That doesn't define any kind of spending limit. Transfer fees don't count on the cap. We can spend as much on fees as we like.

No evidence...and I agree we do pay fee's, however this originally started with Expro claiming that we have not got a h/back because agents saw us as a cash strapped club so infalted the prices of their players I do not buy into this, that would mean we pay over the odds for all our players..Mind you he also said our targets had chosen to stay with their own club and fight for their place, like Myler, Sammut etc need to do that!
If at this moment in time 3 other clubs were also in the mix for Sammut do people believe the asking price would be drastically different for the other 2 clubs than the asking price for FC, just because we are cash rich as it was put..The reason the prices are high for h/backs is that they are like rocking horse poo.

On the cap maybe, but surley the club have there own spending limits what they set themselves? It's basic business, I'm not saying that I believe it but it's not out of the realms of possibility that the club knew that Berrigan was leaving a long time ago (half of this forum did) and decided that the best use of Berrigans wages would not be spend on a players wages, but to invest in a young player like Westerman who without a big transfer fee wouldn't be available to us.

Michael Picker Canberra Raiders.

None of the in the know people mentioned his name.

Tried to sign him, but couldn't get a workpermit/Visa etc.

I also don't buy into this claim that agents see us as a soft touch, I've seen us outbid for players so many times often by clubs who don't generate as much income as we do, this suggests to me that the club has a strict wage structure and will not pay what they see as over the odds for a player, we don't get involved in bidding wars, that is fair enough and probabally one of the reasons why we are one of the most financially sound clubs around. If I were an agent I'd see Hull as like getting blood from a stone if wanting to land my client a ridiculous contract, in contrast to someone like Wakefield who have proved they are willing to overspend way beyond there means, or seemingly the likes of Rovers, Wire and Wigan in the past who have proved they are willing to pull out all the stops to get the players they want, even teams like Salford and Hudds with wealthy backers would be a better proposition for an agent to milk money out of then Hull in my opinion.

Expro's point was not that we would not pay a fee but simply we would not be held to ransom and pay over the odds, a fair fee would have been fine but we would not just throw any amount of money at Sammutt as it would not be worth it.

Myler did decide to stay and fight for his place and YES he does need to do that, do you remember the CC final, he wasn't in the 17 and is not always guaranteed to be which is why we thought we might get him.

We can and will pay fee's but like any sensible business we will want to negotiate a fair price. Why pay a silly fee for Sammutt when he wants to go home in 2 years, makes no sense.

He's a decent young player, Played most of the year with Souths Logan, who are Canberras feeder team in the QLD cup. They were minor premiers last year. I remember reading about him getting a DUI last year. Maybe that had something to do with it?

Where did you get the info from dave? Strange player to target.

This is correct, but is contradicts the point that agents see us as a soft touch though, a good analogy to Hull would be Arsenal, a club with money to spend but only on a certain type of player, and more importantly strict budgets on what they will pay a player. Like the Southampton youngster they are chasing, I'm sure his club and agent are wanting the likes of Man City, Chelsea and Real Madrid to get envolved so they can inflate the transfer fee and his wages, were as they know Arsenal won't be budged on there valuation of the player.

If he hasn't played a minimum number of NRL games he won't get a working visa.

He didn't say they saw us as a soft touch. His point was that they see us as a club with cash to spend and a need to spend it, and hence inflate the price of their player in the belief that we will be forced to cough up more than we would in different circumstances.

According to a true source close to the club...FC have not being held to ransom by any agents whilst searching for a h/back, other factors have played a part. The major factor being the length are our requirments this season.

Precisely!

surely that squad cannot be at maximum cap??.

TBF whilst you are correct in what you say, its no good bleating about it as the situation the club finds itself in is one of its own making.

I may not be a commercial genius , but looks like the price is driven by supply and demand.

Haven't seen anyone 'bleating' about it, just offering it as one reason why signing targets hasn't been easy.

Well, no. As mentioned on any number of occasions by our CEO and coach. The fact that we're still looking at signings is a bit of a giveaway as well.

with regards to fees i am going to do the unthinkable and defend hull here.

Myler doesnt want to go to hull so it is irrelevent.
Sammut is just too risky. He doesnt have a great pedigree and wants to go back to the nrl. As such, he would be a short term fix and crus want way too much for a stop gap and someone who doesnt organise.
Chase is the best player but Cas have simply said no to anything as the fans would crucify the board if they let him go. The only way to move them would be imo £300k+ (the agent thinks this as a min as well) and even then they may not go for it. Is he worth that, im not sure tbh.

there is no point paying silly money even tho we are fairly desparate,we will just have to manage with what we have

why pay £300k for Chase, he isn't worth that kind of money, rather go with what we have, it isn't as if Agar would make use of a talented h/b, we'd still play 5 and kick.

I know this is a complete waste of my time but two things come to mind about the 5 drives and a kick:
1. that's rugby league nowadays, particularly when getting out of your own half - as evidenced by Australia and New Zealand international matches of recent times (which have been heralded as the best games of all time by some)
2. the proportion of tries scored by Hull off kicks last season was extremely small as a percentage of their overall tries scored. If you want to check just look through the videos of last year (if you can bear it). I know we didn't score many tries but perhaps we'd have got more if we'd have done the kick on the sixth instead of running it. So whch is it to be - do we want more kicks?

I've not watched international RL for this very reason, I want to see the ball going through hands, if I wanted to watch a kick a thon I'd watch Union



I can't bear to watch the video's, I'd just like to see us passing and making gaps (and exploiting them) not setting up for 5 drives and a kick and look surprised/amazed when we do make a break.

But that's my point - the vast majority of our tries didn't come from kicks, they came from exactly what you describe - just not as many as we'd have liked: although it was enough to take us within a few minutes of the top four. And, considering our half-backs only started 6 games together, is it surprising that we didn't score more?

The five drives and a kick rumour is a season out of date like the Yeaman never passes one. I know we weren't the most attractive team last year but they played to their strengths (just like any other business would approach it if missing key staff) when their playmakers were injured but, even then, scored from passing plays when they'd set up the field position.

...and also all these people going on about Sammut are talking about what? A player with a great kicking game...