Like I have said to you in my previous post - coaches make mistakes. Hence, it is more than possible Michael Maguire regrets not giving Cook a chance in the run-on team sooner in the season. Alternatively, you could also look at things from the flip side and argue that if Michael Maguire saw that much potential in McInnes, then he would have kept him and persevered with him into next season. The other thing you need to take into account is how much power Maguire has over signings. After the Raiders debacle, it was confirmed that his assistants and other backroom staff were sacked over his head and that Richardson was running things in the background. Now I'm not saying this is a foregone conclusion but there is a distinct possibility that players, including Robbie Farah, could have been signed over his head too.
In terms of Farah being in the starting squad, I don't think that is as much of an issue as you are making out. Remember, when he played for the Tigers this season he was coming off the bench, as he did at times last season as well and from all reports, quite enjoyed that role. So if starting games meant that much to him, then surely he would have left the Tigers long ago. Personally, at his age, I think he will be more than content with playing 40-50 minutes a game. Based on the way we play - with a hooker who runs out of dummy half in order to utilise our forwards strengths, it becomes paramount that we have two hookers because such a style of play can be particularly draining. Hence, Farah would almost be guaranteed a decent portion of games, albeit if he comes off the bench. Just on that, I actually think its quite beneficial for him coming off the bench as well as it will give him a chance to play against tired defenders - that is why the Cowboys do with Jake Granville with great success; you cannot deny that a crafty hooker, like Farah, would not benefit against tiring big men.
You seem to have massive issues over the hooker role and while it is your right to voice your opinion, you seem to fall into the trap of critiquing signings without proposing any viable alternatives. Like I said, if you can think of any viable alternatives to Farah then name them and we can analyse them. Furthermore, I've also explained to you using sound logic and concrete examples the impact that Cook has had on the team and why other players in the team have benefited from his performances. I'm not saying he transformed the teams on field fortunes on his own, nor do I think he was even our best player in a lot of those games. All I've said and implied is that his style of game is what the team needed. I just think you a) have something against Cook, b) are seeing something in McInnes that isn't there - maybe its because he is a souths junior and c) do not and will not accept any pro-Cook arguments regardless of how logical and justified they are.