[/u
He doesn't need to, all the accurate news or lack thereof on that is provided by @seangleese3 on Twitter.

Tricky one, this. None appear to be of the required standard. If we pay part of their salary at, say, Bradford, whose cap is it on? Sneyd, Pryce, Rankin, Abdull, HTW is fair cover in the halves, I'd say. Can't see Miller staying, although his partner had a baby recently. Is she a Hull girl?

Can't see any of these playing for Hull next season, a full salary cap will be planned without them.

They will either not play or we will pay 50-80 per cent of their salary for them to play for another team.

If we loan them out, whatever we pay towards is irrelevant in regards our cap. It was discussed a while back when Carvell went to Cas.
Basically player X earns 100k, he's loaned out with his new club paying 60k and old club paying 40k. But in terms of the cap, the full 100k liability falls on his new club. This applies even if some money has already been paid.

This again is why our playing wage bill was so high this year.

Makes sense, thanks.

Some people do have 2 week holidays you know



Some of our players have just been on a 9 month holiday

If FC are determined to dispense with the 3, I think Wilf hit the nail on the head, in saying, we could just deregister them and AP pay the wages out. This keeps them off cap. Probably force their hand in moving on too, if they are the consumate professionals. Still think they have been hard done to, irrespective of who signed them etc.

I'd be prepared to give Arundle a shot, he has speed to burn and is a player we can work with, out of the three his attitude has being second to none. Sent a message when we played against him and is the only one who has made noises about coming back and wanting to prove his worth.

Maybe the club should look at renegotiating his deal. He won't earn what he does now at another club, so will be in his best interests to do that.

If these three are on the sort of wages some people claim they are I'm not sure AP could afford to throw that much money away.

I also think Arundel may still have something to offer.

It could be a smart move on his part to offer to reduce his terms as it would show he is committed. However if Radford just doesn't fancy him it would probably be a waste of time.

It seems neil has eased your worries about gleeson mrs b, feel better now do you ?

Well he's not quite agreeing with the Hudge! seems like a colourful character our Mr G www.newsnow.co.uk/A/735032041?-4338:2393:t Reading Mr Hudgells epistle it looks like Mr Caro has been a bit economical with the truth as well!

Well he's not quite agreeing with the Hudge! seems like a colourful character our Mr G www.newsnow.co.uk/A/735032041?-4338:2393:t Reading Mr Hudgells epistle it looks like Mr Caro has been a bit economical with the truth as well!

Twitter is always better when you read back what you've written and think before clicking return, but then we wouldn't have that glorious response

the only thing more dangerous than Twitter is the "Reply All" button on email, if I ever use it (which I rarely do), I delete all of the names and then add them again one by one, once made a MASSIVE mistake that cost me a contract!

So too is unnecessarily cc'ing people into emails. I know someone who did that. It cost him his job and he ended up in court.

What worries were these? I feel [uvery[/u chipper today, thanks

Happy days.

Out of the three i'd possibly keep Arundle.. He looked good before he got injured. I think that's his downfall, he's too injury prone and it always seems to happen when he picks up form.

You mean he should take less cash for more years? Less cash alone would show he should be committed. Contracted to 2016, so he need be in no rush.

been in bother myself on that score. However, the reply all is also a great function to slam dunk the original senders efforts to be a pi1ck and copy every man and his dog in!

No I just meant he should offer to take less money for the reminder of his contract in the hope of getting back into the team.

I've often thought that re-negotiating contracts with the likes of Miller and Arundel would be the best way forward, but obviously the likelihood of them accepting lower money is slim, especially in Arundel's case who has a lot longer on his deal.

As 1865 says, the chances of that are slim. If he's the best option available and Hull are paying him anyway it'd be cutting your nose off to spite your own face not to pick him. If he's not the best option, he won't get picked anyway despite taking up less of the wage budget (which'd be a bitter pill for him, I'm sure).
It might just be that he's not part of LR's plans, in which case there are 3 better options than taking a pay cut. Pay-off, subsidised loan deal at another club, hang about and hope for a new coach.

This time next year, a renegotiation might be sensible. He'll be paying tax at the higher rate, unless rumours are miles off, so there'd be a case for taking an extra 12 months on less per year than he'd otherwise get in 2016, but more than he'd get elsewhere.

Its hard to see him getting many starts when we will have Sa, Yeaman, Michaels and Logan who can all play centre. However I would rather have seen him at centre last year than Whiting.

I don't believe he is part of LR's plans. Offering to take a pay cut may play well with the Chairman but probably not the Coach. He could sit on his arris collecting the cash for anther two years but he's only young and he'll want to get a contract somewhere else after 2016 so needs to be playing. Most teams will be sorting out their recruitment soon so if his future does lie elsewhere it needs sorting in the near future.

Let's have a look at the options

Yeaman ; final season ?

Sa ; not the fastest, better impact SR off bench

Michaels ; mainly a winger?

Logan ; looks good in attack and will improve defensively. Needs time to mature.

Arundel ; been unlucky, don't think he's on as much as people say. Needs a run in a team,

Whiting ; utility player

Talanoa; better winger ?