I must confess to being lost at some of the 'logic' in much of this. Can anyone explain the 'benefits' of demanding the last ounce from contracted players when they have made it obvious they don't want to stay? Maybe also, how having de-motivated people who would rather be elsewhere in the squad, benefits performance, because I can't see how that works either.

Have I missed something here?

Has Andy Lynch actually said he wants to leave, doesn't want to spend the rest of his career at the Bulls or that he's looking for one last pay day?

Basically is this thread a whole load of hot air, or is there actually some sort of substance to it?

Played well today. Keep it up Andy as long as your in a Bulls shirt. Rumour at best i would say

Lynch was absolutely outstanding today. Langley did nothing. I top earner I would want rid of!

Langley was disgusting. Falling off tackles, not making yards.

Apparently Richard Agar has told a few Hull fans that the Lynch deal is almost done. His move to Hull was also mentioned by the commentators on BCB today I think. As they say, there's no smoke without fire, so where do we look for a replacement if Andy moves on?

Will be sad if lynch goes, as much as Koppy and Tom are progressing and as reliable scruton and Hargreaves are none of them are as reliable and as talented as lynch. What a mistake bulls will have made if the rumour about him bring pushed out by the board is true to free up money to bring another player in.
I would offload surplus requirements in Langley, platt and Sykes before even contemplating letting lynch go

We can't just kick people like Sykes, Platt and Langley out as they are all under contract. Obviously we would keep Lynch if he was happy to stay, but when a player wants to go and another side match your demands for a transfer fee, the club is left with little option but to sell.

The fact that Leeds signed Richard Moore and Hull are apparently trying to buy a contracted Prop would perhaps suggest that there aren't that many Props readily available on the market right now.

Of course you do, you say we're not selling him.

Of course you do, you say we're not selling him.

I wouldn't begrudge Andy Lynch this move, even though he had a very good game today.

He passed up the chance to make a move when his last contract came around, opting to stay with us. Despite his best efforts the team had been ever less successful. Now he has the chance - late in his career - to make what I guess will be quite a lucrative move, and go to a team that will likely be at least challenging next season.

Really.... I can't blame him for that.

That said, I sincerely hope that the club has a plan B - because a prop quarter of Hargreaves, Scruton, Kopczak and Burgess (with presumably Crossley) as back up is hardly going to frighten the other teams, even though it is workmanlike and (in the case of Koppy and Burgess) likely to improve a bit.

If Lynch goes we need a top quality replacement.


He had a good game today, and even though he is nearing the end of his career he is still one of the best props in the comp.

Langley needs to get his act together for next season though.

So if this deal doe's happen the club need to make a real statement of intent with his replacement or they can forget about getting anywhere near the pledge total.