i'm in two minds about this signing. on the one hand he's a great player and it's someone like him that hull need, but will he be another sicknote. at least it looks like thorman will be getting the boot.

True....may turn out to be their loss and our big gain......end of the day its a results buissnes ans if he gets the results...jobs a good un

Newton smashed his face in just before the play-offs so he didn't miss many.

which can only be a good thing

Oh, too right. If he's on the pitch, he'll be better than any scrum half we've had for many years. He's a very, very good player. I just can't help but think if he was worth a 2 year deal at this stage of his career, he'd have got one from the club he's built his reputation at and helped to win numerous trophies along the way.



I genuinely hope that at the end of 2011 someone drags this thread up and points out how wrong I was.

Best post i've read, well done and thank you.



This Hull FC fan has been craving that personality since Chico Jackson finished.



I have a feeling Long will be something special, and could end up coaching here. I have said for a while we need a born winner and have spoke about Hanley and Farrell and Cunningham. Long fits in alongside them, he wont chuck in a towel when 3 tries down and half hour left.

Think its a decent signing if we put another quality running half back with him. Playing Horney or even worse Thorman (God please no!!) then its not the signing we need. We need a half back we can sart to build a team around not a stop gap year after year. Saints, Leeds and Bradford all have their years of success built around a steady backs combination.



I truly hope Long and Fitzgibbon arent our 'Marque' signings for next year. If so I dread for season ticket sales!!

errrrrm sean long great number 7 not the best in SL but he aint the worst but will he perform for hull fc...we shall see

To be fair, I'm not sure what part of buying a house in Hull is incompatible with what TKOAH was saying. He might keep his existing property and live there three days a week.

According to various Saints fans, the primary reason for not offering Long a 2 year deal was to allow them to bring their younger players through. That seems plausible at least.

We do have likes of wheeler and eastmond coming thru but both untried at 7 at super league level.



I think he do ok for you if he stays clear of injurys. Don't let him kick goals tho!!!

Been reading what the Saints fans have been saying about Long on their board. Interesting comparing it with what the Giants fans said about Thorman when he signed for us!



I'm sure he will do a good job for us for two years, but we need to start looking for a long term replacement sooner rather than later.

completely agree; for me this is a perfect signing for 2 years but we cannot be in the same desperate position this time in 2 years



we have to start planning now for when Long leaves

The reason is the long term plan. We recruited Potter to integrate the younger local talent since he had done well in that regard in France. We have had a number of players all approaching the latter end of their careers and/or contracts at a similar time. Last year Talau wanted a two year contract and he was offered one; he went to Salford. We didn't renew Scully, due to the enormous cost of his injuries I should imagine. Long was offered one year as well, just as Cunningham has been (again). Cunningham has taken these extensions up to now, Long did not want to. I don't think it was about talent but ultimately about flexibility for the club which has to rebuild itself given the number of players coming to the end of their careers and/or contracts. This season alone sees Long, Cunningham, Cayless, Gidley and Gilmour all out of contract.

Yeah, the scrum half played a lot more games last season

I've been saying this for weeks, good post.

For all those bemoaning us signing Long instead of Orford. www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2009/ju ... l-transfer Taken from the above article "Hull, who have already signed the ­veteran Sydney Roosters forward Craig ­Fitzgibbon for 2010, had also made a substantial offer to the Manly Sea Eagles scrum-half Matt Orford, reportedly wanted by Wigan and Warrington. But Orford is now expected to stay in Australia, and that has forced any Super League club in need of a new half-back to look closer to home."

For all those bemoaning us signing Long instead of Orford. www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2009/ju ... l-transfer Taken from the above article "Hull, who have already signed the ­veteran Sydney Roosters forward Craig ­Fitzgibbon for 2010, had also made a substantial offer to the Manly Sea Eagles scrum-half Matt Orford, reportedly wanted by Wigan and Warrington. But Orford is now expected to stay in Australia, and that has forced any Super League club in need of a new half-back to look closer to home."

Close - but no banana.



Try reading the various threads on here an the Saints board and you'll learn why Long was only offered 1 year at Saints.

I may have been speculating a little with the reasons but Fact is he was only offered a ONE year deal and that is the ONLY reason he has now signed for Hull...end off.



Had Saints been able/willing to offer him the two year deal do you seriously think he'd have chosen Hull over Saints....if you do...then keeping taking the tablets

Wayne Bennett recently said (on the BBC website) that sometimes it's better to take a short term loss in favour of long term gain. This is precisely the thinking at Saints regarding Long.



Perhaps Saints will be the poorer next season for Long's absence. He's a hell of a player who is bound to be missed. At this moment there are a number of kids competing for his shirt, with Eastmond being the #1 candidate (Smith may return from CC, but I doubt it. Lomax can play seven, as can Wheeler).



If Eastmond gets the nod he will doubtlessly find it difficult. The Saints pack and backs are so used to Long communication is almost telepathic. Kyle is going to have to stake his own claim and that will take time and effort. But he has plenty of talent and his attitude seems good.



I expect there will be some short term loss, but we've got to bite the bullet. Yes, Saints may well drop points because of this, but it would be extremely counterproductive to keep kids like Eastmond waiting much longer. So you see, it's not that Long isn't up to it. He is. But there are other, younger - and possibly better - players ready to make names for themselves now.

Whereas at Hull we only really have one top prospect (Williams) who can play at 7 and he is nowhere near ready. Two years of Sean Long allows Hull to develop the young lad further and for him to learn from Long as the Saints young lads have done. In two years time he could be ready but a lot can happe in two years either way.



It looks a good deal for both sides from where I am sitting.

Unavailable I'm afraid mate, shoulder injury.

If he can keep fit

Whilst I think Long is a good buy, I find it hard to believe a club like Hull with such a vast catchment area is currently unable to promote a scrum half of some description from the juniors.



Going back a few years both Saints and Hull were talking up Scott Moore and Tommy Lee respectively as scrum halves with bright futures. Since then both have enjoyed mixed fortunes - Moore's lack of explosive pace was the reason he was moved to hooker (where he played okay-ish at Cas and better at Huddersfield). Lee's star appears to have diminished significantly to the point where he could well leave Hull.



The thing is, Saints took the hit and worked hard to produce a new crop of kids. What happened at Hull?