What I also didn't chip in with my post (mainly because I'd see it as bizarre given our current position) is that his ommitance last week wasn't down to injury and was more down to their relationship, but as stated I'd find that extreme.

I agree with you both he can do a job BUT he's not irreplaceable and putting two and two together he could well be one of the two mentioned in this thread that asked to leave but we're trying to convince to stay, if that is the case though, I'd be intrigued to see who is going if gale, because I don't imagine us having McGuire, lilley, sutcliffe, gale and burrow (even if seen as hooker) position switch for sutcliffe? Or lilley out on loan until McGuire retires? If nobody were to leave

If Gale does come Cas can take their pick of Burrow, McGuire and Sutcliffe. Simply not good enough.
Saying that if we get relegated would Gale want to come to Leeds I think not.
It is now a real possibility we could go down.

Surprise surprise, not a dicky bird.

Here's an idea frosties, either name your source, the actual news itself...or just shut up.

Credibility is gone.

I'm sure Frosties posted in good faith on what he had heard ( as he had with the Brierley saga. Cough! ) ....and it all makes for a more entertaining forum. It would be a hell of a lot more boring if the likes of Frosties didn't contribute their grapevine stories....even if they do turn out to be a pile of shiite. !!!!

The problem is it is only a forum for a bunch of nobodies (apart from me and maybe Printer of course) so why the excessive subterfuge at times in these days of twitter and social media?
If you're worried about breaking a confidence then you have already done that by posting anything at all that initiates the rumour mill in the first place.....surely?

The problem with this stuff is the certainty with which some people post what are clearly rumours/general chatter. Others then go too far in questioning whether they actually know the real goings on behind the scenes, which leads to a defensive response from the original poster. And on and on it then rolls.

The rumours are part of the fun. If people would say things with less certainty there wouldn't be a problem.

Bingo!!!

Nobody really gets ridiculed for sharing rumours they've heard, unless they're claiming them as 'fact' or 'from the horses mouth' or any other term to make it sound 'in the know' - like you say, it's the degree of certainly that some individuals try and portray.

They'd have more credibility if they shared the info and gave the reasons why they thought its credible. Then, if and when it either does or doesn't come off, they can comment on how it all eventually played out.

The problem is, some people desperately want to look 'in the know', so throw out the rumours as certainties, with caveats like 'but I can't say where it's come from or who it involves' and 'it might never come out in public', and then when nothing appears, they give no further comment...

It's all good fun though!