Quote Exeter Rhino="Exeter Rhino"Given that Leeds appeared at the time to have chosen to keep Burgess over Scruton, which in hindsight wasn't the best of ideas if true (yes, I know the Bulls also offered more money), I'd rather not get Scruton back to lose yet another pair of solid squad members. Especially considering that both of them have significant improvement in them, are already making a strong contribution to the team, and that homegrown players are increasingly at a premium in the current Leeds set-up.'"
Where is the evidence that Leeds 'chose' to keep Burgess over Scruton?
One was in contract at the time while one was coming out of contract. The one coming out of contract having rejected Leeds' terms to stay was open to offers elsewhere and took the best one available to him in terms of (and I'm only guessing here) 1st grade/starting opportunities, length of contract and remuneration.
If you are correct and Leeds 'chose' Burgess over Scruton then that would be a concern on a footballing front.
In my view it's highly likely that Leeds chose not to compete for his signature once Scruton had rejected their terms much as they had done with Calderwood a couple of seasons earlier.
It's also interesting that Eastwood was secured as his replacement in the role of interchange prop, I wonder how cost effective that move turned out compared to retaining the locally produced potential future England International.
