I know lets put it to bed and get on with life let the bosses sort it out we cant can we

Totally agree General.., the only people who don't realise that Rovers come out of this affair looking like complete amateurs are the board and blinkered fans.....Rovers handling of , and stance over , the affair , has no positive connotations whatsoever...

Ever thought of becoming a defence lawyer?

What are the chances that his Tongan passport suddenly arrives in time for him to go to the World Cup as a Tongan international??

The two situations are very different. I'd imagine had Rovers been able to play Mason from the off, and none of this messing around had have occurred, then this probably would not have happened.

I have a life away from this board.
If you want me to say 'the mail understands ' then there you go.
Still banging that drum it seems so well done on that score, Thankfully I have at no point needed to use the HDM as proof and I doubt I ever will as they are known for just guessing and using the line 'the HDM understands' as its usual get out clause incase it is proved to be BS.

£1.7 million over 3 years would likely have turned his head - and I wouldn't blame him tbh. Who wouldn't want to ~quadruple his wage? After the failure to get Galea off quota and until Mason's contact with Toulon came to light, Rovers did everything they could IMO. With hindsight they could have maybe tried to de-reg/move on Clinton, if they'd known that Tonga would stop issuing passports - but if Mason had then done a flit anyway that'd have been similarly embarrassing.

Cooke, despite being gagged, has dropped some strong hints as to why he wanted out at Hull. If Mason's justification is that he really wanted to stay, forgo the extra £1m+, but Rovers let him down, I'd be less than entirely convinced. As I guess Hull fans are regarding Cooke's 9 years, 11 months comments.

Not that Rovers didn't make a bit of a hash of it, but with hindsight even with a fairer wind we'd have got one season and maybe a fee at very best.

Your assumption here is that the offer would have been made even if Mason's move to Rovers had gone seamlessly.

I'm not convinced that comparisons to the Cooke fiasco have any value given the rather enormous differences in the two situations.

Yep. Whatever, he was talking to Toulon while the expectation (albeit incorrect) was that he'd be able to continue at Rovers. Being Tongan, maybe he had a better feel for what was going on there.




The value is in stopping people having their cake and eating it, when I'm doing the the ascetic self-denial thing.
I'm happy to focus on the similarities.

If he'd wanted to stay, Rovers would have had to pay. If he'd wanted to play, he could have gone to Bradford. He wanted to go and Rovers have let him. Any one is fine and fair. If he wanted stay while unable to play only until going to Toulon in the Autumn, that'd take the pee.

Roverswall wrote:I have a life away from this board. If you want me to say 'the mail understands ' then there you go. Still banging that drum it seems so well done on that score, Thankfully I have at no point needed to use the HDM as proof and I doubt I ever will as they are known for just guessing and using the line 'the HDM understands' as its usual get out clause incase it is proved to be BS. No drum-banging from me. As far as I'm concerned on the vast majority of occasions the Mail understands something, it's borne out to be correct. Alas, it's you that always ridicules their understanding, insinuating it's invariably an undercover attempt to undermine Rovers. I'm being a bit mean though, aren't I, after your gracious apology last time you challenged the Mail's understanding, accused folk of guesswork and was then proved wrong. Do you think they're right about Mason's alleged talks with Toulon while signed for you but before arriving in Britain, then? The Mail state the link with Toulon as a fact. They haven't cited "understanding" as their "BS" get out clause in this case. First I've heard of it, so I hope they know what they're doing. Probably more BS, though. (BTW - thought we weren't allowed to abbreviate words or manipulate curses to beat the swear filter? Is BS alright, now, then?)

Roverswall wrote:I have a life away from this board. If you want me to say 'the mail understands ' then there you go. Still banging that drum it seems so well done on that score, Thankfully I have at no point needed to use the HDM as proof and I doubt I ever will as they are known for just guessing and using the line 'the HDM understands' as its usual get out clause incase it is proved to be BS. No drum-banging from me. As far as I'm concerned on the vast majority of occasions the Mail understands something, it's borne out to be correct. Alas, it's you that always ridicules their understanding, insinuating it's invariably an undercover attempt to undermine Rovers. I'm being a bit mean though, aren't I, after your gracious apology last time you challenged the Mail's understanding, accused folk of guesswork and was then proved wrong. Do you think they're right about Mason's alleged talks with Toulon while signed for you but before arriving in Britain, then? The Mail state the link with Toulon as a fact. They haven't cited "understanding" as their "BS" get out clause in this case. First I've heard of it, so I hope they know what they're doing. Probably more BS, though. (BTW - thought we weren't allowed to abbreviate words or manipulate curses to beat the swear filter? Is BS alright, now, then?)