Any fallout between Saul & Radford would be a carry over from last season when Radford was caught lying live on air and using bully tactics to put his player down and call him a liar to save his own booty. It's no wonder the kid is vexed off the way he was treated by the so called adult! So instead of man managing the situation with regard to Saul (otherwise why are we even letting Smith train with us) we could be losing our decent young FB who has pace to burn, who does back up and can spot the gaps for a slug whom is almost 30 that no begger wants..oh but he'll be cheap so that's okay then! typifies Hull FC over the last 2 seasons with nobodies being brought in instead of trusting to the youth, why is Naughton not the FB option after Saul, he was specifically brought in by Radford to cover that role (amongst others) and is a FB specialist. We had the option for the 2nd year on Naughton's contract, wasn't it us that only wanted to keep it to 1 year as opposed to the other way around? I'd rather we keep him and what he can offer than sign a player on the way down.
knockersbumpMKII wrote:Any fallout between Saul & Radford would be a carry over from last season when Radford was caught lying live on air and using bully tactics to put his player down and call him a liar to save his own booty. It's no wonder the kid is vexed off the way he was treated by the so called adult! So instead of man managing the situation with regard to Saul (otherwise why are we even letting Smith train with us) we could be losing our decent young FB who has pace to burn, who does back up and can spot the gaps for a slug whom is almost 30 that no begger wants..oh but he'll be cheap so that's okay then! typifies Hull FC over the last 2 seasons with nobodies being brought in instead of trusting to the youth, why is Naughton not the FB option after Saul, he was specifically brought in by Radford to cover that role (amongst others) and is a FB specialist. We had the option for the 2nd year on Naughton's contract, wasn't it us that only wanted to keep it to 1 year as opposed to the other way around? I'd rather we keep him and what he can offer than sign a player on the way down.
If Shaul doesnt appear at all against HKR then i would say the writing is on the wall and the rumours probably true. Cant see him playing against Salford without any pre season game time. Crooks,Lineham,and now possibly Shaul. We dont need Smith as we have sufficient cover and as a full back is not the type we need. With the offload ability we now have in the forwards the back up pacey Shaul type is whats needed. Naughton is not an ideal full back but would rather see him there than Smith but we all know Smith is a done deal as far as Radford is concerned.
Joined: Feb 09 2004 Posts: 7735 Location: Here there and everywhere
knockersbumpMKII wrote:Any fallout between Saul & Radford would be a carry over from last season when Radford was caught lying live on air and using bully tactics to put his player down and call him a liar to save his own booty. It's no wonder the kid is vexed off the way he was treated by the so called adult! So instead of man managing the situation with regard to Saul (otherwise why are we even letting Smith train with us) we could be losing our decent young FB who has pace to burn, who does back up and can spot the gaps for a slug whom is almost 30 that no begger wants..oh but he'll be cheap so that's okay then! typifies Hull FC over the last 2 seasons with nobodies being brought in instead of trusting to the youth, why is Naughton not the FB option after Saul, he was specifically brought in by Radford to cover that role (amongst others) and is a FB specialist. We had the option for the 2nd year on Naughton's contract, wasn't it us that only wanted to keep it to 1 year as opposed to the other way around? I'd rather we keep him and what he can offer than sign a player on the way down.
knockersbumpMKII wrote:Any fallout between Saul & Radford would be a carry over from last season when Radford was caught lying live on air and using bully tactics to put his player down and call him a liar to save his own booty. It's no wonder the kid is vexed off the way he was treated by the so called adult! So instead of man managing the situation with regard to Saul (otherwise why are we even letting Smith train with us) we could be losing our decent young FB who has pace to burn, who does back up and can spot the gaps for a slug whom is almost 30 that no begger wants..oh but he'll be cheap so that's okay then! typifies Hull FC over the last 2 seasons with nobodies being brought in instead of trusting to the youth, why is Naughton not the FB option after Saul, he was specifically brought in by Radford to cover that role (amongst others) and is a FB specialist. We had the option for the 2nd year on Naughton's contract, wasn't it us that only wanted to keep it to 1 year as opposed to the other way around? I'd rather we keep him and what he can offer than sign a player on the way down.
Here we go - different year, but same old bullshine.
Cup Winners: 1914, 1982, 2005, 2016, 2017. Cup Runners-Up: 1908, 1909, 1910, 1922, 1923, 1959, 1960, 1980, 1983, 1985, 2008, 2013. League Champions: 1920, 1921, 1936, 1956, 1958, 1983. League Runners-Up: 1957, 1982, 1984, 2006.
Joined: Nov 30 2002 Posts: 3524 Location: North Hull
Doom&Gloom Merchant wrote:Here we go - different year, but same old bullshine.
That's what I thought .
HULL FC CHALLENGE CUP WINNERS 2005 GRAND FINALISTS 2006 CHALLENGE CUP FINALISTS 2008 CHALLENGE CUP FINALISTS 2013 CHALLENGE CUP WINNERS 2016 CHALLENGE CUP WINNERS 2017
bonaire wrote:If Shaul doesnt appear at all against HKR then i would say the writing is on the wall and the rumours probably true. Cant see him playing against Salford without any pre season game time. Crooks,Lineham,and now possibly Shaul. We dont need Smith as we have sufficient cover and as a full back is not the type we need. With the offload ability we now have in the forwards the back up pacey Shaul type is whats needed. Naughton is not an ideal full back but would rather see him there than Smith but we all know Smith is a done deal as far as Radford is concerned.
You forgot westerman. Maybe rovers have offered a fee for shaul?
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum