rlhttps://twitter.com/rugbyleagueitk/status/1332090077858697220?s

Called it regarding Gelling, Catalans interested apparently.

I don't think we will replace him if he goes. We are pretty stocked in the centres. Inglis would take Gelling's place. Then we have King, Mamo, Brand, Currie, Hughes & Ratchford can play there.

To be fair I think that describes Gelling throughout his career!

We will need adequate cover for Inglis as he will probably miss games due to injury throughout the year. It’s whether we think a combination of Mamo, Brand & Roebuck are good enough cover?

Next year budgets will be tight so releasing Gelling probably makes sense. But another reason is that there will be no reserve games and no dual reg.next year, so over-age players like Roebuck will have nowhere to go (unless they get a season long loan). With Riley Dean, Eribe Doro and Nathan Roebuck's contracts finishing Nov '21 Price will need to see them playing at SL or Championship standard to make an assessment, preferably before end of April when the players can approach other SL sides. So I think our youngsters will be first pick when an injury occurs with the first team squad. There seems little point in Roebuck waiting behind King, Inglis, Gelling as he will probably never get a game. TBH the club really needs to make a call between Brand and Roebuck as well and release the one that doesn't get the nod. Perhaps send Brand back to Widnes on a season long loan ?

must admit, from the little that i've seen of both of them, roebuck showed more in that salford game, and i think that if we were to release gelling, there's nothing he couldn't replace directly. Gelling hasn't pulled up any trees this year and if anything i've been very disapointed with parts of his game.

if we can replace an expensive big lad with a cheaper big lad, and put some development on it, its win win.

Overall I've not been disappointed by Gelling and wouldn't be if he stayed on.

However, if he's going I agree with you and Charlie that there is merit beyond creating cap space with having a development pathway for the young lads a bit of a chance a bit of hope and from what we saw, all be it fleetingly, a bit of mettle. Added to that it's a position that we are well covered with good options and if it releases some funds for a freshen up or reinforcements elsewhere then happy days

I suspect most people will think the same as well. He is big and strong and takes a lot of marking, but he has always made daft errors. A straight swap of Gelling with Roebuck will certainly leave you short changed for some time to come - even assuming he kicks on, but I suppose the club has to make a decision and if Gelling is sitting on the sidelines waiting for King or Inglis to get injured it's probably an expensive option.

Yep - as others have said you get good and bad with Gelling, but I think the 'good' outweighs the bad.
Ignoring Inglis and King who will be 1st choice centres imo, none of the other players mentioned poses the same problems that Gelling does in attack (not considering Ratch here because we are likely to need him in other positions, although I am sure he'd do a great job), having said that we don't get to see Charnley at his best with Gelling even though (I think) they played together at Wigan.

Then there's the court case...... not sure about tbe timescale for all that, or whether anything is likely to happen.

Gelling won't want to be 3rd choice centre so I can see why he'd want to leave and it's logical that other clubs would be interested in a player of his quality.

With the cap involved, a lack of reserves and our youth coming through etc etc it makes sense in the bigger picture, BUT next year is SP's last year under contract, so are his thoughts going to be looking to develop the youth or will he 'play safe' and not risk them for fear of not getting another contract......... mmm.....

This. Gelling was mostly good, it often took him a while to settle in to a game but then he would be one of our better players once he had settled. Youngsters need game time and mamo can cover as well as charnley.