And yor point is?
Why should we have trouble attracting young talent?
What is the problem with Gleeson or Brown? if we were paying top whack wages for Brown I would question the move but if the club see potential then good enough for me. As for Gleeson he is better value at centre than Webster IMO.

The club seem to be bringing on a few local lads who may or may not make the grade our problem is we seem to be good at producing prop's as FC seem to produce hookers neither club seem to be able to produce half back's, its a shame that we loose a couple of promising lads but I am sure most on here would swap Hull for Australia (or anywhere).

You choose Hull or Australia with the chance of making it into the NRL who pay better than here. The lad is young & I suppose belives in his ability, good luck to him.

He's got a far better chance of making it in S/L than he has in the NRL.

he is out of contract and had a similar deal to what he was on offered by rovers again i was told which is not a huge amount (though he has only made a couple of first team appearances!). The kid has made a lifestyle choice and good luck to him.

I suspect both himself and louis sherriff will reappear at a championship club in a couple of years like ewan dowes has but you can't hold it against them for giving it a go. If it hadn't left us short of cover in a pretty thin squad already I'm sure this wouldn't even have made any news tbh

You may be correct but that is not the point, he is a young lad with little experiance of life, he might just think he is good enough, right or wrong its his choice. You try telling an adolecent teenager what is right or wrong.

I have been to oz and i do not blame any young lad for going their its a chance of a lifetime which might not come again so if you are a young rovers or fc player or any other team i say take the chance you will regret it if you don't

Yer I get what your saying, and what an experience hell hopefully have whilst out there

Good at producing props, maybe. But 2 of your best have gone. What IS bad is that you kept Clinton and took on O'Hara.

O'Hara is a good solid pro.

Define "kept" when used in the context of not dismissing someone who has a contract. If you manage it, it may come in useful when joining in conversations about Seymour (assuming you occasionally visit the Hull FC board?).

KEPT as in didnt release him when it was found he really wasn't pulling his [considerable] weight, was massively unfit and was strongly rumoured to be dropped for laziness and troublecausing reasons. Then you have the 10 minute wonder Paea who really isn't a patch on Watts or Taylor.

My feelings on Seymour are well documented. I didn't want him in the first place and still don't want him. He's an ineffective attacker, a very poor tactical kicker and slow. He's really the only Agar signing left at the club and looking likely to be shown the door.

Rovers realeased Clinton when his contract expired. A point you failed to grasp, rather unsurprisingly. Paea out performed both Talyor and Watts for Rovers last season, he was our best forward and none of his spells are anything approaching 10 minutes. You clearly have him confused with someone else, again this is not surprising.

As for Seymour, you can show him as many doors as you like, but with 2 years remaining on a lucrative contract he can decide not to walk through any of them. This, as I obviously need to spell it out, is the point I was making, and why I drew parallels with Clinton's time at Rovers.

Ah, so you wait for contracts to expire, do you? Like Green's? Like Watts'? Like Taylor's? Like Mason?

I could go on, but it's wasted. The difference between Clinton and Seymour is obvious. One came to this country with a big reputation and spectacularly failed to live up to it and his high salary. In fact, he became so unfit he was a figure of ridicule. Seymour had no reputation, was signed in a moment of panic by the former administration and isn't good enough for a team with top 4 aspirations.

As for Paea, every time I watched him, he was poor. Both he and Mika played well in patches. Keep them. Please.

Mickey Paea is better than Watts and Taylor, Watts has a great offload on him but doesn't make that many yards, Taylor makes good yards but not as good as Paea.

No, but to remove Clinton would have cost "cash strapped" Rovers a lot of money, unlike all the other's you list where the departure brought money in (Green, Talor, Watts), or cost nothing (Mason).

Clinton's comparative reputation with Seymour is even more irrelevant than your existance. The similarity however is that both are taking a pension from a Hull club. At least ours is thankfully over, you still have to deal (one way or another) with yours. Remind me, if Seymour's signing was a blind panic decision, why was he signed up 7 months before the season started? Everyone at your club seemed to think he was the answer at the timehttps://forums.rlfans.com/viewtopic.php?f Maybe you were amongst them, obviously using a different troll name.

Couldn't agree more,added to the fact that Watts was removed from our squad for basically being in Clinton mode then you can see we're addressing the problem. As HH says Seymour was a panic buy, whereas missing out on the show pony Chase and then signing Prince at 33 on a 3 year contract (see S.Long for the usual outcome to such signings) is a well reasoned piece of business.

Ellis aside the black and whites have completely failed to deliver on the postseason promises yet in Pearson they trust, anyone feel the emperor is lacking in the clothing dept.