RLFANS.COM
Celebrating
22 years service to
the Rugby League
Community!
WWW.RLFANS.COM • View topic - Academy Prospects
Re: Academy Prospects Mon Jul 19, 2021 12:28 pm  

User avatarBumpyMcbump wrote:
BumpyMcbump User avatar
Stevo's Armpit

Joined: Sat Jun 26, 2021 1:35 pm
Posts: 83
Dave K. wrote:
Slight disappointment, I'm sure we want to keep him but cant match his offer, I'd rather keep our other 3 props who will have all had increased offers.

Really need Bowden to step up and stay fit, along with Taylor

why are we offering three other props pay rises, what justifies this in the current financial situation, if higher earning players are demanding pay rises we should call their bluff and let them go, we don't want mercenaries at our club who ignore the bigger picture.
If we lose Fash on that basis and then sign someone else to replace him that would stink. Who are we going to get for same money that does what fash does?
This just smacks of what happened with Chris Green, could have been a decent loose forward or bulked up a bit more and still have some of his pace, was misused by Radford most of the time but still did a decent job for the pay rate, and then when we got rid we had the usual 'we need another prop' comment.
It certainly tells youngsters that we are still a club that would rather sign externally and offload our home grown talent, how many do we have in our run on 13 when everyone is fit, Ans ONE, and that's Houghton. Sure other home grown players are on the bench every week and in the run on 13 but it sends out the wrong signal to younger players IMO if we're giving the bigger earners more but letting our youngsters go (again).
Re: Academy Prospects Mon Jul 19, 2021 1:49 pm  

Dave K. wrote:
Dave K. 100% League Network
100% League Network

Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2003 2:48 am
Posts: 20510
Location: Back in Hull.
BumpyMcbump wrote:
why are we offering three other props pay rises, what justifies this in the current financial situation, if higher earning players are demanding pay rises we should call their bluff and let them go, we don't want mercenaries at our club who ignore the bigger picture.
If we lose Fash on that basis and then sign someone else to replace him that would stink. Who are we going to get for same money that does what fash does?
This just smacks of what happened with Chris Green, could have been a decent loose forward or bulked up a bit more and still have some of his pace, was misused by Radford most of the time but still did a decent job for the pay rate, and then when we got rid we had the usual 'we need another prop' comment.
It certainly tells youngsters that we are still a club that would rather sign externally and offload our home grown talent, how many do we have in our run on 13 when everyone is fit, Ans ONE, and that's Houghton. Sure other home grown players are on the bench every week and in the run on 13 but it sends out the wrong signal to younger players IMO if we're giving the bigger earners more but letting our youngsters go (again).



If you dont think Satae deserves a payrise then you havrnt watched him this season,if we dont then we would lose him to another superleague club, that's how it works. The same with Sao and Brown, these would have been a greater loss than Fash and harder to replace.

Releasing Green has been justified, inconsistent and always injured.
Re: Academy Prospects Mon Jul 19, 2021 4:52 pm  

User avatarChris71 wrote:
Chris71 User avatar
Silver RLFANS Member
Silver RLFANS Member

Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2004 10:46 am
Posts: 5607
Location: Never never land away with the fairies
Dave K. wrote:
If you dont think Satae deserves a payrise then you havrnt watched him this season,if we dont then we would lose him to another superleague club, that's how it works. The same with Sao and Brown, these would have been a greater loss than Fash and harder to replace.

Releasing Green has been justified, inconsistent and always injured.


Agree there to be honest Dave. Satae especially has earned an improved deal along with Sao, both of whom have really stood up to the plate in the absence of both Taylor and Bowden. Brown is a very promising young player who will be garnering interest from other clubs and with the lack of genuine quality in the prop dept around the game then it comes down to a bit of a bidding war if we do not make fair an decent offers.

Obviously is another club comes along and offers a player more than we are prepared or able to offer due to A) WHat the club feel they are worth B) Pay structure in terms of cap C) Other areas in the squad that need addressing etc then theres not much the club can do as seem with Coote's move.

As for Green I don't think there is an argument to be had, the decision to let him go was correct, as has been proved as he's hardly ripped it up at Wakefield has he?
I really enjoy long walks especially when they are taken by people I don't like!
Re: Academy Prospects Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:46 pm  

mwindass wrote:
mwindass Strong-running second rower
Strong-running second rower

Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2008 6:40 pm
Posts: 406
BumpyMcbump wrote:
why are we offering three other props pay rises, what justifies this in the current financial situation, if higher earning players are demanding pay rises we should call their bluff and let them go, we don't want mercenaries at our club who ignore the bigger picture.
If we lose Fash on that basis and then sign someone else to replace him that would stink. Who are we going to get for same money that does what fash does?
This just smacks of what happened with Chris Green, could have been a decent loose forward or bulked up a bit more and still have some of his pace, was misused by Radford most of the time but still did a decent job for the pay rate, and then when we got rid we had the usual 'we need another prop' comment.
It certainly tells youngsters that we are still a club that would rather sign externally and offload our home grown talent, how many do we have in our run on 13 when everyone is fit, Ans ONE, and that's Houghton. Sure other home grown players are on the bench every week and in the run on 13 but it sends out the wrong signal to younger players IMO if we're giving the bigger earners more but letting our youngsters go (again).


We just forgetting Taylor, Houghton, Lane, Cator, Brown, Scott have played most weeks.

McNamara and Wynne have been used when needed.

Bowden has played every week he's been fit. Not bad for a team that doesn't play local lads.
Re: Academy Prospects Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:52 pm  

bonaire wrote:
bonaire Bronze RLFANS Member
Bronze RLFANS Member

Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2014 5:39 pm
Posts: 4521
Chris71 wrote:
Agree there to be honest Dave. Satae especially has earned an improved deal along with Sao, both of whom have really stood up to the plate in the absence of both Taylor and Bowden. Brown is a very promising young player who will be garnering interest from other clubs and with the lack of genuine quality in the prop dept around the game then it comes down to a bit of a bidding war if we do not make fair an decent offers.

Obviously is another club comes along and offers a player more than we are prepared or able to offer due to A) WHat the club feel they are worth B) Pay structure in terms of cap C) Other areas in the squad that need addressing etc then theres not much the club can do as seem with Coote's move.

As for Green I don't think there is an argument to be had, the decision to let him go was correct, as has been proved as he's hardly ripped it up at Wakefield has he?


Dont know what happened to Chris Green because if you look at his performances during 2016 and 2017 especially the Wembley matches both him and Bowden were very impressive.Its not often when you rotate your first choice front rows you dont see any reduction in go forward.
Yes he was injured but not long term like Bowden and Taylor.
We have seen how Bowden has struggled for form since his serious injury and i have to say i am concerned that we may have seen the best of Taylor.
Taylor played only 11 matches in 2020 season and looks like missing a minimum of four months this season and like Bowden think he will struggle to get back to any form.
Re: Academy Prospects Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:54 pm  

bonaire wrote:
bonaire Bronze RLFANS Member
Bronze RLFANS Member

Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2014 5:39 pm
Posts: 4521
mwindass wrote:
We just forgetting Taylor, Houghton, Lane, Cator, Brown, Scott have played most weeks.

McNamara and Wynne have been used when needed.

Bowden has played every week he's been fit. Not bad for a team that doesn't play local lads.



Taylor?
hasnt played for 3 months
Re: Academy Prospects Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:55 pm  

ccs wrote:
ccs Silver RLFANS Member
Silver RLFANS Member

Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2011 5:58 pm
Posts: 5096
bonaire wrote:
Yes he was injured but not long term like Bowden and Taylor.


So a ruptured Achilles doesn't count.
Re: Academy Prospects Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:59 pm  

mwindass wrote:
mwindass Strong-running second rower
Strong-running second rower

Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2008 6:40 pm
Posts: 406
bonaire wrote:
Taylor?
hasnt played for 3 months


:roll:

Point still stands. Local players playing for local team.
Re: Academy Prospects Wed Jul 28, 2021 5:14 pm  

User avatarComeOnYouUll wrote:
ComeOnYouUll User avatar
Gold RLFANS Member
Gold RLFANS Member

Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 19520
Ellam wrote:
Fash definately signed for Huddersfield


Definitely not #intheknow

https://www.hullfc.com/blog/2021/07/28/fash-signs-two-year-contract-extension/
Re: Academy Prospects Wed Jul 28, 2021 5:41 pm  
Marcus's Bicycle Free-scoring winger
Free-scoring winger

Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 6:29 pm
Posts: 1754


Good news. He's been our most improved player over the last 2 years. When he started I didn't think he would be good enough for SL due to his lack of size but I'm pleased he's proved me wrong.
PreviousNext

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Dave K., Irregs#16, Irregular Hoops, K-Diddy, Karen, Marcus's Bicycle, Paddyfc, REDWHITEANDBLUE, Rocknrolla69er, The FC Aces, thehullwhitestar, Yippee try yay and 217 guests

Quick Reply



Subject:
Message:

   
Please note using apple style emoji's can result in posting failures.

Return to Hull FC - blackandwhites.co.uk


When you register you get access to the live match scores, live match chat and you can post in the discussions on the forums.
YOU HAVE RL CHAT OFF
RLFANS Match Centre
Thu 16th Sep
SL RND: 25 Castleford24-40Warrington
Sun 12th Sep
SLRND: 24 Leigh26-18Wakefield
NRL RND: 26 Parramatta28-20Newcastle
CH RND: 21 Batley24-31Dewsbury
CH RND: 21 LondonB28-48Featherstone
CH RND: 21 Oldham24-38Newcastle
CH RND: 21 Whitehaven19-6Halifax
CH RND: 21 Widnes10-9Bradford
CH RND: 21 Sheffield28-34Swinton
L1 RND: 21 Workington14-32Hunslet
L1 RND: 21 Doncaster26-28Keighley
L1 RND: 21 Rochdale50-22Coventry
WSL RND: 15 CastlefordW6-50St.HelensW
WSL RND: 15 Wire W18-34FeatherstoneW
WSL RND: 15 LeedsW28-10WiganW
Sat 11th Sep
SL RND: 24 Hull FC0-10Wigan
SL RND: 24 Warrington20-19Salford
SL RND: 24 Catalans18-30Huddersfield
SL RND: 24 Hull KR26-19Castleford
NRL
LIVE
Sydney25-24Gold Coast
This is an inplay table and positions can change as matches are in play.
National Rugby League 2021 ROUND : 25
 PLDFADIFFPTS
Melbourne 24 815 316 499 42
Penrith 24 640 280 360 42
Souths 24 775 453 322 40
Manly 24 744 492 252 32
Sydney 24 636 475 161 32
Parramatta 24 566 457 109 30
Newcastle 24 428 571 -143 24
Gold Coast 24 568 553 15 20
 
Cronulla 24 512 556 -44 20
Canberra 24 481 578 -97 20
St.George 24 474 616 -142 16
NZ Warriors 24 453 624 -171 16
Wests 24 500 714 -214 16
Brisbane 24 446 695 -249 14
NQL Cowboys 24 460 748 -288 14
Canterbury 24 340 710 -370 6
This is an inplay table and positions can change as matches are in play.
Betfred Super League XXVI ROUND : 25
 PLDFADIFFPTSDIFFWP%
Catalans 22 680 386 294 38 176.17 86.36
St.Helens 20 534 203 331 32 263.05 80
Warrington 21 588 354 234 31 166.10 73.81
Wigan 24 375 377 -2 28 99.47 58.33
Hull KR 19 485 422 63 20 114.93 52.63
Leeds 23 520 428 92 24 121.50 52.17
 
Castleford 23 439 552 -113 22 79.53 47.83
Hull FC 20 397 432 -35 17 91.90 42.50
Huddersfield 23 418 492 -74 16 84.96 34.78
Wakefield 23 438 536 -98 16 81.72 34.78
Salford 21 376 572 -196 12 65.73 28.57
Leigh 21 332 828 -496 4 40.10 9.52
This is an inplay table and positions can change as matches are in play.
Betfred Championship 2021 ROUND : 20
 PLDFADIFFPTSDIFFWP%
Toulouse 13 616 112 504 26 550 100
Featherstone 19 817 254 563 34 321.65 94.74
Halifax 19 512 323 189 26 158.51 68.42
Bradford 18 483 455 28 24 106.15 66.67
LondonB 18 504 499 5 21 101 63.89
Batley 19 525 370 155 24 141.89 63.16
 
Whitehaven 20 447 496 -49 21 90.12 52.50
York 19 470 455 15 16 103.30 42.11
Widnes 19 458 509 -51 15 89.98 39.47
Newcastle 18 381 521 -140 13 73.13 36.11
Sheffield 18 382 553 -171 13 69.08 36.11
Dewsbury 19 308 570 -262 13 54.04 34.21
Oldham 19 270 691 -421 5 39.07 13.16
Swinton 20 354 719 -365 3 49.24 7.50
This is an inplay table and positions can change as matches are in play.
Betfred League One 2021 ROUND : 22
 PLDFADIFFPTSDIFFWP%
Barrow 17 596 275 321 27 216.73 79.41
Workington 15 471 310 161 21 151.94 70
Crusaders 17 539 410 129 22 131.46 64.71
Doncaster 17 472 390 82 22 121.03 64.71
Keighley 18 612 385 227 23 158.96 63.89
Hunslet 18 562 435 127 20 129.20 55.56
 
Rochdale 17 505 488 17 17 103.48 50
Coventry 17 407 460 -53 12 88.48 35.29
LondonS 18 292 577 -285 7 50.61 19.44
West Wales 18 208 896 -688 1 23.21 2.78
This is an inplay table and positions can change as matches are in play.
Betfred Womens Super League 2021 ROUND : 9
 PLDFADIFFPTSDIFFWP%
St.HelensW 7 370 36 334 12 1,027.78 85.71
WiganW 6 222 64 158 10 346.88 83.33
YorkW 6 186 102 84 8 182.35 66.67
CastlefordW 6 166 96 70 8 172.92 66.67
BradfordW 8 158 264 -106 6 59.85 37.50
Hudds W 7 104 288 -184 4 36.11 28.57
 
Wire W 8 150 334 -184 4 44.91 25
FeatherstoneW 8 122 338 -216 4 36.09 25
LeedsW 7 364 38 326 14 957.89 100
WakefieldW 7 50 332 -282 0 15.06 0
RLFANS Recent Posts




X
::::::::