Re: Segayaro : Mon Aug 29, 2016 8:03 am  

GH has, mainly, been brilliant. however that doesn't mean he should be immune from criticism. last years hooker farce was very poor and changes are obviously needed or we will struggle again next year.
as for contracts ask andy hay and Karl Pratt what they mean.
if a club wants to move players on they will do

Re: Segayaro : Mon Aug 29, 2016 8:11 am  

tad rhino wrote:

GH has, mainly, been brilliant. however that doesn't mean he should be immune from criticism. last years hooker farce was very poor and changes are obviously needed or we will struggle again next year.
as for contracts ask andy hay and Karl Pratt what they mean.
if a club wants to move players on they will do

Players can be moved on, but there is a salary cap implication of doing so. realistically it's not worth getting rid of players as you spend the same money but get fewer players. Better to persuade them to look elsewhere as opportunities may be limited.

Re: Segayaro : Mon Aug 29, 2016 8:14 am  

RHINO-MARK wrote:

Wouldn't keep him if he played for free.

He's one of the worst players I've ever seen pull on a Leeds shirt.

Re: Segayaro : Mon Aug 29, 2016 9:17 am  

RHINO-MARK wrote:

Wouldn't keep him if he played for free.

Me neither. Although he's not been bad this year, I really didn't like what he said in that interview about retirement being an option, more evidence is heart isn't in it. Id rather give his squad next year to someone who's first thought would be to find another club rather than give up.

Re: Segayaro : Mon Aug 29, 2016 9:50 am  

Achurch is not needed. We have JJB, Ablett, Ferres, Ward, Keinhorst and Delaney who are all better than him. Singleton and Cuthbertson have also played at 13. It would be a bad move to use any cap space on another back rower even on a low wage, it's the last position we need to sign a player in. Hopefully Achurch is just trying to big himself up in the YEP to encourage a team like Wakie or Cas to come in and make him a decent offer.

Re: Segayaro : Mon Aug 29, 2016 10:32 am  

The Eagle wrote:

Players can be moved on, but there is a salary cap implication of doing so. realistically it's not worth getting rid of players as you spend the same money but get fewer players. Better to persuade them to look elsewhere as opportunities may be limited.

GH/RL has form for loading contracts with various clauses im sure if he wanted rid he wouldn't struggle to do so.

Re: Segayaro : Mon Aug 29, 2016 12:14 pm  

RHINO-MARK wrote:

GH/RL has form for loading contracts with various clauses im sure if he wanted rid he wouldn't struggle to do so.

Are there any examples of this???

Re: Segayaro : Mon Aug 29, 2016 3:07 pm  

Marty Grrrrrrrrrr! wrote:

Are there any examples of this???

Just look through our history or just a few months ago with Falloon.
Look at the clear-out Powell had or Toopi leaving early all "undisclosed" etc.

Re: Segayaro : Mon Aug 29, 2016 3:14 pm  

plus if he wanted the older players out I'm sure they could retire and be sorted out with jobs at an above average wage. it's been done before

Re: Segayaro : Mon Aug 29, 2016 9:03 pm  

RhinoDan wrote:

So GH knows where Segeyaro is playing next year, but was certain Aiton was staying the year before? Hmm. In other words he can't really be sure can he?

Hmm only difference is Segeyaro is under contract for 2017. Aiton was never contracted for 2016. GH banked on Aiton signing a new deal so never looked around hmmm. Not difficult to understand.

As for Achurch, he says he'll retire if he is paid less than his previous contract. Jog on Mitch!