No offence meant here but we are concerned about the goings on at our club on here, not when or if Hull KR poached any players from Wakie last year

It is isn't it, we'll do the honourable thing and get the business done early doors even chucking a few quid their way while you'll look to exploit any loophole you can in order to take their players for free with practically no chance of replacing them less than a week before they kick off the season.


Just compounding their troubles, shameful behaviour really.

If you want them then I'm sure they'll happily take fees for both given how far down the track you've taken it with their players.

You seem more upset than the Bradford fans.

I like you.

You didn't pay a fee for Poore.

If we are required to pay a fee we will, but if the RFL says we don't (For whatever reasons) then why would pay a fee, we are a business after all. Whilst not helping them on th pitch we are helping them off then pitch by taking two of their higher ending players on their wage bill, like you did with Poore.

The timing isn't great for either club TBH.

Unbelievable, so Hull are helping us out by getting Carvell and Gales wage off the payroll.

He is.

poore and cockayne were contracted to wakefield, their assets, you removed them from wakefield, no difference to what we are doing and you only paid for one of them


have sympathy for the bulls fans, but not for the club, they did it to us with vaikona and radford, albeit different owners, what comes around goes around as they say

Quote: roger daly "Unbelievable, so Hull are helping us out by getting Carvell and Gales wage off the payroll.'" you are aware your club offered Gale to us only a few weeks ago! www.hulldailymail.co.uk/Hull-FC- ... story.html

Quote: roger daly "Unbelievable, so Hull are helping us out by getting Carvell and Gales wage off the payroll.'" you are aware your club offered Gale to us only a few weeks ago! www.hulldailymail.co.uk/Hull-FC- ... story.html

Didn't the RFL put a ban on clubs poaching our players the last time we were going through a change of ownership? I don't know why the same can't be done now. If this new guy who's making an offer to buy the club happens to be loaded (please let him be loaded!) then all our financial worries could be over soon and there'd be no need for players to be worried about being paid. According to the T&A there is a 28 day period after admin for any new offers to buy the club, we should get at least that amount of time protection against the vultures.

I agree with an earlier comment re Gale, is he contracted or not following Tupe? also seems strange to have him answering questions at season launch dinner on Saturday then considering future. he has also been offered a new contract to counter Hull interest, this must have been sorted before Sat night. Just seems strange timing, there must have been other players available for sat night

I do love the way people talk of players being 'released' in such a casual manner.

There are two sides to any contract and if the player being 'released' doesn't get another offer, equal or better than the one he already has, he has every right to decline the generous offer of being 'released'. Players can't be released without their consent - except in a very few exceptional circumstances, which would take a court or an RFL enquiry at least to decide. Why would any player being dumped, just accept it to suit the club?

I think it was more of mutual agreement between clubs at the time as you have no real right to obstruct the players that way. As fans we often forget this is the players job and their livelihood we're talking about.

"Hull tried to sign the 25-year-old at the start of pre-season, only for their offer to be knocked back. It's understood the Bulls then offered the ex-London pivot to Hull last month, only for coach Lee Radford to turn the West Yorkshire club down due to the arrival of Aussie stand-off Jordan Rankin."

You appear to have stopped reading just before the bit I've underlined.