As has been said though Rhinoms,he was offered a deal,one above the usual contract offered to players of his standing.WHEN it was offered should not really make too much difference. If he had any commitment to wanting to become a first teamer,like the generation of players who have enjoyed the last decade of success did, he would have signed it as it is clear of late that he was going to get chances in the team.

Indeed ....very unreasonable not to have [ibeen[/i happy [ibeing[/i (hope that's right wheels?) back up to the likes of Bailey and Kirke

. He would be a Leeds player: enough said.

He is 18 years old, of course he will be back up to senior players for the next season or two while he adapts and grows into being a SL prop.You tell me a prop of his age who is commanding a place in a top end SL team at his age? He was starting to make the matchday 19 so i think that should have been enough to show the lad he was highly thought of.

No argument. Regardless of age I too would be happy to be back up to the man mountain that is Ian Kirke.

Hey, i cant disagree regards Lord Lucan, ive made my opinions about him quite clear on his personal thread

Does he like cake?

So the lad himself has said Leeds offered him a contract before his agent touted him to NZ. Brian McDermott himself has said the contract was above what the club would usually offer a player at his stage of development.

I think unless those criticizing the club are willing to acceot these as facts there's little point in further discussion, unless you're happy to discuss the premise that black is white.

G1 - I've tried your approach several times. Apparently it also makes no difference whatsoever that the Warriors' approach is unprecedented - the club should have been ready for it, and have had Baldwinson and Tonks contracted 'just in case'.

It should also be added that there is no indication that the Warriors plan for either Baldwinson or Tonks to play anything other than U20s next year. See also Daniel Smith at Souths.

Why did they see priority in signing up Kike and Kylie at first part of season, where nobody was sniffing around, and there is a deadline well into the season before clubs can talk to them, yet let there identified future planned stars wait?

The unprecedented makes no difference, the priorities were wrong.

Shame - real shame, I was looking forward to seeing Baldwinson break through to the first team in much the same way as when Ward did.

I as said earlier in this thread, Wigan did everything possible to hold on to Tomkins to try and stop him from going to NZ and they failed so what chance, realistically, did we have when trying to hang on to a couple of academy lads?

How long have these lads been seen as having such high potential?

Why is it a question of priorities? Why because they sign player A does it mean they're not trying to sign player B?

Because player B & C in this scenario, were not offered conracts at the same time as your player A's. When in fact they should have been offered before them.

Genuinely gutted about Baldwinson's departure from the club but as G1 said the club did offer the player more than what they normally offer to a player at this stage in his development. There's very little more the club could have done and NZ Warriors seem to be the real deal at the moment when it comes to signing top players as seen with Sam Tomkins.

Leeds Rhinos won't be held to ransom to anybody but it'll be interesting to see how these next ten years pan out now there's a real danger that clubs from the NRL seem determined to sign anyone of quality up from Super League.

Bailey has re-signed

Your argument doesn't hold water now and didn't even before the real facts came out. Given that Baldwinson was hyped up to be the new JP and everyone connected with the development side of the club was talking his stock up why would he not think he had a great future at Leeds? It is not logical.

Even if he had had the NZ offer before one from Leeds as you have stated as a fact (but which is not the case according to the player and the 1st team coach) then surely he would have discussed this at length with the club that has spent so much on his development. If he didn't then shame on him. If he did but wanted more money than the club's valuation then so be it. Thats business.

It is not closing the stable door at all. It is obvious that this player has had his head turned by promises from agents (who want to earn a commission) and maybe too much adulation from junior coaches and fans too making it inevitable that this would have happened anyway to this particular teenager. But please do not keep making out this player felt he didn't have a future at Leeds. He has chosen to go for the money and a future in the NRL. Good luck to the lad I hope he makes it.

Why do you assume that Leeds prioritised Leuluia & Kirke? Because they accepted and the 2 young lads didn't? Leuluia for example had already expressed his desire to carry on at Leeds so I doubt much time or effort went into resigning him, likewise I doubt resigning Kirke took up a massive chunk of GH's time. In reality it was probably two of the quickest and effortless contract negotiations GH has had to do.

Players B & C are (rightly or wrongly) successful first 17 players, who have much influence on the bottom line of the club (success and therefore income). Their talents are on display, and could easily have been offered deals by other SL clubs at any time. As it has always done with this group of players, this club rewards loyalty.

I don't know when the youngsters were offerend contracts, but there is no reason why they wouldn't be able to hand out contracts in parallel. It may be that they were delaying to see how they developed, with respect to leaving it late to get them a better deal. I would certainly prefer a contract as a person with a few first team games under my belt, than someone who is just a prospect.

Exactly, what are the club supposed to do?!

Bailey apparently had an offer on the table from Brisbane but has signed a new deal at Leeds.

Might be wrong, but does he have kids over here that don't live with him? May have been a contributing factor to him staying the UK if so.

AG-His lad goes to the same school as my youngest don't know if he has anymore kids though.

Not sure what you are trying to argue there? You are basically proving the point, that Kirke and Kylie could have easily waited until later in the season for offers, instead of making the youngsters wait for their offers.

Leeds offer was the first one Baldwinson had on the table.

It was higher than usual for a player of such limited first team experience.

He chose to stall on it, got an offer from NZ to go play Under 20s over there and took that instead.

Not sure quite what else the club could have done, or where the relevance is in the timing of other deals. Leeds got in first, couldn't agree a deal for whatever reason and the lad chose to go elsewhere.

Well done to him, but he's not the first junior at any club to think the grass is greener somewhere else and he won't be the last.

Not sure why there is this made up thing of Leeds offered first. But more importantly, there is two players not one.