If we haven't signed him, I can't see the club dragging it on and the fans expecting him to be with us, only to go and annouce Sidlow from Bradford (for example)

your spot on here other players are looking at this rant very poorly he has left micky in a very difficult position and this can not be good for HKR he was told something in private and has choose to tell the world in the paper very poor indeed from a chairman I'm sure other players will be less than honest with HKR in the future and as far as paying ridicules money our chairman was bang on when he said from now on the club will be paying the big money in the middle of the field not on the edges like before i.e. Sing, black lock which is what caused the problems with Cooke at long last we have the right plan in place for success and HKR can not match it Hudge just can not accept this Great signing by the club and welcome to FC micky

Unlike a Hull fan to over play it and get all excited...

I'd be happy if they just learnt so spell his name correctly.

As punishment for signing for Hull,pure and simple.

I didn't think that Paea had told the club (NH)? I thought the gripe was that he was going around telling his team mates he'd signed for Hull, but hadn't actually told the club? Not that it's any of their business after he's told them he won't be re-signing, mind.

If and when a statement is made - assuming we have signed him I hope it reads something like;

"Mickey Paea has signed a contract for far less money than he had been offered elsewhere (about 7 miles elsewhere). Mickey described the move as "too good to be true" on the basis he has signed for a club with ambition, clear ownership structures and professionalism, something he had considered lacking, through experience, in ESL. This, along with a lack of Wolves at the door, made it a dream move, and at least he now has a clear future path"

Wake up!!!! You're dreaming again!!!

Hoping I said

Is it really any different to when 'Sir' Adam got his mad on over Luke Briscoe going off to Leeds?

His agent started chatting poop, Mickey didn't correct it, Hudgell decided not to be complicit by his silence in a version of events that cast the club in a somewhat negative light, and which was not, he claims, an accurate reflection of the situation.

From 'What I cannot stomach...' onwards, it does go a wee bit ranty, but while he could have toned that down a tad, imo as a Rovers fan, it was right and, more importantly, best, he said something and presented our version of events.

I'm disappointed Paea's going, that it is to Hull adds a bit of salt. I can understand why he'd want to keep quiet, but [imisrepresenting[/i - even if the motivation is understandable (sadly) - that called for a correction. It is wrong and sad that players are fearful to be honest about these moves, but at most that excuses silence.

The gripe is with his agent misrepresenting the situation, compounded by putting a negative slant on Rovers' position.

Tbf, it is that latter part which is more provocative, but the former offers an easier opening 'counter punch'. If you're going to be forthright, then you should at least have the decency and bravery to be honest too. Or, you know, try a bit of slightly more diplomatic language - that'd be easiest all round.

So, agent, when asked, in trying to protect his client from a bit of abuse shocker then?