this is what i thought when i read the artical.

i still think he would be very good for leeds. i hope he comes.

I'm sure I read something about that when Wigan signed Fielden, but I'm not 100% sure if it was for salary cap purposes, or just to stop clubs getting around the 20/25 rule.

Wigan weren't frontloading contracts though they were offsetting by paying existing players less in the current season to fit new player's wages in. Those reduced contracts being renegotiated into longer deals.

IIRC (and I perhaps don't) Wigan didn't break the salary cap in terms of money spent but they broke the 'spirit' of the cap.

And how enforceable will that be when the player claims he's injured and won't play? Would you really want to keep a player that wanted to be elsewhere?

It's daft. Pay someone what he is worth on a regular basis without any front loading, or retrospective payments (I understand that's what Saints do/did) after the players contract is up, then there is no room for dispute.

Usual rules would apply.



Usual rules would apply.



....and we lose players we might have rather kept, or can't sign players we might have wanted to, and waste cap room.

Where did the idea of retrospective payments come from? Now, that's a daft idea, completely the reverse of what I suggested and would leave a team in trouble in later years.

If the contract is worth £450 over four years and we have shed loads of cap space now it makes perfect sense to front load.

Let's say, for example, burrow has two years left on his current deal. re-negotiate, giving him a 4 year deal with higher wages in the 1st two years than the last two. He earns more, gets longer term security and we have a lower cap hit in years 3 and 4 of the contract.

It's great salary cap management and a great way to retain players you want to keep.

If we assume that Burrow is already receiving his fair settlement under the Leeds pay structure wouldn't they be breaking their own rules to allocate surplus cap money this season and next and if so would that matter?

May not necessarily be good once tax is worked out for the player. An 40k a year player on a 5 year contract of 60k, 60k, 20k, 20k, would maybe pay more tax than a straight 40k per year. Not sure that would be beneficial to them. They could offset it by having a kick ass pension though



Which begs the question, would a company pension count on the salary cap? Its exempt from Tax, so you could argue that it should be exempt from salary cap too

This is starting to turn into porn for accountants so I am out of the discussion.

'Excuse me laides, can I check your figures....................'(cue bass guitar music)

while looking for latest articles on Crocker i came across this bout Eastwood
[urlhttp://www.foxsports.com.au/story/0,8659,25213405-23214,00.html[/url

I guess this means that my tongue in cheek comments re SBW won't now come to fruition. www.foxsports.com.au/story/0,865 ... 17,00.html

I guess this means that my tongue in cheek comments re SBW won't now come to fruition. www.foxsports.com.au/story/0,865 ... 17,00.html

So if a genuine statement from Mr H then its spin doctoring at its best (or worst), or do we file under cr@p reporting from the gurus at Radio Leeds ?

Why did Lee "head for that burger van" Crooks pop into my head when I looked at that?

Does that mean Tansey is not on loan either then?

No idea, but it does suggest that there is a contract in place between the player and Leeds contrary to some of the opinions voiced above.

There was alledgedly a contract in place with Tansey also, but he is playing over there.

Good debut by him today for the Bulldogs - 1 try 1 assist and very busy and thats with only 2 training sessions. He will be a miss for us

1 try, 1 pass and a couple of missed tackles, including one that cost a try.

Indeed. The missed tackle was right under the sticks too. Lovely pass to set up the try thought. Really looked knackered after a few minutes, very slow to get back the ten. Could but it down to lack of match fitness due to the visa mess. But he really could do with losing a bit of weight!

snap. That won't get in the way of people wanting to think what they want.


He made little meters going forward but chased the kick well for the try and impressed with his willingness to work. Good worker but not world class like some think and certainly not the international standoff some claim.

The replacement for Nick Scruton as an interchange prop. Covering any other positions was always a major flight of fantasy, IMO of course.

As a second rower capable of missing crucial tackles we already have one of those at Leeds.

Greg Eastwood bites hand that fed him www.news.com.au/couriermail/spor ... 09,00.html

Greg Eastwood bites hand that fed him www.news.com.au/couriermail/spor ... 09,00.html

Looks like he could do with a good meal inside him but I never realised he was that hungry.

Looks like he could do with a few less meals inside him if you ask me. I think he's been on the Keiron Cuningham weight loss plan.....