I considered Buderus but the fact he played in Leeds second game of the season knocked that idea on the head. His knee injury was only discovered (apparently) in his fourty or so minutes V Wakefield.




Yes there is a difference. I'd still expect Leeds to take a longer term view over a player's current injuries with a good medical assesment.



Accepted that hindsight is a wonderful thing but in this case has reality played out any differently to the medical expectation?



Quite, so disappointing Leeds were unable to make this blinding capture for themselves for 2010. That said he's a left centre so Leeds' move for 2009 with Senior still under contract would have likely as not seen him used elsewhere.

It doesnt take a dumb a55 to note that

a) Leeds get quite a few thousend more per game then Saints at £18 3,000 more for instance is £54,000 per game.

b) bigger fan base = more replica gear lets say we sell 3,000 more shirts per season too thats £120,000

Thats just 2 examples i've come up with.

Leeds Rugby LTD generate much more then Saints do so where does the money go?

there is hospitality, Cricket revenue when they use the pitch as a car park, money spent behind the bar on matchdays with having bigger crowds.

Saints and Leeds have been on a par recently only this year our development has been poor

so where is all the money going?

I'm just confused by the situation

I really am. We're crying out for a centre and we've let 2 top class one's go to Wigan ans Saints....i'm gobsmacked to be honest, i've just got to beleive they have several other irons in the fire..

I don't know what the medical assessment was pre-surgery, so I couldn't possibly comment.

Whether Leeds could or should have signed him up for 2010 is another question altogether. Perhaps they tried and the player chose Saints.

On the face of it Leeds' turnover will be bigger than that of St Helens and possibly any other competitor out there in SL.

The bottom line is that each and every club can only spend £1.6 million on 1st grade player contracts or whatever the cap is currently set at.

The disappointment to me is that Leeds apparently choose not to spend the full amount that they are allowed to under the present system.

I wouldn't wish Leeds to break the salary cap (not by one penny and not for one second) however anyone can avoid breaking the salary cap if they underspend by thousands. As an accounting exercise that to me is almost as bad as overspending by a similar amount, when it occurs in a season where the squad is lacking in quantity and arguably quality also.

Wouldn't it be fun to have no salary cap for a decade... just to see...

Thats why central park is a supermarket!

The Joker informed me that Leeds would definitely sign him, i'm not trusting him anymore.

It is a similar situation to when saints signed flannery, he had a badly broken lek and hadn't walked in 6 months, but is now one of the most solid back rowers in the comp. As you say you have to take a longer term veiw. I really think Leeds loss is our gain on this occasion

One could wonder whether the expensive maintainance/repair/rebuilding required on various parts of the ground is having an impact? Impossible to say really.
What I would disagree with is the wisdom of the notion:

IF (Income) - (Expenditure on Players) = x (where x>0)
AND New players = 0
x = (Expenditure on Rugby Union Team)

What's one of those ? sounds nasty though..

I'd love it if Leeds carnegietykes went out of existance.........................
The pitch would be better for it...

Its a lot like a broken leg, but hurts more

Ah right...does it make more of a snapping sound

I'm led to believe it does

I agree with that, but Leeds have had their fingers burned on a few overseas crocks who never fully recovered in the past, so I can understand their reticence on this one.

Just for clarity the notion you are disagreeing with has never been one I have held.

A business with a turnover reputed to be in excess of £6 million should have few or no issues spending their full allowance within a salary cap set at £1.6 million. The personnel losses from the last two season's champion squad have not been adequately replaced either externally or internally. I've watched Leeds long enough to know that any period of relative success is likely to be fleeting enough as it is without adopting a self imposed handicap which I fear is the case this season.

For all Leeds claim they would rather have had a game last weekend the free weekends their early Challenge Cup exit will provide may yet paper over the cracks of a limited squad.

We sign who we sign, and we play who we play.

Should the fact that we have risen so far under our current leadership, give us grounds for doubting there ability to maintain or even increase our current standing within the super league fraternity?

And isn't Flannery already one short in the testicle department? I suppose we could always ask Leon to confirm.

flannery is gash mate!! totally gash!! people on your board have said this even after his one good game in a saints shirt which was against us!!

Not for a Leeds fan it wouldn't.

Quote me on it...

That must be in with a shout for the "most clueless post of year award"......

It was announced [url=http://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/leeds-rhinos-news/Rhinos-sign-world-star-Buderus.3873905.jp13th March 2008[/url. Months before would be when, sometime 2007?

I'm Disappointed that we didn't sign Sia Soliola, It no doubt strengthens St Helens in the Centre department unless of course that it is true that they are losing Matt Gidley because if signed as a direct replacement Soliola doesn't possess the skills that Gidley brings to the team...