Fair points, but I don't think Yeaman is good enough to start for Hull either. I hope next season it will be Crooks and Sa or a new centre, however I doubt the first one. Yeaman if 50k is off cap is worth keeping as a backup.

Crooks will not be here next season

I reckon your right, just trying to cling on to hope that whatever has happened could be resolved.

Earlier in the thread I mentioned we haven't let too many go in the past I think we regret, think this could be one though.

Again, I agree.

I'm also unsure about how much better use of the cap we are getting by him being at Bradford, because if his wages are the sticking point to him going there permanently, it suggests they possibly aren't paying all of them currently (unless it's just because their cap can't cover it next year). Even if they are though, it would seem strange for them to sign Arundel on his high wages, so that we could bring in Sa for less. Surely they'd have got a whiff of Sa?

Won't Whiting qualify for the £50k next year, too? In which case, you might as well look at Yeaman's entire wage in assessing his worth vs. cost (which we don't know, anyway).

Forgot about Whiting, maybe 25k each then, without knowing the wages, its hard to say if they are value for money or not.

For Arundel in this thread you could also read Miller (not necessarily performed as well, but still not given the chances - pre season being his downfall)

Depends, I don't know the full ins and outs of how it works. Is it linked to how much a player earns (e.g. 50% up to a maximum of £50k), or just as long as a qualifying player earns over £50k you can claim the lot? If it's the latter, you might as well look at a player's full wage, as unless you get rid of them all you're going to get the £50k, and if none of them are worth their wage you're doing something very wrong.

To a slightly lesser extent, absolutely. If it hadn't been for how obviously and monumentally rubbish our halves were coming to a head against Widnes and the massive pressure that debacle generated, I'm not sure Miller would have been given a run in the side.

I still don't understand how Arundel was one of only 2 dropped from the 8 players who played in our 1-7 after that game. Amongst an admittedly very poor lot, he and Talanoa were about the best IMO, played ok. The other 2 centres were both abysmal but started the following week.

I believe it's a £50k concession per club if they have at least one player in his 11th+ Super League season. Both Yeaman and Whiting qualify.

Pre season AP did say this year we would have £250k as players wages off cap. Assume a chunk of that was for Biggs (when is he coming again? )

I'm on record from earlier in the season saying that Arundel should have been used more. But that still isn't 'forcing him out'. We clearly don't want him because be believe he is too expensive for what he brings to the side and having that much money tied up in an average player is hindering efforts to improve the squad. So rather than play him - which may, for all we know, trigger additional payments - we've looked to loan him out to free up cap space.

And in fairness, if the rumours concerning his salary are even half right I can't really argue with that plan. We desperately need to spend money elsewhere and wisely.

The problem we have with both Arundel and Crooks as players is that they are both poor tacklers.That said when you have young players who are deficient in an area of the game the club/coach should spend time with them to improve the technique.
Salary should not be an issue used solely to get rid of a player.

If that's the case, by your reckoning, every player can be improved to the point where they are giving value for money, if not more.

If only it were that simple.

If the club feel that Arundel will never reach a high enough standard to give value for money, then so be it.

ps I've still not found any reference to Pitts' contract being extended beyond 2014.

Arundel will know that his contract will prevent him getting a similar deal elsewhere so if he really wants to play rugby and not just collect his wages it may be that he would be willing to re-negotiate his contract - if he is assured he is going to be given a fair crack of the whip and selected or dropped on merit/performances alone.

Personally I would rather see him at centre than Whiting.