So what have Saints done with the remaining 2,3,4 (Whatever it is) years of his contract? I take it we've had to pay him off, at least partially to get him to leave?

Just simply awful squad development by the club.

I think you'd be absolutely correct.

Foster showed great promise in 2011 but sadly didnt quite cut it in 2012. As a result, he fell behind Makinson, Gardner, Meli and Swift in the pecking order and would be 5th choice winger for us if he stayed. The kid wants to be playing first team rugby so cant really blame him for going, although I do feel hte only thing we will miss is his goalkicking as our other wingers are far stronger than him

Im guessing that Foster will have opted to resign/release himself from his contract? Therefore becoming available for nothing and moved to the highest bidder which so happened to be Bradford. A big step considering he had 2 years to run at Saints on good money but opted for a 1 year deal at Bradford? I'd have chanced the Union market if i was him.

Best of luck to him.

Rubbish. Foster was no worse than any of the other players and bar one shocker of a game at Bradford, what exactly did he do wrong? His lack of form was due to the ridiculous choice of coach the club have made in recent seasons and he was one of about 15 players who were also terrible during that period, and they aren't being chased out of the club.

Gardner is terrible, he is a complete waste of a squad place, he offers nothing. Swift isn't a winger in a million years and I'd be astonished if he ended up playing there. He's only been playing there to give him experience in the first team in a position we can carry a player in.

Meli is pretty awful on the wing as well, because he cannot catch. Foster might not be the best player ever, but he should be in our team. He's better than Gardner, less of a liability than Meli and has the positive of being an excellent goal kicker, something we lacked last season and will no doubt lack next season too.

For once I do find myself in agreement with Saddened and Saints fan. In that we have let similar efforts from long standing players go unchecked and even offered new deals. I'm not saying Foster was the future at Saints, but Gardner was just as bad in defence and under the highball in his first 4-5 years at Saints, he was no faster. People saying Ade is better than Foster now, well yes but he's had over 10 years to get to that level.

In a round about way I understand why the club want to let him go, but for those same reasons we have not let others go. I fail to see the consistency. As it is, if Foster has only signed a 1 year deal, then it's as good as a one year loan deal. If he put out good performances for Bradford then more power to him and he can still be signed by Saints for 2014. If he does not make it then we have managed to get out of his contract early. In a way this one year deal is more risk to Foster than Saints. He must be confident in himself to take a one year deal and must be confident that he can prove himself to both Saints, Bradford and any other club that maybe looking next year, otherwise he could have just sat on his 2 year deal at Saints.

His attitude seems absolutely bang on for me, despite his reputation for being obsessed with image and status rather than rugby. Like Gaskell he was unfairly ostracised last season but instead of just sulking, went on loan and had a decent stint in a team that was struggling when he arrived. He also refused to settle for being pushed out this coming season and chose a move to another club so he can prove himself.

It's not as simple as clicking your fingers and letting someone go though, these are contracted players and we need teams to come in for them. Fewer teams are likely to be in for Gardner than Foster due to age, salary and long-term potential. I don't think Gardner or Foster are viewed as long-term players at this club, so better for me that we clear the decks why we can and then use their wages (and hopefully Meli's too) to recruit a top-class winger for 2014 if we can't promote one.

I understand your concern for future planning, but even if we kept Foster with that season in mind, is not exactly the solution to get us from bridesmaids to champions.

We've managed to pick up Turner and Walmsley for next season, two young english players who are well rated in certain circles. Who's to say we won't be able to pick up a winger next year?

I don't really see what the fuss is all about, letting our 4th choice winger leave.

Good luck to him in pastures new. He never lacked commitment to Saints in my mind, but not every fairytale works out exactly as planned.

I understand we can't let Ade go, it was more when you look at Ade's performances against Fosters at a similar age, they were not really that different. But through those years we kept Ade, where as Foster seams to have been excluded more.

I suppose you can say the difference is, that in the years when Ade was dropping the ball and having similar days to Foster in defence, the team was winning things so it did not matter. But when people say Foster is not Saints quality my question is was Ade at a similar age and time in his career???

I always use a very simple criterion for judging how good a player we've just sold/released is: Who else in the league wants them/ultimately signs them? Foster, as a free agent, has been signed by a lower table club and only on a short deal. That says everything that needs to be said about the lad and his prospects and what the rest of the league thinks about him quite succinctly and no further comment is necessary.

We haven't paid him off. He's asked to go. He was told he wasn't first choice and didnt want to play for Rochdale.

Saints agreed to his release.

He just wanted to play first team rugby which he wouldn't get at saints. He loves saints and would love to stay but he wants to play first team.

Most of those were big talents but trouble makers that big clubs gave up on and wouldn't take the chance of a big contract on until/if they matured. Shenton would be snapped up by any team in the league given an opportunity - he was let go by Saints early to a non-threat club because he just hasn't settled here and we didn't want him coming back to haunt us in a Leeds shirt. Hardly comparable to Foster who none of the big clubs want simply because he isn't good enough for the top level and hasn't developed past his early promise. If he signs for Wigan or Warrington in a year or 2 and tears the league up then we can bemoan a poor Saints recruitment decision, but frankly he won't and it isn't.

Not necessarily. Bradford only have a one year licence remember and so if Foster wants to play at Superleague level he would be foolish to sign for more than one year. The length of the contract might also reflect his own thoughts about his future. He may be reviewing whether to continue playing at all. We don't know. But a one year deal is not necessarily a reflection of his confidence level.