True but why just 3? They should arguably take a longer-term approach and say that when you're given a contract, then it's for a period of time that will see, say, two English summers and a winter, guaranteed. Central and incremental contracts of twelve months' duration or less are hardly going to give the player ease of mind and arguably lead to the inconsistent play exhibited by Jennings. I suppose the philosophy is to guard against complacency and show all involved that the pool of replacement talent is so deep that anyone can swim to the top, but the reality out on the pitch suggests that that thinking is flawed.