heard he might be on his way to the k.c on loan only needs noble to rubber stamp it.

you're about a week behind on that one, and Agar has also denied it in the local rag I believe.

well i work with his uncle and hull have phoned him that's from the horse's mouth!! so agar can deny it all he wants!!! no smoke without fire

Surely it was from the horse's uncle's mouth then?

Anyway it isn't happening.

Whys Agar phoning his uncle what position does he play

Nah ta!

Trouble causing dirty beep. Dont need him!

To be fair, i have heard this again today that hull were in touch yesterday just as an enquiry. My source is usually pretty good so find it hard to not believe him but i live in hope

.

phoned him rather than his agent/Wigan? Odd.

If thats the case and he does come on loan, then Hall should just leave for the good of his career.

I agree why upset the apple cart we are playing for each other as a team sorry I dont think we need him

Yup, I would rather see Hall plying his trade somewhere else barring Rovers

than stuck in the 21's. Hall would offer us hell of alot more than Mathers ever would and wouldn't cost us penalty after penalty!

We are down to our last backs.

Byrne out for the season, Raynor and Tony unlikely to be back for weeks

If any of the back 5 that played v Huddersfield get injured, as it stands we would have to play a forward there.

I don't understand why people are so violently against the principle of looking round for some [ucover[/u in the backs when we are down to the last ones in the squad. Who on earth says that any player coming in on loan would automatically displace Hall? I'm not a fan of Mathers but would be pretty hacked off if the club weren't looking at some cover in the backs if we have some cash spare seeing that we have 3 senior backs with long-term injury. It's just common sense, surely.

Broughton would do for cover before Mathers for my liking!
Or why not promote someone from the 21's? James Green for example?

Like I said, I don't like Mathers either and don't know what Broughton's situation is.

The average age of our current backline is 22.6; I personally think we have enough inexperience with Briscoe and Hall - James Green would not be the answer. The gutting thing is that the absence of Tony and Raynor is exactly the scenario for which Byrne was brought in.

Exactly why the franchise system was brought in so that the youngsters get a chance to play when injury's kick in . No need to bring in Mather's there is no relegation so why not keep on giving the young kids a chance.

Do you think they'd let us have Amos instead?

is that why you went to the rfl to plead for players like gene to have special dispensation!!?

Oh, but that's different

ah the phrase of the moron.

Only if Wakey let us have Mr Wilkes as well.

Quite right. If Rovers, for example had an injured prop, you'd immediately look to Scott Wheeldon or Liam Watts rather than shuffling your dispensation players round, surely?

Rhys offers far more at prop than Mills ever will its abit like throwing sam moa straight in with hardly any training and overlooking Maloney. What do you reckon?????????????

Or they saw more in him in those 5 days than Maloney has shown in 3 months???

Who mentioned Mills? He's not exactly young is he.



Maloney was signed as a replacement for Wheeldon. We overlooked Wheeldon so it makes sense to overlook Maloney

That we are inside the quota regulations and don't need special dispensation.