So, we sack Tansey and then offer Gleeson a contract, is this not shameful double standards?

Not until Gleeson breaches our disciplinary policy as many times as Tansey did and doesn't get sacked..

I don't think it's necessarily double standards, but he's had loads of chances at other clubs and still has 'personal issues'. Seems like desperation to me. Would having Long and Gleeson together be asking for bother?

I tend to agree to an extent, i'd rather use Reardon as an example though.

However Gleeson is a top centre, if he was only half decent and had a "utility" tag then i wouldnt be to happy.

Glesson will be short term and quite inexpensive all things considered, as we know, our board are "frugal" to say the least.

Nowhere near the cap and we havent been for years.

That is another concern, indeed.

Espcially now Long has 2 games to sit out and twiddle his thumbs.

No doubt you'll have some evidence of that?

I'm undecided on this one. Ok, he hasn't breached [iour[/i disciplinary policy, but he hasn't exactly been a model professional throughout his career either. Sacking one player because of a specific problem, then signing another one with a history of similar problems does at least seem to be a little foolish.

you should be on stage you know

maybe it would but things cant get much worse than it already is so id be happy to give it a go and find out!

don't be silly, drooler doesn't deal in evidenced facts, rumour and misdirection is much better.

Oh I'm not keen on this potential signing for exactly those reasons. Personally I wouldn't go anywhere near Gleeson, no matter how good a player he is. We simply don't have a good record of being able to control or reform 'problem' players.

Still not double standards though.

I'll take that as a 'no' then.