Keiththered wrote:
Dave K. wrote:
It may be a cup final in your eyes.
Plus that was different as they were season long loans not just for one game.
Plus that was under our previous coaches, which myself and others critised for not playing enough young kids.
I'd be disappointed if Hull did the same.
I’m sure FC will never do anything like that. TS or any subsequent coach will definitely not want to disappoint you Dave.
As Dave has said they were long term loans which no one had or has issues with and that is totally different to 1 game loan deals. Also as Dave states a number of people were disappointed myself included we didn't play the young lads more, even Hodgson himself admitted that was a mistake.
As Hull FC supporter rugby league fan, if as a club we did short term loans for 1 game instead of using our reserves & academy players I'd be very disappointed in the club.
If teams start doing 1 week loan deals then what is the point of having squads as that's the whole purpose of a 1st team squad thats larger than the 17 that take to the field. This is just another example of why the reserve league should be enforced properly and all SL clubs should have suitable academies.
In all honesty its a bit of a smack in the face for the academy and reserve players at Rovers if they are over looked for one of the loan players and given the outrage when the club were denied an Elite licence you'd think that as a club you'd be able to cover 1 game with players from within the club.
Think this is another example of why the game is such a mess when there little or no incentive for clubs to promote their own players.
No one is against loans but the rules should be any loans has to be for a minimum 4 weeks.
