It wasn't a mild dig at all, it was a "do you ever actually speak about the reality, that FC are pants at the moment and Carvell was a poor signing, hence his release"

I am accused of being negative, but some people can only view life through B&W spectacles.

Colbon,must be close to 30.I must admit I didnt know carvels record at warry was so good,but spent a lot of his career injured.

Some can't wait to knock the new signings and have little digs but when we retain a player like Hadley the usual moaners go missing on that thread mmmmm wonder why ?

What's that to do with point? You said Carvell was injury prone when we signed him, you were wrong, just admit it for once.

He was a poor signing though and we gave been pour this year, but that's another point.

He IS injury prone, so I am right, which is probably why Wire got rid.

anyway, MM....

Carvell was a last min n at the time good addition. He picked up a knock n in the corresponding time bowden n thomson stiod up to be counted. Cas were looking to bulk squad up in that area n radford was already favouring them 2 n knew green was ready n only had carvel in mind for 1 yr. So benificial to let him go and suited carvel travel wise to go cas.
As a signing didnt work out as well as it might but wasnt a'bad' signing. Anyone who says they knew thomson would have done as well as a prop is a liar n yet ellis still had to do some prop time for some games. So adding carvell when we did cant be called a bad signing-just sensible at the time.
thomson a suprise prop(who knew)
say we never signed carvell
n green out half a season would of left us with4 props to last half a season at the time we signed carvell.

That is simply not true. He played over 170 games for us in his original spell for us (in eight years).

Difficult to get away from the fact that combining youngsters with potential and experienced players with their best days behind them makes some sense as a stepping stone but it's fraught with danger. If the potential doesn't materialise and/or if we just happen to get players who've been great up to 32 but who's bodies start to go rapidly downhill at 33/34 then we've got problems. There are no guarantees with any signing or indeed any player but there is significantly more risk when players get towards their mid thirties. Having said that we can't get the top guys who are at their peak so provided we get the right mix it's probably the next best thing and I can't really see an alternative.

Childish response again.



This isn't the Minichiello thread.

Speak to Carvs, ask him about his pelvic injury and what his doc told him about it. Before he decided to leave us first time

back on thread, so who else is coming ?

But accurate, you and Dave are the same, always something good around the corner, I admire your optimism.

and the MM signing has been discussed on here

I have no idea what your issue with me is, but given Kosh's recent warning, why not just get over it and TALK ABOUT HULL FC!?!?!

I will do, what's his number?

Obviously the doc was wrong then as he had a great career at Warrington.

I read on the Wigan board that Canberra prop Tom Learoyd-Lahrs is rumoured to be signing for one of the Hull clubs. He is off contract at the end of the season and won't be offered a new deal by the Raiders.

If true is it us or for Rovers as a replacement for Langley or Poore?

He has had injury problems (don't they all) but has played origin and internationals. He is only 28 and certainly fits the definition of a "big rough-@rsed prop" that some posters say we need.

Thoughts?