funny, because when we bumped into him at Alton Towers and my lad asked him if he was coming back or staying at Wakey he said he had options at Hudds and Wakey but hadn't decided yet. That was before you even had a new coach sorted. Perhaps the fact he had just got off the Smiler had addled his brain. Of course I'm not suggesting anyone else wouldn't know more than the player himself.......
As for the suggestion he wont get game time. We now only have three wingers at the club - the twins and jerry - given jerry will be 34 next year and has already had several niggly injuries this season I would imagine they are both likely to get game time.
suggesting he would rather play at wakey instead of his hometown club is so funny - saints or leeds perhaps but not wakey.

Perhaps the bloke handing out the contracts would, you work it out



NB: I've been involved with players and clubs for years and players are occasionally economical with the truth

INOUT

I wonder whether he said something vague just to get rid of the crazy fan hassling him while he was at Alton Towers. Just a thought. I don't know him or you to say for sure.

Any club wanting to sign Innes at the expiry of his contract at Huddersfield at end of November would have had to pay compensation of circa £45000 to Huddersfield. When you add his wage for 2022 on top of that, it would make him a 80/85 grand winger. No club would have been interested at that price for a 21 year old with less than 50 appearances

Innes had no option to re-sign. He will be in a much better position this time next year when there will be no compensation due.

Hope that helps jools.

Innes is one hell of an athlete blessed with great pace. He is still only a young lad, he got better and better with us especially his defence. If given the game time he will continue to develop into a top player . One would hope that fans would forgive a young player the odd mistake or two that you will always get with young lads.

Quite right, but we've basically given him development time and the Farts will benefit rather than allow one of our own kids fill in and Trinity could've benefited.

I agree he is, and I do forgive him the odd error.

As Klav says that's not the issue. For a club that normally does a good bit of business, I'm just not convinced that we were on the winning side. To me it boils down to whether Senior was at a point in his development where he could offer us more than we had available on the books, I don't think he was, I now think come next season he might be, but that won't be with us. For me, we've simply fine-tuned a racehorse for someone else and that makes no sense to me at all.

The only positives are that if we do need a loan player next season and he's available he would now be an excellent choice. I suppose looking further ahead, should it not pan out for him at Hudds then we would be in prime position to go for him and by then he'd be nearly 23, no longer a rookie and no longer taking chances away from an Academy player.

Just my opinion.

Think we OK with the deal, at various times TJ and Kershaw injured so Innes covered, Kay covering hooking role so Innes much needed. Bill , Arundel and Reece injured and guess what Innes was on hand to play centre.

I agree. He filled a hole at just the right time.
I'm not upset that he resigned with them. Would have been OK if he'd signed with us.

As pointed out to our little friend, he could only ever re-sign for Hudds. Depends how you look at it but for me that what made it a bad deal.

I just hope WP is a bit braver with Academy players, ironic really because I thought it was CC best attribute in his early years as our coach.

I think you are seeing it as a bad signing because it wasn't long term.
But to me it was never that. It was a short term plug that helped us when we needed it.
I don't think any of the young players were held back because of him. If they'd been good enough they'd have been in.
Only Croft was in front for me and his injury stopped that.

Giants might have benefitted by taking a player that got some experience elsewhere but equally they must have liked how he played with us or they wouldn't have signed him.

The benefit for us was having a player that covered a couple of roles and kept young players not yet ready, out of the firing line. They will benefit now when they get the chance.

No it’s because I don’t think he was ready enough when we took him. I have no issue with loan players but they have to offer more than what we already have.

Although I think FT has gone a bit OTT with the blame stuff he still has a fair point. At the time Senior signed he was little better than Greensmith IMO and effectively robbed him of a chance for no obvious gain to us.

Academy players IMO deserve their chance when we are down to the bone and I don’t think Ollie got his. As I say he lost his chances to a player who at the time had exactly the same flaws. I know they were not exactly the same player, Senior is more a winger and clearly faster but I still don’t think it was right.
Had it been an older version of Senior then yes.

One things for sure we have a fantastic crop of Academy players this year and if we repeat this with the likes of Murphy or Eseh (just examples) I will be deeply disappointed with the club. Once is unfortunate but if we keep doing it then I can guarantee that a lot more people than FT will consider pulling their support for the Academy funding. I mean what’s the point, they can’t all make it but at least some have to.