Re: CRAIG HALL : Fri Apr 25, 2008 10:12 am  

General Zod. wrote:

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

If a better player is available that has an accurate valuation of themselves that matches that of the club why wouldnt we let him go? It would be our choice the same as the Briscoe deal.

Why why why do Rovers fans always have to think something like this is getting one over on Hull? Why dont you just accept that if we valued a player and wanted to keep them enough to match their valuation they would stay. (Briscoe and Chester for example)

Re: CRAIG HALL : Fri Apr 25, 2008 10:13 am  

Mild Rover wrote:

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.

As ive said, becuase there may be better out there for the money he is wanting. Hull may make the decision to let him go as he values himself differently to what we do, in which case good luck to the kid.

Re: CRAIG HALL : Fri Apr 25, 2008 10:13 am  

Sheldon wrote:

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.

Not really. I think he has the potential and may become an international in say 5 years. If we have won a numerous trophies in the meantime then the decision is justified i guess?

Leeds can highlight a number of their 'rejects' that went on to play international but I dont reckon they look back in regret do you?

[Mild Rover]

Re: CRAIG HALL : Fri Apr 25, 2008 10:13 am  

Big Dave T wrote:

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.

So after years of nurturing your own talent (and critisizing others for failing to do so), you are going for the short-term quick fix.

Franchises, stabilty, PAH!

You lot have got it all back to front.

Re: CRAIG HALL : Fri Apr 25, 2008 10:13 am  

Big Dave T wrote:

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!)

The point being made was Hull wont really have control over whether Hall leaves or not.
They can make him an offer but ultimately it will be down to the player if he stays or not.
Get over yourself.

Re: CRAIG HALL : Fri Apr 25, 2008 10:17 am  

Gavin Miller - Legend wrote:

The point being made was Hull wont really have control over whether Hall leaves or not.
They can make him an offer but ultimately it will be down to the player if he stays or not.
Get over yourself.

Or. Hull will know exactly what figure to offer to ensure Hall stays. It is currently under their control to offer him what he wants.

Hull may choose not to.

Tom Briscoe got what he wanted a couple of months ago...

[Mild Rover]

Re: CRAIG HALL : Fri Apr 25, 2008 10:17 am  

Big Dave T wrote:

Hull may make the decision to let him go as he values himself differently to what we do, in which case good luck to the kid.

That is different to not wanting to re-sign him - that is being unwilling to make a sufficiently attractive offer to persuade him to stay.

Re: CRAIG HALL : Fri Apr 25, 2008 10:18 am  

knocker norton wrote:

Not really. I think he has the potential and may become an international in say 5 years. If we have won a numerous trophies in the meantime then the decision is justified i guess?

Leeds can highlight a number of their 'rejects' that went on to play international but I dont reckon they look back in regret do you?

i like the fact we have players coming through our academy and i want the best of them to stay at the club, leeds never let anyone go who had halls ability at this stage.

fwiw i'd expect hall to sign a 3 year deal with hull.
i also think this come be good for hkr with whelam getting more chances to impress and develop.

Re: CRAIG HALL : Fri Apr 25, 2008 10:19 am  

Mild Rover wrote:

That is different to not wanting to re-sign him - that is being unwilling to make a sufficiently attractive offer to persuade him to stay.

Its the same thing entirely. We choose not to offer what he wants therefore we dont want to re-sign him as its not the right deal for Hull. (if any of this happens anyway)

[Mild Rover]

Re: CRAIG HALL : Fri Apr 25, 2008 10:20 am  

knocker norton wrote:

Tom Briscoe got what he wanted a couple of months ago...

A Power Ranger doll?