But then its us that see him every week.....who has been better for us?

He is without doubt an all round better player now than he was 4 years ago.

I think there is a doubt about because if he has improved as you believe he has Morgan would have had him signed up for a few more years and he would be around the national side. IMO of course.

Who is to say Morgan won't sign him up?? Why would his improvement make him good enough to get into the national side?? Also do you seriously think his defence was better when he was at Hull??

I said i beleived he was a better all round player now than he was when he was during his days at Hull and i think the improvement in the one facet of his game he was poor in is unquestionable proof.

Personally I think its all posturing to get his price down for next season, Hull have potentially missed a trick by saying they are not interested in him, like Rovers feigning interest in Moa last year.

I don't buy that at all. His defence used to be awful but he had started to sort that out well before he left Hull and had improved out of sight. Rovers may have other creative players but Cooke is not the attacking weapon he used to be at Hull.

His best rugby was at Hull and I don't think he will ever get back to that level.

Calderwood lol

Morgan may sign him up but probably wont,
If he was really keen for him to stay he would have offered him a new deal last year. Take Newton as an example they didnt wait for his contract to run down before offering a new one .

His defence may have improved but he is miles away from the attacking threat he was at hull

I agree with that, maybe if we had signed a quality off-off instead of Dobson, Cooke could have played in his most effective position, scrum half. But the signing of Dobson was a master stroke and it clearly was a good move by the club.

I must have fallen asleep for a year and missed something...in what way is/was it a masterstroke...???

A reasonable scrum half in this country with an admittedly very good kicking game but thats it..anyone who saw the match up with Orford last week will have seen what a top class scrum half is all about...

Signing the Albert Goldthorpe Medal winner wasn't too bad I don't think.

Orford is a good player but until hes played in more than a friendly I dont think you can compare him to Dobbo.

Did you??

Orford was ok and for his first outing he looked like he'll be a good acquisition but he was nowhere near as good as dobbo was in his first game for us, which was competetive. Dobson was the difference between us finishing outside the PO's in 2008 and 4th in 2009.

I'd go as far as saying Kearney looked better than Orford last week, guess he's the big name Aussie tho' so anything he does will be creamed over.

He has played in slightly more than friendlies, take the Rovers specs off..when Dobson has played anywhere near as many NRL matches or got any grand final medals or Dally M player of the year awards then perhaps he can be compared in the same post code as Orford....

Orford is widely acknowledged in Aussie RL as the best uncapped Australian scrum half...the same RL community regard Dobson as reserve grade fodder.....

Dobson is a middling scrum half with a very good kicking game, he has not shown he is a winner of any sorts, when he guides Rovers to victories in big games then i will be convinced...

So because Orford is rated the best uncapped Aussie scrum half that in some way diminishes the merits of signing Michael Dobson. Slightly skewed logic you have there. Personally I'm more than content to settle for the still improving 23 year old who has already proven his worth in SL for Wigan, Catalans and Rovers.