Re: CRAIG HALL : Fri Apr 25, 2008 9:38 am  

Gavin Miller - Legend wrote:

So Hull didnt want to keep Cooke

Of course they did. But its a pointless statement as the move was illegal. I think slavery is still illegal in the UK?

[Mild Rover]

Re: CRAIG HALL : Fri Apr 25, 2008 9:42 am  

Big Dave T wrote:

One thing i will say, if we dont re-sign Hall it is because we didnt want to,

Why would you want to get rid of a player who:

Is your top try scorer so far this season

Is only 20 and is rated as one of best young players in RL

Is club-trained

Who can kick goals

The club and player may not be able to agree a contract, but that is different to not wanting to sign him. If Hull FC don't even make him an offer, someone there has gone wrong in the head.

Re: CRAIG HALL : Fri Apr 25, 2008 9:45 am  

Big Dave T wrote:

You said this last season and made yourself look foolish then too!

No, I said "FACT" where as this time I've said "should it happen"...

Big Dave T wrote:

One thing i will say, if we dont re-sign Hall it is because we didnt want to, in which case i wish him luck if he moves on.

I think you need to get your head out of the sand mate.

Re: CRAIG HALL : Fri Apr 25, 2008 10:00 am  

General Zod. wrote:

No, I said "FACT" where as this time I've said "should it happen"...


I think you need to get your head out of the sand mate.

Maybe Hull are in the market for a Matt Cooper quality type centre?

Maybe Hull FC think Tom Briscoe is the better prospect going forward?

It is a FACT that sides need to be ruthless in recruitment and sometimes fans favourites are released.

[R.B.A]

Re: CRAIG HALL : Fri Apr 25, 2008 10:00 am  

Big Dave T wrote:

You said this last season and made yourself look foolish then too!

One thing i will say, if we dont re-sign Hall it is because we didnt want to, in which case i wish him luck if he moves on.

On what grounds do you think Hull would decide that Hall was surplas to requirements Dave?

[Mild Rover]

Re: CRAIG HALL : Fri Apr 25, 2008 10:03 am  

BalearicHullFan wrote:

Of course they did. But its a pointless statement as the move was illegal. I think slavery is still illegal in the UK?

The RFL deemed Cooke's move to be against their rules. The legality of the move in terms of UK law has not been judged - I think you might be on dangerous ground implying otherwise.

Re: CRAIG HALL : Fri Apr 25, 2008 10:08 am  

R.B.A wrote:

On what grounds do you think Hull would decide that Hall was surplas to requirements Dave?

What knocker has said above mate, we were told by a source close to the club that we may be getting ready to make some tough decisions regarding certain players in order to bring in better quality players that are ready now not in 5 years time.

Re: CRAIG HALL : Fri Apr 25, 2008 10:09 am  

R.B.A wrote:

On what grounds do you think Hull would decide that Hall was surplas to requirements Dave?

if he turned down hulls vaulation of him, which is fair enough.

tbh if we are looking at a genuine quality Centre and hall leaves it will be no great loss for the next season as we'll have a new Centre and yeaman with briscoe as back up.
it may bite us in the booty the couple of seasons after that when hall, as i expect him to do, becomes international class.

Re: CRAIG HALL : Fri Apr 25, 2008 10:09 am  

Gavin Miller - Legend wrote:

Like keeping hold of Paul Cooke type we didnt want to

Totally different. We did want to keep Cooke, our team was structured around him, he walked out on a contract and the RFL have punished him for that. No need to bring him up in this conversation at all which is about Hally been OOC at the end of the year. (get over Cooke!)

: Fri Apr 25, 2008 10:11 am  

put it this way,

if Justin Morgan really did turn down Shaun Berrigan, he made a massive mistake,

Berrigan would walk in to the Hull KR side in whatever position he chose,

in fact he would probably walk in to any side in SL,

IMO he was one of only three real world class signings this season and is much much much better than either Webster of Fisher