203 replies to this topic

[Gav Wilson]

leeds were playing him out of position. he was a fullback.

Yet according to your forum a few weeks ago, when Leeds asked Fev to play him at Full Back when he was on Dual Reg, Fev outright refused and set him back to Headingley.

Hmm...

[oldrover]

Leeds wanted Zak's signature well before his contract expired. Warrington were also keen to sign him. The two SL powers entered into a bidding war and Rovers accepted the best offer. I can't see much wrong with that, it happens in major sports all the time.

Rovers didn't just inherit a gifted player, he wasn't wanted by SL clubs as a junior and didn't make any of the rep camps. He really blossomed once he joined the Rovers system so I think it's fair to say that Daryl Powell and his team played a major part in Zak being the player he is now. Zak himself will tell you that.

you're quite right Terry, Zak was continually overlooked by s/l scouts when he was at lions. it was the fev scout at the time ( a man who has a great talent for spotting raw talent and potential), who brought him to the fev scholarship, where his rise was meteoric.

[oldrover]

Yet according to your forum a few weeks ago, when Leeds asked Fev to play him at Full Back when he was on Dual Reg, Fev outright refused and set him back to Headingley.

Hmm...

if we had plaayed him at fullback, where would we have played hardman. we tried him at centre and it just didn't work. perhaps gary thornton will be faced with the same dilemma
hmmm

[Gav Wilson]

if we had plaayed him at fullback, where would we have played hardman. we tried him at centre and it just didn't work. perhaps gary thornton will be faced with the same dilemma
hmmm

If York are trying to squeeze a player in their team as good as Zak Hardaker, I certainly won't be complaining!

[oldrover]

If York are trying to squeeze a player in their team as good as Zak Hardaker, I certainly won't be complaining!

a drop of the shoulder, a swerve of the hips, and he's gone

[oldrover]

no, it's no good. i've been checking my programmes and i can't find any criticism of rovers treatment of rovers young players or their amateur clubs, by any contributor. i'll keep looking though, and obviously i dont have them all ,so maybe i've missed it.

[Steve Slater]

Yet according to your forum a few weeks ago, when Leeds asked Fev to play him at Full Back when he was on Dual Reg, Fev outright refused and set him back to Headingley.

Hmm...

He was an outstanding winger for Fev before he signed for Leeds, and there was a place for him in that position when he came back. When he played full-back for Fev he didn't seem as effective as he did on the wing, where he was the best outside Super League. So why would they go through the growing pains of developing him as a pro full-back (different from playing there as a junior), while putting Hardman's nose out of joint at the same time, purely for Leeds's benefit?

[The Parksider]

Why would they go through the growing pains of developing him as a pro full-back (different from playing there as a junior), while putting Hardman's nose out of joint at the same time, purely for Leeds's benefit?

For the £80,000 perhaps, helps the club balance the books......

[l'angelo mysterioso]

For the £80,000 perhaps, helps the club balance the books......

before or after tax?

[Gav Wilson]

He was an outstanding winger for Fev before he signed for Leeds, and there was a place for him in that position when he came back. When he played full-back for Fev he didn't seem as effective as he did on the wing, where he was the best outside Super League. So why would they go through the growing pains of developing him as a pro full-back (different from playing there as a junior), while putting Hardman's nose out of joint at the same time, purely for Leeds's benefit?

I'm not saying they should have, I was just picking up on a comment saying Leeds were playing him out of position.

[oldrover]

no, it's no good. i've been checking my programmes and i can't find any criticism of rovers treatment of rovers young players or their amateur clubs, by any contributor. i'll keep looking though, and obviously i dont have them all ,so maybe i've missed it.

not even a mention on vixen fm

[Griff]

before or after tax?

Tax ?

Rugby league clubs don't pay tax. You have to have profits for that to happen!!

[l'angelo mysterioso]

no, it's no good. i've been checking my programmes and i can't find any criticism of rovers treatment of rovers young players or their amateur clubs, by any contributor. i'll keep looking though, and obviously i dont have them all ,so maybe i've missed it.

why would Rovers criticise themselves in their own house magazine?

[l'angelo mysterioso]

not even a mention on vixen fm

why would there be?

Do you mean to say you record their programmes?

spooky.

[l'angelo mysterioso]

Tax ?

Rugby league clubs don't pay tax

especially when you have a company that speciallises in tax avoidance for the wealthy as a main sponsor.
Morality? fairness? When it suits.

[keighley]

especially when you have a company that speciallises in tax avoidance for the wealthy as a main sponsor.
Morality? fairness? When it suits.

Featherstone wouldn't be classed as wealthy though. Perhaps Probiz should be transferred to Leeds where they also will have more chance to prove their abilities.

[l'angelo mysterioso]

Featherstone wouldn't be classed as wealthy though. Perhaps Probiz should be transferred to Leeds where they also will have more chance to prove their abilities.

well the sid sid and doris bonkers tendency of their fan base are red hot on morality, fairness and justice(see posts and threads on their 'forum' passim): but not when a company like probiz is putting cash and expertise into their club.

[Griff]

Featherstone wouldn't be classed as wealthy though.

No ? Well, they have a lot of land.

[oldrover]

well the sid sid and doris bonkers tendency of their fan base are red hot on morality, fairness and justice(see posts and threads on their 'forum' passim): but not when a company like probiz is putting cash and expertise into their club.

you had plenty of opportunities to express your opinions on this and rovers attitude to young players and their amateur clubs. you were a contributor to the programme, there were forums where fans were invited to ask questions and express opinions. the fact that you choose to do it now just looks like sour grapes. as you say, when it suits. have a nice day

[l'angelo mysterioso]

you had plenty of opportunities to express your opinions on this and rovers attitude to young players and their amateur clubs. you were a contributor to the programme, there were forums where fans were invited to ask questions and express opinions. the fact that you choose to do it now just looks like sour grapes. as you say, when it suits. have a nice day

I wouldn't have dreamt of using the clubs official magazine as a vehicle for my own views. It would have been amateurish and self serving. Opinions expressed there are those of club officials players and coaches

in any case if you bother to check this particular thread I only discovered about Roversand other clubs treatment of local amateur clubs, when someone (El capo) brought up the subject a couple of days ago.
anyway: you are one of the chief moralisers and whingers about all things 'not fair', do you think companies that specialising in tax avoidance for the rich is 'moral', or do you and the rest wear the cloak of morality when it suits.




If I ever I had a a view on what was going on at Rovers, I would express it personally to those concerned.

Sour grapes what for?

Edited by l'angelo mysterioso, 18 November 2012 - 06:14 PM.