again...

read my last post

Where is Matty Head btw

: Sat Jan 03, 2009 4:45 pm  

knocker norton wrote:

Cooke had left and we went for Monaghan first didnt we?

I actually forgot about Monaghan but i think us missing out on him was more to do with us not been able to match the spending power of Wire.

: Sat Jan 03, 2009 4:45 pm  

The Hollywood Frasier wrote:

read my last post

I arent that quick at reading and typing...

: Sat Jan 03, 2009 4:46 pm  

fc baldy wrote:

You ever thought Agar MIGHT think Thorman is the right player for the team.

So you would play a 13 at 6 and a 6 at 7....we would be back to square one as neither of them are organising halfs.


Agar wasnt my 1st choice but he will get my backing....think i'll trust his judgement on players in stead of people in the crowd who think they know it all.

Horne, while 7 isn't his best position, has proved he can play at 7 more than Thorman has proved he can. Thorman has started 5 games at 7 since coming back from Aus for the 2005 season, so not sure how you can use that arguement. Plus, Agar played Radford at 13 a lot last year and imo that really is a crap position for him.
And saying you will trust him. Well you have just slagged off the signing of Dykes, would you say that Sharp was right in signing him? Or would you stick to your opinion on the player as one of the people in the crowd?

: Sat Jan 03, 2009 4:46 pm  

The Hollywood Frasier wrote:

I actually forgot about Monaghan but i think us missing out on him was more to do with us not been able to match the spending power of Wire.

Correct and tbh,he wasnt much cop was he.

: Sat Jan 03, 2009 4:47 pm  

The Key wrote:

It doesn't matter who is available, its about whether they are right for the team. Imo, Thorman isn't the right man and until I am proven wrong by his performances, I will say that we should have waited to sign someone who is the right man, whether that was this off-season, during this coming season, or for 2010.

course it matters we needed someone to partner horne so agar got thorman on a 1 year deal which i think is a good move,if he has a good season then he will get another deal if not then he goes,who else would partner horne all next season