Re: Hardaker : Mon Nov 07, 2016 4:09 pm  

When we ever learn? £160k fee agreed, 50% off market value to get a quick sale. Makes one wonder if any player exchanges were put into the mix.

Re: Hardaker : Mon Nov 07, 2016 4:19 pm  

Norman Stanley Fletcher wrote:

When we ever learn? £160k fee agreed, 50% off market value to get a quick sale. Makes one wonder if any player exchanges were put into the mix.

If £160k is the correct figure then we've done pretty well in the circumstances. The £300k was always a fanciful idea that just let clubs know we weren't going to roll over and let him go cheap. Considering his off field issues and no big clubs (or NRL teams) were after him because they had FB's in place then with mid table teams left in the race it's a good amount.

We can't erase his off field issues and that knocks at least £50-100k off his value.

Also "quick sale".....it's been anything but. By the sounds of it Cas we're trying to get him for around £90k.

Re: Hardaker : Mon Nov 07, 2016 4:48 pm  

ThePrinter wrote:

If £160k is the correct figure then we've done pretty well in the circumstances. The £300k was always a fanciful idea that just let clubs know we weren't going to roll over and let him go cheap. Considering his off field issues and no big clubs (or NRL teams) were after him because they had FB's in place then with mid table teams left in the race it's a good amount.

We can't erase his off field issues and that knocks at least £50-100k off his value.

Also "quick sale".....it's been anything but. By the sounds of it Cas we're trying to get him for around £90k.

160k for a rotten egg you want shot of is good business.

Re: Hardaker : Mon Nov 07, 2016 5:03 pm  

loiner81 wrote:

So now it's been shown (by your own links no less!!) that he "offended" no more than twice, possibly even once... does that mean you'll be admitting to talking rubbish and making things up again?

If it's only the once he is still obviously a dick who I think we have paid over the odds for at £160k. I hope there are strings attached to that sum, though I can't think what they would be. It's about the same as we paid for Steadman nearly 30 years ago. If he is half as good I will be relieved.

Re: Hardaker : Mon Nov 07, 2016 5:07 pm  

ThePrinter wrote:

If £160k is the correct figure then we've done pretty well in the circumstances. The £300k was always a fanciful idea that just let clubs know we weren't going to roll over and let him go cheap. Considering his off field issues and no big clubs (or NRL teams) were after him because they had FB's in place then with mid table teams left in the race it's a good amount.

We can't erase his off field issues and that knocks at least £50-100k off his value.

Also "quick sale".....it's been anything but. By the sounds of it Cas we're trying to get him for around £90k.

No big clubs,the team Cas now have I would call them a big club .will be top Yorkshire team again this season.

Re: Hardaker : Mon Nov 07, 2016 5:08 pm  

tigertot wrote:

If it's only the once he is still obviously a dick who I think we have paid over the odds for at £160k. I hope there are strings attached to that sum, though I can't think what they would be. It's about the same as we paid for Steadman nearly 30 years ago. If he is half as good I will be relieved.

I think he'll go well, he'll have to do or it's next stop: The Championship.

£160k is a great bit of business though, well done Leeds if true.

Re: Hardaker : Mon Nov 07, 2016 5:21 pm  

£100,000 plus Roberts would have done nicely for me.
I still think we have let the best FB in SL go relatively on the cheap.
If for instance Slater was available in his prime how much would we have to pay for him?
I am not for one minute saying Zak is as good as Slater but he is the best in his position over here and it could prove a good bit of business for Cas in a position they are struggling with.
Where does that leave Eden or will Zak play centre?
Equally if he continues acting a nob outside the game then we have done the business letting him go.
It does make Zak look stupid saying he would never play for a tin pot club like Cas.
At least his team mates and the coach can keep more of an eye on him being so close to his stomping ground.
No doubt he has been read the riot act like many times at Leeds.
Up to him now.
Good luck Zak you were/are a top player and your on field performances will be missed here at Leeds.

Re: Hardaker : Mon Nov 07, 2016 5:35 pm  

Biff Tannen wrote:

160k for a rotten egg you want shot of is good business.

Good business if we sign a player of Zak's stature. No doubt we'll see nothing for it!

Re: Hardaker : Mon Nov 07, 2016 5:41 pm  

bonnie wrote:

No big clubs,the team Cas now have I would call them a big club .will be top Yorkshire team again this season.

Bettering the other West Yorkshire clubs for one season doesn't make you a big club. Reaching finals consistently and having the ground and crowds to back it up does and Saints, Wigan and Wire (and possibly Hull if they can build on this year) are currently the other big clubs in the league along with us.

Zak's fee! : Mon Nov 07, 2016 6:31 pm  

So seemingly on his way to cas.
What do we reckon we will do with the transfer fee? (Rumoured £160.000)
A) sign a player of Zak's value?
B) use the money towards the south stand?
C) see nothing for it?