Re: Jack Hughes : Sat Dec 15, 2018 1:58 pm  

It’s a gamble, the club will have weighed it up. Some you win, some you lose.

Re: Jack Hughes : Sat Dec 15, 2018 2:26 pm  

I'm with Wires71 on this. Jack Hughes was good last season but I think the jury is still out on him. Three years is a long time. This is probably another symptom of the lack of quality players around, like Leeds giving Dom Crosby a three year deal. Even half decent SL players now have some scarcity power.

[Winslade's Offload]

Re: Jack Hughes : Sat Dec 15, 2018 4:14 pm  

The problem is, we don't know the whole story. What were the discussions between coach and agent for instance ? " Leeds will offer Jack a 3 year contract at £XX next April, so you need to decide if you wish to keep him or not". Clubs are not a charity and will not offer terms that are more generous than they think a player is worth (and that includes the element of contract duration as well as salary). So barring an error of judgement by the coach, we would have to assume the club have offered a 'market price' for his services. 5-6 years ago I would agree he wouldn't have got these terms and might even have been fighting for a starting position. As you suggested, the fall in standards has perhaps also coloured our judgement on his value.

Re: Jack Hughes : Sat Dec 15, 2018 4:47 pm  

I suppose also it depends when other players' contracts are up, as you'd probably want contract expiries to come up in a staggered fashion. A risk if everyone is on a one or two year contract, is a lot of players are then out of contract together, which means a lot of them are starting to think about options elsewhere at the same time, which may not be ideal for general focus of the squad. And then if one year quite a few of them sign elsewhere then you might not want to have a mass exodus on your hands so could end up being held to ransom by others whose deals are also up.

So I can see some logic in locking some players down a bit longer.

Re: Jack Hughes : Sat Dec 15, 2018 5:11 pm  

Great business for me

Re: Jack Hughes : Sat Dec 15, 2018 6:03 pm  

I'm chuffed Jack has signed a new contract.

Re: Jack Hughes : Sun Dec 16, 2018 8:38 am  

He's still young, 27 in January so a lot of good years ahead of him. This year he was only behind Daryl Clark on our top tacklers, and 4th in number of carries. Very hard working, and a player team mates will appreciate.

When the numbers of interchanges are going down you need more players who can go 80 minutes.

In 2017 he kept cutting inside rather than going himself or using team mates, which he has done this year. In 2017 he was sometimes moved into the centres as well, either starting there or after a reshuffle, which didn't help.

Re: Jack Hughes : Sun Dec 16, 2018 11:45 am  

This would suggest that in 2021 our first choice second row will be Currie and Hughes. That's ok but it doesn't fill me with excitement. Currie and Bateman would. Or Currie and Livett realising his potential.

Re: Jack Hughes : Sun Dec 16, 2018 11:53 am  

Terry Griffiths wrote:

This would suggest that in 2021 our first choice second row will be Currie and Hughes. That's ok but it doesn't fill me with excitement. Currie and Bateman would. Or Currie and Livett realising his potential.

Livett is a very average player for me. Hughes’ defence gets him above Livett in the pecking order with Livett bottom of the list of backrowers we have

Re: Jack Hughes : Sun Dec 16, 2018 12:02 pm  

Winslade's Offload wrote: Clubs are not a charity and will not offer terms that are more generous than they think a player is worth (and that includes the element of contract duration as well as salary). That's why the Matty Russel contract was baffling. Granted a lucrative 3 year contract for 2017,18,19 then binned 3 games into the 2018 season under Price after the howlers at Huddersfield and Widnes. I think we will still be playing part of his wages through 2019. So the club has form for lengthy contracts for players which turnout that no other SL team wants. (I'm not suggesting it's the same for Hughes as he is a solid if unspectacular SL 2nd rower). Source: https://www.warringtonguardian.co.uk/ne ... xtensions/

Winslade's Offload wrote: Clubs are not a charity and will not offer terms that are more generous than they think a player is worth (and that includes the element of contract duration as well as salary). That's why the Matty Russel contract was baffling. Granted a lucrative 3 year contract for 2017,18,19 then binned 3 games into the 2018 season under Price after the howlers at Huddersfield and Widnes. I think we will still be playing part of his wages through 2019. So the club has form for lengthy contracts for players which turnout that no other SL team wants. (I'm not suggesting it's the same for Hughes as he is a solid if unspectacular SL 2nd rower). Source: https://www.warringtonguardian.co.uk/ne ... xtensions/