If the clubs can sustain an increase in the cap (in this climate I am not sure they can) then, yes, I would be for an increase.

I do want to see Leeds retain the likes of Calderwood, Walker, Scruton and Smith but an increased cap isn't necessarily going to ensure that. We will not be able to match RU salaries. Do you think Leeds should've matched Wasps offer to Lee Smith? If they did, do you not think McGuire, Sinfield, Burrow and others would've been knocking on GH's door?

What is needed is something more pro-active that rewards clubs for producing home-grown talent. The £50k dispensation is a start but doesn't go nearly close enough.

Its' frustrating when we lose a quality young player but you have to remain philosophical. Had Scruton stayed would Burgess have played in the GF? It took a while, a few stop gaps and an overseas player but Walker's replacement came from within, Smith.

Just keep the conveyor belt turning.

The team that won the final, the most successful team in the period of SL where we have had a consistent hard (as opposed to the soft cap previously in place that allowed breaches with financial or points penalties) salary cap have done so on the back of the league's best youth policy. The losing finalist probably has the next best youth policy.
Yet you think the cap encourages teams to abandon youth development?

The salary cap forces teams to invest in academies, because it's far cheaper to bring players through than buy them in from a position where you compete on salary in the open market. The cap also encourages the less wealthy teams to invest, because it prevents the richer teams poaching their players.

Do you think Wigan could have afforded to keep him if they had been able to use another academy player instead of one of the four imports and one external signing in their backs?

St Helens went backwards in 2009 compared to 2008 as did Leeds to a lesser extent. Both suffered the same problem of under investment.

Leeds failed to retain their WCC and make an impact in the Challenge Cup.

St Helens failed to defend their LLS and Challenge Cup title.

Did Leeds gain the LLS or did St Helens lose it? As with every season it's a combination of the two.

Or, if the glass is half full, both clubs did a magnificent job to sustain their lengthy period of success, St Helens achieving their 6th consecutive top 2 finish and 4th consecutive GF and Leeds achieving their 3rd consecutive top2 finish and 3rd consecutive, unprecedented GF.

12 other clubs in the league would desperately love to go as backwards as Leeds and St Helens.

I will keep trying D.



The primary objective is to win all trophies available...simple as.



Leeds have kept the side together BECAUSE of their internal salary / pay structure nothing to do with the SC...simple as.



The standard of rugby is a purely subjective matter and a personal opinion. IMHO this season has been as interesting and exciting as any other if not better, with teams beating any other on a given day... Simple as.



Couldnt give a flying fu.ck what the Aussies think...Simple as.



Scruton and Calderwood both made a huge mistake career wise and Smith is now realising the same...Simple as.



Ellis made a career move not based on pure financial gain and this is to be respected...Simple as.

If you're basing that on League table finishes St Helens finished 5th in 2004. As prize money is handed out after the play off series some might argue they didn't finish top two in 2005 either.

Leeds 3rd GF is not unprecedented. Bradford and St Helens have both done the same and better but yes I understand your point there.

Going backwards is not my idea of the direction any club should be taking and Leeds thankfully have ensured (if recruitment is anything to go by) it's a trend they're determined to reverse in 2010.

I judge the direction the club is heading in on the achievements the players make on the field and not the signings the chief exec makes before a ball is kicked or passed.

Still, if you're not happy with what the squad did this year but are happy with next already year because we signed some new players..............

We went backwards in 2009 ????? Feck me your getting has bad as David.

Leeds only win because everyone else is rubbish.

It's a new and interesting variant on the "Leeds only win because they bribe the refs" drivel you get from some opposition speccies on here.

Not defend the WCC and going out at home in the first round of the Challenge Cup were disappointments for me in 2009. The rest I'm happy with.

The WCC was an opportunity missed to do something no other club in the history of the sport has ever achieved. (In addition to matching Bradford's and Wigan's record in the event) That makes it important to the likes of myself just as much as winning a third championship is also highly important and significant.

Winning the WCC this season would have been a huge step forward granted, however failure doesnt (for me at least) represent a backwrd step either.

Similar with the CC. If this season we had completed a full hat-trick of available major trophies then again this would be a huge achievement, but I cant accept failing in this respect is going backwards.

Doing the double this year is for me a step forward and with the squad improvements for next year I can see us doing the triple maybe even the quadruple.

It's not the sole reason but it's one of the reasons.

Leeds scored less, conceded more (net -98 ) over the regular rounds after the addition of Salford and Celtic diluting the overall quality of the 27 fixtures.

St Helens faired worse by losing three extra matches as compared to 2008.

Leeds and St Helens remained the class of the field only less classy than in 2008.



The strength of the 2009 squad, better or not than 2008?

That afterall is my basic point in all of this and has been over the course of the season.

Player policy and retention at Leeds cannot be questioned by anyone IMO

How many Leeds academy lads have won GF in the last 5 years, 14-15?

Just looking at the game on Saturday, who was the last player in that team to make their Leeds debut?

Some players will move on thats just life, Leeds manage it far better than anyone else IMO.

I will stand to be corrected but havent both top 2 clubs LOST more games this season than in previous.

How does that square with the "rest" being so rubbish ???

2009 team achieved the League and Championship double

The round of the cup you go out in is irrelevant it's the opposition; we lost to a team who had not been beaten in the comp for over 3 years, I would have been confident that we would have won the cup had we had Warringtons run to wembley.

I do wonder if some fans would only be happy if we didn't concede a single point all season.

Read the thread again and you'll see that I've already stated that Leeds didn't move in that regard this season, though the weaker St Helens did. Even then St Helens also lost eight in 2007 while still finishing top. So your statement doesn't hold true in either case probably.





While I wonder if some fans are happy to see the biggest club in British RL finish as second best or worse in any comp they enter.

Same boot other foot.

Warrington's run to Wembley really does sum up the importance of the CC in comparison to the GF.

With Warrington's run to Wembley we would have won the final. Then suddenly would the squad have been good enough for TVOC?

Would those games have been games too far for the squads fitness?

What if a run to the final had injured Sinfield or Burrow?

No, I'll take what we have and be grateful for it.

I should.

That's why you invest in the squad during the off season to enable you to challenge on all fronts over the course of the season.

Are you saying Leeds can't or shouldn't aim to do the Championship and Cup double?

So you would of preferred Warrington’s season to ours?

I think G1 has stated on many occasion that he would rather win the cup than not but he sees the GF as the more prestigious.

More like it appears I may be the only poster expecting Leeds to challenge on both fronts. I hope the club management and it's players are more ambitious than some of it's fans.

What makes you think they aren't?

4 Finals in the last ten years (of which 3 ended in narrow defeats). IIRC a couple of other semi-finals on top of that. Apart from Saints, Leeds record in the Challenge Cup since their last win stands comparison with just about anyone.