Balls to Mossop, Westerman and Clark. I want to know Gotcha's inside track about Burgess signing. I'm really loving this episode of jackanory

No , Leeds haven't agreed a deal with Hull over Westerman, having agreed terms with him and told him done deal. As a consequence they also missed out on Clarke, who had also agreed terms with Leeds, who also told him a done deal. Unless of course they can persuade Wire to change again on Clarke.

The "criticism" is not not signing players, it is telling players deal done before actually agreeing with the club concerned. People need to stop getting on the defensive and actually look at what is said, and the movement at hand.

And as for Burgess the comment on him and Westerman came from a coach at Leeds, whom I shall not name, who was at our clubs presentation evening last night. There is three signings to be announced over next month.

Yes but what did Hull tell Westerman? What did Warrington tell Clark?

You're telling us what Leeds told these players. Your story is based on these players only listening to Leeds' version of events.

Either Warrington agreed and told Clark it was a done deal.....and are the ones to back out once they've found an expensive chauffeur.

Or they told Clark it wasn't yet a done deal and considering they're his current employers then you'd go with that if you were in Clark's shoes surely.

You're only presenting Leeds' apparent version of events, what were the other clubs version of events? Pretty important considering it was their players in the first place.

So Hetherington, who has been recruiting / selling players for 30 odd years gets permission to speak to a player from their current club without agreeing a fee. Meets said player and agrees terms. Then tells player its a done deal before he has agreed a transfer fee. This from a man who keeps his cards close to his chest at the best of times and has managed to keep many signings under wraps until it was officially announced ( a few exceptions accepted ).
Not for the first time I will take some of what is posted on here with a barrow load of salt.

I only know the Leeds position. But considering that Hull and Warrington had agreed with the talks for Leeds to have, that would show the players they would be leaving if deals can be done would it not? Therefore I don't understand why you are so fixed on what they said.

As for Brierley, the first time, well that was made clear from the Leigh Chairman, who made it clear Leeds had spoken to him without their Permission. So I guess as they didn't know, they couldn't have told the player any different to what Leeds were saying could they?

If someone offered you a contract for a job, which you wanted, would you not believe it until your current employer told you?

I can only recall one signing in the last 13 years, that being Ali, that wasn't known by people before it was announced. You would have to have been without Internet, conversation, or phones, to believe what I think you are trying to say.

Apart from Mullaley's, Cuthbertson's and Garbutt's names never being mentioned on here until they signed. I think at best Garbutt was named only 2/3 days beforehand.

Actually you are correct on Garbutt, I did forget about him. Not the others though. And not mentioning on here is not an indication of under wraps, plenty mentions elsewhere.

Because those clubs will agreed to Leeds buying those players based on a certain fee being discussed between the two teams.



So Brierley spoke to Leeds behind his present clubs back and took it as gospel that the deal was done. Sounds legit.



Not in the sporting world if it was dependent on my current employers being satisfied with selling me for the right price.

f

Really because usually it only takes two minutes before people post what they've heard on here......when was that club prevention night you just mentioned in relation to your latest rumour? 24 hours ago wasn't it?

Seem to recall everyone getting braced for Sam Rapira signing for us until he was announced for Hudds and out of the blue we had Mullaley.

Leigh held his registration. They could have prevented him playing for Leeds so he must have known it wasn't a done deal.

Exactly, and the players took Leeds word on it that it was sorted. Leeds assumed they would get the deal they wanted. They didn't, hence the failure of the deals.

Comes back yet again to Leeds telling players something that is not the case, and it is only that that I have made the point on.

Please are you at liberty to say what positions the 3 signings will cover? Thanks

I don't know mate sorry, I don't proclaim to know inside tracks. All I know from speaking to a Leeds coach, is that Leeds couldn't pay the fee to see through the Westerman deal that Hull wanted, as a lot was going on Burgess. Last night I didn't believe it, but having seen the many comments today about the Westerman deal falling through, I now do. Furthermore the same coach said there was three signings. If one is Butgess and we know we will get an hooker, that only leaves one anyway, which I presume is Brierley.

Well then the players are foolish to take Leeds' word on it if that's what has happened.

Only a couple of people from Leeds' side will have been in the meetings and I find it very unlikely that GH or McDermott would come out and tell others "we've told Clark/Westerman/Brierley that it's a done deal".

Coming out and telling others it's a done deal maybe, but that's different to stating they've told the players in question it's a done deal.

SELLING CLUB "we're giving you permission to speak to Leeds, but we're still in the process of agreeing a fee"

LEEDS "the deal is done"

PLAYER TO SELLING CLUB "Leeds told me the deal is done"

SELLING CLUB "no it's not, they haven't matched our desired fee yet"

Player......ok I'll just believe Leeds' word then.

Joe Westerman definitely has talent although at present he certainly hasn't fulfilled it at either of his 2 previous clubs

IF I was GH would I sign Westerman,Then sorry it's a definite NO from me i'm afraid
IF Joe can get rid of his culture and one that he has had for far too long now IMO then he could be an outstanding player without a doubt

I hope that he proves me wrong and goes on to change his career for the better but I personally wouldn't touch him with a barge pole

What an absolute load of old tosh.....

So Leeds agree terms and tell the player it's a done deal with no idea of the clubs valuation on the player or if they wish to go through with the deal... Of course.... And to do that, they ask the club for permission to speak to the player (except Leigh) and therefore obviously have a discussion with the club about whether or not they're likely to agree to a release for said player, but then don't bother to discuss a likely price range before going off and agreeing terms and telling the player 'it's a done deal'.... Seems plausible.... Wait a minute, no it doesn't - it seems like a crock of something smelly that you couldn't make up... Oh wait a minute, someone just did....

Which coach were you speaking to Gotcha and are you sure it really was who you thought it was? I'm going to take a leap of faith (and with your proven record of falsely claiming conversations with Leeds officials it's quite a leap) because I'd love for you to be right, for once, with the Burgess claims.

Back to reality, I'd take GHs professionalism over that of Joe Westerman frankly, especially if Westerman is blabbing about such dealings to all and sundry. And it says all you need to know about Clarke's professionalism that he needs the club she's signed for and is allegedly trying ti get away from to sign him a chauffeur.

Actually, why are we even discussing these ridiculous hypotheticals as if they're facts?

Burgess signing would be massive. Sadly I don't believe it, and will only believe it when it happens

Westerman happy we haven't got him.

The hookers mentioned. Either souls do.

Brierly not fussed about

I'm not getting defensive, you're definitely confused though because there's just no way that's happened.
If anything then someone from Leeds will have said "we agree to your wage terms, it'll be a done deal if/when your club agrees to transfer terms"

What you're claiming just didn't and wouldn't happen, sorry, and if that's what players have told you then they're either lying or (more likely) too thick to understand what was happening.

With due respect you do not know the Leeds position, unless your posting name is a nom de plume for either GH or BM and something tells me that they wouldn't keep posting on going critical comments against themselves if they were you.

So at best your comments are first hand hearsay from the players concerned but more likely 2nd hand hearsay from someone who was not in the room when the talks took place.

If, as you imply, a contract was offered and that is what the players wanted why didn't the player(s) then sign the contract? The answer is they were not offered a contract because these were just exploratory talks with candidates who were being considered.

Finally may I ask the reason why you always take sides against the Leeds club on almost every issue?

And why on earth would a selling club allow Leeds to speak to their player, a contracted player, without first agreeing to the piece - Leeds could then potentially offer the player a contract that is enough to turn their head and unsettle them - so the player now adamantly wants to move, as it's a substantial upgrade on their earnings, Leeds then fail to come to terms with the club, so the selling club are left with an unsettled player, who wants out to join Leeds and probably holds a grudge against his current club for holding him back and preventing him taking advantage of a lucrative contract..... Seems like a great way to do business on both clubs part..... RIDICULOUS

So this is either - completely made up by the poster to try claim some sort of 'in the know' bragging rights and also have a pop at Leeds...

Or,

The poster has heard a few bits and pieces on the grapevine, has added 2 + 2 and come to 550000...

Or,

Someone has given the poor poster this info as 'gospel' knowing how gullible they are and is now laughing their socks off that not only did the person believe the utter tripe, but has then posted it on the internet and hung his hat on it....

I really hope it's the last one - coz at least someone has had a good giggle out of it...

Why would Hull FC allow one of their better players to discuss terms with a rival SL club?
IMO that question is also the answer I'm afraid

Right back on the second post I made on the subject, I stated that I am not saying Leeds were wrong to pull out.

The fact you see that as a criticism tells me you are relating to it, and in truth can see they have not acted professionally. If you are a club that proclaims to look after players and be loyal, which Leeds have been excellent at, then you do not make false promises, and it is that point that I have continued to make.

That is not taking sides, it's making a moral point. In the case of Clarke it had gone as far as arranging new accommodation.

I would ask the reverse question of you.