maybe his second year isnt worth so much and a testimonial (sp) swayed him to stay and to boost his wages on his second year? Allthough he could have 1 if he had gone to rovers i think he will get far more people at kc

Bang on the money - IMHO.

Maybe he's on a reduced terms playing contract.,topped up
by a coach's salary for the u15's.??

Could they do same for Webster??

i'm happy - radford is a loyal black n white, plenty of experience and he's tough and a demon in defence

we've lost cusack and dowes and we need an english forward given the quota reduction. apart from fielden/LMS there's not much out there available better than radford IMO

would rather keep radders than dowes and we can't afford to lose 'em both. Agar has said a few times recently that we are going for a more rigid salary structure implying that radford is in adherence to this new policy therefore we probably shouldn't whinge about his salary either

What I was getting at is that it seems all agents need to do is say that their player may be leaving for Rovers and we give them what they want. We had it last year with Sam Moa and now this year with Radford.

i think you'll find fc have a wage structure and have been proven in the past the wont break that. I dont think they would in this situation either

Well with all the rumours going around, I think is by far the best outcome. I would have been shocked if we had signed him but it seems most on here are happy with his re signing.

The decision to keep Moa was undoubtedly the correct one.

No no no no no no no

and no

when will people stop being deluded fools and realise he is not a player we should have!!!!!!

we need to aim much higher

I have not mentioned salary at all, I was saying that we have had 2 players who were offered 1 year deals then all of a sudden Rovers 'declare interest' or a story is fabricated by the HDM and next thing we are offering a 2 year deal.

I'll continue to bleat on then and talk some more of that brown stuff that despite the fact it runs up and down your ground all season never makes the grass any greener....he will be fine next year, not sure about the one after that though, no different than what I said when Rovers made him an offer. One of his major strengths is off the field in the dressing room anyway. As Justine said last night he is a quality player and good to have in the middle of the field. I expect that we have kept to our offer, which was not as big as some others, but made it two years and not one and offered some coaching which he was after.

Now talking to the more civilised officianado's, it was interesting when he talks about Rich's plans for the future and does anyone else wonder if now we should withdraw our offer to Dowesey and try and get some new blood at prop?

It is now given how he has been performing however at the time it was a massive risk to offer him a 2 year deal given the tightening of the overseas players rulings.

The thing is, how many do? Totally agree that there's is much value in players of the Radford/Dowes mould. Our problem in recent years has not been that we've had such players, just the amount we've had. The balance is beginning to be redressed IMO.

Dont think thats the rational at all. I think it's more a case of there been no one else out there. We offered Radders a 1 year deal while we were having talks with LMS and Fielden. Once we knew that neither was coming we realised we had to up our offer to keep Radders. Nothing to do with Rovers or the HDM imo.

Would rather have kept Dowes if that's what this means, don't think he's got 2 years in him. Will be happy to be proved wrong.

I would respectfully disagree. I think he showed enough last season to indicate that he would be worth at least two years.

It's another facet of our unique position though. If there is genuine interest from Rovers, it's a much easier option to take for players without a passion for Hull FC. There can't be a less disruptive change of clubs in RL, surely?

The problem is telling the difference between genuine interest and complete guff to try and improve terms. I would hope that the club are in a better position than us to know how strong their position is.

Depends what other options we have as a new prop?

agree with Wilf, unless his body miraculously repairs itself , i think he will become a bit part in the second term of his new contract !!.. however given what is available for the same money he is a steal!!

Yup, and if i was him i'd be banging on Rules' door to get an improved deal on longer terms after this year. The kids worth a 4-year deal IMO.

Depends on who we can bring in i guess Wilf.
Would be suprised now if either the Fielden or LMS Signings came off.
Would be happy with Hargreaves though.Only 24,plenty of experience and an underrated player IMO.

Agreed. If his form next year is anything like this year we need to get him signed up for a long time.

Agree. He definitely looked a better use of an overseas spot than Cusack did.

maybe lee spoke with rovers and was not intrested with what they offered or the part he would play there? It was only last night that rule said there was an offer on the table for him and didnt state how long it was open for.

Due to salary cap and import quota restrictions, we cannot aim higher.

What happens if Long is out for a prolonged time again??

Webster could deputise at 7 and 9 , this could release Berrigan to play 3,6 or 13.

For mine, it would be a mistake, to only have 1 player in the squad, who is a ball player.

but alot of "fans" seem to knock him or say his is a "plodder" really gets my goat. Hes a true pro and good at what he does