When i first heard we had signed greg and paid a transfer fee to get him i was really pleased , but now all this contract clause of greg will have to return to hudds in 2 years if they want him has soured the signing for me to be honest ! its almost like we are paying his wages for 2 years while hudds see if he gets better and if he does they are going to recall him , its the strangest transfer i have ever heard of ! its sounds more like a loan signing ? and how they can do this after 2 years and he has signed for 3 is even more confusing

I must admit I was confused at first by the ‘clause’ but now it has been explained I think it will become commonplace in the future.

The clause is a reaction to what has been occurring in the contract market for some years now. When a player approaches his final year of a contract that player remains a saleable asset, however when a player enters the final year of a contract they are no longer a saleable asset.

Reflect this on the Greg Eden contract, the clause is effectively a first refusal ‘buy-back’ option during the ‘saleable’ asset period (in this instance, for 2 yrs).

But if that is true then what happens if Greg Eden and HKR sit down in Aug 2014 and decide to extend into 2017.
Can Hudds block it?

No, the Giants cannot block it.

If, say, Rovers extend Eden's contract during the 2yr 'clause' period, then it doesn't change a thing. The clause remains in situ until it 'expires'. There is no top-up fee or such like to pay at the end of the clause period.

The only way the Giants can invoke the clause is if Greg Eden wants to leave Rovers (or if Rovers want rid) during the 2yr period. But even then, the decision to return to the Giants remains with the player. There is no binding obligation for the player to return to the Giants.

If Rovers want to sell Eden, then they are obligated to give the Giants first refusal during the clause period.

or you could say burns a player whos played nrl all his career against holdsworth whos played for bottom end SL side for the last few years

I don't know the ins and outs of "the Clause" but it is a fair observation that at board/management level Giants and Rovers have a good relationship. Both clubs and the player are happy with whatever the agreement actually is, I doubt there are powers to "block" but even if there were I would be very surprised if any blocking ever happened.

FWIW I don't think anybody expects to see Greg at Giants again other than as a Rovers player.

You could say the same about Seymore aswell (in relation to Burns)

or to push my point further eden was first choice at hudds until his coach left against mcdonnel who got in the exiles team because of injuries we can all put a spin on it

Doesn't make any difference, the gulf in those derby games was larger than the final table showed.

We should sign Eddie Charlton next, as we are so far behind the neighbours we need snookers.

I'm here all night.

Perhaps, but the question remains. If, in a joint team, 6 of the back 7 in 2012 would have been Rovers, how did FC end up on top?

I wasn't aware of a joint team, so I will have to pass. Next question please.