[quote="Dave K.":aa8tgagn]Yes, if those rules come into play, not a fan of this rule, but others will exploit it, so we may have too. Depends on the season he has, needs a big one.[/quote:aa8tgagn] Not a fan either as there's less incentive to produce home grown talent but as you say others will take advantage of it. I'd guess they'll be number of other players who'll qualify as well.

[quote="ComeOnYouUll":3ans7mwm]Sao and Fash were both poor last season but start with a clean slate for me. Clearly they both need to up their game and improve their discipline. Abdull was a risky signing that didn't pay off. Calling it a disaster is pure hyperbole. At least we have cut out losses rather than pay him for being sat in the stands.[/quote:3ans7mwm] I agree. Very disappointed with both player’s discipline last year and both need to cut it out. I’m hoping Ligi’s was down to frustration, with the team/club. On his day he is a good player and if he has a good season, will be decent value to us in 2026 once he is off quota. As for Fash, he really needs a big year and when all are fit, he’ll need to break in to the first 17. He’s got to stop all the nonsense of picking fights, especially the Derby. He just needs to concentrate on being a good Prop. To me he is a Prop. I have never understood the thought of playing him at 13, he has no link play or key handling skills to put him in that role. We need to play players in their true positions. Hopefully Carty will demand a new level of discipline. I felt in recent seasons the Club Hull concept had led to a few of the local lads being complacent about being in the squad (not the 2024 break through youngsters). I want all players to be in merit and if they don’t deliver or become a discipline liability then they can live on for me. Teams rarely win when they have to play part of the game with 12 men and that was a contributing factor to our performances last season.

[quote="Chris71":cs4ig4r0]Don't agree at all. Sneyd had an offer from Salford for a 3 year deal and a chance to return home, as a club at the time weren't in a position to match that offer or come close so it was mutually agreed he'd leave with 1 year left on his contract. Connor was ousted by Smith, if what I was told has some truth to it because he questioned Smith and Gene on their methods. Whether that's 100% I can't say but looking at the way Ellis left and subsequently returned on Smiths own departure I'd say theres a good chance what I was told has merit. My understanding on Gale was he didn't meet the clause in his contract to trigger the 2nd year. Evans was in his last year and was released early due to injuries and compassionate reasons. Reynolds was just a total crock, poor expensive signing, a very poor influence and only had a few month left on his deal which wasn't going to be renewed at the end of the season. So for me the ones mentioned are in no way similar in any aspect.[/quote:cs4ig4r0] It’s kind of nice that we can look at the same set of facts and draw completely opposite conclusions from them! In these times of division and discord, seeing it writ small and inconsequential makes a change at least. [quote="BP1":cs4ig4r0]Maybe, possibly, although I don't think too many were sorry to see Gale or Evans depart. It just feels a touch different today with some of these decisions being made around players who very quickly (for differing reasons) have been deemed not to be up to scratch and have been summarily released. As I pointed out last night, it is the clubs that make the correct retention/recruitment decisions (most of the time) that ultimately become the successful sides (backed up with a healthy youth policy), specifically Wigan, Saints and, in the past, Leeds. Of course, this could merely be the likes of myself looking for shafts of sunlight through the darkened storm clouds, but the noises coming out of the club since the end of last season would seem to indicate, on the surface at least, that a new professional broom has swept through our club and it does feel different to quite a few of the faithful on here. Ultimately, of course, the proof is in the pudding (which means results on the field) but right now there is an air of renewed optimism around the place, a feeling of sleeves being rolled up and applying to the task in hand. I think that is essentially what the likes of Chris and others are positing with Abdull/Staveley releases being a part of the new attitude. As the next few months unfold we will find out whether we are making the right decisions or not, watch this space as they say!!![/quote:cs4ig4r0] Aye, you just don’t know until it happens. Outside of the couple of clubs that always win, there are no guarantees. The experienced coach with a proven track was a change from his immediate predecessors, but it didn’t work out. Myler saying Hull will look ahead when considering signings, so as not to block pathways reminds me of the rationale behind the now much-maligned recruitment round for 2019. That’s not to say it is certain to go badly this time. My point isn’t really about right or wrong. New and familiar approaches can both go either way. This just doesn’t feel like one of the new ones to me - there are certainly other things that I do think Hull are doing differently for 2025.

[quote="Rugby Raider":33uku84y] Teams rarely win when they have to play part of the game with 12 men and that was a contributing factor to our performances last season.[/quote:33uku84y] I believe we only had ten out of twenty-eight games last year when we had thirteen players on the pitch for the full eighty minutes.

[quote="ComeOnYouUll":1nqegqp2]I believe we only had ten out of twenty-eight games last year when we had thirteen players on the pitch for the full eighty minutes.[/quote:1nqegqp2] thats some stat, knew we were playing shorthanded a bit with the raft of cards we were getting but when put like that its shocking