Very surprised at this but cant blame him for wanting to play every week, surely we've got some more in comings due. Leaves us short at half back and full back as he would have been first choice cover for both.
Very surprised at this but cant blame him for wanting to play every week, surely we've got some more in comings due. Leaves us short at half back and full back as he would have been first choice cover for both.
If we don't have an equal ability player at least lined up then we've made a massive fek up.
Agree with all the above... seems very strange unless we are freeing up cap space for a good prop but as others have said this now leaves us short for decent cover in two key areas which we can't afford to have if we're aiming for the top end of the table and competing for trophies.
We've let both back up fullbacks go.. and he provided decent cover in the halves.
He wouldn't have got much game time, so it's a good decision for him. And a great addition for York.
But where does that leave us in cover? Edgell and Lumb for fullback, and Sinfield in the halves? Then we are back to half a team reshuffle if Frawley and Croft are both out?
Leeds must need the cap space for a big signing. There is no other logical reason to let him go.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 192 guests
REPLY
Please note using apple style emoji's can result in posting failures.
Use the FULL EDITOR to better format content or upload images, be notified of replies etc...