Put aside the eternal cook vs mcinnes debate.
The question was asked why we signed an aging Farah.
Initially we thought getting farah was a thought out plan. If he's come as a replacement to mcinnes, and not that mcinnes was pushed out by farah's signing like we first thought, then that changes the rationale behind his signing.
Whatever your opinion on cook vs mcinnes goes out the window
If you are like me and think mcinnes is a great future prospect, farah's signature no longer meant mcinnes was pushed out. Mcinnes was leaving and we had to get a replacement
If you think cook is the greatest hooker in history, the story would no longer be we signed an aging rep player and he's cutting into what cook does. We lost cooks back-up in mcinnes and got a cheap back-up in farah.
If you think cook is ok but not sure yet if he can be a fulltime hooker in a team to challenge for finals, then we signed farah when we lost our other plan b in Mcinnes.
The signing of Farah was a puzzingly one, but if it's come after mcinnes has left, and it doesn't really matter what your opinion of mcinnes is, then it makes more sense