I can kind of see the logic in re-signing both on a 1 year deal to be honest.

Phelps on the basis of - Roberts and Richards both having suffering quite bad injuries which are never easy to full recover from and as such they may need to be gradually re-introduced. So having someone with the versatility of Phelps next season may be an added bonus.

Karl Pryce - He made an improvement this year on previous showings, albeit he is still not really producing what you would expect from someone of his size and attributes based on what he's done before. So maybe, they have said to him "you can have a 1 year deal and if you achieve certain targets we set then that will trigger another year".

Personally I feel these triggered year options are very worthwhile as the players tend to produce when they're playing for a contract.

All this being said, I can see why they wouldn't re-sign

I wouldn't want him (or KP) keeping Marsh or Charnley out.

Personally, I'm really pleased George is staying. He does so much organising in the team and whilst he might not be quite as quick as he was in his first year; he has been excellent for us (especially the second half of the season) and definitely deserves another year.

Phelps was playing very well until he got injured and personally don't think he always got the recognition he deserved as there is no doubting his enthusiasm and he is a pretty good all rounder.

KP and the exit door is a no brainer for me

Personally i'll back the coaches decisions whether we keep the players or not, they're the ones who train with them day in day out and set their performance objectives.

Agreed unfortunatley. He is a great guy who has obviously done alot behind the scenes for the charity and with the local schools. When fit he plays really well but has really struggled to get any kind of form back since being injured early on.

It's a real shame cos Cammy is one of those 'middle players' who is a head above the rest when you watch the reserves but doesn't seem to have a place in the 1st team.

He told me on Sat night he hasn't signed anything yet and at the moment he hasn't got a club.

I think this is an important attitude to adopt.

Surely Made and Waney have done enough to earn our trust now.

Whatever decision they reach re. players, I'll happily have it.

+1

+2

I think, given that we have an empty quota spot, he's young, not gonna be on too much money and very versatile as well os obviously giving 100% every game then letting phelps go would be stupidity. However, as you say if Madge and Wane think he should go then I will accept this as the right thing to do because I trust them 100% now and tbh what they say is going to be the best way.

Problem with Phelps is he takes up a Quota spot, if he didn't he would have a new contract for sure!

Did Josh Charnley sign an extension to his contract?

Personally I think the quota spot is a bit of a red herring, given the salary cap it may well be the case that freeing up the quota spot by releasing Phelps would be a waste as we couldn't afford anyone better due to the cap limit. Phelps is hardly on top money so his realse would not exactly make enough SC space for a top drawer import.

I suspect it will all come down to cap space - after all the club has just signed several youngsters on to pro contracts and some of the first team contracts are due for renweal (or will be so next year) so cap room will be the key rather than quota.

Given the season they have just had I also suspect that several on the younger players in the squad will be due/looking for salary increases as well.

Except for those 7 games he played in before injury.

I say let him go, why take up the quota spot for the sake of it?

Leave it open who know who may come available next year mid season

Is Phelps any better value to the club than Charnley or Marsh?

Would Phelps staying (as much as I think he's a decent player) hinder the potential development of Charnley and Marsh?

Simples imo.

No argument from me on that one - agree completely was just chucking my two penn'orth in (for what it is worth

)

Yes but if we never questioned the decisions this place may as well shut down because it would get pretty boring if every thread was one that blindly accepted everything as bound to be correct.

Given we won the GF the coach has definitely got it right this year but that hasn't stopped very different opinions about Pryce (for example) being expressed. He may yet get a contract but if he does I for one would not consider that a wise move by the club and don't really think I would be changing my opinion because he got a deal and "the club know best". I'd want to see him improve bucket loads before I'd agree with such a decision and I'd be concerned who he was keeping out form the U20's. Same applies to Phelps really (if he gets a deal).

Dave

McIllorum - Get him signed up on 2/3 years, he's not the finished article but he's progressing well and seems to break into the first team every year. He just needs to stay injury/suspension free, both factors have been an issue in the past.

Deacon - Hopefully a year extension, wouldn't want to be throwing Mellor in there in case of injury because he's coming back from a bad injuryu himself, plus Deacon was a really important player at the back end of the year.

Pryce - I'd like to see him stay because I think he's seriously underated by a lot on here, he scores a ton of tries and attacking his wing becomes a non-option, so what if he's a bit lazy on the scoot?

Phelps - Not a lot better that youngsters we already have, he may be a fan favourite but I wouldn't keep him.

I think if there's room on the cap and we arent getting anyone else the simple answer is to keep Phelps. He is a good player the quota spot is irrelevant because there probably isnt enough room to sign a better aussie anyway and he provides cover for the whole of the back line.

I think he would do the opposite of hindering the development of young talent because:
a) he IS young talent he's only 25 and
b) having him means that in crunch games we dont have to throw a youngster in at the deep end due to injuries and hope they dont run scared.

I wouldnt sign him if it means any of the others leaving (at the end of the day Pryce should probably be kept over him due to them both basically being back cover and Pryce being younger) but if they dont have to get rid of those to keep him then keep him. Simples.

Does noone remember the brilliant form and the praise he received for it at the start of the season? Phelps IS a good player.

I've been reliably informed that KP was at Odsal yesterday.

I am afraid if you are 25 and are not a 1st team regular you won't last long at any club. I forget the number but how many over age players you can play in the U20's is not that many. Phelps would prevent the over age slots being used for injured players returning to fitness.



We are in the very good position of being able to blood young players as we have done this season without them being a liability or having t blood too many.

Several young backs have been given a game before him despite him being fit and that should tell you something.



He's not that good. It's a bit of myth this brilliant form at the start of the season. He played about 1 1/2 games against no one special before getting crocked. Apparently he stands out over the under 20 players as he should at 25 but yet he has never forced his way back into a team that is now picked on merit

Bottom line is like Ainscough he needs to move on to get a game in a 1st team on a regular basis. He is very enthusiastic and I think sometimes people confuse that for talent. He'd do a good job for a club like Salford but I can't see the likes of Wire, Saints or Leeds chasing his signature.

Dave

I can see Phelps ending up somewhere like Quins once they have a new coach sorted out.

That could be a good call, or maybe Crusaders, as they don't have quota restrictions.

Catalans