I've said before it was underestimated by a few just how important and good Aiton was for us last season (his chemistry with Cuthbertson particularly so). I think perhaps because of his "illness" and lack of games in 2014 (to properly judge whether he was worth keeping and on how much money) and the drug issue from Cronulla still hanging around that we hesitated in terms of tying him to a new deal.

How do you get that?. Its not GH job to mange the team. The only person responsible for what happens on the pitch is McDermott.

Well if we believe certain people on here then they're players here (and in the past) that McDermott wanted to get rid of but wasn't allowed. Also players he wanted but weren't signed.

Personally I think that could be true to an extent, however if he was denied the squad he wanted to the extent people make out on here then I think he'd have walked by now.....because as people point out he is a bit of a stubborn 'I like things my way' kind of guy so I couldn't see him tolerating having his hands tied TOO MUCH and putting up with it.

I know it's not gh job to manage the team. I meant it's gh fault for handing Mac the ridiculous contract

As I understand it the contract is just a 12 month rolling deal. If so he could be paid off with 12 months coin. Or has this changed to a longer term deal?

It is has you say, and from what I have heard it has already been agreed he will go end of the year. What worries me is the meantime.

It's idiotic to not consider the consequences of letting Aiton have more money - it would drive the entire squad to demand more resulting in other, much better and more important squad members than Aiton ever was, becoming unsettled. Contrary to popular opinion there isn't a great reservoir of unfilled Leeds salary cap space (hence Ferris only getting a one year deal on low money). Aiton was offerred a reasonable deal, he rejected it. We won the treble without him in any event and he certainly wasn't the player to disrupt the entire club over.

Mark Laurie wrote:As I understand it the contract is just a 12 month rolling deal. If so he could be paid off with 12 months coin. Or has this changed to a longer term deal? Hope this helps... but I doubt it will.

Mark Laurie wrote:As I understand it the contract is just a 12 month rolling deal. If so he could be paid off with 12 months coin. Or has this changed to a longer term deal? Hope this helps... but I doubt it will.

William Eve wrote:Hope this helps... but I doubt it will. Thanks William. Sounds quite waffly but at end of day suspect it will be just a rolling deal - hence no end date. Understand Hull kr have a new unnamed coach coming next season. The unnamed bit is a little odd as usually Aussies tend to be relaxed about saying what is happening next season. Wonder if peacock has lined up McD or perhaps sinfield to join him there next year. Probably not but lack of transparency makes you wonder.

William Eve wrote:Hope this helps... but I doubt it will. Thanks William. Sounds quite waffly but at end of day suspect it will be just a rolling deal - hence no end date. Understand Hull kr have a new unnamed coach coming next season. The unnamed bit is a little odd as usually Aussies tend to be relaxed about saying what is happening next season. Wonder if peacock has lined up McD or perhaps sinfield to join him there next year. Probably not but lack of transparency makes you wonder.

Typical waffle and deliberately obfuscatory GH contractual Orwellian newspeak bollox released to a handful of nodding-dog RL journos who do as they are told and spin it accordingly. I remember it being spun as a 'Job For Life' at the time. No RL journo would come up with that. They were charmed and cultivated. Wouldn't take much mind. Free coffee and cake in the Carnegie Stand would have sufficed for them to be eating out of his hand. Sycophants!

The Hull KR stuff is very interesting. I look forward to seeing how scenario that pans out. I'm convinced Peacock was instrumental in getting rid of Chester. Clearing the decks early for next season?