Good job Justin doesnt blame players and sulk with them then

Hall is a very good try scorer and has pace to burn but his defence in 4 years has not improved and he constantly rushes out of the line. The emergence of Jordan Turner has sealed his fate at FC. Turner has made more improvement in half a season than Hall has done at his time at FC.

If you play him on the left side you'll have better luck, plus if he gets regular games at centre he should improve. I like him a lot and think he has bags of potential, but even I've just about run out of patience with his lack of progress. Think a change of club could be good for him TBH.

Be interesting to see how this unfolds. Don't think Hull ever announced that he was free to talk to other clubs and the anti-tampering deadline is a fair old way away...

From reading your board I get the impression that Hull's ooc players are often given the chance to test the market, but if Hull are also making an offer it isn't announced that that is the case. Everybody seemed to accept that Tickle had an offer from Hudds.
The LMS and Fielden to Hull rumours are/were no different in this respect - Quins and Wigan haven't made announcements, as far as I'm aware. It's not a particularly enforceable rule - even if ( ) Hull wanted to cause Rovers grief, HKR would have to botch things pretty spectacularly to give them an in. Announcing the signing before the deadline or some such. And who would want to be seen as a club that creates problems for players who simply want to take up employment elsewhere at the end of a contract?

All which assumes the accuracy of HDM article.

Leave him at Hull Fc he is rubbish in IMO, he cant tackle frightened to death, only good when no one in front of him, went ok with Widnes, but not a superleague player, not as good as anything we have already, rather keep Scott Weeldon and use the money there, in fact rather play him in the backs than Craig Hall

All negotiations these days involve agents anyway. You can have discussions with an agent, who then advises his client. No direct contact with a player is needed.

Unless the rules prevent a players agent from speaking to other clubs I can’t see how the anti-tampering deadline is workable.

They do.
It still isn't workable though.

Ok, wasn't aware of that.

Maybe an agent can't speak to another club in a formal capacity, but how can you prevent or regulate informal discussions?

Agents can speak to who they like, when they like,

Its only the player who cannot speak unless his current club allow him to talk, like Fc have done with others in the past

I'm pretty sure it is players or their representatives, covering any third party intermediary. I've been wrong plenty of times before, of course.

All it does is give a club a chance to manage the news of a departure, and maybe secure a replacement, free from the baying of disgruntled fans. A series of announcements generally follow the passing of the deadline. It is naive to think that the process from first contact, via talking it over with family and assessing other offers, to signing on the dotted line is completed in a matter of hours.
It's a convenient conceit, that keeps us talking about this year and next, not looking ever further ahead. 'Barrington Fishface is ooc in 2014, we should make him an offer' - [ishudder[/i.

Pretty sure you're right on this.


It's meant to allow the current employer first dibs on negotiations, and it only really covers advanced talks and/or actually signing a contract. Preliminary discussions would be (even more) impossible to enforce as they're unlikely to produce any evidence.

He must be about ninety three now so more likely to cross The Chocolate River's Tributary to The Dark Side.

Barrington's hypothetical great-grandson and namesake.

I can only recall that happening once, so you'd have to assume a lot of pre "anti tamper" talking goes on.