We would not have been where we are now if we had kept him.

Na, the boos boys knew better.

Spot on.

He was a horrible bounder....................but he would have scored a few....unlike our lame, and disinterested players we now have.

Well it appears that long high balls to Parker and Porter don't work.

Somebody had best tell our pathetic excuses for players.

did Kyle want to be at Pools though? It's no good hankering after someone who only wanted to put himself in the shop window, and his wages would have caused a problem

Out of those two I reckon we need Christ.

not disagreeing about the target man - in fact I completely agree - just not that it should have been Kevin Kyle.Some of his performances were clearly from a bloke who didn't believe he should be at Hartlepool. Barker would have been a better option over the course of the season, or at least someone who would have given their all every game and not be on such a wage that would have eventually caused dressing room unrest.

Ditto.

Kyle didn't want to be a Pools, at Walsall he said "fuck off, don't pass to me, I'm knackered". Lots of people heard this.

Every single away match Kyle played he looked even more disinterested than some of our current batch of players, which is some achievement.

Home performances were a bit better though.

Totally agree what we need in the close season is to bring in defenders not forwards we run the risk of turning into newcastle at this rate

no - just a different type of forward. The signings of Lange, Nardiello, Parker - those three are all very similar in what they give to the team. Maybe Henderson was thought of as being the target man but he bombed badly. Considering the injuries we needed maybe two forwards not four, plus a left back and a keeper. We signed the cover for left back too late in my opinion, and we got what was the only player on offer!! Although I don't actually think he looks too bad, considering we've had people like Chris Lynch in the past in that position!!!!

If you are refering to me as an idiot suggesting we sign more forwards, I didnt suggest it. We had already signed him, I am suggesting we would have been better off than we are now had we kept him !!!!!

I fully appreciate the argument we would have been better of signing defenders, but we didnt........................

kyle was quality, cant understand why some fans thought otherwise, excellent goals to games ratio, if only we could get him or Howard for next season . Kyles goals kept us up perhaps?

Good defending starts with the attack. The longer you keep the ball in their box the less time they spend bombarding yours. Barker was a great defender in that respect. I think this might be the point being raised, not the number of goals - and the point is far from idiotic.
Lange looked to be that kind of player to me, the little I saw of him. He was closing down everything within closing down distance agaisnt Walsall.

Monty, I don't disagree with what you're saying here but I don't think our problem has been that we have struggled to keep the ball in attack. The problem has been that if we give a team 3 or 4 chances they will normally convert the majority of them.

Territory wise we do OK, it's just we fall to pieces so easily.

They missed an open goal in the first half and controlled the last 15 minutes.

I thought they were decent enough but we gifted them 3 goals as you say and you can't afford that when you only have one striker that is likely to get you a goal and he goes off with half an hour left.

Can you confirm which of our current players DO?