I'm going by his own tweets.

I doubt he will stay.

Why reply in the public domain? Any player with intent to perform at the highest level and win things, which in SL will be standard, will have their head significantly turned at signing for SL's most successful team. No brainer.

It's negotiation by us as a club, nothing less. The "we can hold onto our best players, aren't we serious now" model is barmy. It should be standard procedure and doesn't need reinforcing. It's letting the minor detail become the big detail again.

I'd expect a negotiation dance by GH and him to either say "no ta" or stump up. Either way, bizarre response by us as a club.

From the squad Leeds had at the beginning of 2011 they have lost:

Danny Buderus, Keith Senior, Brent Webb, Ali Lauititi, Luke Burgess, Lee Smith, Ben Cross, Weller Hauraki, Jay Pitts.

They have signed:

Darrell Griffin, Richard Moore, Mitch Achurch.
__________________________________________

Do you really think Leeds couldn't fit Keith Lulia under the cap?

And then theres contract upgrades, ryan hall, kallum watkins, ward, keinhorst, hardaker etc.

No upgrade of existing deals then? I bet Hardaker is a few bob more these days

Its plainly obvious that Leeds have space under their cap, but they couldn't tempt Lunt or Jool Moon to sign so why is Lulia different?

Rumours are that Leeds have a strict salary structure and winning things is not a given in any sport. it could that Lulia is bloomin happy at Odsal and setlled, money is not everything.....

Of course there will have been upgrades, but when you look at the sheer difference in the ins and outs then the post saying Leeds have no money under the cap was laughable.

The problem for Leeds trying to recruit Lulia or Moon is that they'll be (I imagine) among best paid players at their clubs, but Leeds couldn't justify matching or increasing their salaries to make them the best paid players at Headingley ahead of existing players who've given the club years of trophy-winning experience.

His tweet didn't say anything about him rejecting an offer, just that he was staying. The club statement otoh is very specific that the club rejected the offer but informed Keith of the offer.

Which is how transfer dealings should be handled for contracted players. Leeds did it the right way and approached the club, not the player or his agent.

exactly - so what are Moon and Lulia on compared to say Sienfeld or JP?
or
Are we getting enough bang for our buck so to speak?

out of the 4 there, and if all on the same money I would take Sienfeld every day of the week (said through gritted teeth)

Who's Sienfeld?

He means seinfeld the U.S. comedian.

who knows what will happen should rhinos up their offer?
surely ok bulls would jump at the chance for some cash, they still have quote capable centres

There's nothing to be gained, and much to be lost, by selling players right now, remind me what we're trying to sell at the minute....oh yes, that was it, season tickets. Selling our best players would be the kiss of death to ticket sales, whilst announcing how we won't accept a sale is almost as good as a new signing. It's good to see the management have their heads screwed on.

Is the "only 50% of a players wage counts on the salary cap when they have been at the club for 10 years" still in play? Or have I just made that up? Leeds have quite a few long serving players, I'm sure plenty would count if the rule is in play. I also imagine they will have a large amount of ££ ready for new signings wages.

Fair play to them for trying to sign a good player the correct way. I now understand why Hetherington was being so nice to the Bulls not so long ago!

I think the 50% of a players salary is still 'in play', although it's only available for 1 player per team. The Bulls probably only have Langley that falls into this category.

Yet another article coming out of the Bulls + TnA giving primacy of status to the Leeds club.

Nearly right. Rule your referring to is that 50% or 50k (whichevers lower) of a players wage who's served 10yrs doesn't count. But your only allowed 50k total allowance across the entire squad. So if more than one player qualifies the allowance is shared between them. In our case only Langley qualifies so assuming he's on 100k or more then 50k of that doesn't count towards the salary cap. Doesn't really matter until we're spending right up to cap, which we didn't do last year and aren't anywhere close to this year yet. Leeds have several players that qualify but they still only get 50k allowance overall.

How does it give any primacy to Leeds. They made an offer, we refused it. Don't see what problem is.

WTF is "giving primacy of status" anyway? And I'm all for brave talk, but it's a bit Black Knightesque, isn't it, to genuinely try to claim that we are at the moment anywhere near "equal in status" to Leeds? SL Champions versus club just out of administration that hasn't even made the playoffs in several seasons?

I think Bulls should make a audacious bid for Watkins, Hardaker, Ward & BJB from Leeds. It's not got a hope in hell of succeeding, but it will show ambition.

There's no need for brave talk, in the same way that in the run up to a season ticket deadline there's no need for 3 articles about the Leeds Rhinos. Nobody's trying to make the case that we're of equal status to the Rhinos I just don't think it's the job of the club and the local paper to repeatedly make the case that we're not.

More to the point what is the benefit of it? Lulia was staying at Bradford yesterday morning and he's staying at Bradford now. All that's been done is raise the issue of him being wanted by a bigger, more successful club.

Just to add further context less than a fortnight after FC and Stuart Duffy went to visit GH to learn about dealing with agents and negotiating with players, Hetherington makes a bid for one of our best players.

Even, “Leeds made an approach through the correct channels".

It's not Black Knightesque, it's borderline obsequious.

being a bit more cynical than the usual suspects have, the story "Bulls completely and utterly Reject unwelcome bid for star centre Lulia, around whom the team is being built, from hated rivals Leeds" is news whereas the story "Lulia completes second year of his contract" is no news. Its season ticket selling time as alluded to by one poster, if theres one thing they have learnt from Hetherington this is it. how to make a pr mountain out of a molehill.

And if we were to sell, I would hope we got Ryan Bailey as part of the deal, no point having a good strong running centre if he never has the ball.

Thing we'll never know is whether club would have made this public at all if Parker hadn't highlighted it in league express. The rumour was out in open so club acted to quash it. If they hadn't done that then rumour would have persisted and damaged ticket sales. Case of being damned whatever option they took IMO.

free publicity is good publicity, so not damned at all this way. In fact I would like to hear confirmation that L'Estrange and Kearney are not going anywhere either, can somebody start rumours please?

Personally I would not be too bothered if Kearney WAS to go. Kear into his favoured better role at FB and money spent elsewhere would be fine by me.

Why did bitter stuart Duffy release that Leeds had made an offer? He was quoted as saying Bradford had turned down an offer from the Rhino's. Short of stories is he? or is he like usual merely mixing a bottle. Twisting the truth in order to make bulls fans go on the attack of rhino's. why does bradford always mislead the fans??