Re: Monaghan Signs for Wolves : Sun Dec 05, 2010 12:35 pm  

FC Wembley 08 wrote:

Lets get one thing clear: I am not your mate, and to think that, suggests that you yourself don't have much between the ears....
You carry on with you're 'debate' that you are doing soooo well with. And i'll carry on in the adult conversations with my fellow fans. Not jumped up little pr1cks like you!!

I think we should leave Zod to it now. Let's embrace the spirit of the festive season - there's only so much you can do with South Pole Elves before leaving them to wallow in their red and whiteness. "The best way to spread FC cheer is singing loud for all to hear. "

Re: Monaghan Signs for Wolves : Sun Dec 05, 2010 12:39 pm  

The Angry Pirate wrote:

Outsider looking in time again......I'm not sure where you get the idea that Morgan is a better coach than Agar, or that supporters of other clubs hold that view??....Personally, as I stated before, I believe that Agar is not good enough for a club of your stature and ambition.....As for Morgan, he's done a good job with Rovers, fetching them up from small club status to a well run, competitive Super League side, but similar to Hull with Agar, you get the impression that if Rovers are determined to make the big step to becoming a trophy winning side, then they need to bring in a top quality coach.

But as for Morgan being a significant better to Agar?....NO!!

Confused by the point of this post, I said there aren't any fans of other clubs who rate Agar as better than Morgan... based on that your comments support what I said.

Re: Monaghan Signs for Wolves : Sun Dec 05, 2010 12:39 pm  

Mrs Barista wrote:

I think we should leave Zod to it now. Let's embrace the spirit of the festive season - there's only so much you can do with South Pole Elves before leaving them to wallow in their red and whiteness. "The best way to spread FC cheer is singing loud for all to hear. "

I agree, i'm not going to respond to him anymore anyway. I've said my peice and that's it. I know quite a few Rovers fans and a few are also relatives, but he's an embarrassment to his club and rugby league in general!!

Re: Monaghan Signs for Wolves : Sun Dec 05, 2010 12:47 pm  

Mrs Barista wrote:

Not at all. You wanted some statistical analysis. How else would you "interpret" the following (can't be @rsed posting all 83 gems):

"Rovers are top dogs in the city because they have a superior derby record since their return to SL and gone further in the competition than us for 3 years running." I'd interpret it as fact.
"Rovers have a better coach than us based on what they have both achieved over the same time frame." Based on the criteria I set out, again it's fact
"I acknowledge they are top dogs in our city and have been for some time." Based on peformance in the competition it's fact
"I don't think it's fair to say that just because Fox was so outstanding in 2009 that he made the dream team, the fact he didn't make it in 2010 means he's 'gone backwards" By your definition then B Hodgeson, Gidley, Sinfield and Peacock all 'went backwards' in 2010, fascinating.
"I seem to remember Mason having one of his best seasons ever last year.. If he doesn't make it over then that's all the better for us, but we're hardly in a position to crow about it after crocker?" Fair enough I got this one wrong, you're right that the fact we got so much stick over Crocker means we'd give them hell if Mason didn't come
"I said he (Mason) was a bigger capture, i.e. a bigger name, which he undoubtebly is... sure maybe he'll flop in SL next year but it's not likely." Fact! The biggest name to come to SL in quite some time.. an you think of a bigger one since Johns' little stint at Wire?

Sorry, bud, but you were sort of doing OK on the Agar front, some credibility there. To let it get run away with you and slate the board, the youth development system, season pass sales, Hougton, Lyne, Berrigan, and refer multiple times to Rovers as "top dogs" was amusing. I think it's the love-in for Fox and the ridiculous statement that in the hypothetical scenario of Mason not coming it the pi$$-taking would be tempered by Crocker not getting here that just blows it apart, I'm afraid. You are General Zod, who also much used the phrase "top dogs", incidentally, and I claim my £5.

I also don't get all the Reece Lynne stuff, I didn't belittle him I simply said we've seen little from him yet.. all we've had is hype and Tommy Lee got plenty of that.

Re: Monaghan Signs for Wolves : Sun Dec 05, 2010 12:52 pm  

FC Wembley 08 wrote:

I agree, i'm not going to respond to him anymore anyway. I've said my peice and that's it. I know quite a few Rovers fans and a few are also relatives, but he's an embarrassment to his club and rugby league in general!!

Resorting to name-calling now it's a relief you won't be responding to my posts anymore though, if this was a boxing match you'd have been knocked out ages ago.

Re: Monaghan Signs for Wolves : Sun Dec 05, 2010 12:53 pm  

garry brindley wrote:

Confused by the point of this post, I said there aren't any fans of other clubs who rate Agar as better than Morgan... based on that your comments support what I said.

Your problem is you use the wrong examples for your comparisons.....You chose Rovers' recent improvement has some sort of example for FC's under acheivement, when you should actually be comparing Wigan' & Wire's improvement.....Now you attempt to put down Agar by comparing him with the similarly average Justin Morgan.

My point is that while Agar is an average coach, Morgan isn't any better......If bettering Hull KR is the height of your ambitions (and your posts seem to point to this), then as a club you have a problem.....You have both the squad and following to be a lot, lot better.

Re: Monaghan Signs for Wolves : Sun Dec 05, 2010 12:56 pm  

The Angry Pirate wrote:

Your problem is you use the wrong examples for your comparisons.....You chose Rovers' recent improvement has some sort of example for FC's under acheivement, when you should actually be comparing Wigan' & Wire's improvement.....Now you attempt to put down Agar by comparing him with the similarly average Justin Morgan.

My point is that while Agar is an average coach, Morgan isn't any better......If bettering Hull KR is the height of your ambitions (and your posts seem to point to this), then as a club you have a problem.....You have both the squad and following to be a lot, lot better.

Agree with what your saying there, I'm actually not one of the FC fans who see the be all and end all as beating Rovers... I'd happily lose to them twice a season if we were regularly in the shake-up for trophies at the end. I use Rovers to illustrate the point because while FC are one of the 3 or 4 clubs in the competition that has the fan-base and infrastructure in place to be the best team in the country.. we can't even manage to be the best team in our city.

Re: Monaghan Signs for Wolves : Sun Dec 05, 2010 1:09 pm  

So many pages of who is the better prospect to sign for, Hull or Rovers. Pointless and small-time TBH. I think there are a few people that need to realise that for any NRL hot properties coming over, both clubs are probably 5 or 6 names down the pecking order now unless they offer extra money.

If I was a top class RL player coming out of contract and put my Hull loyalty and the home town factor to one side, I wouldn't sign for either.

[Kosh]

Re: Monaghan Signs for Wolves : Sun Dec 05, 2010 3:18 pm  

Bigger Daddy wrote:

I would guess that Hicks has retired now, and some / all of his wages for the 2011 season have been paid to him. Because this payment has been made after 1st December, it falls in the 2011 cap year. But it doesn't count towards the 2011 cap, because Hicks won't actually play in the 2011 season. A player's wages only count towards the cap if he plays a first team game in that year.
Probably.

Finally had some time to check this, and you're right. The relevant parts of the rules are 6.1.2 to 6.1.4 as below...

6.1.2 Where the proposed transaction is the termination of a Playing Contract with one of the Club’s existing Players, as part of which the Club proposes to make a new payment (in a lump sum or in instalments) to the Player that was not provided for in his Playing Contract or other arrangements (and therefore was not previously included in the calculation of his Salary Cap Value) (the “Termination Payment”), then the information provided to the RSCM must include a proposed compromise agreement between the Player and the Club (in the form of the RFL’s standard compromise agreement as drafted from time to time) setting out full details of the agreement reached, including full details of the Termination Payment. If termination in such circumstances is approved by the RSCM, the Player’s original Salary Cap Value shall thereafter be disregarded for purposes of calculating the Club’s Aggregate First Tier Liability and/or Aggregate Second Tier Liability. However, save where Clauses 6.1.3 or 6.1.4 applies, the Club shall retain a Salary Cap Value for that Player for the remainder of the term of his old Playing Contract, being the Gross value of the Termination Payment, spread on a pro rata basis over the remaining term of the Playing Contract, notwithstanding that the Player may no longer be registered to play with the Club.

6.1.4 Where the proposed transaction is a termination of a Playing Contract in accordance with Clause 6.1.2, but in circumstances where such termination takes place prior to the first Salary Cap Relevant Match of the relevant Salary Cap Year, provided such termination is approved by the RSCM, the Player’s original Salary Cap Value shall thereafter be disregarded for purposes of calculating the Club’s Aggregate First Tier and/or Aggregate Second Tier Liability.

So any payment made to Hicks will not count on the cap if paid after 1st December 2010 - which is what I guess has happened.

Re: Monaghan Signs for Wolves : Sun Dec 05, 2010 3:22 pm  

Kosh wrote:

Finally had some time to check this, and you're right. The relevant parts of the rules are 6.1.2 to 6.1.4 as below...

So any payment made to Hicks will not count on the cap if paid after 1st December 2010 - which is what I guess has happened.

So could this have been the case for Raynor and King who left FC on 1st Dec and around Christmas 2009 respectively but never played for FC in 2010?