The Eagle wrote:He's a decent player with good attributes, and poor attributes. The poor parts to his game can be more afforded in a good team

Shabino wrote:We still propagating the myth that Hurrell was somehow a bad signing for Leeds? Have you watched our other big money signings?

The Eagle wrote:He was a great signing for Leeds. But Leeds weren't in the best place to utilise him properly. How we'd kill for his go forward or impact close to the line.

He's still a limited player though. A better team like saints can play him to his strengths, and be able to better cover his mistake

The Eagle wrote:He was a great signing for Leeds. But Leeds weren't in the best place to utilise him properly. How we'd kill for his go forward or impact close to the line.
Y u good inju
He's still a limited player though. A better team like saints can play him to his strengths, and be able to better cover his mistake

Shabino wrote:Limited yes. 10x better than what we have now. Very good injury record too . I think that s just as important now…!

christopher wrote:Good injury record?

Hasn’t he played about 170 games in 10 years?

Shabino wrote:Think more but player most games for us over the three years. For our standards that’s outstanding!

christopher wrote:Think he played 43 games for us over 3 years.

Shabino wrote:[exturl][/exturl]Don’t forget we playef a-lot less games in two of those seasons so good record….
How may has our other marquee signing played?