Thought Murph had a year left on his contract. Make him stay. Murph is a decent lad he is not a to##er like Solo or Brough who held the club to ransom when they wanted a move - I think Murph has told the club he wants away but if we refuse his request I believe he will still give 100% in the last year of his contract.

Glover should be telling them to take their crap else where if theres any truth in this, shudds are really starting to take the peas!

Murphy is a solid centre defensively but has not set the world on fire in attack. Would be sad to see him go, but i would take Kirmond, Raleigh and Wood in exchange. Kirmond is a very good back rower who can cover the backs. Raleigh gives us good depth in the back row and at prop. Not sure about Wood at 7, but would take him as hooker cover. If Murphy wants away then let him go.

I'm off the opinion that we should make a stand. Make him see out his contract, if that means him sitting in the stands every week so be it. But we must show a strong stance with regard to want away players.

Huddersfield will still have salary cap problems regardless of whether they take on Murphy or not, so the liklihood is that Raleigh or Kirmond will still be available anyway.

Murphy seems like a decent lad and has given good service to WTW.

However, he's young, has a short career and if Mr Burns is waving big money at him, he'll take it, just like any of us with half a brain would. That said, Mr Glover should take a really tough stance on his contractual obligations in my view and make Shudds dig deep - maybe if we send a strong message under this new regime, they'll look elsewhere for a club with less cash to use in place of a decent Academy set-up.

Of the the three players rumoured to be heading this way, I don't see that we have a use for Wood, but Raleigh and Kirmond would be useful additions.

IF they are releasing 3 for salary cap reasons, how do we fit them in with a lower spend?

Kirmond did alright for us, but if we are in a position to choose rather than just accept scraps, I would hope we could do better, he has looked ordinary last couple of weeks, never rated Raleigh.

And if Wood is 1 of them, is someone just trying to collect as many Kyles as possible?

But is it the old dilema ?, he did'nt go when we were in a far worse position early season, we must be in a far stronger position now to be able to say to shudds we want so and so player or bog off, he is our player and under contract. Never mind all this cash in now b--l---s.

To me how we deal with this situation says a lot about our future in relation to our own juniors.

Tongia is another I don't get, this lad is something special and should have been tied up ASAP.

Got to agree with that one - surely we didn't scout him, bring him over, take care of all the attendant admin in respect of visa, RFL clearance etc, only for another club to reap the benefits?

I'm favouring towards making Murphy see out his contract. He doesn't strike me as the Darrell Griffin type who would sulk and not perform. He would still give 100% in any game he's selected to play in.

I'd go with that as well. Tell him to stay and see out his contract then he can go and play for whoever he wants to next year. If we have a decent season next year (which I think we will) then he may want to stay.

If he doesn't go for it, he can play in the reserves all season for mine.

Every player has his price and the club should be saying "look we dont want your rejects so start talking money-big money" we would then see how serious they are.Yes they could wait 12 month till he was OOC but the same goes for the players they want to off load to us.

If he is going (as widely predicted), then we should be asking for some money.

if we accept the players, then why don't we play hardball and ask for someone like grix back?

if we get the 3 mentioned, then that is just helping them out of a hole.

Agree wholeheartedly.

Time for Wakefield Trinity to make a stand, tell Hudds to go forth and multiply.

If they want Murphy so badly, we stick a MASSIVE price tag on his head and make them choose whether to pay up or sod off.

I would personally rather see him sat in the reserves than see us bend over for Hudds yet again.

Why should we help them meet the salary cap restrictions by agreeing to let him go in exchange for players they don't want. As said earlier if they have salary cap issues then they will have to release some of their players anyway, most clubs are already full for next year so we could probably pick them up on a free if that was the case.

If Glover really wants to turn this club around then we should be telling Hudds no way unless they are willing to pay £150,000 or give us who WE WANT, not who they want rid of. Then we'll see just how deep Uncle Ken's pockets are!

I will be very p'd off if we let them dictate terms again.

it all comes down to value. and how much is on the table. can't see us making a lad sit in the stands for a year, that gives us no value at all.

if the deal is right, then i trust agar/glover and little jimmy to do the right thing for us.

i like murphy, but he's not the messiah. he'd not be as big a loss as brough or obst the way he's performed this year. i think he has potential, but has a lot to do to justify his reputation on here.

He's a very naughty boy!