Ben Reynolds

[The Phantom Horseman]

Matthew Shaw suggesting on Twitter we might be getting Ben Reynolds on loan from Wakefield. Presumably to fill the void until Holmes is fit, but it does suggest we are not happy with what we've been getting at half back.

[Monkeymagic22]

Confirmed. Decent signing

[The Phantom Horseman]

 https://www.featherstonerovers.co.uk/news/reynolds-joins-rovers-448M5

On loan for a month, at which point Holmes should be ready to play. You'd have to guess this doesn't augur well for Ase Boas.

[Private Baldrick]

Mmmm, not liking this. Nowt against Reynolds, but ANOTHER loan signing? Add in Holmes and Smith from Huddersfield, Turner from Cas, the DR from Leeds and I can see why we are targeted by other clubs.

I know we are not breaking any rules but it is getting a bit silly for me now. Just remind me what those lads busting a gut in the reserves tonight are playing for?

[jamescolin]

It is the system. How many reserve lads are good enough for the first team? They are playing in the reserves to get experience and improve their performance. When good enough they get into the team. We are working within the rules to get the best results for our team .

[Robin Evans]

Oldrover will be made up.....

Chuffed with this signing... even more chuffed for Dave

[Blue Pike]

A positive on this is after a few bad performances the Club are not sitting still and hoping things get better, they are acting quickly to pull out players who have put in weak performances and replace them with good uns  .No passengers, its a tough competition .

[The Phantom Horseman]

1 hour ago, Private Baldrick said:

Mmmm, not liking this. Nowt against Reynolds, but ANOTHER loan signing? Add in Holmes and Smith from Huddersfield, Turner from Cas, the DR from Leeds and I can see why we are targeted by other clubs.

I know we are not breaking any rules but it is getting a bit silly for me now. Just remind me what those lads busting a gut in the reserves tonight are playing for?

Let's be honest, we saw in pre-season that most of the lads from the reserves are very raw and some way away at this early stage from being serious first team calibre.

One of the knock-on effects from the Sky money, (and the large differential between the funding for SL clubs and Championship ones) is that SL clubs can afford to maintain large squads of quality players, many of whom aren't going to get a game barring a string of injuries. Dan Smith has looked a quality player for us but he's nowhere near the starting line-up of a team that can't buy a win in SL. These players have to play somewhere and in the absence of reserve teams at so many clubs you can't blame our management for offering loan deals to some of these players.

[sentoffagain2]

   6  is an important part of the teams structure along with 1 7 and 9 ,i said after the second game that we needed better at 6 than we have.Scrum half is ok and may improve with a decent stand off alongside helping with the plays.As for loan players what else can we do,our budget will have been covered,no use throwing money we do not have at present away with a miracle of Leicester City proportions needed to get promoted.This season is a  GAP year and the sooner spectators realise it the better.

[Monkeymagic22]

The problem with loan players in crucial positions is that we won’t get any consistency. Wakey are going well though, so fingers crossed that they don’t pick up any injuries.

[haskey]

Subtle difference though :-  The players loaned out to us are because they have players not getting game time.  the subtle being that Price at Warrington has hinted that he will be sending Currie to Rochdale to complete his recovery, and then return to the first team fully fit as quoted in the LE

[Gooleboy]

Good signing, Stand Off has been a problem this season. It would be great not to do Loans or DR, but the Club has to do what it has to do to be competitive, so no issue for me. Regarding the Reserves, the step up would be way to much for them.

[Private Baldrick]

55 minutes ago, The Phantom Horseman said:

Let's be honest, we saw in pre-season that most of the lads from the reserves are very raw and some way away at this early stage from being serious first team calibre.

One of the knock-on effects from the Sky money, (and the large differential between the funding for SL clubs and Championship ones) is that SL clubs can afford to maintain large squads of quality players, many of whom aren't going to get a game barring a string of injuries. Dan Smith has looked a quality player for us but he's nowhere near the starting line-up of a team that can't buy a win in SL. These players have to play somewhere and in the absence of reserve teams at so many clubs you can't blame our management for offering loan deals to some of these players.

I am not claiming our reserves at the moment are strong enough to step up, I just think picking up players ad hoc is sending out the wrong signals as a club.

As for the loans then I have no problem with long term, season long deals where the player can buy into the club and feel part of it. A year long loan is no different to a year long contract for one of 'our own' players.

Like I said I have nothing against Reynolds or Holmes, but in who's interest are they here? Like others have said, is it to gain match fitness for them to return to their super league clubs? Where will that leave us at the business end of the season, scratting around for players again?

I am just a little uneasy now with all the loans and DR we are using that's all. 

[jamescolin]

And the alternative is?

[Les Tonks Sidestep]

31 minutes ago, Private Baldrick said:

I am not claiming our reserves at the moment are strong enough to step up, I just think picking up players ad hoc is sending out the wrong signals as a club.

As for the loans then I have no problem with long term, season long deals where the player can buy into the club and feel part of it. A year long loan is no different to a year long contract for one of 'our own' players.

Like I said I have nothing against Reynolds or Holmes, but in who's interest are they here? Like others have said, is it to gain match fitness for them to return to their super league clubs? Where will that leave us at the business end of the season, scratting around for players again?

I am just a little uneasy now with all the loans and DR we are using that's all. 

Actually it is. A year long loan can be ended at anytime if all parties agree or if any recall clauses are activated. The player, however, cannot play for any club other than that he has been loaned to until a minimum of 28 days have passed from the (initial) start date of the loan no matter how long the loan period originally specified.

[Private Baldrick]

1 minute ago, Les Tonks Sidestep said:

Actually it is. A year long deal can be ended anytime if all parties agree or if any recall clauses are activated. The player, however, cannot play for any club other than that he has been loaned to until a minimum of 28 days have passed from the (initial) start date of the loan no matter how long the loan period originally specified.

I was thinking more along the lines when we had Minns, Baldwinson and Forster a few year back from Leeds.

[gazza77]

Just now, Private Baldrick said:

I was thinking more along the lines when we had Minns, Baldwinson and Forster a few year back from Leeds.

 

Just now, Private Baldrick said:

I was thinking more along the lines when we had Minns, Baldwinson and Forster a few year back from Leeds.

They were all on 1 year deals with us. 

[Private Baldrick]

4 minutes ago, gazza77 said:

 

They were all on 1 year deals with us. 

I thought they were loans, not to worry.

[gazza77]

1 minute ago, Private Baldrick said:

I thought they were loans, not to worry.

 

1 minute ago, Private Baldrick said:

I thought they were loans, not to worry.

It was some arrangement where they signed for us for a year, but Leeds had first refusal after the 12 months. It all seemed a bit odd, and was the start point for the current DR really. I can understand the confusion! 

[Private Baldrick]

2 minutes ago, gazza77 said:

 

It was some arrangement where they signed for us for a year, but Leeds had first refusal after the 12 months. It all seemed a bit odd, and was the start point for the current DR really. I can understand the confusion! 

Aye, wasn't it challenged by someone at the time as to it's 'legality'?

[Gareth hock]

Put it this way am glad it’s us that’s signing this calibra of player and not Halifax Leigh Batley etc .

[gazza77]

16 minutes ago, Private Baldrick said:

Aye, wasn't it challenged by someone at the time as to it's 'legality'?

I vaguely recall Leeds getting slapped wrists as they played for their U19s against the kiwis a couple of days after signing for us. 

[Les Tonks Sidestep]

14 minutes ago, Private Baldrick said:

Aye, wasn't it challenged by someone at the time as to it's 'legality'?

Leeds got into trouble for having some of those 3 attending their training sessions, which isn't allowed.

19 minutes ago, gazza77 said:

 

It was some arrangement where they signed for us for a year, but Leeds had first refusal after the 12 months. It all seemed a bit odd, and was the start point for the current DR really. I can understand the confusion! 

Didn't we 'sign' those 3 and also use DR that season. I think Swinton/Warrington did something similar the previous year but it involved more players.

[gazza77]

Just now, Les Tonks Sidestep said:

Leeds got into trouble for having some of those 3 attending their training sessions, which isn't allowed.

Didn't we 'sign' those 3 and also use DR that season. I think Swinton/Warrington did something similar the previous year but it involved more players.

We did iirc. Was our first year with Leeds I think, weren't we with Wakey the year before. 

[Les Tonks Sidestep]

4 minutes ago, gazza77 said:

We did iirc. Was our first year with Leeds I think, weren't we with Wakey the year before. 

Yes. Didn't we DR with Wakefield for a few years?