I don't see the Burgess and Lynch situation as being the same.

Selling Burgess was bad business for the club (assuming the pay off was the £40K quoted on here). Keeping him for a year, with his performances on the pitch and the feel good factor and good press off it (and I don't believe most players would coast for a season either) far outweigh the benefit of the transfer fee imo.

The deal with Lynch (again assuming its a "significant 6 figure sum" as quoted) is good business though and not a sign of poor management by the club. Some of my thinking here will depend on whether the remaining forwards step up and perform in the additional game time they will get - the assumption people make is that they won't increase their stats incrementally based on game time and close the gap with Lynch, I don't think that's a given and hope Koppy and Burgess continue to improve (and no I have nothing to back that up!) - and/or we make good use of some of the cap space for a replacement.

Another thing I'd been thinking before about talk of us having space under the cap was around players up for contract renewal soon. Look at the list of people finishing next year - Elima, Ainscough, Burgess, Donaldson, Addy, McEvoy. We need cap space to be sure of retaining some/all of these players. Making knee jerk signings and using up cap space for 2/3 years on average players isn't good management. I'd put Jeffries and Syke's signings in that bracket. Anyway my point is losing Lynch's salary may help with retaining up coming players and be beneficial in the long run.

Bottom line for me is Bulls aren't going to win anything next season with or without Lynch and Raynor. Aim should be to develop a winning team for 2, 3 even 4 seasons down the line with out going bust. Planning recruitment purely aimed at making the play offs as if thats the limit of our aspirations doesn't do it for me. It should be about progress to winning trophies.

Of course I've been drinking since lunchtime so could be talking total baelycks...

Because he is an ar5ehole who would not be supported by any FC fan.

I chuffed to bits that we have signed Andy. Felt disappointed when we didn't get him from Cas and despite his age I am certain that he will do a great job for us over the next 3 to 5 years.

Im 50/50 wether letting lynch go is a good or bad thing.
The major down side like previously mentioned is, it shows that we are willing to sell any off our players to any team!! You would never see leeds selling sinfield to say saints, or warrington letting briers go , etc etc . That said i don't really believe lynch should ever of been named our captain in the first place, captains that have respect from the referees can gain so much more for their side during the game and you could tell with the way the ref's spoke to lynch that he didn't have that respect at all.
Look we are going to miss his work ethic in yards up field , however he is quite prone (especially in big games) of crucial errors, he does give quite a few stupid penalties away and can become quite slack at try line defense. i just hope we do sign a decent prop to replace him and not give the old " we will give youth a chance" , that would be no good for anyone and our pack would get murdered next year if we do.

OK. I kept my own counsel on Lynch for a while because I had a pretty damn good idea he would be probably be going from a bit ago, and said I would keep a low profile over it.

IF this frees up cap space so we can sign a marquee player who can make THE difference (although that seems to require Jeffries to be off quota and Sammut Fed trained? Mat, you are the guru on this?) then OK, I'll buy it. Win for Bulls win for Hull FC and most importantly win for Andy...that's fine.

If we have lost Lynch and get no-one of consequence to replace him though, then its JP all over again. And I'll go fekking ballistic. You watch me.

Doh.

Quote ="Adeybull"OK. I kept my own counsel on Lynch for a while because I had a pretty damn good idea he would be probably be going from a bit ago, and said I would keep a low profile over it. IF this frees up cap space so we can sign a marquee player who can make THE difference (although that seems to require Jeffries to be off quota and Sammut Fed trained? Mat, you are the guru on this?) then OK, I'll buy it. Win for Bulls win for Hull FC and most importantly win for Andy...that's fine. If we have lost Lynch and get no-one of consequence to replace him though, then its JP all over again. And I'll go fekking ballistic. You watch me.'" www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/s ... w_players/ Maybe Im reading something that's not there but I've thought ever since the 'I've given the players too much credit ' line that Potter didn't rate Lynch. Last week his attempts at saying he wanted him to stay were positively ambiguous. Considering the deal was on the table for a month I think Potter has players lined up to come in and isn't in the least sorry to see a big wage earner go.

Quote ="Adeybull"OK. I kept my own counsel on Lynch for a while because I had a pretty damn good idea he would be probably be going from a bit ago, and said I would keep a low profile over it. IF this frees up cap space so we can sign a marquee player who can make THE difference (although that seems to require Jeffries to be off quota and Sammut Fed trained? Mat, you are the guru on this?) then OK, I'll buy it. Win for Bulls win for Hull FC and most importantly win for Andy...that's fine. If we have lost Lynch and get no-one of consequence to replace him though, then its JP all over again. And I'll go fekking ballistic. You watch me.'" www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/s ... w_players/ Maybe Im reading something that's not there but I've thought ever since the 'I've given the players too much credit ' line that Potter didn't rate Lynch. Last week his attempts at saying he wanted him to stay were positively ambiguous. Considering the deal was on the table for a month I think Potter has players lined up to come in and isn't in the least sorry to see a big wage earner go.

People may not like this but i would sell ANY player in our squad who is 32, a high earner and more importantly in the last year of his contract who may have stated he wont be re-signing for £100k (if this is the amount received).

People are quire right Wire wouldnt sell Briers, Leeds Sinfield etc but i suspect our finances are not as well off as these clubs so needs must

Cashing in on an asset may not be ideal but money talks. Lets hope we can use Lynchs salary to attract an excellent replacement and we are still better off by the transfer fee. Easier said than done but lets give them a chance

It does sort of come across that the club didn't go out of its way to try and keep Lynch, so I hope you are right about there being a player or players lined up. My big worry, if that includes a strong antipodean candidate as has been rumoured, would be if we can't get a quota and non fed trained slot freed up in time. If we are relying on the RFL to rule on Sammut, I don't think the experience of recent years should fill us with confidence for a favourable ruling? That is my biggest concern. If we can bring in a strong replacement - and we sure need something to stiffen up the pack - then I expect history will show this as being a win-win-win as I indicated earlier. Bringing in some Joe Averages is precisely what we do NOT need right now though, as pretty well everyone has said. I HOPE there is a pretty strong candidate lined up and provisionally signed, just waiting on the necessary slots to become available.

I hope the T & A publish some sort of 'tribute' piece about Andy Lynch. Similar to that of Paul Deacon when he left. Link below: www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/s ... ul_Deacon/

I hope the T & A publish some sort of 'tribute' piece about Andy Lynch. Similar to that of Paul Deacon when he left. Link below: www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/s ... ul_Deacon/

Let's face it. We've probably not got anyone (decent) lined up as how did we know Hull were going to come in for Lynch and actually offer us some cash to get him? Lynch could have said, thanks, but no thanks, I'll stay where I am.

Most players are already under contract for next year and regardless of what people think I seriously doubt we'll be offering cash for a transfer fee to another club. Even if we did offer cash, don't kid yourselves that it would be for anyone who's any good or would be substantial enough to obtain a better replacement than Lynch.

In terms of the Raynor incident, someone will know and it will come out. It could be simply the likelihood he's off back to the nick, but there have been rumours of "incident/s" in the past year that could not be posted on here......

Pay tribute by all means but didn't Deacon actually win stuff. I wondered at the ovation Menzies got when Catalans came when in truth Henderson had actually been a real catalyst in our march to the Grand Final in 2005 and seemed to barley raise a clap. Menzies provided occasional moments of beauty in what was otherwise utter ignominy.

Seeing as (once again surprise surprise) the mods have completely ignored this since I reported you for it, I guess I will just have to bring you to task and once again, publicly, which seeing as the Mods claim they do not want, curiously seem to do nothing at all to keep it private.

This above here is yet another snidey dig at me and even if you lie and claim that it is not, perhaps then you can tell us why exactly you made the post because it is clearly nothing at all to do with the thread.

Apparently (and TBH I doubt it) the mods have spoken to you about this which means one of two things. 1. They haven't and therefore they are lying about having had a word with you, or, 2. They have done but you continue to ignore any warnings you have been given.

I wonder which one it is?

To make it worse, you hide behind snidey digs because clearly you are not "man enough" to name names (although I accept that it does help you keep on playing your phoney "nice guy" role without looking too obvious.)

I am sorry that this has been brought into the thread, especially given the warnings that were posted last week. However, warnings are there to be heeded by everyone and, as I said, I did as I was told and reported it as oppose to challenge it. As usual, nothing was done so why do the mods bother asking you to do something, then completely ignoring you when you do as you are asked?

Yes, public criticism of moderation, because when it is kept private then sod all is done if your face fits. (Unless of course the mods believe that random digs with no contribution to the thread whatsoever is perfectly acceptable if dear old Adey posts them?)

I believe he was actually calling me a fruitcake for stating my opinion that our 4 props are good enough - and if this is the case its only a bit of banter and have no issue with it

No, it wasn't. I was yet another Adeybull dig at the fact I suffer from depression. He has form for it. Still, I refer to the thread started last week by the mods....

=#FF0000Regardless of the any future results, most users would like to see posts worth reading without having to trawl through ones that do not. Therefore, if you post messages that:

1 Contribute nothing.
2 Are a personal attack on another poster.

You may well be banned for the foreseeable from RA&B.

If you are someone with 'history' with another poster on ra&b, please take a deep breath, respond to the issues rather than the poster and let the mods sort them out if they are out of line.

Mods may not be able to respond on a 24/7 basis so please bear with us.

Cheers

the mods

Interesting to see what happens next because Adey's post, (regardless of who it was aimed at) meets both points above.

Yes that one post contributes nothing, but he does contribute quite alot other than the occasional post,

and surely it would matter who it was aimed at where as IF it was suggested i am a fruitcake i have no cause for complaint as I dont see it as an attack only a friendly bit of banter which i can laugh off

Where IF it was aimed at you i can understand where your coming from but end of the day its only a bit of banter between a few fans, after all its only peoples opinions.

Well the club have said that it's nothing to do with the court case. As to WHAT he's actually done, unless there's a news story waiting to come out, I don't think we're going to know.

But I'd have to agree we'll have no one lined up. Simply because of how transfers work in RL. My understanding runs along the lines of; start of the year, agents will let clubs know that players x,y and z are OOC at the end of the year. The clubs themselves will know which of their players are OOC and of them which players they want to keep and how much they can afford to pay to keep them and which players they'll be letting go and how much that will free up on the salary cap. Clubs usually let players know if they're getting a new deal or will be leaving round about May time (this also seems to be reflected in a drop in form from some players).

Now, there is the anti-tamper deadline in September, however all that seems to do is stop clubs making "official" contract offers to players. However, that doesn't mean you don't have agents calling up a club just to pass the time of day and perhaps that club will say "hey, that player you represent, if he played here he'd be earning £x more".

But what that all boils down to is that any player of quality will have already got 2012 sorted out, unless a big money backed club comes calling with a transfer fee.

But it is not. It was done to mock and provoke a reaction and it has been going on long enough. As I said, I raised my concerns about it and complained but nothing gets done.

The post in red was a post from the mods. They made up the rules which I followed. Now we will see if anything will get done about it.

Of course, if, as you say that Adey contributes a lot elsewhere you would agree that he has no need to let himself down by making sly digs and frankly pointless post I am sure?

TBH mate, you're coming off a bit paranoid. Yes, you've got your issues with Adey, that doesn't mean every post he makes is some kind of slight aimed solely at you.

Possibly so. But who do YOU think it was aimed at????

Be honest now.

And, whilst you are being honest can you say that his post does NOT breach the two main rules the mods spoke of last week?

Well i think it was aimed at me and i dont have an issue with it so although it may breach 1 or both points surely if it doesnt offend me then there isnt much of an issue

Anyway back on topic ??

Oh and paranoia is a symptom of depression, which, I am sure Adey knows. Classy guy.

Even if it WAS, which I very much doubt, I have raised NUMEROUS complaints about Adey's wee digs at my depression. You would think that, in light of this, he would be a bit more careful where he was calling someone else a "fruitcake", especially when said person was debateing with me wouldn't you say?

Well, although the post follows yours, there's no actual quote in with the original one. Without your expanded comments about how you feel it's aimed at you, I'd have say pulsator2k7's assertion that it was aimed at him and his suggestion we could cope with just 4 props is the most likely and if that's the case then although it doesn't really add to the topic, I wouldn't call it abuse. I'd call it banter, not meant to be taken seriously.