Maybe he hasn’t achieved what the club expected in preseason but it does seem odd. Another prop down.

Making space for Livett?

Please just NO. Someone already said that Matt Turner had asked the club and apparently they have said no.

I suppose if the club aren't happy with his progression with us, this is a good way to see how he actually gets on in super league. I think he'll get more game time there, and if he hits the ground running and impresses we keep him, if he's bang average but Cas want him we let him go. I do Agree it's another head scratcher though, if it was a simple loan i'd see it just as needed game time, but the option to keep if both parties agree says there's something more to it.

To go from giving someone a four-year deal, to then shipping them out before they have even made their debut, is very strange to say the least. If it was just a loan, I would think 'fair enough' but the option to buy is surprising. It will be interesting to hear what the club have got to say about this one.

He wasn`t getting selected by Bradford at the end of last season which was puzzling at the time and there wasn`t any news that he was injured to justify his absence.

I saw him play in our reserve team and was underwhelmed with what I saw and that was before we sent him back to Bradford.

He certainly has the physique, but guessing that there have been disciplinary/lifestyle issues with him?

https://www.loverugbyleague.com/post/jo ... 1734514108

https://www.loverugbyleague.com/post/jo ... 1734514108

Obviously saw something in training / reserves games that made them think it wasn't going to be - need to get better at identifying these things before the player signs, if that is the case.

Glad Bateman got sorted, I was a bit meh with his signing at the time, but he put in a good shift for us in the end and important given teh situation with Fitzgibbon. Unsure as to whether he has 2 years left at NRL level though.....

Not a head scratcher to me.
Players want to play, and he has realistic bench opportunities at Cas.
He hasn’t at Wire.

Chambers dealing with the welfare of the lad. And not thrown under a bus by it.
If he doesn’t get a permanent gig, he’s still secure at Wire.

105

Possible that some of our prop prospects have progressed better than expected so he has slipped way down the pecking order. Max Wood for example has performed way over what could realistically have been expected.

Another one who is rumoured to be off on loan for first team experience.

Trying to think of past Warrington players who have gone on loan, then come back and cemented a place in the side. (With the exception of King).

Cooper, off the top of my head.
He went Cas for a bit.
Indirectly Ratty Muscle?
Loaned and contract ended, re-signed?

Re Max Wood. A solid prospect but he, Lucas Green and Luke Thomas might struggle to get game time early on as they will be behind Vaughan, Harrison, Yates, Crowther, Musgrove and Philbin.

Wood, Green and Thomas etc will be available to play for the Smellies with the dual registration arrangement that we have with them.

It's a short list.

So the Okoro thing about keeping him if both parties agree, seems to be for a possible season long loan, rather than an actual keep him permanently deal from what i've read.
Which would make more sense, as his game time would be quite limited here. Where if he impresses there he might play week in week out.
Although i would rather have him on a rolling month to month loan, rather than just seeing him off for the whole season.

Ben Currie (Swinton)
Joe Philbin (Swinton, Rochdale, Crusaders, Bradford)
Danny Walker (Rochdale)
Ben Harrison (Swinton, Widnes)
Rhys Evans (Leigh, Swinton)
Tom Lineham (Rochdale)
Chris Riley (Quins RL)
Dec Patton (Rochdale, then again later when he fell out of favour)

Morley and Briers played on duel reg at Swinton.

https://www.warringtonguardian.co.uk/sp ... m-burgess/

https://www.warringtonguardian.co.uk/sp ... m-burgess/

Don't remember that but I assume these were both about getting match fitness; I picked examples where players were sent out early in their careers to get a bit of experience and then recorded 100+ appearances for us.

Quote: just_browny "Don't remember that but I assume these were both about getting match fitness; I picked examples where players were sent out early in their careers to get a bit of experience and then recorded 100+ appearances for us.'" https://www.warringtonguardian.co.uk/sp ... ton-lions/ I think I’m wrong about Briers being loaned. It may had been spoken about following an injury but I wouldn’t put a penny on that either.

Quote: just_browny "Don't remember that but I assume these were both about getting match fitness; I picked examples where players were sent out early in their careers to get a bit of experience and then recorded 100+ appearances for us.'" https://www.warringtonguardian.co.uk/sp ... ton-lions/ I think I’m wrong about Briers being loaned. It may had been spoken about following an injury but I wouldn’t put a penny on that either.

As I said a short list, especially if you compare to those players who went on loan and didn't establish themselves in the 1st team. It's even shorter if you only consider loans made in the last decade.

I guess my point was "if you find yourself on loan, there is a high chance you will be out of the door soon after" as these will testify (non-exhaustive list of loans in the last 5 years).

Dudson
Bullock
Bruines
Longstaff
Dean
Doro
Livett
Robson
Moran
Roebuck
Gannon
Johnson
Brand
Kibula

Surely though ANY deal - be it loan, permanent or whatever - only ever happens if all parties agree to it, so I'm not sure why that needs to be written into an agreement. But hey ho, let's just hope it works out for the best.