Surley not? Mason is past it.
Agree..........but it's just a back-up for one year.
Surley not? Mason is past it.
Surley not? Mason is past it.
Mason will be coming on a 2nd tier contract with wouldn't take up much of the cap and we will have room to move for a outside back so basically we are getting double its a smart move by the club saving money to use it on something we need
where did that info come from? why would he agree to a 2nd tier contract when he could make a lot more in the english super league?
it seems very strange that we're paying a big chunk of grant's contract to play for an enemy nrl club if it is just so we can sign someone like mason who is turning 36 this year. i would rather grant was kept. i would have had him on the interchange
He seems to be ageless--he will go into his 17th season in the top grade if he snags a contract. I hope he gets one if he really wants to play on. It's a great effort to spend 16 seasons in RL!!
Mason's disruptive days are behind now. In fact,he has had a positive influence in recent years.
6'5"-119kgs--if fit,he will do the job.
Grant,IMO,was a failure with us--I expected SOO performances from him to match his pay packet but,alas,he was a disappointment!!
He seems to be ageless--he will go into his 17th season in the top grade if he snags a contract. I hope he gets one if he really wants to play on. It's a great effort to spend 16 seasons in RL!!
Mason's disruptive days are behind now. In fact,he has had a positive influence in recent years.
6'5"-119kgs--if fit,he will do the job.
Grant,IMO,was a failure with us--I expected SOO performances from him to match his pay packet but,alas,he was a disappointment!!
anything is possible
it seems very strange that we're paying a big chunk of grant's contract to play for an enemy nrl club if it is just so we can sign someone like mason who is turning 36 this year. i would rather grant was kept. i would have had him on the interchange
Agreed by the time we pay whatever we have to pay for Grant and then buy Mason we will be no better off cap wise from what I can see.
it seems very strange that we're paying a big chunk of grant's contract to play for an enemy nrl club if it is just so we can sign someone like mason who is turning 36 this year. i would rather grant was kept. i would have had him on the interchange
Where did you read that were paying Grant money? My understanding was it was at his request and therefore we were not liable for him.
Where did you read that were paying Grant money? My understanding was it was at his request and therefore we were not liable for him.