I don't know what the problem ever was about him getting two years? People like Wilf bleating on that his body will be shot to bits is a load of sh&te. He's really fit, trains hard and his injury record is almost none existent. Look at players like Menzies who is still doing the business and a couple of years oldern than Lee.

I'm dissappointed Rovers never got him to be honest, will do a solid job for you lot for the two years he's contracted.

Congratulations on the re-signing of an average forward!

Sheer madness to give him 2 years!

Think its fairly obvious we've offered a 1 year deal but the other targets we've had have obviously escaped us so as i said this morning we've probably changed our offer from 1 year to 2 in order to not be short of a front row next year.

Regarding his salary, its as Standee said for me. We want to make sure we are getting value for money and Radford is not worth a huge salary. (if he was indeed on one before)

A reduced deal for him for 1 year was ideal, 2 years is ok as long as it's a reduced deal to allow some signings.

But with Dowes going thay may have offered a little more and put him on the same contract as now, I think he is worth it IMO.

Surprised that he has got a 2 year deal whoever his agent is has done a great job getting him that.

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?