What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

The Rumours Thread

kit66

Bench
Messages
3,998
It truly makes me laugh when people post that McInnes left the club because Mary was moved on. The guy was a grown man and our club's captain. Not a petulant child holding a grudge. I'm fairly sure his decision would have been based around what was best for him and his family and out of a sense that he was being treated how a club captain, and a player of his caliber, should be treated. Not out of his supposed disappointment and anger that the club moved Mary on.

Even the club said at the time that McInnes wanted a long term deal and wanted it sorted out before the start of the next season. I believe "working on different timeframes" was the crap coming out of the club, at the time, when talking about negotiations with Cam.
For all the people banging on about culture here was a guy, our club captain, our best and fairest for the previous two seasons, always effort on effort, phenomenal work rate, gave his everything on the field and an absolute born leader, and the incoming coach and club didn't even put an offer on the table for him when he wanted his future sorted. And we all know why that was. Because Hook wanted McCullough at dummy half and saw him as an equal replacement for him on lesser coin. A notion so absurd it's absolutely laughable.

To be honest this was one of the first things that Hook did that made me seriously question his judgement. Putting the retention of McInnes on the back burner and making the slowest dummy half in the comp, who was coming off of a complete hamstring tear, a priority signing was mind boggling to me at the time. Anyone could have seen that the the way the game was changing speed and elusiveness around the ruck would be becoming increasingly more vital. Whether Cam was to play dummy half or lock, the one thing he had was speed. He set the tone and led our defensive line speed, week in week out, and he wasn't shown the respect he should have been when he wanted his future taken care of. You couldn't have found a better role model for our young juniors that were coming through. For what McInnes had produced, on the field for us, the club should have made him the priority not a busted 31 year old who happen to be friends with Ben Hunt and who Hook had previously coached.

We lost Cam, someone who set the example for others to follow, and ended up signing players like McGuire and Burgess both of whom had previously been found guilty of eye gouging and had rap sheets a mile long...

A "notion" I find very hard to believe. Do you have any proof of that.
Losing Cam was regrettable but he made his choice, now he's a bench grunt for the Sharkies.
Could have stayed and been Captain of the Dragons.
 

Gareth67

First Grade
Messages
8,785

Good one Roosters. Now that you have Brown, keep going. There are others that you could pick-up and your salary cap won't be affected. Come to think of it, you could sign up a whole new team and just have a two team competition called The Politis Cup.

Gee that club is so ........... We need, we want, we get and no-one else can have them as we are so greedy.
Just unbelievable ! Where is the salary cap auditor ? Or should I ask what credentials does the so called salary cap auditor possess to diligently do his job ?

And please don’t say an apartment overlooking Bondi beach . 🤔
 

BLM01

First Grade
Messages
9,912
Had to laugh at the last line in that article "the Eels are chipping in a large portion of his yearly salary". I just read elsewhere earlier that the knocked back the Manly swap off because Browns money is much more than Harper's, and they don't want to chip in any dollars. Uncle Nick doing more dodgy deals?
I agree, think about it,
Why would a club offload a player if they are still paying most of his salary
To sign a nobody on low money just doesn’t make sense
they might as well have kept him
 

Slippery Morris

First Grade
Messages
7,868
If that is the case (Eels paying most of his salary) then why the hell didn't Saints go for Nathan Brown. HE is the type of guy saints are crying for. Also a cheap forward is all they go for these days and this guy sounds to be an absolute bargain by the sounds of it. Surely the Eels would have felt better releasing him to the Saints that the Roosters.
 

possm

Coach
Messages
15,905
Even after our fantastic win against the Titans this week, I still hold the view that we should sign Hasler as head coach and Nathen Brown as recruitment manager. If we did this, most things we would say about recruitment on here would be of a positive nature.
 

VodkaSaint

Juniors
Messages
1,681
A "notion" I find very hard to believe. Do you have any proof of that.
Losing Cam was regrettable but he made his choice, now he's a bench grunt for the Sharkies.
Could have stayed and been Captain of the Dragons.
and i dont think they will he will be rewarded with a new Contract, they stuffed up paying him overs to start with
 

VodkaSaint

Juniors
Messages
1,681
If that is the case (Eels paying most of his salary) then why the hell didn't Saints go for Nathan Brown. HE is the type of guy saints are crying for. Also a cheap forward is all they go for these days and this guy sounds to be an absolute bargain by the sounds of it. Surely the Eels would have felt better releasing him to the Saints that the Roosters.
saints did go for him, the eels wanted dragons to take over his contract in full
 

be55

Juniors
Messages
614
A "notion" I find very hard to believe. Do you have any proof of that.

What...that Hook signed McCullough to play dummy half? Well he didn't sign him to play fullback. It was common knowledge that Hook was interested in bringing McCullough down to play for us. It was reported by multiple people in the media. And that was before McInnes even signed with the Sharks.

Losing Cam was regrettable but he made his choice, now he's a bench grunt for the Sharkies.
Could have stayed and been Captain of the Dragons.

Yes it was regrettable. But it doesn't change the fact that that "bench grunt" you refer to, on Friday, ran for 160m from 16 hit ups, 64 post contact meters and made 30 tackles and 3 tackle breaks (most of any froward). His stats were every bit comparable to Finucane's. And by all accounts Hook, and the club, threw everything but the kitchen sink at Finucane to sign him.

Maybe we already had a player of Finucane's quality but WE DIDN'T EVEN PUT AN OFFER ON THE TABLE FOR HIM. It's there in the article! Not even an extension offer! Surely that shows what value Hook put in him and his signature


It's okay for you to say "he could have stayed and been captain". What would you have done if you were captain and you wanted your future sorted, and other clubs were interested in your signature, and the club, who you busted your guts for, put you on the back burner?

Jesus Christ read between the lines. Hook wanted McCullough, because he coached him at the Broncos, and he got him. And we've been playing with the weight of the world's slowest dummy half for the last two years. You've only got to look at what Liddle did yesterday to see what an improvement he'll be and what a little speed out of dummy half can do for a sides momentum...
 

AyiosYiorgos

Coach
Messages
14,158
If that is the case (Eels paying most of his salary) then why the hell didn't Saints go for Nathan Brown. HE is the type of guy saints are crying for. Also a cheap forward is all they go for these days and this guy sounds to be an absolute bargain by the sounds of it. Surely the Eels would have felt better releasing him to the Saints that the Roosters.
Parra wanted us to take over all his contract, but are happy to pay a big portion of his contract and let him sign for the roosters, doesn't sound suss at all by the roosters, makes you wonder sometime.
 

kit66

Bench
Messages
3,998
What...that Hook signed McCullough to play dummy half? Well he didn't sign him to play fullback. It was common knowledge that Hook was interested in bringing McCullough down to play for us. It was reported by multiple people in the media. And that was before McInnes even signed with the Sharks.



Yes it was regrettable. But it doesn't change the fact that that "bench grunt" you refer to, on Friday, ran for 160m from 16 hit ups, 64 post contact meters and made 30 tackles and 3 tackle breaks (most of any froward). His stats were every bit comparable to Finucane's. And by all accounts Hook, and the club, threw everything but the kitchen sink at Finucane to sign him.

Maybe we already had a player of Finucane's quality but WE DIDN'T EVEN PUT AN OFFER ON THE TABLE FOR HIM. It's there in the article! Not even an extension offer! Surely that shows what value Hook put in him and his signature


It's okay for you to say "he could have stayed and been captain". What would you have done if you were captain and you wanted your future sorted, and other clubs were interested in your signature, and the club, who you busted your guts for, put you on the back burner?

Jesus Christ read between the lines. Hook wanted McCullough, because he coached him at the Broncos, and he got him. And we've been playing with the weight of the world's slowest dummy half for the last two years. You've only got to look at what Liddle did yesterday to see what an improvement he'll be and what a little speed out of dummy half can do for a sides momentum...

So, that's a no ?

I'm not doubting Cam's quality and abilities, I'm well aware of what we lost and would have much preferred to keep him, I loved the guy but it was 100% his choice, no-one told him to leave, no-one put a timeline on anything but him. I thought he was a bit childish about it to be honest but he's where he wants to be. Time to move on.
 

Trifili13

Juniors
Messages
1,129
Parra wanted us to take over all his contract, but are happy to pay a big portion of his contract and let him sign for the roosters, doesn't sound suss at all by the roosters, makes you wonder sometime.
Agree. Nothing to see just move along. We now even have other clubs buying into the Roosters culture and are willing to chip in for their players to go there.
 

jak

Bench
Messages
3,452
If that is the case (Eels paying most of his salary) then why the hell didn't Saints go for Nathan Brown. HE is the type of guy saints are crying for. Also a cheap forward is all they go for these days and this guy sounds to be an absolute bargain by the sounds of it. Surely the Eels would have felt better releasing him to the Saints that the Roosters.
certain rules only apply to the roosters.
 

Latest posts

Top