The statement does read a bit like he used us as a stepping stone but I think that is just unfortunate in the way it's worded.

I was always aware he wanted to go back to Aus if he could after two years and so I have no problem with this at all. If he'd left the stepping stone comments out and how we made him good enough for the NRL perhaps it would have been better but I think he is trying to be complementary rather than imply we are a feeder club.

If he'd signed another contract I'd be more concerned in a way as he would only have been doing it as 2nd best as he clearly wanted to go and play in the NRL. I think his motivation for playing for us has been fine but if he was only doing it after this season as he could not get a club in Aus then I think his motivation might be an issue.

He has seen his contract out, done his job so no problem with him leaving on an individual level.

The fact for the bigger picture this means our turnover of players continues is more disturbing but now we will see what the club is made of in terms of retaining players it sees as the future. I always thought part of the reason why Green got the two year deal was not just because [ihe[/i wanted it but because it would be about that time our younger players would be ready to take over. It's been the plan all along.

Is it too soon? Maybe but I think that [iwas[/i the plan and so now the crucial test of the clubs ambition is here. If it decides the young trio mentioned by Wane are the future it simply cannot entertain any interest from elsewhere. It has got to retain these players and if that means improved contracts and having to fight off other clubs with more cash then it's just got to do it. Not cash in as soon as a half decent offer comes along.

Yes I think the initial deal was the one that suited Green the best, providing he could get an NRL deal after 2 years with Wigan, which it appears he has done with Melbourne. I was just meaning from the club's point of view keeping him around as an experienced player in a young squad for another 12 months would probably have been ideal.

Part of me would actually quite like to see a 1. Hampshire 6. Powell. 7. Smith 9. McIlorum combination with Williams on the bench from next year, but we have so little experience in key positions throughout the squad I think SW would desperately want to keep Bowen on for another season.

I think Wane has a lot of faith in the young players but perhaps too much at times. I also wonder how much influence he has if a potential sale of a player is in the offing though that does not apply in the Green case as no fee with be due.

In terms of recruitment I have concerns because if Wane or IL thinks he can build a great side based on our own production line I think they are mistaken and I also don't think signings like Tauati are going to help with that ambition either. We need to be on the look our for players of Kevin Lockes age and ability to add a spark of class to the side.

We have not made that kind of a signing since we got Finch/Hoffman and Lima when the Storm screwed the salary cap up.

At the moment we have our own young players, sign players who[i might[/i turn out to be good like Tauati, sign younger players like Bateman and Sarge/Gelling and if we are lucky and older head like Bowen but I don't think that strategy will deliver the goods.



One of the things Rads highlighted when he came back from that SL forum/knowledge share day about only half the SL clubs bothered to attend was how Leeds structure their wages.

He wrote about it in the match program and basically Leeds have a kind of carer progression ladder. "Do this and you get that" sort of thing. What that means is players know what they have to do to get a better contract but they also know what that contract will be money-wise as they have a tiered wage structure. I think this lets everyone know where they stand and it seems to work in Leeds favour. It has not led to an exodus because players don't think whatever wage teirs they have are good enough.

Rads seemed very keen on the idea but whether we are implementing it, who knows.

dont get too excited, Tautai wont be the new messiah, but lets hope he is better than Luaki (sp?)

I have seen enough in Tautai to think he will be a good addition to our squad and give us the strike and athleticism that we lack in the back row. If we can get Vea, rumored on the rumors thread we will have added 2 really big dynamic lads that we lack and have lacked for some time.

I'm led to believe that Vea has signed for the dark side over the hill.

While I don't think Green will be greatly missed. Again we see, year after year, our players wanting to leave the club. And once again in that crucial area of half back.

Our best period ever for the club, arguably, was the Edwards/Gregory partnership.

It shouldn't take a 'rocket scientist' to realise that a stability is necessary. Or that the two halves make a massive difference to a clubs fortunes.I just hope that Hampshire will be able to fulfil in that area.

I think Hampshire is the fans choice for that 6 role but it looks pretty clear he's Wanes third choice at the moment. Hopefully he gets a fair crack there at some point this year because if he does I think he'll nail it.

Tim Smith will be available for next year.could you be in for him?

I wouldnt have him back as a water boy, never seen a worse defender in professional Rugby League.

Bobby Goulding is back playing?

Bobby could fill the missing half back position that Saints so badly need.

Disappointing. Been a very good signing.

I don't know why anyone is surprised he is going (if they are) because it was more or less announced the day he signed it was for two years with a view to him returning home after that.

The club has had plenty of time to plan for it. It's the unexpected departures that are the problem.