LEICESTER TIGERS 2020/21 SQUAD/TRANSFERS/CONTRACT THREAD EPISODE VI: The Return of the Burns

[TigerFeetSteve]

Tigerfeetsteeve, sounds like a wonderful suggestion. sign a 30 year old injury prone prop who is discarded by Wasps then wonder why a very promising young James Whitcombe leaves to get game time.

Absolutely not. Whitcombe is the one who gets gametime if both are fit and available, however if we get an injury during an international window, we need cover. Without spending too much we may be able to get a decent Prem std prop who yes we need to manage game time of but shouldn't be required to play regularly. Maybe I should have put the names round the other way in my list but it wasn't an out and out this is the order to pick them. We're in the market for a 3rd/4th choice prop (either TH or LH)

Yet we have some good young props coming through. So what we want is a decent quality prop, who won't play huge amounts so we don't want to spend too much cap there, but is reliable if required. To my mind he ticks all the boxes.

[mol2]

I don't think we dropped the ball with De Bruin, he was already signed elsewhere by the time we signed him on a temporary contract.

A pity.

[RagingBull]

I don't think we dropped the ball with De Bruin, he was already signed elsewhere by the time we signed him on a temporary contract.

A pity.

We was in talks with him same time as Edinburgh.

[Wayne Richardson Fan Club]

Personally I don't think Whitcombe is that far away from being our No.2 LH, just lack of actual playing time.

[sam16111986]

1 game in the LV cup, 3 years ago and we lost 50 - 28.

Thought it was more than that tbf. So you don't think he's an option there at all?

For me no.
Would rather pinch a championship 10.

Which I presume would be the plan if we had a long term injury. Fourth choice option is mainly going to be playing A league and Prem Cup maybe not even that if the third choice needs game time.

Would actually prefer us to help with the Nottingham coaching with a view to allowing some of their players to come down and help with numbers at Oval Park. That way if we had injury issues we could draft in from there. We could help them out by lending them some players as well. Enhance that relationship and should help them acquire some good players if they knew they'd get the chance to go down to Oval Park and train with a Prem club.

[TheChild]

Thought it was more than that tbf. So you don't think he's an option there at all?

For me no.
Would rather pinch a championship 10.

Which I presume would be the plan if we had a long term injury. Fourth choice option is mainly going to be playing A league and Prem Cup maybe not even that if the third choice needs game time.

Would actually prefer us to help with the Nottingham coaching with a view to allowing some of their players to come down and help with numbers at Oval Park. That way if we had injury issues we could draft in from there. We could help them out by lending them some players as well. Enhance that relationship and should help them acquire some good players if they knew they'd get the chance to go down to Oval Park and train with a Prem club.

Being a fan of Nottingham as well as Tigers, I can’t say I agree with this.
Nottingham are a club in their own right, and should be more than just a feeder club for Tigers. What we need are players who want to play for us and perhaps then move onto bigger things rather than ‘oh come and sign for Nottingham and you can play for Tigers’!
I’ve seen far too many times what happens when Prem clubs (not just Tigers are guilty of this, that lot down the M69 are pretty bad for it as well) we’re left scrabbling to field a team because someone has decided to snap their fingers and send our players running because they want someone to be water carrier or some such ridiculous thing.

It should be the case that if we do happen to have any players spare, or we don’t have a game, and Tigers are in need- sure, maybe send a few over. No issues there. However what I do have an issue with is any Prem club snapping their fingers and expecting our players to forget whether the club they’re signed to need them or not, they’re expected to go elsewhere!
The whole debacle with David Williams is a case in point. Supposed to be Nottingham’s player yet Tigers seems to think they can call the shots with him and leave him twiddling his thumbs, no intention it seems of playing him but won’t let his supposed parent club have him either (with the exception of a couple of odd games towards the end of the season where he promptly went on to prove exactly what he can do)
The Championship is not just a breeding ground for Prem clubs to cherry pick when they feel like it. I’ve seen what can go spectacularly wrong when that happens and it all ended in tears.

[LE18]

Why would Worth cover 10?

He's done it before, we could do with a 4th option and he also covers fullback so provides back up to Murimurivalu and Steward. An effective use of cap in the short term.

Why would we send Worth away for a year to develop him as a full back and then when he comes back start developing him again as a fly half, waste of a year away.

[Jimmy Skitz]

Why would Worth cover 10?

He's done it before, we could do with a 4th option and he also covers fullback so provides back up to Murimurivalu and Steward. An effective use of cap in the short term.

Why would we send Worth away for a year to develop him as a full back and then when he comes back start developing him again as a fly half, waste of a year away.

its not developing him there its using him as the last option so we can spend resources elsewhere

[TigerFeetSteve]

For me no.
Would rather pinch a championship 10.

Which I presume would be the plan if we had a long term injury. Fourth choice option is mainly going to be playing A league and Prem Cup maybe not even that if the third choice needs game time.

Would actually prefer us to help with the Nottingham coaching with a view to allowing some of their players to come down and help with numbers at Oval Park. That way if we had injury issues we could draft in from there. We could help them out by lending them some players as well. Enhance that relationship and should help them acquire some good players if they knew they'd get the chance to go down to Oval Park and train with a Prem club.

Being a fan of Nottingham as well as Tigers, I can’t say I agree with this.
Nottingham are a club in their own right, and should be more than just a feeder club for Tigers. What we need are players who want to play for us and perhaps then move onto bigger things rather than ‘oh come and sign for Nottingham and you can play for Tigers’!
I’ve seen far too many times what happens when Prem clubs (not just Tigers are guilty of this, that lot down the M69 are pretty bad for it as well) we’re left scrabbling to field a team because someone has decided to snap their fingers and send our players running because they want someone to be water carrier or some such ridiculous thing.

It should be the case that if we do happen to have any players spare, or we don’t have a game, and Tigers are in need- sure, maybe send a few over. No issues there. However what I do have an issue with is any Prem club snapping their fingers and expecting our players to forget whether the club they’re signed to need them or not, they’re expected to go elsewhere!
The whole debacle with David Williams is a case in point. Supposed to be Nottingham’s player yet Tigers seems to think they can call the shots with him and leave him twiddling his thumbs, no intention it seems of playing him but won’t let his supposed parent club have him either (with the exception of a couple of odd games towards the end of the season where he promptly went on to prove exactly what he can do)
The Championship is not just a breeding ground for Prem clubs to cherry pick when they feel like it. I’ve seen what can go spectacularly wrong when that happens and it all ended in tears.

Personally I think both Nottingham & Tigers benefited from the relationship this year. Even when it came to the Williams situation.

Williams was loaned out to Tigers since the restart of last season with the loan extending into this year. With the newer arrivals at the club Williams was always a fringe player, however it wasn't till AFTER the 6N that the Premiership Cup was cancelled, a competition I would have expected to him to feature heavily in. As it was once Nadolo returned to fitness, we dual registered a number of players (Williams and Chessum) along with sending the likes of Aspland-Robinson out on loan.

Outside of that though we would have been paying the bulk of his wages for the last 12 months and when he did return to Nottingham they had a player who had been training day in day out.

The kicker for that loan not working out as well as hoped was the Cup not being played. During that time Browning (along with other players were loaned to Nottingham)

I don't see having strong links between the two as a bad thing, as the relationship can be beneficial for both sides.

[LE18]

He's done it before, we could do with a 4th option and he also covers fullback so provides back up to Murimurivalu and Steward. An effective use of cap in the short term.

Why would we send Worth away for a year to develop him as a full back and then when he comes back start developing him again as a fly half, waste of a year away.

its not developing him there its using him as the last option so we can spend resources elsewhere

I really don't see Worth as a 10, he is too big and slow for me, if posters just want to pull players out of thin air just because they think someone might do it, then why not use a "play maker" such as Scott or Kelly as emergency cover as we have a number of established centres chasing 2 positions, use the spare at 10, not a covering full back.

[Scott1]

Why would we send Worth away for a year to develop him as a full back and then when he comes back start developing him again as a fly half, waste of a year away.

its not developing him there its using him as the last option so we can spend resources elsewhere

I really don't see Worth as a 10, he is too big and slow for me, if posters just want to pull players out of thin air just because they think someone might do it, then why not use a "play maker" such as Scott or Kelly as emergency cover as we have a number of established centres chasing 2 positions, use the spare at 10, not a covering full back.

You really think using Kelly and Scott at 10 would be the same as using Worth there?!

[Wayne Richardson Fan Club]

I have always thought Worth should of been developed as a 12, he is a solid 15, but he has always had decent distribution, he just lacks a bit of pace, something that might just stop Steward making it at International level.

[TheChild]

Personally I think both Nottingham & Tigers benefited from the relationship this year. Even when it came to the Williams situation.

Williams was loaned out to Tigers since the restart of last season with the loan extending into this year. With the newer arrivals at the club Williams was always a fringe player, however it wasn't till AFTER the 6N that the Premiership Cup was cancelled, a competition I would have expected to him to feature heavily in. As it was once Nadolo returned to fitness, we dual registered a number of players (Williams and Chessum) along with sending the likes of Aspland-Robinson out on loan.

Outside of that though we would have been paying the bulk of his wages for the last 12 months and when he did return to Nottingham they had a player who had been training day in day out.

The kicker for that loan not working out as well as hoped was the Cup not being played. During that time Browning (along with other players were loaned to Nottingham)

I don't see having strong links between the two as a bad thing, as the relationship can be beneficial for both sides.

It can be on some occasions but on others it works well for the Prem side but leaves the Championship side in the deep and sticky stuff!

Not Tigers involved in this one- but I can recall one occasion where a couple of days before our biggest game of the season, a club with ‘links’ decide they want our first choice prop to warm their bench. Said prop doesn’t want to go, we can’t spare him but club with ‘links’ insist they must have him. He’s on for ten minutes, then he returns to us. Following that said club hound us so much to sign him that we eventually give in. He’s under contract, we don’t want to let him go, he doesn’t want to go etc. Then said club changes their mind leaving him without a club.

This is what happens when clubs develop ‘links’ the Prem club thinks they automatically have first choice of every single member of the other team’s squad, especially ones who have no links to the other team.

While I have no issue with dual registration etc and in theory it’s saved our bacon a few times, what I do have an issue with is when a club randomly decides they want one of our players who has nowt to do with them. (Tigers have also been guilty of this before, it wasn’t so very long ago either- also took one of our best players on the eve of a massive game for us)

I’m pretty sure Tigers would have told us where to go if we had asked to borrow Ellis Genge or George Ford to play against Saracens, so perhaps it should work both ways. There should be an agreed pool of players that both sides could utilize agreed at the beginning of the season, and no other players outside of that pool can be taken- and there should be no expectation that either side can demand any player outside that pool at any point. The whole system appears very one sided at the minute- we get sent a few development players/the odd established player coming back from injury and in return we’re expected to allow unlimited access to our first choice players at any point! Doesn’t really seem too fair does it?

[TigerFeetSteve]

Personally I think both Nottingham & Tigers benefited from the relationship this year. Even when it came to the Williams situation.

Williams was loaned out to Tigers since the restart of last season with the loan extending into this year. With the newer arrivals at the club Williams was always a fringe player, however it wasn't till AFTER the 6N that the Premiership Cup was cancelled, a competition I would have expected to him to feature heavily in. As it was once Nadolo returned to fitness, we dual registered a number of players (Williams and Chessum) along with sending the likes of Aspland-Robinson out on loan.

Outside of that though we would have been paying the bulk of his wages for the last 12 months and when he did return to Nottingham they had a player who had been training day in day out.

The kicker for that loan not working out as well as hoped was the Cup not being played. During that time Browning (along with other players were loaned to Nottingham)

I don't see having strong links between the two as a bad thing, as the relationship can be beneficial for both sides.

It can be on some occasions but on others it works well for the Prem side but leaves the Championship side in the deep and sticky stuff!

Not Tigers involved in this one- but I can recall one occasion where a couple of days before our biggest game of the season, a club with ‘links’ decide they want our first choice prop to warm their bench. Said prop doesn’t want to go, we can’t spare him but club with ‘links’ insist they must have him. He’s on for ten minutes, then he returns to us. Following that said club hound us so much to sign him that we eventually give in. He’s under contract, we don’t want to let him go, he doesn’t want to go etc. Then said club changes their mind leaving him without a club.

This is what happens when clubs develop ‘links’ the Prem club thinks they automatically have first choice of every single member of the other team’s squad, especially ones who have no links to the other team.

While I have no issue with dual registration etc and in theory it’s saved our bacon a few times, what I do have an issue with is when a club randomly decides they want one of our players who has nowt to do with them. (Tigers have also been guilty of this before, it wasn’t so very long ago either- also took one of our best players on the eve of a massive game for us)

I’m pretty sure Tigers would have told us where to go if we had asked to borrow Ellis Genge or George Ford to play against Saracens, so perhaps it should work both ways. There should be an agreed pool of players that both sides could utilize agreed at the beginning of the season, and no other players outside of that pool can be taken- and there should be no expectation that either side can demand any player outside that pool at any point. The whole system appears very one sided at the minute- we get sent a few development players/the odd established player coming back from injury and in return we’re expected to allow unlimited access to our first choice players at any point! Doesn’t really seem too fair does it?

I agree in principle. To have these links it needs to be a relationship that benefits both clubs.

Both clubs & the player involved should be able to say yes OR no to any of the requests. Personally what I've seen this year Tigers - Notts have got a nice balance, with only Dimen not really working out (in a normal year would he have gone on loan to a N1 club)

Clubs need to have healthy relationship with each other that is vital but these links between clubs in different divisions are key to player development both in going up and down the ladder.

[RagingBull]

It depends I guess on who pays the players wages.