did you forget about our no.13, Josh Bowden?
I think Fash should be looked upon as a shoe in on the bench for next year if he continues his progress.
Turgut I agree needs game time, he was being used as a utility forward last year, whilst I was disappointed with his progress after getting a fairly decent run and there was some nasty niggle that was totally uncalled for if we are to continue his development then he and other need to get games ahead of senior players that are really not cutting the mustard and are in effect blocking the progress of others.

I merely stated a fact.
we have not had a marquee signing that the club i.e. Adam Pearson has paid for.
We have only had one season with a marquee player - Pritchard, as mentioned mostly paid for by the Canterbury club.
There is nothing stopping AP from signing a marquee player to bolster/improve the team other than what I mentioned, the financial risk, the risk is based upon the cost of paying that extra salary against what can be gained.
If that financial risk was not a consideration then why haven't we had a marquee signing every year, or do you think that we don't need a marquee signing, that t wouldn't enhance/improve our chances of winning silverware?

No, yet again instead of addressing what was said you attack a poster with irrelevant BS because you don't have the capacity to even enter into a debate about what was said, just lob abuse at posters.

back to back Challenge Cups, back to back on the brink of the Grand Final, AP has invested in the infrastrcture of the club long term. You simply just criticise the club at every turn.

He hasn't criticised the club, he has stated that AP hasn't opted to utilise the marquee player ruling, apart from Pritchard, but his salary had contributions from the Bulldogs too

Like I said, we could use a prop at 13, ie Bowden or Green.

With Fash I think he’ll become our first call at back up with injuries in the pack but don’t know if he’ll become a first choice 17 player due to his size. Maybe he’d do the job as an extra forward on the bench.

Turget needs to be playing at least Championship level on a regular basis but it’s hard to get players out on loan with a lot of clubs tied up with players on dual reg. Ideally we need Doncaster getting promoted.

read his post again, "nothing stopping", that is basically "why hasn't". Pritchard was completely overrated and overpaid. Make Kelly a "marquee" by all means.

not good enough yet Dave even in division 1.
We went through this before we signed Kelly everyone saying Tuimavave would be our 6 yet most people could see it wasnt his position.
When Kelly goes we need to use the quota spot and try to sign a similar running half.Abdull and Connor are not the answer especially playing with Sneyd.
Connor should be at right centre and Griffin moved into the second row.

Whilst a proportion of his salary was paid by the Bulldogs, Hull still paid him enough to be able to use him as a marquee player, £175k of which counts on the cap IIRC.

The issue isn't the money IMO, but the % of cap that 1 marquee player takes up. £175k is just shy of 10% of the whole cap, could be too high a proportion for a chairman to risk on one player, which may be why the rule hasn't been utilised more in general. I think the home grown marquee player rule is used more across SL at the moment as less £ counts on the cap, proportionately a lot lower.

I think the "notional" marquee salary cap is now set at £150k (£75k if club trained), and I guess it means that promoting a £100k player to a marquee player effectively reduces your salary cap by £50k.
Obviously increasing any player's salary reduces the overall pot, but getting up to £150k (and beyond) will probably end up with one player less in the squad.

You're absolutely right, I've just checked the RFL's website, here are the current key dispensations:

=#0000FF- Marquee Player – Each Super League Club is permitted to have two Marquee Players whose Salary Cap Value is limited to £150,000 (or £75,000 if Club Trained).

- Club Trained Dispensation – Each Super League Club is given up to £100,000 of dispensation for producing Super League standard players.

- Player Welfare Dispensation – Each Super League Club that achieves the player welfare target is given a £15,000 dispensation.

- New Talent Pool Dispensation – Any Player who has not previously played Rugby League is given a value of £0 in the first year of his contract and at 50% of his true value in the second year.

- Returning Talent Pool Dispensation – Any Player who has not previously played Rugby League in the 5 years prior to signing is given a value of 50% of his true value in the first year of his contract and 75% of his true value in the second year.

- International Bonuses – Bonuses paid for international representation are excluded up to specified maximums.

- Educational Fees paid directly by Clubs are excluded.

- Prize Money – Payments made out of prize money are excluded.

add in the impact on morale, £250K + (with bonus etc), most fans can expect to earn that in 25 years after tax.

Who's blocking Turgut's progression?

Only himself

Jordan Lane

Looks like it to me. No offence to Turgut, I like him, but our first pick back rowers are Manu, Mini and Hadley, deservedly so. After that we're into Washy, who has utility value at hooker and loads of experience, and Lane has been given his chance by Radford and leapfrogged Turgut IMO. If he were to play at centre he has Griffin, Connor, Tuimavave and Logan ahead of him, again IMO. I'm not sure who this raft of progression-blockers are.

So you've just agreed with Lane being 1 of them and then named the rest.
So in effect have you not answered your own question?
Yes that could all change next season with departures and arrivals.
For me Turgut hasn't shown enough to be anyway near the starting 17 yet anyway, headless chicken trying too hard springs to mind.
So not sure he is actually being blocked as alluded too but merely not taken his chance unlike Fash and Lane.

has he not taken a chance, or just not good enough for an aspiring SL side?

Not at all. The assertion was that Turgut's progression is being blocked by inadequate senior players. I agree that Lane, as a junior player promoted by Radford, is now ahead of Turgut in the pecking order.

In my opinion both.
had high hopes for Turgut but when given a chance he has done nothing to show he has the ability to be a super League player.
he is out of contract at the end of the season so i think Radford will send him out on loan/DR when we have some bodies back and his is fit and depending on how well he does will determine whether he gets an extension.
On current form Championship player at best

You're so limited you can't even grasp the fact I'm defending Pearson re marquee signings with respect to the risk factor.

bwliwve me, I am far from "limited", you are are very adept troll, but no supporter.

Washbrook is blocking several players from getting valuable experience whilst not offering enough to justify his place 'IN MY OPINION', he's a tryer but he isn't cutting the mustard.
People say he's reliable, at giving effort yes, he misses plenty of tackles and more often than not third man in, he's slow at dummy half, he rarely ever bends the line because he lacks pace, I mentioned his error count previously, I haven't bothered to check what that's like since.
He's certainly been picked over Litten countless times and very probably Turgut who was utilised in the forwards and at centre last season, he (Turgut) will not progress any further until he gets more game time. If Radford doesn't get him game time he will fall away and be another youth set up failure that the club failed to exploit, given he was the England academy captain and was touted as the next big thing and that he's only just turned 22 I'd say the club need to give him a chance, don't you?

Clearly you are of limited thinking capacity because so eager were you to start an argument as the good little troll that you are, you missed that I defended Pearson not signing marquee players, you then threw a nonsensical statement into the equation asking me where my money was, as if that had anything to do with the subject at hand re marquee signings or otherwise, just clutching at some little straw.
Then you've done nothing but try to avoid the fact that you were wrong and wouldn't enter into the debate about recruitment and/or marquee signings. I simply said there was nothing stopping Pearson from signing a marquee player but the consideration was the financial risk.
All you could muster with your limited capacity was to start bitching in your usual fashion, it's just rinse and repeat, as I said, you clearly are of limited capacity and it's you whom are the troll with your incessant argumentative nature and yet another jibe saying I'm not a supporter, aw bless yah

Y A W N

( to the tune of YMCA)

You said senior player[us[/u. Washbrook is one. Who are the others?

Christ on a bike, you can hardly say Radford:
a) Hasn't given Turgut an opportunity. He's played almost 30 games, right?
b) Isn't giving youth a chance. Fash, Masi, Lane, Downs, Turgut, Litten..how many appearances have they clocked up over last season and this? It's not a handful, it's a lot.

Lane's overtaken him in the pecking order from what I can see, that happens. Not everyone will make it. Look at Ben Crooks for example. Darryl Powell shipped him on and he's playing in the championship. Radford's judgement proved right again.