FC Fans Survey

Quote: downtheante "1. I mean that it is entirely plausible that there is more going on in the background at clubs like Warrington that means they have a much higher quality squad than the pure cap would allow.
2. I think Tansey, Westerman, Turner, Ellis [iet al [/iwere key British signings at a time (before Crusaders' demise) that we expected the quota to become much more restirctive in the future and, therefore, were worth spending money on. I think they were canny signings for the future but they are not the highest quality players now. Warrington keep poaching Salford's best players because they have the money to do so and they will be good enough to walk into the first team (would Tansey, Turner, Ellis and Westerman walk into Warrington's team?). Now Hull has that kind of money so I expect a different approach when bringing players in. Which is why I wonder if Hull would have recruited McKinnon, Heremaia and Seymour etc if Pearson had owned the club at that time. So, yes, Agar has "his team" but it is still not as good as the top four teams.
3. Whether your suspicions are right or wrong does not take away from the fact that Hull were left with no replacements and with no time to find one. That meant that Agar's squad was depleted in key areas and there was no-one to come into the team. Sometimes, circumstance/happenstance/whatever you want to call it does play a part evern if we don't want it to.
4. Agar had a great understudy to Long who played in the pre-season friendly - unfortunatley he suffered a long-term injury so when Long was injured Nicklas couoldn't step into his shoes and develop. Imagine how he might have come on this year. I think Nicklas was ready to start making the step-up and that was why he was a full tiem squad member.'"

1. So, cheating in short. I'm not convinced by the conspirancy theory on that one. Or, the chance of winning trophies. The latter is something we need to convince players we are capable of. I personally think the coach is a factor in that.
2. How many of Warrington's 'poaches' have been for transfer fees? Genuine question, I don't know for sure. I thought they'd mainly been getting them when their contracts are up, in which case we had just as much chance of getting them in money terms. If they chose Warrington instead it was probably for different reasons.
3. My point was that we probably did have enough time to find them, we just didn't (or didn't adequately enough). There were mitigating factors, but also some self-inflicted.
4. I've not seen a lot of Nicklas, but I was under the impression that he was less of an organiser than Long, more the supporting stand-off. I thought Williams was more the string-pulling type.