Zak is very big on his mates, always having the lads round and having a laugh. Don't think he would move to Aus, and not even contemplate Wigan. He absolutely loves it at Leeds. I don't believe for one minute that Leeds or Zak would consider a move.

Good to see in an ever changing world some things remain constant. G1 and Bloodbath defending the below average Bailey.

To think we got rid of Amor and kept Bailey.

One of Zak's best mates is Josh Carnley - just saying.

No he isn't, Just saying like.

They may well have got close on tour for National sides. But they don't spend time normal week to week. Hardakers best mates are Ponte lads.

Funny enough though, I was just talking to one of his best mates this morning, considering these rumours. And he has confirmed that Zak is actually discussing new terms with Leeds, and has been for the past month, he want's more money. And yes, he has had words in his ear of how much he can earn elsewhere. Has no desire to leave at all, but as with a few of the Leeds players at the moment apparently, money is now more important than playing at Leeds, and it is not just Zak that is considering what's out there.

If you read my post it was more critical of you as opposed to defending Mr Bailey.

Who are the others and also considering the length of his current deal i'd the say club definately hold the cards with this one but i personally wouldn't be-grudge players of Hardakers ilk getting more money even if we have to release fringe players and ones no longer required i.e Moore & Kirke

Well you can't just release players willy nilly. You'd have to buy out their contract, and that would count on the salary cap, so you'd not make space on it anyway (unless we had space this year I guess). You're also assuming that the players mentioned are not in the plans of the management team. Again, I think this unlikely. Moore may want more gametime, but I'd think that we are quite happy having strength in depth in the front row. I can't see us wanting rid of Kirke. WE may not understand it, but he is clearly valued by the club. Hardaker would be worth an upgrade, just to reflect his rise over the last 2 years. I would expect this to be making him in line with his international colleagues at club level

I don't know. The person in question said half the team, to which I said don't be stupid. He then said over stated, but Zak is not the only one.

He has three years left doesn't he? I would say the club holds the cards. But then again I would have said the same with regards Buderus, Eastwood, Harris, and Innes, also.

I see yer point Gotcha but Eastwood ,Buderus & Innes all returned home down under plus we got a decent fee for Harris to switch codes iirc.
The Hardaker situation if there is one is more straight forward imo and is more easily resolved with the Club in more control than the player.

I still think many supporters dont understand how a contract works. Kirke signed a 2 year extension last season so has a deal till the end of 2015. He isnt just going to give up that money.

So looks like Zak didn't have a clause triggering an automatic pay rise when he got capped by England?

That said, the lad is the best out-and-out fullback in SL. Should be one of our top earners.

I would say he has a few ahead of him in the salary list currently so cannot seeing Leeds being able to hand out a large chunk of salary:

Sinfield
Peacock
McGuire
JJB
Burrows
Moon
Delaney
Briscoe
Watkins

So would say he is in the mid range for the salary at Leeds, especially as he signed a lengthly contract last year would suggest a yearly increase, plus possible england rep top up, although he is currently in the knights squad.

If he wants more money, then it might be more than rumours, would not be surprised if he went this year or next, Leeds have a strong pool of young talent and some high earning oldies so somewhere we have to expect a couple leaving us for a better deal.

He probably does ok.
Slightly O/T, I had an interesting conversation with a former member of staff about the way in which players at Leeds are contracted - and no, I'm not about to reveal my source.
I was told that the senior squad are almost entirely salaried, with very few appearance-related add-ons. Largely fixed costs, so easy to calculate implications in terms of the SC.
Conversely, lower ranked players are not that well paid but do get decent money added on for playing appearances. This is supposed to incentivise them wrt making the first team.
However - and it's quite a big however - although we're not at the limit of the SC, were we to play these youngsters week in, week out we would soon be pushing the limits. So, were the coach to dip into his pool of junior talent too early in the season only for us to hit a late-season injury crisis, then we'd be searching desperately for a paddle (or joining the list of cap-busting cheats).
Sheds a bit of light on the match day selection process and perhaps explains how some of the more perplexing decisions came about.

Don't believe for one minute Peacock will be a top earner. He's had two new contracts over last couple of years, each to add length to the contrac, and most probably a reduction where he gets the security rather than the bundle of cash.

The fact is, in terms of longevity, potential, and ability, Hardaker really should be finding himself in the top 5 earners at the club, and deservedly so.

I know exactly how a contract works and releases have been negotiated many times in the past and i'm pretty sure IF it was made clear he had no future with us and was just gonna be a Hunslet squad player he'd move on.

Really, Peacock is and has been one of the best SL players for the last ten years, you think he is not up there in salary....?

I understand your points on Hardacker, BUT his contract was drafted prior to last season those factors you mention don't have much impact, also going with a previous poster the younger players (hardacker was viewed as this for his last contract agreement) are on a lower wage with the play bonuses, he should be doing more than ok for a young guy in his 20's but with spotlight comes expectations and if he wants to be a top earner right now he shoud maybe move on or chill out a little and stay on at Leeds who gave him the chance and will repay him, if maybe a little later than he wants.....

This ties in with what i have been informed too Clearwing

It also clears a few things up regarding why certain players have subsequently chosen to move to other clubs whilst on the periphery of our regular starting first team

I had this discussion both on here and on the Bulls forum when Nick Scruton left us to move over to the Bulls

I had it on as good authority as you probably could get that Scrutes left the Rhinos solely due to the implications within his contract that wouldn't enable him to earn the maximum amount possible should he get injured

Where as the Bulls offered slightly more than the Rhinos did for his overall contract, but that he received the whole amount whether he played or not and thus making him a salaried player if you like

Before it gets mentioned as a possible reason for Scruton leaving, then all is long gone forgiven between Scrutes and JP and that they are still good mates

Having Scruton on a performance and appearance related contract doesn't look a bad choice, given his record since joining Bradford, does it?

Some of the top earners may need to move over for the kids, McGuire, Peacock, JJB

Definitely food for thought.

That's a shame might have given you and G1 an excuse for acting like prats.

Still looking forward to the day Bailey is shipped to Hunslet.

So let me get this right, defending a player that has been an integral part of the first team for the past decade, one who is nearly always in the starting 17 under 3 successive coaches, a player with six championship winning rings (or would have if someone hadn’t nicked them) and former international make you a prat?

Does this also account for Sinfield, McGuire, Burrow and JJB?

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, even if it so far off the mark they're facing the opposite direction.

As Dirty Harry once said "Opinions are like assholes. Everybody's got one and everyone thinks everyone else's stinks"

Playing devils advocate
According to a lot on here it does if you defend kirke. The 5 winners rings, being picked by 3 different coaches etc should be discarded "he is a lucky squad player lucky to be around a great team"
The same could be said of bailey.

For me he has had two seasons I have been really hopeful that he would kick on but he never really has done 2004 and 2012.

I have always thought the reaction bailey gets is OTT. Away fans vastly under rate him but at the same time I think he is generally over rated by our fans

Thats a fair point Ferdy i think RB when available has been pretty poor this year as has Mcguire but saying that i'd still retain both over Kirke!
With regards to Mags i'd like to see Sutcliffe starting at 6 next year and see if he (Mags) comes back with a resturn to good form from the bench.
Alse re-Kirke i thought he ended the season well & really stood up but wehn the injuries hit and we needed the experienced players to take a leading role he vanished and for me thats another reason i wouldn't have retained him.
Also re-Bailey i'd have offered a 1yr deal ony with the incentive to earn a longer deal or be moved on.

Yes.