That irreplaceable guy left to join a club heading to the championship and it was last season. I know everyone is replaceable but the question I ask why release when we are unsure if one of the other quota players may not play again this season. He did not ask to leave he was told by our chairman that he could so the only reason would be to save money. To then allow him to join one of our main competitors just adds to the stupidity of the original decision and the haste it was pushed through.
We even considered letting two other players leave but decided at the last minute it would probably be better to keep them should we pick up any injuries.

How many second rowers do we have?
How many outside backs do we have?

This is irrelevant it's not where he plays but why he was released. If it was the former I would think Kirke would be a better bet. I read they had decided that they were not going to offer him a contract if that was the reason then you could add the majority of the squad who are out of contract with no indication of any new offers being made. To release a quota spot then look at removing Locke until it can be confirmed he will be back this season.
I would guess it was the best option to save money because let's face it this is the major motivation at the moment.
We enter our last guaranteed SL game on Sunday having played our worst season' with only a small number signed for next season and no ground.

Will be interesting how they price next years season tickets in view of this years debacle.

Relegated prices unchanged unless we are in an all seater stadium still in SL increase dependent on where we are playing. If for example all seater I would expect quite an increase. The season tickets sales are a long way off first we need to know the league we are in and then the ground we are occupying. This would suggest we may have to go sometime once the season ends with no revenue that clubs expect from early birds offers.

You release Kirke and who is the 'domestic' player that comes in and replaces him?
Don't you think this option has already been explored, with the signings of Howarth, Tansey and Walker?
So I would say it's very relevant.
As for Locke being removed, maybe that will come later on, if the club has a replacement lined up?
Give the bloke a chance because if he did get released with no replacement, you would be moaning at that!

I know Ryan leaving and Tupou coming in were only announced this week but I would have thought it was sorted before Locke got injured, as the RFL have to sanction the signings and to get Tupou signed up we must have had to show we were freeing up a quota space. No way Tupou would be here and eligible for Hudds game if we had only sorted it all this week.

Perhaps Ryan was amongst the high earners at the club and it was felt that the money could be better utilised on other players coming in to strengthen weaker areas, as we are reasonably well endowed for back rowers.

The weaker in some areas and well off in other areas was what I was trying to subtly get across but WHOOSH!
It went over someone's head.