But that would be the sensible thing to do

maybe circumstances dictated otherwise

You should take time to check out what honours he won playing rugby league. It's a fairly impressive list.
Seems to have carried that trophy winning mentality over into his first ever coaching role also.

I have previously been Radford's biggest critic, but had the decency to admit I was wrong, Bumpy seems incapable of doing the same.

Turd.

nothing to do with the 3 red cards from the previous season?

the red v wire was straw which did for the camel

You really are quite the protagonist of utter drivel at times

Name one other time Radford the player lost his rag whilst playing for Hull. If memory served, Bailey elbowed LR on the crown of the head on a couple of occasions which lead to Radford lashing out. Ask yourself this, would you want to be on the end of any one of those punches?

And if you are really suggesting that the final league position hinged on one incident in one game, you have made a slightly bigger clown of yourself than is the standard

What would it take to get Bienek playing this season? Is it a salary cap issue or London needing a fee?

He was out of contract, and we've already paid a fee from what I can tell, so I assume he's now registered with us and out on loan 'til the end of the season.

Jake the Peg reckons we've spent £100k on this young lad, any idea what the true figure is? If London's season ends before ours and for whatever reason we need a big unit would in theory he be available for a couple of games?

I think it was more to do with Pearson why Watts was sold .
He apparently didn’t think he was getting value for money.

Whilst i have no knowledge of the decision or what prompted it,i very much doubt Adam Pearson made that decision.
For me it would be Radfords decision which was supported by Pearson and probably Gaz Ellis had some imput.
Not getting value for money is way off the mark.After all he could have missed more games than the suspensions through injury so would the clubs owner instruct the coach to get rid because the player was not value for money as he was injured.
There is obviously something that has gone on in the background with Watts and Radford and we have to back the clubs decision.
The only thing i would criticise is not leaving the decision until the end of the season or until we had a suitable replacement.

But, and also without any knowledge of what occurred, it appears to have been something which required action immediately.
I don't think the club would have acted as quickly, if it had been something that could've waited for replacement or season end.
As per one of the above posts, I believe it was as a result of last seasons poor disciplinary record, after which he, Watts, was probably set targets, and failed to achieve them.

Well what I heard, Radford had to beg Pearson to give Watts another chance after something happened in Australia. That chance was then ruined with the red against Warrington.

Another rumour was that Taylor and Watts had a falling out in Australia which really split the dressing room. First hit between Watts and Taylor could be tasty next month

Apparently the case that senior players had enough of Watts and wanted him out, and that would presumably include Taylor.

Doubt there was a split in dressing room though. A split would imply there were people taking Watts's side!

If I've said that please link to it otherwise it's another one of those untruths that the voices in your head keep whispering to you when you're in your little padded room

I've heard about 10 reasons why watts was sold, all of them supposedly from good sources and each as plausible/implausible as teh next. Fact is we've lost a top quality player and not been able to replace that quality as yet so are poorer for it

Correct. And thats partly due to Watts being sat in the stands too often due to red cards. I said last season that 2 of those red were unlucky (bordering on unjust - the one on Gale and the one on McIllorum). But the fact remains that Watts became a player which the officials will have been watching that much more closely due to reputation.

The Red v Wire was just completely avoidable but for some pseudo macho BS he wanted to display which then got him a 3 game ban. If you were paying his wages, would you for give than? If it was a one off, perhaps. If it was the fourth time in 12 months?????

There are then the stories (I use this term as I don't know for fact the truth on this), but his refuelling habits and punctuality have been questioned.

At what point is it you draw the line?

Re the point highlighted, of course not, but no player goes out with the indention to get themselves injured, these are unavoidable. The Red V wire was very avoidable ...

At the end of the season.

Problem with that is we spend a season showing Fash and co that it’s fine to take the p1$$ if you’re talented enough. Not really aligned to a fair play/hard work culture.

Well, we will agree to disagree here. Having someone who is disrupting the camp, often made unavailable by their own action and probably (I dont know this) one of the higher earners in the squad for another 7-8 months would not be the example to set to the likes of Fash / Masi / Downs / anyone else you care to name.

Otherwise Hull would become a place players could sign for and they could instantly take the p!$$ knowing that they would not be shipped out until the end of the season.

What other untruths, you mean Pearson lying to fans about Westerman when he knew full well the club had to release him due to SC, Motu Tony deceiving fans in his statement in the HDM when he said we had the space under the SC to sign Lee Smith when later on it was cnfirmed we don't have any salary cap (space). what else?
Oh yeah, short memory eh, page one ...

Rovers board is just underneath the FC one, why not post on there....

The lie about Shaul being bullied by Radford was a personal favourite.