the down side of loaning players : Wed Apr 01, 2009 9:37 am  

you are always at the club that owns them mercy or dropped in it as Halifax are here. http://www.sportinglife.com/rugbyleague ... lifax.html

you are always at the club that owns them mercy or dropped in it as Halifax are here. http://www.sportinglife.com/rugbyleague ... lifax.html

: Wed Apr 01, 2009 9:51 am  

But it's not a massive problem though really is it?

We are not going to win the cup so the league and NRC are a priority.

Whats more of a problem is if they are recalled and don't come back.

Wilson, Watene, Tamghart, Cherryholme, Wrench.

Think it will be ok him missing a game.

: Wed Apr 01, 2009 10:28 am  

Plus we've already beaten them without him!

: Wed Apr 01, 2009 10:33 am  

But I can see his point, James is yet to oplay 2 games in a row for us, that disrupts the momentum he brings.
He looks like the type of prop which simply does not have a bad game, however there are times when Wilson, Frank and Cherry are brilliant then a little lacking at other times.

Hopefully this will be the last time he is forced to sit out due to Bulls regulations.

This year we are in a position where we have a strong set of 6 props so can get over obstacles like this.

: Wed Apr 01, 2009 11:57 am  

If anything, it shows that 'Fax have done well to sign a player of his calibre. To me, it would suggest that Bradford will consider him a possible inclusion in future Challenge Cup squads so obviously rate his credentials.

: Wed Apr 01, 2009 12:07 pm  

Obviously Fax aren't going to complain - they have a choice of either complying with Bradford's wishes or risking Bradford almost certainly recalling the player. But it's not fair on Fax for Bradford to announce now that they don't like who Fax are playing this week and don't want their lad to play.

IMHO Bradford shouldn't be allowed to decide at this stage what games the player can or can't play. Effectively it seems there's nothing to stop Bradford interfering with Fax's team selection on a game by game basis which is wrong on many different levels.

It's not uncommon to see stipulations about loan players not being able to play against parent clubs etc, but these are usually written into the loan agreement up front. Same should apply if a club wants to block its player from appearing against a certain level of opposition (eg SL teams) or in certain cup competitions etc - do it in the initial loan agreement so everybody knows the situation up front. After that, unless you recall the player, you should trust the club you've loaned him to to look after him and select their team as they see fit.

: Wed Apr 01, 2009 12:19 pm  

To be fair to Bradford, they didn't put a clause in the loan contract stating he couldn't play in the CC, so if Bradford get knocked out and we progress he will be eligble to play in future rounds.
Its certainly not Bradford deciding who he can and can't play against.
Right now we have a good working relationship with the Bulls (You will never know how much it hurts me to say that), mainly down to the fact Calland and McNamara are good mates.
Just hope McNamara can keep his job or might lose James forever!!

The benefits and downsides of Loan players usually even themselves out, especially short term loans, but season long loans seem to work ok

: Wed Apr 01, 2009 12:24 pm  

You take your chances and make your choice and suffer what goes with it.

: Wed Apr 01, 2009 8:08 pm  

Standidge wrote:

But I can see his point, James is yet to oplay 2 games in a row for us, that disrupts the momentum he brings.
He looks like the type of prop which simply does not have a bad game, however there are times when Wilson, Frank and Cherry are brilliant then a little lacking at other times.

Hopefully this will be the last time he is forced to sit out due to Bulls regulations.

This year we are in a position where we have a strong set of 6 props so can get over obstacles like this.

That's just greedy - no wonder nobody else can find any!