The point that you are raising that I have not addressed has not been framed as a question previously. I will give you my take on this particular situation that you have raised.

Are you actually seriously suggesting that Neil Hudgell's moral standing can be brought into question because of a single signing made by the club? Not him personally, but by the club! I would, obviously, point out the vast sums of money he has raised and donated to local charities and argue that this certainly impacts on his moral standing or is it more convenient to ignore these facts and focus on a single, albeit potentially quite serious negative.

Regarding the actual signing, yes he would have had to sanction it but it would have been the coaches target, does this mean that the coach is morally questionable? or is it MS who would have secured the signing? is he morally questionable? Are you asking me to condem one person in a group for a decision I did not agree with and one which I did not have full access to the process and thoughts behind?

It would help me frame any future replies if you could confirm if it is the issue of the fee or the violent crime that you take the most exception to? This would allow me a better understanding of your main argument.

I will say that I think it was morally wrong of the CLUB to keep him after his conviction. I personally did not want to be represented by this particular player. However I do understand that if we condem someone perpetually for foolish mistakes then what chance of reform and rehabilitation? If we travel down this dangerous road then as a society it is a short step to what we are currently seeing in the US.

In simple terms, I think the club was morally wrong to keep him after his conviction. However, regarding the resigning I think that the answer is not quite clear cut. Mainly for the reasons stated above. I would be personally reluctant to condem anyone for giving someone a chance at redemption. I would also argue that up to this point BC has repaid the faith shown in him by the club and appears to have done a great deal of maturing.

Regarding comparative morality, and in return for my reply to your question, how do you feel about the people at your club who signed or kept multiple convicted violent criminals? I am not saying your club was wrong for the same reasons I have outlined above but am just interested in your opinion.

No, that's not irony at all, do you even understand what irony is/means??
No, what the troll did, is troll, baiting a forum member over something that was untrue with respect to Lorroyer and true with respect to Pearson and Motu Tony from past events with respect to selling and signing players (Specifically Westerman and Lee Smith).
Again, the clubs own words in print and at a public meeting proved that to be the case.

Its quite a smart thing to do as it doesn't cost much and there is one more player talking to others about what a decent lot Hull are which can only help persuade others considering coming here. I very much doubt he'll have many good words about a deceitful, embittered short person at one of his previous clubs! Hull aren't perfect, I'm not sure the Pritchard exit was that smooth and McDonnell and Arundel were a bit gruesome (though neither of them has done much to prove it was wrong performance wise) but generally they have been reasonable and professional. So well done Hull for showing that off the field there's a clear winner in this city as well.

Bit harsh on pritchard, hes not even played an nrl game since leaving and weve only played 1 sl game ha

Ps

To be fair, you might not be talking about pritchard! Red red wine ooops

I don't think he meant Pritchard in that regard, just McDonnell and Arundel.

Correct