Re: Gleeson ?! : Mon Mar 07, 2011 2:41 pm  

Jake the Peg wrote:

Jesus, can't believe what I've been told

Believe it mate, we DID score over 40 on Friday.

Re: Gleeson ?! : Mon Mar 07, 2011 2:52 pm  

east hull FC fan wrote:

Believe it mate, we DID score over 40 on Friday.

And marting gleeson has

Re: Gleeson ?! : Mon Mar 07, 2011 2:53 pm  

This is going only one way folks.....

Re: Gleeson ?! : Mon Mar 07, 2011 3:13 pm  

Jake the Peg wrote:

Jesus, can't believe what I've been told

We have a decent half back at last?.

Re: Gleeson ?! : Mon Mar 07, 2011 6:50 pm  

it's just been on humberside, saying it would not be good business sacking jordan tansey and signing martin gleeson

Re: Gleeson ?! : Mon Mar 07, 2011 6:56 pm  

Hello would someone be good enough to PM me what he has done,thankyou.

Re: Gleeson ?! : Mon Mar 07, 2011 6:59 pm  

Lee Tucker FC Fan 2006 wrote:

it's just been on humberside, saying it would not be good business sacking jordan tansey and signing martin gleeson

Who is saying this exactly? It would be rank hypocrisy, clearly, but whether getting Gleeson on a cheap deal would be "bad business" is another question.

Re: Gleeson ?! : Mon Mar 07, 2011 7:00 pm  

fuzzywuzzy wrote:

Hello would someone be good enough to PM me what he has done,thankyou.

I'm sure someone will. I received a PM about what he's supposed to have done despite stating quite explicitly on this very thread that I didn't want one.

Re: Gleeson ?! : Mon Mar 07, 2011 7:05 pm  

Rock God X wrote:

I'm sure someone will. I received a PM about what he's supposed to have done despite stating quite explicitly on this very thread that I didn't want one.

Yeah someone replied thanks, if it is true Hull want to run a mile from him and his agent!!!

Re: Gleeson ?! : Mon Mar 07, 2011 7:06 pm  

Rock God X wrote:

I'm sure someone will. I received a PM about what he's supposed to have done despite stating quite explicitly on this very thread that I didn't want one.

Mrs Barista wrote:

Who is saying this exactly? It would be rank hypocrisy, clearly, but whether getting Gleeson on a cheap deal would be "bad business" is another question.

I can't see why they're saying it's bad business. Getting someone as good as Gleeson on the cheap must be seen as great business, the baggage he comes with being the problem. Hypocrisy, I'm not sure either, we sacked Tansey for his discipline whereas taking Gleeson on would be taking a player who has been made available by his club.