I think you do need to send a message sometimes - to fans, sponsors, and at this point in time, Brad Arthur. What signal does it send him if he's asked to 'make do' without one of the marquee players he personally went after? It certainly doesn't tell him that the cub is backing him to the utmost. I do agree entirely that a replacement should strengthen the side - we're talking about replacing one of our highest earners. Any replacement has to be the sort of player that can make an impact.

AC - I've no idea who we should go for. Someone mentioned Ravalawa. He'd be the closest straight swap, albeit a bit of a downgrade on Sivo from what I've seen. But would he come for one season? Would we want him to do that? Perhaps a better bet would be to look round the Qld or NSW Cup and see if there's a big winger that would be interested if it gave them exposure at a higher level. Or maybe not a winger at all.

Either way its a big challenge to get anyone at this stage of the season. Perhaps the best thing of all to do is wait and see if someone falls out of favour in the NRL who might be willing to come over for a chunk of one season?

I suspect you're manufacturing a point of conflict where none is likely to exist. Not replacing an injured player isn't a failure to support the coach and it'd be remarkable were Brad to read it as such. Like every coach he can't always have what he wants.
There's also the question of how we might go about this without a Salford dispensation on cap and quota. We could perhaps deregister sivo but we could then be in the territory of him rehabbing at our expense while looking for another club. Not saying he would but it would seem possible.

Deregistering for the season in these circumstances is fairly standard, and has no bearing on contractual status. I'd be amazed if the players don't see it that way too.

INOUT
Sivo has a three year contract so unless he actually wants to leave he'll be staying and hopefully playing next year. We already know that the we can spend Sivo’s cap allowance (150k) on another player. What we don't know is whether the rules will allow us to temporarily remove Sivo from the quota and bring in another quota player. Whatever we are allowed to do it will be a tricky balancing act in terms of A) Not running into cap problems in 26 and B) Managing quota spots (if he can be removed) ahead of Sivo’s return.

There is of course a third issue here too, do we actually have another 150k+ to spend on a player? If Sivo is paid by insurance then its fine, but otherwise its a cost the club will not have budgeted for.

Yep. I've never doubted the boards ambition, but if they do stump up the cash to bring in another player it would surely silence those who do.

And put 50p a pint on their Tetleys.

I don't think it's worthwhile jumping the gun to replace Sivo. The silver lining to his injury is that at present, we can easily accommodate his absence.

It would make far more sense to get into the season, and see what other positions we come short in due to injury. If we lose a back-rower for instance, I'd rather have a rainy day fund for that spot that getting a wing, when we've actually got decent cover there.

I think the cap is 'dynamic', meaning it is the cumulative spend over a season, rather than any one week's total wage bill. It might therefore be more enticing for a decent NRL player to come over for a 6 month stint half way through the season for £150k, rather than a full season for the same amount.

Anyone know if there's a deadline in terms of de-registering a player?

I`m not so sure that`s the case as presumably the team have been trained to use the battering ram methods of Hall and Sivo. We don`t have that luxury with the likes of Handley or Lumb.
So we either change our pre season methods to accommodate a slightly different approach or we look to get someone, know idea who to replicate Sivo`s skillset.

I can't imagine there's an insurance policy covering professional rugby players when they get injured because so many get injured that the premium would be huge. It would probably cost 30% of your salary base so wouldn't be worth it for either party as would just be pound swapping. It's not like insuring a dancer's feet for an unexpected freak event. Rugby players get injured all the time and it's unfortunately a business risk.

That said, the fact that Leeds appeared to be monitoring the Salford situation for dispensations suggests that we can find the money if required.