Re: O Carroll : Thu Jun 28, 2012 10:49 am  

newgroundb4cas wrote:

bye bye fatty

If you're going to make comments such as this, its probably best not to use a picture of yourself as your avatar!!

Re: O Carroll : Thu Jun 28, 2012 10:52 am  

Viva La Vikings!! wrote:

I think its the fact he said we would have broken the rules again. We didnt break the rules approaching Kevin Brown, both clubs agreed and they got a settlement. Also, if your on about breaking the rules and going into administration 5 years ago, thats a different story.

Pretty much! What rules have we broke?

The fact they then go onto mention 'not under these owners' in regards FC makes it more Bizzare

On players? I think all clubs / players / agents are well aware their is always all sorts going on!

Re: O Carroll : Thu Jun 28, 2012 11:33 am  

J20 wrote:

Pretty much! What rules have we broke?

The fact they then go onto mention 'not under these owners' in regards FC makes it more Bizzare

On players? I think all clubs / players / agents are well aware their is always all sorts going on!

Its the worst unkept rugby league secret that it isnt even a secret anymore. Clubs approach players all the time but because all clubs do it before September 1st theres never a problem.

Anyway it will be interesting to see whether the Tickle/Ocarroll rumours come to anything. Both better than Pickersgill

Re: O Carroll : Thu Jun 28, 2012 11:36 am  

Viva La Vikings!! wrote:

Its the worst unkept rugby league secret that it isnt even a secret anymore. Clubs approach players all the time but because all clubs do it before September 1st theres never a problem.

Anyway it will be interesting to see whether the Tickle/Ocarroll rumours come to anything. Both better than Pickersgill

even when a player is under contract for another 18 months?

I hope you're as open minded when Wigan/Saints poach one of your players and unsettle them mid-season, it's credit to Tickle that he hasn't let this affect his form.

Re: O Carroll : Thu Jun 28, 2012 11:42 am  

Standee wrote:

even when a player is under contract for another 18 months?

I hope you're as open minded when Wigan/Saints poach one of your players and unsettle them mid-season, it's credit to Tickle that he hasn't let this affect his form.

Widnes havent got the luxury of keeping hold of young talent, if a bigger club came in for them then theyd be on their way.

Yet have Widnes got the luxury of introducing such young talent into a team getting hammered 50 points every week. the only way we can introduce talent into our team is if we are successful. By being successful, if that means we have to pay over the odds prices for a couple of players, then so be it. If it doesnt put us in the s h i t financially then im happy.

If Widnes were to talk to Tickle before his contract is up and we get him, by the sounds of it Hull will recieve a hefty fee which most Hull fans seem to be okay with.

Re: O Carroll : Thu Jun 28, 2012 11:52 am  

Viva La Vikings!! wrote:

If Widnes were to talk to Tickle before his contract is up and we get him, by the sounds of it Hull will recieve a hefty fee which most Hull fans seem to be okay with.

I think most fans woud rather you hadn't attempted to poach him.

Re: O Carroll : Thu Jun 28, 2012 12:18 pm  

Standee wrote:

I think most fans woud rather you hadn't attempted to poach him.

Who says we have? Not a single mention of him by us. If Hull weren't happy I'm sure Pearson would make a complaint?

Possible scenario...

Tickle fancies going nearer to home, would rather not sign a new deal, and would like to go sooner rather than later? Hull FC allow him to scout a few options nearer to home but inform him their is by no means a guarantee he will be allowed to go early. Tickle finds himself a possible deal elsewhere and Hull FC then have the option to negotiate a fee / look for a replacement, telling Tickle no replacement and he can't leave etc.

Re: O Carroll : Thu Jun 28, 2012 12:49 pm  

J20 wrote:

Who says we have? Not a single mention of him by us. If Hull weren't happy I'm sure Pearson would make a complaint?

Possible scenario...

Tickle fancies going nearer to home, would rather not sign a new deal, and would like to go sooner rather than later? Hull FC allow him to scout a few options nearer to home but inform him their is by no means a guarantee he will be allowed to go early. Tickle finds himself a possible deal elsewhere and Hull FC then have the option to negotiate a fee / look for a replacement, telling Tickle no replacement and he can't leave etc.

If Widnes want Tickle they better have money for a transfer fee cos without one AP won't let him go anywhere and certainly won't let him go cheap.

Re: O Carroll : Thu Jun 28, 2012 1:18 pm  

PAUL M wrote:

If Widnes want Tickle they better have money for a transfer fee cos without one AP won't let him go anywhere and certainly won't let him go cheap.

No denying that whatsoever. For 2013 anyway.

Re: O Carroll : Thu Jun 28, 2012 2:48 pm  

We definately have the money, we do need tobe careful not to just throw it away. Investing in a player like Tickle wouldnt be throwing it away. The thing that worries me is at the fans forum SOC said hes not willing to fund any losses in the future, we need more stronghold members. Yet we paid Huddersfield a fee for Kevin Brown and the club are creating a £3.5 M training facility for the club.