It's a risk offering him a deal but as has been said he's not breached our club's rule. Providing he makes assurances that he won't and then he sticks to those assurances we shouldn't really have a problem. If he breaches the rules i'd expect him to be gone too.

Spot on imo. Each player starts a new club with a clean slate.

I can be

didn't tansey get 3 chance's though in 12 months

Evidence to prove me wrong?

Or do you believe some posters on here who have said we are the max and have been for years?

That'll be a no then

Bingo. New club, away from all his 'troubles'.

But why make (potential) trouble for ourselves? In a squad that's already struggling to achieve what it is capable of, adding a potentially disruptive influence to the mix is a very risky strategy.

2004 and 2005?

6 years ago then, the last time we had a good team

why did leeds ship tansey off to oz and why did the oz club ship him back to leeds. then sell him to hull £30,000 and hull sacked him after 3 chance's so i got told, then tansey end up at dewsbury for afew games and now at crusaders for 18 months will he last the 18 months

Until he does anything wrong at Hull I am prepared to give him a chance. We have a good set of players now who are not heads and turn up for training in the right state.

I am pretty sure IF he comes to Hull then we will have told him exactly what is expected and I am also sure we would have no problem getting rid of him IF he breaches our rules.

Give him a chance, why not.

The flip side is that when a risky decision comes off the rewards are often greater.

How many times has Gleeson been in violation of our disciplinary policy ?