very debatable.

Good post, not sure about the last bit about thinking what might have been, will really have to up his game, maybe JK can get the best out of him again.

He was good for Hull 9and we have missed him and IMO that is to go with him not being replaced rather than how great he was, if Dykes stayed fit, we wouldnt even have noticed he had gone.

The problem with him at Hull is that we relayed on him too much in attack, if he wasnt playing well we didnt have a plan B.

dont think he will end up anywhere ! hes got a self distruct mode and serious lifestyle choices , the wheels are coming loose again!

A controversial figure and an enigmatic player - moments of brilliance and long spells of quiet. I suspect he'll continue to divide opinion among Rovers fans long after he is gone. I like his style of play, so tend to a more favourable view of him.
When he signed Rovers were on a 6 game losing streak (the last against Salford), but it felt that his arrival lifted the club and 2 wins in the next 3 were enormously important in the fight against relegation. He then wasn't involved in another win for 7 rounds - until the crucial Salford game, where he scored his first Rovers try. His virtuoso display in the 42-6 derby and the drop goal that won the final game of the season made it feel that his signing was going to be truly momentous.
Then he started 2008 banned, had to adapt to a new half-back partner midway through the year and ended it out of favour after infamously being 'unfit for selection'. IMO in 2009 he repaired some of the damage and he continues to show flashes of genius - especially in derbies. But with the club's horizons broadening and given his big wage it is natural that others options be looked at, long-term. OTOH If he wants to stay, keeps his nose clean and accepts a more realistic wage, I'd consider keeping him on beyond 2010 - he's still only 29 iirc and there aren't too many better non-quota stand-offs that are likely to be available out there.


But he got more money and left a team that had peaked and then entered a pretty awful trough, for one that has been on the up.



He added much needed quality to a hard-working but limited squad in a battle for survival that was absolutely crucial to the club's long-term ambitions. The Rovers-Hull element added a bit of spice (and made us feel less guilty
and i meant 80 mins you numpty

Or that I can think quickly.

I know you numpty

In my case,bitterly disappointed.(At the time.)

Then sod me if Shaun doesn`t walk the plank too.

Sell him tomorrow.
In fact give him back to Hull to see him and Long kick off.
Didnt keep us up. Webster and the rest did despite.
There, said it.

FWIW he has been our single biggest loss in the last few seasons. We've struggled to replace him with a creative half too with the likes of Head, Dykes and Thorman. (who all on paper should have done the job but much like Cooke at Rovers have been largely disappointing)

Is the problem for Cooke the way that Morgan uses him? At FC Cooke was our main ball player alongside the likes of Jason Smith. When ive seen Rovers play Cooke seems to be pushed to 2nd receiver or 3rd reciever a lot and i cant recall him hitting his big cut out pass on more than a couple of occassions. For some reason it looks like Morgans tactics are anti-cooke?