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?

Depends on your definition of disappointing. Thorman never has been as good as Cooke. As for Dykes And Head, their problems were being fit, especially Dykes, as when they were actually on the field, they were very good.

I think it's more a case of Pro-Dobson to be honest. They are both capable of controlling the play, but Dobsons's work is more consistent and at a faster pace. Cooke is an enigma as a stand off, as he plays more like a scrum half. There were times last season when it all clicked and they were an outstanding pair. Unfortunately, this was the exception rather than the norm. 2010 is a big year for Cooke, as he has to perform to secure his future, and its been a lot of years since he had that type of pressure on him.

Its debatable, Thorman when through a period of playing internationals and was signed up to go to Oz. On that basis he would be as good as Cooke, different kinds of players though. (personally i agree that Cooke has always been a better player than Thorman but their records may disagree)

Agree too about Dykes and Head not been fit, sadly though due to that they didnt fill the gap that Cooke left.

Here's a debate then, as i see Dobson as been more of a running 6 rather than a passing 7, would rovers be a better team to shift more responsibility to cooke use Dobson in a lesser role?

I can't really debate that with you as I think Dobson is a pretty complete halfback - passing, running and kicking. That is a main reason behind Cooke been a bit peripheral, IMO. As he says in the recent HDM article, he and Horne complemented each other perfectly - neither have been as good consistently since Cooke left Hull (though there are other issues to bare in mind, of course). Cooke was the organizer, Horne the off-the-cuff creator. With Cooke-Webster there was an element of duplication, while Dobson does both (and works well with Galea or I'anson as a foil).
Because Cooke is right-sided and Dobson left-sided, taking a simplistic fan's eye view, you'd think the obvious thing to do would be to split them on the left and right respectively. Strangely, to me, when its been done that way its sometimes been in reverse. I think though that Morgan prefers to keep Dobson at the centre of things as much as possible.
A team may only need one experienced, well-rounded organizer, but you'd prefer 2 in the squad - but then one is likely to be frustrated. For me the debate is whether you play a second half beside Dobson, to share the burden but be in his shadow or go for a centre/back row type of stand-off - putting a lot of responsibility on Dobson but giving you a different dimension. Much as I like Cooke as a player, I can't see any argument for diminishing Dobson's role.

Absolutely not. As MR states above, your average Rovers fan has a vastly different opinion of Dobson's contribution than you, if you see him as a running 6. For example, I think Dobson's short kicking game in 2009 was the best in SL, and without him at 1st receiver, an awful lot of our tries would have gone begging.

and my question for debate was more around, do you think Rovers would have converted more opportunities or created better chances if Dobson wasnt always at 1st receiver and Cooke took some of it over. Gauging by your responses you think not. I dont have an opinion personally. Just an interesting debate to have.

When you put it like that, it is a tough question - I want to see more Cooke, but not less from Dobson. Rovers should therefore be allowed sets of 10, IMO.