Yep, it doesn't happen very often does it?

Why is it clear?

Hill, Alex Walmsley, Danny Brough, Shaun Lunt, Kyle Amor, Michael Dobson, Ben Cockayne, Peter Fox, Danny Kirmond, that's just off the top of my head.

If that were true why did they loan him out (2 years running) instead of simply releasing him?

Besides, Larroyer is proven class, I don't care what the French think.

We signed Cockayne twice. Both times it was from a side in the same league as us.

Look, if we are signing him as a punt, or a development project then I have no problem, but in a key position such as hooker, he will have no space to learn from his mistakes. Lets hope his arrival is followed by a more experienced 9.

Comparisons with Blake Green are very wide of he mark. He had played 25+ NRL games before he joined.

Your new hooker looks like forest gump in his army days on hull daily mail website!

After the utterly disgraceful binning off of The Hammersmith Express, this lad is my new favourite player.

Once I can remember his name.

Just call him Frenchie Sandra

You must be relieved you're not signing tommy lee though?

Indeed, Franny Lee would be more welcome in East Hull.

My only worry now is how are we going to afford some half backs we must of invested all our money in this super star signing

We signed Sam Moa when he was 23 & nobody had heard of him, he's not done to bad for himself.

Danny Brough had already played in the top flight and showed he had the ability, just attitude issues forced him to play at a lower level.

Fox spent one season on loan before breaking into the top division, Amor had broke into the Leeds first team before sent out on loan, something Leeds to very often with their promising players.

Dobson, former Aussie school boy, came here and tore it up from day one. By 24 had played a lot of rugby at the top level over here.

Kirmond only played a few years in the lower league but for a very good outfit before been snapped up.

Hill and Walmsley have done great, more so in the case of Hill who has been outstanding.

If this new hooker of ours has come in as back up, then not an issue at all. If he is a direct replacement for Hodgson then it's a big step in the wrong direction.

Where does it say how much we have paid?

And it's have. Must have.

It doesn't say how much we have paid but we was told that a transfer fee had been agreed for a hooker so if we have paid anything for this guy then there is something seriously wrong and sorry I must (have) of missed that English lesson

Who told you we had paid a transfer fee for a hooker?

NH stated it in a interview a week or 2 ago i believe and they was just waiting for the club they agreed the fee with to announce it

No he didn't, Brough was 22 before he made his Super League debut.
Fox was 22 before he made his Super League debut.
Amor was 23 when he signed for Leeds from Whitehaven, and didn't become a regular SL player until he was 24.
Dobson made his debut age 20 as an unknown with no first grade experience, admittedly younger than the others but he wasn't an established player at any club until he was 22.
Kirmond signed for Huddersfield age 22 and didn't make his first team debut until he was almost 23.
Agreed, but TBH I'm not sure what caliber of replacement you're expecting at this stage or why you would write off a player that you've literally never seen. I'm sure if it was some no-name Aussie then there wouldn't be many complaints.

Haven't you got enough fannies in your team already - oh sorry that said Franny

So all younger than 24 before stepping up to SL? Plus all likely to have played at a better standard before moving up?

Plus I probably would prefer a no name Aussie, who will likely have had a better training and education into the game.

So you'd rather sign a player that has been proven to be not good enough based solely on his place of birth than one who has never been given a chance, just because you don't like where he's from or the league he's been playing in. Great mentality.

Why are some people getting their nickers in a twist over some player who no body knows when we do not know if the club has even signed him yet

This kid seems to have had plenty of clubs, is that not a sign of not been able to play at the highest level come 24? I don't care where our players are born, if they ain't good enough I do care! I'm failing to see any positives what so ever if this kid is going to be first choice, that's unless you can point some out to me?

It just seems strange to immediately write off a player that you've never seen play and know literally nothing about.

Surely at the age of 24 there is a reason why we have never heard of him?