I would agree 100% with remarkable on this one, strengthen another side at our own expense, as hopie says another "Botham " maybe, i hope the club dont come to regret this come 5.00pm Sunday, Im not saying tha ka would be the difference, but our injury situation is dire at best and we are loaning out individuals and fowards at that !!, do you think that you think John Kear would do that boot on tother foot, not a chance, I know what he would say.

Im all for getting these guys experience but not at our expense even if they said yea you can keep kyle, however he will not be playing against us this week as part of the deal.

I will be dissappointred if we now do not have some forwards back in the team from injury, the club should expect to be questioned if we lose this game due to the arrogance of believing we can let a player play against us in our current sutuation and with our injuries at present.

I can just seen wigan loaning a player to saints and then letting him play in the next derby !!!!!!!!!!!!

I will be diss

I agree, and I would go further. By this I think we are understanding that Kylie and Bailey are back. Would it not be better to have a guy in who is playing, fit, and on form at the moment (judging by MOM last week), than a guy who has not played since last season.

Again, I'm not so much saying Amor should be playing for us over Bailey. It's a debate in its own right. Perhaps he should (although there's an argument that Bailey is always going to have a 'first game back', so that should probably be against Wakefield.) but more that Amor should not be playing for them.

Listening to some on here last season he was all written off without a chance of Super League rugby.

Funny old world.

Any clause forbidding him from playing would presumably have had to be written into the original loan agreement.

At that time, Leeds would have anticipated having at least three of Burgess, Cross, Bailey and Leuluai available for this fixture, all of whom they would regard as better players than Amor. If he's not good enough to get into your first team, why worry about having to play against him?

Relax.

It's only Wakefield.

Just like it was only Salford the week before last.

These fixtures exist to provide teams like Leeds with a breather, along with an opportunity to paper over the cracks.

Another meaningless SL fixture in the grand scheme of things.

Eh? Where?

Would it have been better ?? ....I really do have problems with this being and been (my achille's heel)

I'm not proclaiming Amor as the new JP. Nor am I saying he'd even get into our squad (even in its current state!).

Whatever Amor's impact on Leeds' squad, or Super League in general, is irrelevant. He improves Wakefield's squad. And it makes no sense whatsoever to improve the squad of the team you're playing against. Even if it is "only Wakefield".

You want Amor to have first team experience at SL standard - but you want to dictate to Wakey which games he can and can't play?

Is it just me, or is this a nailed on case of having the cake and eating it too?

Imagine if Leeds had done as you suggest - what message does that send out to other teams when we're trying to offload players on them via a loan?

Anyway - surely playing against Leeds would be good for Amor? A chance to show BM what he is (or isn't) missing....

He was absolutley everywhere in that game.

Errrr...... Yep! Exactly that.

Phew! For a minute there I was worried I wasn't making sense.

It says... "You can Loan our players, but they can't play against us."

Am I missing something here? You're making it out like that's a totally ludicrous suggestion?! I think it's perfectly reasonable.

It's not very sporting though, is it?

It's a backdoor way of weakening Wakey, and gives Leeds an unfair advantage (of sorts )

The other way of looking at it, is they should allow him to play, as he's probably spent enough time with the Leeds players for them to know his weaknesses - Maybe it actually works in our favour?

As others have said, if he's not good enough for the Leeds first team, why should we be worried about facing him?