If we can bring someone in that's better or differnt from what we have then fine. If it's a Molloy type played I can't see the point.

To be honest, thats what i was thinking.

I see london have just taken their sixth player on loan. Even though you are only allowed 5 it turns out that they can get round this by saying that technically they are not all on loan?



You couldnt make this up If this is allowed.

I know WTW are stacked with back-rowers but Pitts was mentioned as potentially going to Bulls so he does seem surplus to requirements at Hull FC. It also looks like Jamie Shaul has got the nod for full back at the KC in front McDonnell so he might be on the way out as well.

The signing of J.Pitts seems very logical when you understand how Agars mind functions.



I have also heard another one of our centre/wings will be leaving and a further two more second rowers

have been lined up to sign.

I'd be happy with Pitts but as implied above I'd like to see cover in the 3/4.

I guess it depends how well Kienhorst and Briscoe fit in.

Who let cat out of bag

Do we really need another back-rower? It's the one place we have plenty of options!

I've heard we're looking at a winger and a second rower over the hill at the same club.

Pitts was a back rower when he left us but wasn't he propping at Hull?

Think he's played there a few times for them but the general consensus of the Hull fans when it looked like he was joining Bradford was that he is a good second rower but nowhere near good, or big, enough to be a prop forward.

Maybe that was before they lost Carvell, only got 3 recognised props now in Scruton, Sidlow and Manukafusi.