But a yes man for what? They let Agar spend money so I'm not sure I can see it. What kind of thing is it that the board do that Agar doesn't complain about but, say, Noble would?

We would have got Chase for £150000. There is no way on earth they would have turned that down, despite what their supporters come on here and say

We'd have been in a better bargaining position if we'd gone for chase instead of westerman when they needed the money for their planning app

Totally agree, why we went for Westerman instead still baffles me.

You don't know that for a fact. Chase is absolutely key to their team and they would have been mad to let him go when there was no realistic prospect of signing a replacement. If nothing else the uproar among their fans would have dwarfed what's going on here.

I would rather have had Chase than Westerman but there was no way Cas were willing to let Chase go. To suggest we could have got Chase for £150,000 is fanciful (and thats putting it politely).

Yes but someone else would be pushing for more cash to spend on players, rather than the 'that's your lot and don't ask for anymore' kind of attitude I sense. Top coaches can insist on extra funds and justify why it would benefit the team (i.e go and get me Rangi Chase at all costs).



The board don't do anything wrong, far from it, we are an efficiently run business and perhaps that's our downfall.



Mind you we can't have it both ways.

Small clubs will always let players go at a reasonable price. I believe we would have got him for a lot less than has been quoted on this forum. He will not be playing for Cas next season. He is too good for a small club like Cas, and will end up at one of the big clubs, maybe Saints or Wigan. If he wins MOS this year his price will rise a bit.

He'll end up at saints

No way would they let him go for £150,000. They said he was not for sale, plain and simple. Yes, everyone has a price, but he means more to them then £150,000. Their whole team is worked around him.

I don't often defend the club but in terms of transfer fees we've spent 3 in Agar's time here, some other big clubs haven't spent any.

I agree with you about the fee but the point stands that we would have had a much better chance of getting Chase if he hadn't already lined their pockets with the Westerman money.

Fair point and I do agree but we paid a fee for Tansey when we are 100% desperate....the outlay for Westerman was huge but I just think we could afford more....if we had pushed the boat out even further for Rangi Chase then it would have brought in plenty more season passes (I for one would have renewed mine).



Obst...again we were in a desperate position on the back of Berrigan and Tansey departing. So I think for two of these three deals our hand was forced due to the respective situations we found ourselves in, in which case we were left with no choice but to fork out.

Not sure about us being desperate for Tansey cos our season was already dead at the point we signed him, but I agree with you that the way we target and negotiate for players often seems pretty poor. I'm just saying that I don't think you can argue the resources aren't there to be used.