I mentioned this earlier and thought it interesting to explore. Of course no player is irreplaceable in truth, but certain players in our squad are closer to being "replaced" than others.



Clearly there are salary cap implications, so if we consider like for like "improvements" for similar cost. The definition being "could we improve on that position for the same cost". The improvement could be a more youthful version of the current player or a stronger player. I would suggest the following would fall into the category. (By no means am I suggesting that any of these players are not "good" nor "loyal servants"icon_wink.gif. All speculation anyway as we don't know the salaries involved.



V Anderson

L Anderson

Clarke

Mathers

Hicks

Briers

Wood

Higham?

King (based on reputed salary alone)

mine would be same except for briers and king

Mine would be the same with the exception of Briers, King and Wood.

Agree with the previous posts^.

oh yea forgot bout wood sorry great season so far

these 6 for mine.

outs ins

v Anderson-purdham

Clarke- lunt

penny- cudjoe

grix-westerman

wood- burgess

mathers - hodgson

Why are Huddersfield going to let their best two young players go?

who said they were?



cant i dream?

Why did they let Gleeson go?

They got relegated.

Different era too.

sean lunt rejected a contract last week i believe.