Dual reg ended - was it worth it ?

rlhttps://www.yorkpress.co.uk/sport/yorkcityknights/10671148._/?rl

Well sorry for having an injury crisis

Did they seriously think they were going to get the likes of Watts & Pitts every week?
That said, it's disappointing that some of the players hearts weren't in it.

Ironic that Doncaster are also mentioned at the bottom of that article, as that's who we're supposedly going with moving forward.

So one of the issues raised is that they wanted to rest their own players for the Easter Monday fixture and play some of our guys. That is a bit unfair when we had Shaul make his debut and Jason Crookes as a sub because of injuries. We also had games on Good Friday and Easter Monday.

In the list of players given, Watts and Pitts have been regular first team players, Green has played himself into the team, Jamie Shaul wasn't picked because they had their own full back, I can't think of many occasions where our 3 centres have been fit to play at the same time, Danny Nicklas was let go by us to York if he quit on them than thats an issue with him. As for this unnamed player, that does sound like a poor attitude so fair enough

I think I read a few weeks ago that we would be tying up with Donny next season and that Cooke was keen to get Shaul on a dual reg or on loan.

That will be why we are going into partnership with Donny next season

Quite. Did they not notice us struggling to field a competitive side on a number of occasions?

Shame it didn't work out, and no excuses for players who didn't try hard enough when there, but some of that criticism seems to be a tad one-eyed.

What a story, got to feel sorry for poor York...

Maybe they could tie up with the Dobins next year, the strength in depth will be underwhelming for them.

Ever so sorry for needing our players to cover injuries..Lineham in for Crookes and played so well,he kept his place.

Crooks coverd Arundel and kept his place...didnt Arundle play for york on dual-reg.Watts was made available so he could get fit after injury..Pitts so he could get game time...Shaul,didnt they mess him about and Hadley and Briscoe was no where nr the 1st team so it made sense for them to go there.Hell..if we had known,they could have had Ellis,Houghton and any other bugger they wanted.Will be better linking up with Donny as Cooke is next coach and he understands it more and the demands of S/L...not like the cable-fitter at York.

Reading the piece I wonder if York thought they could have SL calibre players on cheap to help boost their own fortunes?

I get the feeling that communication is vital between the 2 clubs to establish exactly what is and isn't expected of both clubs and any players. The SL club should always be the priority and that should be emphasised right from the word go but it seems NL clubs are under the impression the dual reg players are there's unless the player is absolutely needed to play for the SL club. The players should be seen as a bonus and not the only way of fielding a competitive team.

Obviously I might be biased, but I don't really see much that we as a club have done wrong there. As said, that list of names is pretty unrealistic (especially things like both Arundel and Crooks, the best that was ever going to be possible was one of them, ditto Lineham/Crookes), and several ended up forcing their way into the Hull first team and/or picking up injuries. If they thought they were going to be offered that calibre of players regularly they were at best incredibly naive to think that we wouldn't pick up injuries, or even worse stupid enough to think that we'd still send them to York instead of use them ourselves.

Looking at that list:

Lineham played 21 games for us, and then got injured so would have been more. Crooks played 18 and then ditto. Arundel has played 14 even after having had 2 spells out injured.
Green has played 19 games, Pitts has played 23, Watts has played 21.

That's 6 of the 9 who have either played or been injured for a good 2/3rds of our season at least.

Specifically for Shaul, we were desperate for him to get games somewhere, so it wasn't us as a club that was in any way responsible for him barely playing for them. There were rumours about his attitude, but that's not within our control if true.

So that just leaves Bowden and Crookes, who have still managed 10+ games each, but I don't know how many of the 11 for York they each represent.

As for Easter, do they not realise that we also had to back up from a tough Friday, too? By my reckoning, we used 20 players that weekend and had 5 unavailable through injury/Seymour situation. Given that you have to name your Monday squad before the full extent of Friday's injuries are known, it's no wonder we kept our squad back in case we needed them with 5 injuries already and what turned out to be 3 more down (if we lost 3, I'd be amazed if there weren't significant doubts over a few more).

Lastly Nicklas, yes it was a joke, but again I'm not sure what we could possibly have done wrong. Looked like all his doing from what was reported.

To be honest I am no fan of the way Nicklas has acted on a couple of occasions but I went to see one York game and commented at the time it was a waste of time him being on the field as they seemed literally incapable of passing to the side he (and most of the FC boys that game) where playing on. He just looked completely frustrated and wasting his time. Again as I said at the time it looked like 2 different teams on the pitch - some York players who had trained more together and likewise the Hull players. Maybe York (and us) have left the relationship too early after all it was always going to be a learning curve to see how it played out in the first year with different expectations from both sides.

Exactly the same thing has happened at Doncaster with Wakey, www.newsnow.co.uk/A/667263076?-17215:2422 Its OK but some Clubs saw it as a means of getting players on the cheap which is fine and thats what they did until injuries kick in then the Super league team has to protect its own interests not just by playing these players but when injuries hit really deep keeping them on the sidelines in case any more come. I expect we'll form a liason with Doncaster next season which with the quality of our present crop of youngster should suit them fine. The following year of the 'renaissance' I expect some sort of A Team set up to return because Duel registration won't work if after 23 games you find yourself playing against your Duel Reg team.

Exactly the same thing has happened at Doncaster with Wakey, www.newsnow.co.uk/A/667263076?-17215:2422 Its OK but some Clubs saw it as a means of getting players on the cheap which is fine and thats what they did until injuries kick in then the Super league team has to protect its own interests not just by playing these players but when injuries hit really deep keeping them on the sidelines in case any more come. I expect we'll form a liason with Doncaster next season which with the quality of our present crop of youngster should suit them fine. The following year of the 'renaissance' I expect some sort of A Team set up to return because Duel registration won't work if after 23 games you find yourself playing against your Duel Reg team.

Wonder how many times Morley , Briers & the rest of the wire team turned out for Swinton ...