Re: Bulls rumour thread for 2012 season. : Mon Jun 20, 2011 11:07 am  

A unknown superstar wrote:

I know it's only paper talk, but I've shown you that it says we've offered less. Yet you said that you read that we'd offered more.
And I'd like to see where you have seen this.

You have shown me an article in the local very biased Hull rag which doesn't really say anything other than hearsay. Come back with your facts whenever you like love.

Re: Bulls rumour thread for 2012 season. : Mon Jun 20, 2011 11:14 am  

Youv'e yet to show me any facts to back your statement up that you think we paid more.
Still waiting.

Re: Bulls rumour thread for 2012 season. : Mon Jun 20, 2011 11:26 am  

Here's a good approximation of a 'fact'.

My guess would be that the paper have got it from the club who've been previously told by his agent that Bradford offered x and if they want Seymour will have to match it. Hull refused to up the money and in light of the fact that they were the highest bidder anyway the agent told them he wanted to come to Hull because Shaun Berrigan (he who was a flop, finishing in the bottom 4 twice and left a year early) told him to.

If Seymour has come to Hull for less money because Berro told to him then he's been back on the drink.

Re: Bulls rumour thread for 2012 season. : Mon Jun 20, 2011 11:37 am  

Berrigan wanted to leave a year early due to the death of his father and wanted to be closer to his family.
back on the drink eh? Yeah because Bradford is really appealing isn't it, everyone wants to sign for the mighty Bulls. Your a nothing club now. He obviously see's Hull as the better option for him along with him coming down with a current team mate.

Re: Bulls rumour thread for 2012 season. : Mon Jun 20, 2011 11:46 am  

A unknown superstar wrote:

Youv'e yet to show me any facts to back your statement up that you think we paid more.
Still waiting.

You show me yours and I'll show you mine.

Re: Bulls rumour thread for 2012 season. : Mon Jun 20, 2011 12:03 pm  

A unknown superstar wrote:

Youv'e yet to show me any facts to back your statement up that you think we paid more.
Still waiting.

I don't think he made that statement. He only questioned your statement that Hull offered less.

Re: Bulls rumour thread for 2012 season. : Mon Jun 20, 2011 12:05 pm  

You're just proving that you were talking poop, otherwise you would of shown me a link saying that we offered more.

Bless.

Re: Bulls rumour thread for 2012 season. : Mon Jun 20, 2011 12:09 pm  

A unknown superstar wrote:

You're just proving that you were talking poop, otherwise you would of shown me a link saying that we offered more.

Bless.

You're arguements are flawless but in future if you are looking for a quick win, may I recommend adding FACT on the end of them. It would leave Debaser with nowhere to go

Re: Bulls rumour thread for 2012 season. : Mon Jun 20, 2011 12:10 pm  

Stul wrote:

I don't think he made that statement. He only questioned your statement that Hull offered less.

Debaser wrote,

'I disagree with you. As has been pretty widely reported in the press and internet (I assume you can read?) Hull FC stepped in at the last moment with a "big money offer" and pouched Seymour from under the noses of the Bulls.'

But isn't willing to prove where he saw this, therefor seems as though he hasn't got any proof.

Like I said I'm still waiting for him to back his statement up.

[Bullseye]

Re: Bulls rumour thread for 2012 season. : Mon Jun 20, 2011 12:14 pm  

It should be "An unknown superstar" not "A unknown superstar" shouldn't it?

Anyway this is heading off topic enough as it is! Please an we somehow steer it back? If people want to have an argument over semantics and how you can interpret a press report then suggest you start PM-ing each other as it's boring the rest of us.