But not a good one - hence it being dismissed.


You're confusing bitterness with contempt.

And like I've said, it's what I would have done. But was it not an option to do what Cookie suggested? Like i've said, sometimes I wonder who the bitter ones are.

I don't think I am, especially from the OP.

pointless debate this really. PG was right. Radders got MOM,Turner got a hatrick from centre,and we won easy and played some good stuff which might not have been so with people out of positions and youngsters all over the park!

It does beg the question as to why these "facts" have not yet come out some 5 years down the line. And why some one in the broadcasting profession is so willing to use that as a get out clause for backing a guy who was rated by Andrew Johns as the most difficult player to play against in 2006 to someone who within 12 months had self crippled his career.

Yet another mystery is why RH, who back in April 2007 wew so willing to go with "a story, which at the moment they were not saying was true" yet some "facts" which are apparently would change people's opinion are kept safer than the official secrets act.

Personally I think some of rovers recruitment has done Hull FC a few favours over the last couple of years, judging by the performances of Hall, Hodgson and Wheeldon.

As for Cooke, I wonder is he still gets the unrine extracted each time he decides to pop into Crown

It was an option, but Gentle thought that using Radders was a better one. Turned out to be an option that worked.

Yep, but why bring Cookies views up in the first place? None of us that were talking to him at the time did.

Probably because most of us following the twitter statement saw it as an irelevance, much the same as anything Cooke has to say these days.

Although that said, he is one of the few people I would pi[is[/is on if he wasn't on fire

No, you stated it was an option that Cooke suggested and you thought it was one worthy of consideration. Thankfully we have a coach who doesn't feel the same.

But you carry on being Paul Cooke's No. 2 fan, after Craig Murdoch. I'm sure he needs all the apologists he can muster

I don't think Cooke gives a flying one, that seems to grate on people.

You are correct Judas doesn't give a flying one which was very clear in his actions when he went to the dobbins, clearly a leopard does not change it's spots! despicable excuse of a man.

Maybe not,but I bet deep down he regrets his decision to crap on Hull.

I bet deep down Kath regretted trying to take the pi$$ out of him with contract details. We (the fans) were fecked by both.

Well quite, as League Weekly was quoting from a tweet made before the derby. I'm not on Twitter, though, and certainly wouldn't dream of "following" people like Cooke, so wasn't aware of this until this morning. I guessed people with a similar attitude to Twitter may be interested. Sorry if I've trodden on your toes, but I'm not a mind reader.

Really? Is that what he said? Why did you bite, then?



Where was this? Not mentioned in his tweet quoted in LW.

So you think Doc is right to defend Agar and wring his hands at his departure?

I posted this simply because I read it for the first time in the paper, thought his gall was beyond belief in that he could presume to a) advise Gentle; and b) insinuate criticism in this way. The whole thing smacked to me of a dig at Hull which I wouldn't expect him to do in the same way to Rovers, thereby implying that his new "neutrality" is a nonsense. I thought others may want to share their thoughts.

I didn't realize Cooke's fellow tweeters had a monopoly on this. Silly me.

You what?