Yes of course it is. Although if you took your measure of the clubs position as being what percentage of it's potential it was fulfilling, the Agar era probably is the worst ever performance.

They should have gone back to Cas and got Chase. But they weren't prepared to pay out again. Warrington or Wigan would have done. Tansey and Obst were pocked money fees, and Long, fitzgibbon and Omeley were all within the cap. We paid around £150000 for Westerman but with the money left from Berrigan and Tansey that covers that fee. So don't be fooled into thinking the club have spent anymore money that they should do anyway. Our club should spend to the cap, I bet when you paid for your pass you fully expected that the club would be spending to the cap limit, not £150000 short

Warrington or Wigan would have had the good sense to go after Chase before they went after Westerman.

Cas were categorical that they weren't selling Chase for any price. Were you party to the discussions to be able to confirm that Cas were willing to sell? In any event Chase has 3 years on his deal unexpired, so £300k+ would be the going rate. Chase would be on a big wage plus the fee, neither of which are budgeted this year. Do you really think we have this sort of money kicking around in a transfer fee slush fund?

There are 'yes' men in every organisation and he's clearly one of them. The board can cover this up and tell us they have a desire to give a young British coach time to build a successful side, but a 'yes' man doesn't ask questions or kick up a stink.

Leaves the board with time to run the business with a minimum amount of fuss. Unless we lose the next ten games in a row, Agar is here to stay and while I believe it's time for a change of coach I'm afraid we are all going to have to accept it.

But a yes man for what? They let Agar spend money so I'm not sure I can see it. What kind of thing is it that the board do that Agar doesn't complain about but, say, Noble would?

We would have got Chase for £150000. There is no way on earth they would have turned that down, despite what their supporters come on here and say

We'd have been in a better bargaining position if we'd gone for chase instead of westerman when they needed the money for their planning app

Totally agree, why we went for Westerman instead still baffles me.

You don't know that for a fact. Chase is absolutely key to their team and they would have been mad to let him go when there was no realistic prospect of signing a replacement. If nothing else the uproar among their fans would have dwarfed what's going on here.

I would rather have had Chase than Westerman but there was no way Cas were willing to let Chase go. To suggest we could have got Chase for £150,000 is fanciful (and thats putting it politely).

Yes but someone else would be pushing for more cash to spend on players, rather than the 'that's your lot and don't ask for anymore' kind of attitude I sense. Top coaches can insist on extra funds and justify why it would benefit the team (i.e go and get me Rangi Chase at all costs).

The board don't do anything wrong, far from it, we are an efficiently run business and perhaps that's our downfall.

Mind you we can't have it both ways.

Small clubs will always let players go at a reasonable price. I believe we would have got him for a lot less than has been quoted on this forum. He will not be playing for Cas next season. He is too good for a small club like Cas, and will end up at one of the big clubs, maybe Saints or Wigan. If he wins MOS this year his price will rise a bit.

He'll end up at saints

No way would they let him go for £150,000. They said he was not for sale, plain and simple. Yes, everyone has a price, but he means more to them then £150,000. Their whole team is worked around him.