: Thu Jun 25, 2009 11:32 am  

Dr Hfuhruhurr wrote:

Lauaki is the type of player that is useful if his pack are on the front foot

Lauaki is the type of player who gets his pack on the front foot.

: Thu Jun 25, 2009 11:36 am  

Staffs FC wrote:

Lauaki is the type of player who gets his pack on the front foot.

That must make walking a bit tricky!

: Thu Jun 25, 2009 12:09 pm  

Ellam wrote:

Wrong,Wrong,Wrong,Wrong Long was not released he was offered a one year deal and Fitzgibbon told Sydney he wanted to come to Hull, 4 good signings and two more to come.

Silly me, money obviously had nothing to do with it whatsoever.

In fact, I'm suprised Slater, Inglis and Folou haven't been in touch. Surely they'd want to sign up to our attractive brand of rugby football.

: Thu Jun 25, 2009 12:18 pm  

carl_spackler wrote:

You thinking Lauaki's a halfback or something?

Erm, no.

As a big-ass forward he is precisely the sort we need for getting us on the front foot, that will be his job along with our other forwards. He won't be coming to play on the back of others, so I don't get what you mean.

All I was implying was that he has a reputation of being an impact prop and let's face it, our pack needs to be doing the basics before thinking about impact. IMO Cusack is our only front rower that has good go forward. Dowes hits the line and stops, Thackray bounces of and runs sideways (if he manages to hold the ball) and King thinks he's a half back. I would also like to see Maloney and Moa given a decent opportunity.

: Thu Jun 25, 2009 12:45 pm  

Dr Hfuhruhurr wrote:

Hmmm, personally I see two ageing players being released by their clubs (who obviously feel their best years are behind them) to secure lucrative deals as a reward for previous service.

Lauaki is the type of player that is useful if his pack are on the front foot, I would have thought the acquisition of a front rower that could get us on the front foot would have been more important.

Tansey has shown nothing to suggest he is anything other then average.

Saints wanted Long to sign another contract so they never released him. Luauki is an impact prop and excatly what we need to get us going forward. Tansey was also good for Leeds but had top class players infront of him in Webb, McGuire and Burrow. He has also earnt excellent reviews for his performances for the Roosters.

: Thu Jun 25, 2009 12:51 pm  

PAUL M wrote:

Saints wanted Long to sign another contract so they never released him. Luauki is an impact prop and excatly what we need to get us going forward. Tansey was also good for Leeds but had top class players infront of him in Webb, McGuire and Burrow. He has also earnt excellent reviews for his performances for the Roosters.

agree with your comments but people seem to still skate round the subjest that we havent really signed anyone for next season who we really need in my opinoin other than long.....we need a top class centre and a masive top class prop...no doubt about it...
tansey will be fighting for the full-back spot as it stands but i think motu will fly the nest cum next season anyways,....we have fitzgibbon, another second rower who i feel will play prop(out of position) and luaki, another second rower but he cannot last the full 80....
were is our centre that we desperatly need?? wheres this barn-storming front rower that we rquire?? my guess is we wont get either...how disapointing will that be when it comes to re-nueing passes etc...

: Thu Jun 25, 2009 12:54 pm  

berro's best mate wrote:

agree with your comments but people seem to still skate round the subjest that we havent really signed anyone for next season who we really need in my opinoin other than long.....we need a top class centre and a masive top class prop...no doubt about it...
tansey will be fighting for the full-back spot as it stands but i think motu will fly the nest cum next season anyways,....we have fitzgibbon, another second rower who i feel will play prop(out of position) and luaki, another second rower but he cannot last the full 80....
were is our centre that we desperatly need?? wheres this barn-storming front rower that we rquire?? my guess is we wont get either...how disapointing will that be when it comes to re-nueing passes etc...

Luauki will be used as an impact prop and will do that job very well. I would imagine given his form this season that Tansey will be the fullback for next season.

We have 2/3 more to come in, there are rumours about the likes of Kite, Atkins etc so until they are announced we can't really say how the recruitment has gone. What I would say is so far so good imo.

: Thu Jun 25, 2009 12:56 pm  

PAUL M wrote:

Saints wanted Long to sign another contract

For one year, not two and we probably offered him more cash aswell. Why else would Long (or anyone in their right mind) leave Saints for Hull?

Luauki is an impact prop and excatly what we need to get us going forward

I always though there was a difference between a go forward prop and an impact prop. Price, Civonociva (sp), etc. go forward props. Feka, Thackray, etc. impact props.

Tansey was also good for Leeds but had top class players infront of him in Webb, McGuire and Burrow.

So we have no intention of competing with Leeds, we're happy to sign players that we know are inferior to those at the top clubs?

: Thu Jun 25, 2009 12:57 pm  

Dr Hfuhruhurr wrote:

For one year, not two and we probably offered him more cash aswell. Why else would Long (or anyone in their right mind) leave Saints for Hull?



I always though there was a difference between a go forward prop and an impact prop. Price, Civonociva (sp), etc. go forward props. Feka, Thackray, etc. impact props.




So we have no intention of competing with Leeds, we're happy to sign players that we know are inferior to those at the top clubs?

You keep looking at every negative and I will try and offer a balanced viewpoint.

: Thu Jun 25, 2009 12:59 pm  

Ellam wrote:

Wrong,Wrong,Wrong,Wrong Long was not released he was offered a one year deal and Fitzgibbon told Sydney he wanted to come to Hull, 4 good signings and two more to come.

3 actually