Re: Albert Kelly : Fri Nov 04, 2016 5:26 pm  

unknownlegend wrote:

I've heard from a reliable source that he is signing. Had 2 other offers but wants to stay in Hull. Radford not too concerned about his spat with Rovers, not as bad as made out.

So why if it wasn't as bad as first made out, did Rovers choose not to play him in our most important games in our recent history? Now he may be signing for you, he wasn't that bad after all??? Give me a break!!

Re: Albert Kelly : Fri Nov 04, 2016 5:48 pm  

Heard from two people (one Hull one Dobbins) that he had signed.
Wonder if the hold up is down to the release of Pritchard not being finalised.

Re: Albert Kelly : Fri Nov 04, 2016 5:51 pm  

Tea Maker wrote:

So why if it wasn't as bad as first made out, did Rovers choose not to play him in our most important games in our recent history? Now he may be signing for you, he wasn't that bad after all??? Give me a break!!

Bit like Adam Walker now suddenly being guilty (according to the Dobbins fans chants last Friday) now he's left you ?

Re: Albert Kelly : Fri Nov 04, 2016 6:04 pm  

[quote="Irregular Hoops"]Bit like Adam Walker now suddenly being guilty (according to the Dobbins fans chants last Friday) now he's left you ?[/quote

I don't condone that either, but I also wouldn't be too sure about Albert being a reformed character, we are the third club he has left under a cloud. But I'm sure it will all be different when he is with the mighty Hull!
GOOD LUCK!

Re: Albert Kelly : Fri Nov 04, 2016 6:08 pm  

Don't think he'll be a reformed character by any stretch.
Just a case of having the correct checks, measures and sanctions in place.
The signing is a risk in many respects, but the dearth of talent in Super League means clubs have to take such risks nowadays.

Re: Albert Kelly : Fri Nov 04, 2016 6:19 pm  

Irregular Hoops wrote:

Don't think he'll be a reformed character by any stretch.
Just a case of having the correct checks, measures and sanctions in place.
The signing is a risk in many respects, but the dearth of talent in Super League means clubs have to take such risks nowadays.

This. The days of Trent Barrett playing in SL are long gone.

Re: Albert Kelly : Fri Nov 04, 2016 6:30 pm  

Mrs Barista wrote:

This. The days of Trent Barrett playing in SL are long gone.

Was only saying this today to someone regarding Barrett at Wigan. Seems hard to believe now we could attract such a good player to Super League.
Just have to chance it now with young unproven or damaged goods!

Re: Albert Kelly : Fri Nov 04, 2016 6:31 pm  

Marcus's Bicycle wrote:

It's beginning to look like that. If he's messing the club about they should give him deadline and call his bluff. Hopefully they have other irons in the fire if it doesn't come off.

I don't see why? He's no more or less likely to sign for us than he was a few days ago. It's all speculation anyway. Hull have neither confirmed nor denied that they've offered him a contract.

Re: Albert Kelly : Fri Nov 04, 2016 6:37 pm  

ComeOnYouUll wrote:

I don't see why? He's no more or less likely to sign for us that he was a few days ago. It's all speculation anyway. Hull have neither confirmed nor denied that they've offered him a contract.

Hope you are right. It's just that we've been down this path so many times before.

Re: Albert Kelly : Fri Nov 04, 2016 6:52 pm  

Tea Maker wrote:

So why if it wasn't as bad as first made out, did Rovers choose not to play him in our most important games in our recent history? Now he may be signing for you, he wasn't that bad after all??? Give me a break!!

Just saying what I've heard about Radfords thoughts, I'm not saying anything on the matter. He may not fit or he could be a World beater for us, only time will tell. If you want to know why Rovers never played him I suppose you would have to ask Peacock or Hudge at the next forum. I'm not really interested about his former clubs to be honest.