You are indeed correct, one year extension.

4 years from next year, taking him to 2016, when he'll still only turn 33 during the season. How many games has he missed since signing for us? He must have played more minutes and scored more points than anyone else since he’s been here, so I think he’s earnt it. I’d actually question what sort of message it sends out if we took the stance that we’ll offer the world to others because of their stature whilst bordering on cr*pping on those already at the club who work their socks off simply because they’re not as high profile. I thought that those kind of tricks were the old regime’s style, and I’m hopeful that we’ll now try and build a culture more akin to Leeds where players seem more valued and will want to stick around for longer.



I think you could look at it from the other direction, though. Over the next 2 or 3 years we’ll probably be losing 4-5 experienced members of our pack, we need to make sure there is some continuity. Tickle may well not be a 2nd rower by then, either.

I know, the difference with Ellis is that we might want rid, with Wade it's him wanting out as his family can't settle and have gone home and Briscoe well I don't see us allowing him to leave until his contract up anyway. This is a case of Saints wanting a contracted player, Hull want him to stay and apparently he's happy here and the club want to talk to him about a new deal so I would be surprised if he went and if he did Saints would need to part with big money.

See my other post, 4 years from and including next season, through to the end of 2016.

That would be to big a risk imo.

I might be convinced if Tickle was in the highest class of player.

I don't understand that logic. The quality of the player has absolutely no bearing on their susceptibility to injury. Sean Long was undoubtedly one of the best scrum halves SL has seen, how did he work out for us?

Also as I said, how does it look to players saying 'if you're top drawer, we'll offer a long deal, if you're not quite there it's tough, regardless of how you've previously served the club'. That's not the right attitude at all IMO.

It's not that I want him releasing, I'd happily extend his contract but yes that type of contract should be for a clubs top player.

I'd also worried that type of contract would make a player to relaxed.

Regarding Long I think thats a bit different as Long was desperately needed and we took a massive risk, I don't think we need to with Tickle.

I'd say Tickle IS one of our top players. We've won many a game thanks to his goalkicking, he scores plenty of tries for a backrower, and he puts in far more work than most.

We may not need to take the risk as much, but it's also less of a risk, really. His injury record is impeccable, particularly given he plays for long minutes in the pack. He's a player that will have no shortage of suitors and would be tough for us to replace, so I think we need to show the likes of him and the youngsters that we value our players if they treat us right and that we'll reciprocate and be a good club to be a part of. Things like this can affect how we are viewed by players and thus our recruitment/retention. The goalposts have shifted in recent years to make having good English players more important than ever, so we need to do what we can to make them want to play for us.

I also think you're being pretty harsh with just how old he'd be at the end of such a deal. I've already mentioned the comparisons to Manu and Ellis, Lynch will also be older by the time of the end of his deal.

Fully agree.

Those other players maybe effecting my opinion on this as we could just get to the point where most of our pack will be getting towards the end of their careers, as will the fact that the does play many minutes, it might catch up with him.

On that, I'd say that if anything, keeping him for longer is the solution. If, for arguments' sake, Manu signs a 3 year deal, only giving Tickle a further 2 on top of his existing deal (if he'd take it) would see him, Ellis and Manu all leave in the same year, a similar problem to what we're about to face with our front row. That's either a lot of recruitment needed, or a high dependence on youth all making the grade. Giving him longer provides more stability for both us [iand[/i him.

Plus, if we wait for next year and look to be offering a 2 year extension (I personally think always waiting until the last year of a contract should be something we look to put an end to, as well. It just invites complications), he'll have clubs sniffing around him and we'll be drawn into competing for his signature. If we offer 4 now I think he'd be more likely to just take it and it's done and dusted.

You could still offer him a extension now?

That would take him to 2014/5 then we'd be a stronger position having the pull of his testimonial and we'd be able to backout due to poor form/injuries.

Possibly.

I just think it's slightly shabby to effectively plan for such a situation for Tickle when we haven't others. It's practically saying to him we don't think he'll be any good by that age and that his efforts for us so far count for little. If I were in his shoes it really wouldn't make me feel like the club valued me much when I know they're offering out deals to players who'll be older, and I'd be telling my agent to see what else is out there if that's how things are.

Think a back row of Ellis, Tickle, Manu & Westerman backed up by Whiting & youngsters will be very strong, BUT I fear they are pricing themselves out of the market.

IF we want to win things players have to demonstrate some restraint, an extra 20K on their contract is 20K less to spend elsewhere.

To me this is another sympton of buying in most of the players, locals definitely have more loyalty.

Absolutely understand them all wanting to earn as much as they can, they are great players who have served us well & need their last contract to be as lucrative as possible.

The Leeds model works best, mainly locals who stick together, have pride in the shirt & some restraint on contract demands to keep the squad strong.

Roll on the day when our youth policy competes with the llikes of Leeds, Saints & Wigan.