Look shag, I'll stop being delicate about it, it's not worthy of discussion because you make shizzle up. You pretend you're in the know but we all remember your Phil Daly form. You talk to imaginary people and share your imaginary conversations on here.

You keep at it ,I'm checking out on this one.

Do you mean when i posted this?

You've obviously read it the wrong way Gotcha

Ill make it a bit clearer,although i thought that my initial post was pretty clear

IMO Hull FC can't wait to get rid and hence that they have allowed rival SL clubs to speak to him

Providing it's not on a Tuesday. He'll be busy picking up GH's dry cleaning then.

I am not saying anyone should believe me. I am making a point. I have posted here long enough and clearly pointed out enough that I don't have the insecurities of others. If I post something it is because I am confident enough in what is said. I know it is correct so it is good enough for me.

I mean come on, I am not going to apologise just because I have far more knowledge on some things than others. Had I seen a valid argument against the point I made on here then I would certainly consider it. But lack of knowledge from those arguing isn't a valid argument matey.

What I will give you an assurance on though is that if anyone with true connections can give an assurance that Westerman or Clarke did not agree terms with Leeds, then I will apologise immediately.

Oh good lord

Do you know it's correct though?

A - Were you in the meetings?

B - Was the person who told you in the meetings?

What meetings are you Referring to? Contract terms?

I am confident that Clarke and Westerman agreed terms to answer your first question, and were assured by Leeds the deal was done, hence why I stated the point I did. Had I not been confident I wouldn't have stated it.

As said if someone can prove otherwise, then you have my assurance of an apology.

In relation to my first post on this thread tonight. I repeat an earlier post, I was not sure last night when told about Westerman deal pulled out but Burgess deal a goer, however now I know about the Westerman situation, I am confident this is the case also. However, I was very confident on Clarke ending up our player also.

Translation - you weren't in the meetings nor was the person who told you. Yet you know it's correct. Hmmm.

I've already mentioned this......guess what no answers!

Well Mick Gledhill mentioned Widdop weeks ago .Nice bit of knobble there young Mick

I'll chip my 50p worth in and say i was told re-Clark that we'd agreed a deal with player in terms of Contract length and wages which was always dependent on Wire finding a replacement AND us agreeing a fee i was told we had sorted the latter but Wire weren't happy they could get an adequate replacement so it went down the plug hole the Player was perfectly aware of this.
Re-Westerman check my earlier comments when he was linked but i'm happy enough to believe but everything was agreed with the player "PROVIDING" we could agree a deal with FC something i'm sure GH made clear.
Now like most things although i personally have no reason not to trust where this info came from at the same time deals fall through every day in sport and RL i don't see why it has to be some sort of p!$$ing contest.

I am not saying I disbelieve that you spoke to someone who passed on some gossip to you, be it a junior coach, player for player's relation. However I do not believe the person(s) that told you all this stuff was present at any of the discussions with these players, therefore anything passed on is pure hearsay or gossip.

What I cannot understand is why we keep hearing these rumours are "a done deal" because the only "done deal" is when a contract is signed by all 3 parties. Why don't the rumour mongers make it clear it is just a bit of gossip albeit from a trusted source or a chap in the pub.

It says a lot of the naivety of the folk that you regard as sources and indeed of your own judgement in believing hook line and sinker what is clearly second/third hand gossip which in some cases could include a slice of bias all of which you regard as "knowledge"

I note you now have moved from the "done deal" to "agreed terms" which are two quite different things.

I would ask you one thing and one thing only, reread what I have said and not make assumptions based on clueless posters that derail threads.

You are correct that I posted I had heard the same thing about Westerman, but this was because the Burgess signing was a goer, and it had come from a coach at Leeds. That bit I take your doubts with in good faith, although I am comfortable with it.

Where I don't accept your doubts is regarding Clarke, as this came straight from his mouth, and I have been clear on that. Not hearsay, not bar talk as you put it, but straight from the player. It had even gone as far as new accommodation sorted, helped by Leeds, as they were clear it was a done deal. I also don't accept your doubts on Westerman's contract offer, again this comes direct from the player, although I do accept not direct to me. But regardless it is definitely correct.

As I said in the post you quoted. I am comfortable with the information, as would not have posted otherwise. I don't have these small man insecurities of others, so have no worry's about being doubted, and nor do I just expect people to accept it. I post what is relevant and stick by it, not for attention, but for discussion.

Wish people would stop putting Clarke when they mean Clark. It's getting as bad as Burrows and Maguire now