He doesn't count on Wakefields quota so could be a goer.

That's interesting as, so we were told at the time, his exemption was only for the first contract after leaving Crusaders. In fact, IIRC we originally only signed him on a one year deal before the exemption was announced and we wondered how we'd go on when we re-signed him. Let's hope it's true, the news would certainly get a cheer from me!

I'm not sure about the quota, but I would definitely welcome Sammut back to the club. He does have his off days but he can practically win a game by himself if he's in the mood. He's a threat that the opposition have to constantly think about and he should hopefully take some of the playmaking responsibility away from Gaskell.

I think he should be allowed back as long as he goes back to his Captain Jack look. Can you get a headguard like a pirate hat?

Would really like this to be true. I wondered recently if we went for Sammut in the off season and if Wakey rejected - I'd be surprised if now is the first time we've gone in for him since he left

That's a big yes from me, he is a quality player and would give us another angle of attack (Fleet of foot) really positive if this is true. He is not happy at wakey and would respond with JL and our club

The original exemptions were supposed to be for duration of first contract after players left crusaders. As we were then able to extend sammuts contract without him taking a quota spot and his seeming not to count on wakefields quota either suspect the ex crusaders players were actually given permanent exemptions. Are any others still playing and do they count on their clubs quotas?

Hep Cahill Rhys hanbury can't think of any more

Sammuts playing for London on Sunday

A definite improvement, if he comes, but not the ideal foil for Gaskell, I would have thought.

Jarrod Sammut is the kind of player who makes watching rugby league a joy. He's unpredictable and plays very much off the cuff, and yes, he has his off days but his presence was, and would be, overwhelmingly a positive for me. Both him and Lee can break the line and are excellent at backing up, no real reason why they wouldn't complement each other very well, imo.

I would be thrilled to see Jaz in a bulls shirt, but I can't help but think this wouldn't be great news for Gaskell.

They are both excellent half backs and can tear a team apart at any point, they play very similar games but it's because of that I don't think they will compliment each other well at all.

It's no secret that Jimmy wants his scrum half to be an organiser, and what we would be left with is 2 halves fighting for the lime light, wanting to break the line every play leaving us with little or no organisation or structure in attack. I think the role that Siejka is supposed to play was coming to the fore before his injury, and you could say we've looked a little lost organisation wise in recent weeks in his absense.

We have our flashy half back, lets get an organiser!

True but at the same time, we need another threat on the field besides Gaskell. I actually think we're missing Mullaney big time who posed a big attacking threat for us.

I think having Sammut back would be a real boost for us. Having Mullaney, Gaskell and Sammut would give any opposition defence problems. I think Gaskell would become more of a leader/organiser anyway. Most of our attacking plays come off him, so he has to do some sort of organising, and he is also our main kicker.

Funnily enough, I had similar feelings when Henry Paul was brought in to accompany Robbie! I thought they were far too alike and unlikely to be a good 'foil' for each other but, to be fair, that worked out pretty well in the end. They were brothers, of course, which does bring a different dynamic, but both were [as so often with brothers] clearly very competitive with each other, so those similarities, hopefully, wouldn't be a problem this time either. Brothers in arms?

Jimmy, Henry & Robbie all wanting to be the main man. Oh those were the days!