Re: new player(s) : Tue Nov 12, 2019 1:42 pm  

TheEnforcer273 wrote:

I'm starting to hope the club fully commit to a DR arrangement with Huddersfield ASAP just so you do what you've been threatening for years and clear off and give up on the club. Sick of your tedious posts on here. BORING.

Don't read 'em then, scroll past.

Re: new player(s) : Tue Nov 12, 2019 1:47 pm  

faxcar wrote:

No they obviously don’t, as proved with every DR relationship Fax have been involved in, whether that be players offered to Fax or Fax offering players.

It’s just an “offer” that’s all.

The two clubs speak with one another.
One club says we have so and so available on DR this week, do you want any of them?

The partner club then adds these players to their own to form the full squad to choose from.

The coaching staff then pick a final 19 from that squad who will play that week based on a number of different factors.

Thankfully and being in the best position to know the selection process happens, none of which is based on their own unmovable bias or prejudice.

At no time do any club say to the partner club, these are the players available and you MUST play them.

It so simple to understand, really it is.

So Castleford pulling Mitch Clark out of 'our' team hours before a game isn't DP interfering in our team plans and telling us who we can and can't play?

Re: new player(s) : Tue Nov 12, 2019 2:10 pm  

Hudd-Shay wrote:

So Castleford pulling Mitch Clark out of 'our' team hours before a game isn't DP interfering in our team plans and telling us who we can and can't play?

In fairness, that's a very different kettle of fish to your previous suggestion that "the SL club tell the 'partner' club who and when will play for said partner club".

Re: new player(s) : Tue Nov 12, 2019 2:15 pm  

Hudd-Shay wrote:

So Castleford pulling Mitch Clark out of 'our' team hours before a game isn't DP interfering in our team plans and telling us who we can and can't play?

Clearly you don’t understand how the partnership works.

Both clubs know any offered player can be withdrawn at anytime and have appropriate back up plans.

Just like you would do if someone fell ill at the last minute or got injured in the warm up Fax simply brought in the 18th player who would have been involved in the pre match training and build up process precisely to cause the minimum disruption.

That is exactly what RM said at the time, that he would have liked a bit more size and grunt but it did not interfere with game plans or affect the result.

To say the SL club are some sort of dictatorship that Fax have to bow down to

The level of misrepresentation of our own club is embarrassing to be honest.

Re: new player(s) : Tue Nov 12, 2019 2:19 pm  

The Phantom Horseman wrote:

In fairness, that's a very different kettle of fish to your previous suggestion that "the SL club tell the 'partner' club who and when will play for said partner club".

Well Castleford certainly told us that Clark wasn't going to play for us in that particular game.

Re: new player(s) : Tue Nov 12, 2019 2:22 pm  

faxcar wrote:

Clearly you don’t understand how the partnership works.

Both clubs know any offered player can be withdrawn at anytime and have appropriate back up plans.

Just like you would do if someone fell ill at the last minute or got injured in the warm up Fax simply brought in the 18th player who would have been involved in the pre match training and build up process precisely to cause the minimum disruption.

That is exactly what RM said at the time, that he would have liked a bit more size and grunt but it did not interfere with game plans or affect the result.

To say the SL club are some sort of dictatorship that Fax have bow down

The level of misrepresentation of our own club is embarrassing to be honest.

To say it didn't interfere with the game plan beggars belief.

Re: new player(s) : Tue Nov 12, 2019 2:38 pm  

Hudd-Shay wrote:

To say it didn't interfere with the game plan beggars belief.

Really.

To say 1 player of Mitch’s standard who had never trained or played for Fax before and can’t be arsed according to you if he did play could be so badly missed and have such a negative impact especially when you say we only get their cast offs.

Now that does beggar belief.

Re: new player(s) : Tue Nov 12, 2019 3:16 pm  

Hudd-Shay wrote:

Well Castleford certainly told us that Clark wasn't going to play for us in that particular game.

I'm concerned now. My son's playing junior football this weekend.

If I have to pull him out on the morning of the game, because of illness or another reason, do you think the other parents will believe that I am dictating who and when will play for the club?

Re: new player(s) : Tue Nov 12, 2019 4:21 pm  

Hudd-Shay wrote:

To say it didn't interfere with the game plan beggars belief.

Another thought.
Mitch is a prop who at best would be on the pitch for say a couple of spells totalling 30 to 40 mins.
The game plan as far as he was concerned would be.
Drive it in hard and tackle hard and get on top of your opposite number.
It’s not like he would be involved in dictating plays or anything.

Re: new player(s) : Tue Nov 12, 2019 4:39 pm  

The Phantom Horseman wrote:

I'm concerned now. My son's playing junior football this weekend.

If I have to pull him out on the morning of the game, because of illness or another reason, do you think the other parents will believe that I am dictating who and when will play for the club?

No problems with the other parents but Hudds will probably never watch them play again.