Apparently he wanted an extension of a year at the Bulls but we didnt offer it unfortunately

How early should we be negotiating new deals with players coming to end of contracts?. until we've finished this years retentions and recruitment then we dont know what cap space we potentially have available for upgrades in 2013 as some of this years signings will be on longer than one year deals. eg we let kearney and l'estrange both get upto april/may before renewing their deals. Would have thought tom would be near top of list in terms of players we want to retain and hence talks would start pretty soon in new year. Personally dont think he will sign another SL contract but will go to aus due to family pressure but hope club manage to tie him down.

I'm not sure to be honest - big fish in a small pond here or tiny fish in a big pond over there with his brothers. I think he will stay for a bit.
Unless the club needs to pay some bills or something of course.

club wouldnt get any money if he went at end of his contract next year. suspect if he did sign a new deal it would have NRL get out clause in it like sams. Just tend to think that with all his brothers now down under and his mother staying over here with tom, but going down under a few times a year to visit, he'll maybe come under a bit of peer pressure to follow. hopefully we can make him an attractive enough offer to keep him here but im not holding my breath.

Can't say I'm not disappointed to see Andy leave. He's never let the team down and been the proverbial rock in the pack for what seems like ages. I definitely wish him well though (cept when they play us, natch).

I've said before though, that we really need to judge the ins and outs as a whole package, so I'll hold off any real criticism until it's finalised (we still have the Jeffries passport issue and the, is he or isn't he, over Sammutt, muddying the waters), got to say that I thought we were just about Ok for props, possibly if anything, a tad light if we weren't going to overplay Tom, so I'll be disappointed if there isn't another prop in the offing, either as a newcomer or a re-jigging from within.

I doubt the club would just decide to ship him out to get money

I suspect what happened was

1. His agent said that he wanted to open negotiations on a new contract, for two years, from the end of 2012
2. The club intimated they would be looking for a one year deal at that point
3. Agent has contacts with other SL clubs and puts out feelers
4. Hull show an interest, and make contact with the Bulls
5. Hull negotiate fee with club, and personal terms with player via agent

If it happened like that, then Andy Lynch could quite easily say 'I wasn't looking to leave, in fact I wanted a new contract at Bradford' and be telling the truth. But at the same time, the events played out in a way that meant that the club were left with little option but to sell, to avoid having an out of contract player at the end of next season.

THat's how it seems to be increasingly happening in sport - footballers are rarely allowed to enter into the final year of a contract, for fear of them walking away for no fee. Hence Arsenal deciding to sell Nasri to Man City this Summer. And, of course, agents have a vested interest in promoting these transfers, as they get a decent cut of the fee.

From what I heard he asked for another year but the club declined saying that nobody was getting an extension at the moment. He would've stayed if his contract had been extended to 2013.

I'll be keeping my powder dry on this until we see who his replacement is going to be.

Depends who they are IMO, players like Burgess and Whitehead and other quality youngsters should be negotiated well in advance of the middle of the season that their contracts finish. They should be given long contracts aswell. I reckon about 18 months before their current deal runs out, like Leeds and Hudds do, and tie them up for 4-5 years aswell.

Spot on imo.

Wigan didn't hang around with Tomkins, Hudds didn't with McGilvary etc.

Lynch's replacement has been identified but cant be finalised until the quota issue is sorted.

Hope this doesn't hurt us like the Orford issue did last year

which quota issue? jeffries or sammut. Bit worrying if were basing our recruitment on possibility of sammut getting dispensation unless club have been told something already. If we wait and hope he'll get it then he doesnt we're left scrabbling round for players late in off season when everyones sorted for next season.

This isn't a criticism of the club with regards to selling Lynch as I can see why they've done it and if the right replacement is identified as kingmonkey suggests then I'm in favour. However, why does the club appear so passive in these matters? Where is the 'Hood demands decision from RFL' headline in the RLW? At times we're so meek it's pitiable.

tend to think its a case of we're saying what we can publically. Seem to remember when Hull KR were discussing Willie Masons status with RFL, they had to resort to legal means to get RFL to agree with Hull KRs interpretation of the quota rules. Suspect we may be in same boat and either going through legal channels or waiting on a RFL board meeting for a decision. In which making a fuss in press would maybe be counter-productive.
Think our case will be that all players registered with Crusaders at time of dispensation are entitled to it. Sammut would qualify in that case as he doesnt become a Bulls player until Nov. RFL may be trying to argue that dispensations only apply to Crusaders players who were going to be playing for Crusaders in 2012 season at time that Crusaders withdrew their application. If that interpretation is correct then we're on dodgy ground as Sammuts contract was probably registered by then. Did any of crusaders other overseas players agree a deal to move clubs before Sammut and did they get the dispensation?

Something I just noticed while reading hull board that could have a bearing on our recruitment if correct. Apparently heremeai (SP) has been granted fed trained status by RFL because he played for Leigh in 2006 before the non-fed quota was brought in in 2008. I always understood the fed trained exemptions were only for players in SL when the the non fed quota was introduced and they lost the exemption as soon as they left SL. IF RFL are going to allow any player who had a stint in English leagues (not just SL as leigh were in NL when heremaia played for them) before 2008 an exemption to be fed trained then that potentially opens up a lot of options in terms of recruitment, particularly when jeffries passport comes through.