But your point is still redundant, you're putting the cart before the horse. He won't be affected by whether our pack is on top, because the very reason he will be there is to help get our pack on top. Him doing his job is independent of the rest of the pack doing theirs. Whether it's enough and the backs feed off any platform he provides is another question entirely.

Considering Carvell was rumoured to be sold for circa £50k with a longer contract remaining IIRC, I'd actually say that doesn't reflect too badly at all on Tansey.

One of them has ability. The other's playing for us every week.

We were forced into a corner with carvell. £50k didn't reflect his true market value

I've said plenty of times that agar is operating in difficult circumstances, but that's when great leaders show their mettle. agar has shown nothing to me, and many others, to suggest that he has the ability to coach a group of people to achieve their maximum potential.

Do you honestly believe that he is getting the best out of the players he has available to him?

This is the killer point for me. There's no doubting that Agar has had to deal with some bad luck, and the squad isn't the best, but he should have dealt with it better.

This is what the majority of those who defend agar seem to miss or ignore. Other than a couple of youngsters, not one player is showing their best form under agar, and the youngsters are more likely to be down to natural progression rather than anything agar has done.

I've seen plenty of good coaches do much better with a poorer group of players than agar is working with now. A good coach would be getting the absolute maximum out of the players he has to work with. agar isn't. It isn't his fault, I'm sure he's putting in 100% every day but he just isn't up to it

How are you going to do that? By moaning about him on an internet message board

You believe impact comes before solid go forward, I disagree. I can't think of many props that can single handedly leave the bench and transform a beaten pack, certainly not Lauaki.

And hope city don't extend the stadium, and hope that falling crowds don't result in significantly reduced turnover and possibly solvency

I'm hoping rule eventually sees the light when he's reading my posts

Carvell did it for us. And Feka for Wigan on the odd occasion.

Pretty much how I see it TBH.

Well I hope you're successful

But, wouldn’t it be better to be in a position were you didn’t have to rely on ‘impact’ from the bench to get on the front foot. Surely go forward is more important then impact, just look at Queensland, permanently on the front foot largely thanks to Price and Civonocina (sp). I’d rather have so is on the front foot from the off, rather then having to rely on one player to turn the game from the bench.

Ok then, Danny Brough? Plays in a traditionally more expensive position and panned out very well for Cas and then Wakey. I'm not saying Tansey is guaranteed to be a good signing, just that with the way the RL transfer market works, £30k is still not a bad price tag. Most players are simply released when surplus to requirements and they wnat to move on.

Where have I said he can transform a beaten pack single-handedly?

You said he relies on a dominant pack, I'm saying he's one of those who will help build a dominant pack. What goes on on the pitch before he takes to it is to a certain degree irrelevant to his performance. His job is to receive the ball, take it up and cause damage to the opposition. So long as he's playing well, he can do this no matter what, which is why I don't see your point. If you genuinely think the only reason he'll have impact is off the back of the work of others making it easier for him, IMO you're doing a disservice to any player who plays off the bench.

It would be like saying Rio Ferdinand is dependent on having a good defence to play well. He'd still be able to perform regardless, whether those around him do and the team do well is different.

That's a different point entirely. That question is whether or not the addition of Lauaki is enough.

You said Lauaki is only useful if his pack is on the front foot. That's not at all accurate IMO.

We do need both go forward from the start and impact off the bench, but just because we may struggle with the former does not automatically mean Lauaki would then find it hard to help provide the latter.

Headline back of HDM cooke quote "a return to hull f.c never say never"

Don't want to open old wounds but its hdm running the story, and just wondered on thoughts of the f.c faithful.

Would we really want to see him back in a black n white shirt
after showing his true feelings for F.C and scwalking on about how he was always a K.R FAN......

HE had his best playing days at f.c. But personally i wouldnt want to see him back.

isnt welcome back in my eyes

although we havnt been the same team since he and others left ,there is far too much water gone under the paul cooke bridge ,and too much bad blood ,i think bomber might throw him a life line

I was talking with Alfie Moon at the gym the other day, and we both agreed that this happening would probably be the only thing possible that would make us think about going to watch Hull.

I then said that if we were successful on the pitch due to his return, and he didnt go spouting stuff in the papers like "wish i had never left" etc and doesnt kiss the badge then id be ok with it. I want to see Hull successful - i would sign Hock in 2 years for example, but thats just me

id take him back, hes a good player

rather go watch a succesful team with one player who i dont like playing then watch the stuff im watching now

not saying we would automatically be succesful just because he signed for us

I agree,

i can see the threats of tearing up season tickets and boycotting the club already on these pages but if he can improve the team i don't see why not,thats the most important factor.