If you show any signs of enthusiasm on here,you get accused by some people of being sheep,or wearing black and white specs.Hull are my team,good or bad,and I believe we have some positives,although I will get stick for saying so.

i think it was a mistake to part with brough,but brough is a better player now because he is older and more experienced.scrum halfs tend to do that.no other reason.

Brough has always been a loose cannon,but I didn`t think he played badly whilst at Hull.

And if you try and bring a sense of reality to outlandish claims you get branded as a non fan

I wouldn`t brand anybody who has Hull at heart a none fan,its just that sometimes all negativity gets you down.

You let opinions on an internet message board get you down? Get a grip

it would be a boring world and message board if we agreed all the time.im just an average fan,down when we lose,up when we win.

I wish I was confident Moa will stay.

I don't think Obst is a rubbish signing, but for a quota signing for 2 years I think we could and should be getting better. It's not like he's young with years of potential ahead, either. It's not chance that he's been in the english game for 7 years without a decent club showing the slightest sniff of interest, even when quota restrictions were less stringent than they are now.

getting someone better,who like?

and he's got a funny nose

Firstly, I should establish that I think scrum half is by far the weakest of the 3 positional options Obst offers. I think he's a good bench hooker and half-decent stand-off. But in the summer, in similar positions:

Bradford got Briggs, who looks a better stand-off than Obst. They also got Diskin, who is definitely a better hooker than Obst.
Cas got Orr, who is at least as good, probably better, in all 3 positions, and we could have used the quota spot elsewhere.
I've only seen small amounts of Green, but he looks a better organiser than Obst, which is what we are in more need of than enthusiasm.

We may well have been interested in the above, but if so questions should be asked as to why we didn't get them.

Also, although I have given examples, I don't personally think the 'if you think we can do better, name them' stance means anything. It's not my job to know who's available and how good they are, so I don't have the time and resources required to find such things out. When Noble needed halves at the last minute for Crusaders did he panic buy the best of a commonly-known bad bunch in SL? No, he went and found players who many of us either didn't know, or at least didn't know were available. I know he didn't have the quota issues to deal with Hull do, but personally I'd take any single one of Witt, Sammut or Hanbury over Obst, they're all both better and younger.

And there is the issue! They had Noble, we have Agar - nuff said really!

Yeah bloody Agar, saddling us with the likes of O'Meeley, Fitz, Moa and Westerman.