www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sp ... Saint.html Agreed to sign for Saints and shook hands then signed for Leeds

www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sp ... Saint.html Agreed to sign for Saints and shook hands then signed for Leeds

So were the money gone that we had offered to griffin

So were the money gone that we had offered to griffin

From what i was told at the time, the was nothing else out there worth taking.

So the money is still there if need

Some of it to Jamie Foster maybe?

Jamie wouldnt have got much of a pay rise

Why would you say such a thing? Jamie has scored lots of try's and his kicking is invaluable, his pay rise is worth every penny whatever he got?

He's not the first and he won't be the last. Not as bad as those that sign illegal contracts before the anti-tampering deadline and then renege on them later though. That really is having your cake and eating it.

[iWigan had talks, and Warrington offered more money......but I want to win things![/i

Well, you've come to the right place my boy!

I wasnt saying Jamie a bad playet and didnt deserved his new contract but wat griffin would of been offered would of been a lot more then Jamie extension

i knew what you meant. Even if Griffins money has been divided up between all those with contract extentions that still leaves the money under the new Keep Tomkins rule, so we do have a hole in our cap somewhere. I very much doubt what ever Griffin was offered plus the Tomkins money could have been split up between a few of the younger lads on new contracts.

Also it does ask the question, what is the difference in recruitment policy that means Leeds sign a player they want in 1 day and we don't. I'm not saying that our policy is wrong, but it does leave us open to being undercut more often.

We've had few props lead us up the garden Plath like carvell, Adrian shelford and now griffin.

It shows that Royce feels we are light in the prop department in the fact we tried to sign him.


I think he would have been a good signing.