George Lawler : Sat May 08, 2021 3:59 pm  

Sad news that George Lawler leaving at the end of the season
Has been a loyal player for the club, best of look to him in the future.
Hoping we can attract new blood for next season, I think trying to get Toby King going in the right direction but I think that it is been optimistic.

Re: George Lawler : Sun May 09, 2021 1:26 am  

Good player and you’ll be disappointed in losing him I’m sure. That said, he’ll stand a much better chance of winning something at his new club Warrington.

Re: George Lawler : Tue May 11, 2021 11:17 am  

It’s our clubs fault we should have tied him down to a long contract last year if not earlier. He will be another like Jon Wilkin a stalwart for another team & we get no financial gain out of the deal.

Re: George Lawler : Tue May 11, 2021 12:22 pm  

Beverley red wrote:

It’s our clubs fault we should have tied him down to a long contract last year if not earlier. He will be another like Jon Wilkin a stalwart for another team & we get no financial gain out of the deal.

i doubt it , john was very young when he left,, we were in the championship at the time george is 26 totally different players

Re: George Lawler : Tue May 11, 2021 2:39 pm  

supersport wrote:

i doubt it , john was very young when he left,, we were in the championship at the time george is 26 totally different players

I did not realise he was as old as that? I think my point is still valid though, we should be tying home grown players to long contracts so at least we can recoupe a fee if they move on. We would be gambling up to a point but if the contracts were written up properly it could work. Different in my day once you signed the club owned you until they decided to release you. I am not suggesting we would want to go back to those days.

Re: George Lawler : Tue May 11, 2021 8:11 pm  

Rovers did try to keep Lawler with a significantly improved long term offer plus a testimonial. He's had his head turned though and was determined to leave.

Coaches appreciate Lawler because of his work ethic, stamina and ability to play 80 minutes. Having said that he isn't the biggest, doesn't break the line, doesn't offload and isn't the most skilful. He's a tough workhorse but limited. Rovers would have had to pay more than they thought he was worth to keep him and decided not to do that.

Litten is staying, Abdull is staying and others will be announced. The show goes on.

[Mild Rover]

Re: George Lawler : Sat May 15, 2021 10:06 am  

Beverley red wrote:

I did not realise he was as old as that? I think my point is still valid though, we should be tying home grown players to long contracts so at least we can recoupe a fee if they move on. We would be gambling up to a point but if the contracts were written up properly it could work. Different in my day once you signed the club owned you until they decided to release you. I am not suggesting we would want to go back to those days.

Lawler turns 26 on 1 September. There often seems to be a perception that local players are young and have lots of untapped potential compared even with younger non-locals.

Comments relating to the performance of ‘young’ Krissy Welham vs ‘Aussie’ Rhys Lovegrove have stuck in my memory because KW is 1 day older than than RL. Quite a few fans were keen to stick with James Green long term because props don’t hit their peak until a couple of years older than however old he happened to be at the time.

Tying players down also ties the club down. What if a player doesn’t develop as hoped (a frequent occurrence for Rovers home grown players over the last decade or so)? Or starts to get injured a lot? You’re then stuck with them on the payroll. Fees are pretty rare and small nowadays - I doubt Lawler would have attracted a big one if still under contract beyond this season.

Once you take sentiment out of it there’s no reason to worry about recouping a fee for Lawler more than there would be for Minchella or Storton. The feeling of possession and potential subsequent loss/disappointment associated with the academy system doesn’t make much rational sense. There’s more to rugby and life than just the rational, but it is always where you’re at that matters more than where you’re from - loads of our best and most favourite players have been adopted sons.

Re: George Lawler : Sat May 15, 2021 6:31 pm  

Mild Rover wrote:

Lawler turns 26 on 1 September. There often seems to be a perception that local players are young and have lots of untapped potential compared even with younger non-locals.

Comments relating to the performance of ‘young’ Krissy Welham vs ‘Aussie’ Rhys Lovegrove have stuck in my memory because KW is 1 day older than than RL. Quite a few fans were keen to stick with James Green long term because props don’t hit their peak until a couple of years older than however old he happened to be at the time.

Tying players down also ties the club down. What if a player doesn’t develop as hoped (a frequent occurrence for Rovers home grown players over the last decade or so)? Or starts to get injured a lot? You’re then stuck with them on the payroll. Fees are pretty rare and small nowadays - I doubt Lawler would have attracted a big one if still under contract beyond this season.

Once you take sentiment out of it there’s no reason to worry about recouping a fee for Lawler more than there would be for Minchella or Storton. The feeling of possession and potential subsequent loss/disappointment associated with the academy system doesn’t make much rational sense. There’s more to rugby and life than just the rational, but it is always where you’re at that matters more than where you’re from - loads of our best and most favourite players have been adopted sons.

well put sir