Oh yeah, what a great quality competition that would be. It wouldn't matter that a team would be full of dross to keep within the cap, as long as each team spends the same.



I think a lot of people are undervaluing the players. If you have a quality player it is only right that player could justify a decent salary. I don't think £100k a year for a decent RL player is excessive in any way, especially considering the short career they have. Obviously a class RL player is going to be on much more, and an average player is going to be on less.

But really we should look at a cap that works at an average of £100k a player, possibly to a 20 man squad. I don't think we should limit to undervalue players.

At the same time, the argument for that player leaving goes to another club to get his wage, is also unfair and can be restricting to the player. A player isn't going to turn down £80k at Saints to get £100k at Crusaders is he? Money comes first to a degree, but they want a chance to display talent aswell. And on that basis, in order to fit in the cap we are under valueing.

So you want clubs to spend £2M on wages when they already run at a loss spending £1.65M? Where is the extra revenue going to come from? Would you be happy paying £40-50 to go to a game so clubs could afford to pay higher wages?

Gotcha

Why do you think giving players higher wages equates to better quality rugby and vice versa?

I recall Graham Lowe's comments about the full time Super League tourists. It was alon the lines that they were soft. They turn up to training in their BMWs and then sit around all day. Lads who turn up to night training after working as a plasterer etc were much better.

I think the "top" players deserve more and that clubs shouldn't be pushed into losing quality youngsters they've produced because they are penalised by the cap.
I'm all in favour of acadamy produced players having a % of their wages cap exempt.
As for other clubs who aren't producing the youth that shouldn't mean that they get the advantage of taking top youngsters that clubs like Leeds and Saints produce.

The landlord of Stoggy's would like to disagree with you.

I think you are assuming that the players the game brings through are all the players available to be brought through, and i really cant agree thats the case.

If the game were to cast its net wider and deeper we would get more, better, players.

We have a system which pretty much consists of a player joining the an amateur club as a child, then moving through the stages, the cream goes to academy rugby, the cream of that to first team. That is really the only route into the game, and we simply dont have the a nationwide amateur set up to sustain that as our only route.

I am personally of the belief that there are many many athletes out there who could be top quality players, but simply never play the game.

Look at a player like Kevin Penny, a basketball player who within a few years of taking up the game is an SL player. Whilst he may not be the answer, the next one might be.

Making it integral to your competitiveness to have a spine of players you have developed will mean when the amateur player pool is exhausted clubs will be forced to to explore new areas and find more, new players and we would see RL scouts looking at sprinters, basketball players, wrestlers, who are 13, 14, 15, 16 and not played RL before, giving them the opportunity, teaching them the basics and i would be very very surprised if we didnt improve our league and national team. There is a limited amount of world class athletic ability, we cant expect it to just fall into our laps in the amatuer RL system.

But whilst the options are all that time and effort and no little skill to find and develop a player, or an antipodean who you know will have the basics already there, clubs arent going to do this.


there would be no real issue with giving crusaders a dispensation. Especially with regards to attracting welsh union players. Quins i feel are in a position to compete on an even footing, and that is something they should be very proud of

It produces better quality for the teams that have the players.

I don't go with this argument that because players don't get the wage they want that they will go to another club, thus increasing the competition in the league. We only have to look at Australia for that, to see players leaving for a sport alien to Rugby League.

I don't see Player A leaving Saints/Leeds to get a better salary at Crusaders/Wakefield. They would have 2 options, leave the game or accept the lower wage and be dissatisfield.

The salary cap is a wonderful concept that all team sports should implement, but it should not be restrictive to the players. Like I said, IMO a decent rugbly league player should be able to earn £100k per year, and should have the opportunity to win things at the same time. I don't think that is excessive. But under the current cap limit a team can not have too many players of that level, never mind great Rugby League players.

IMO all clubs should be spending the same cap yes, but you should not penalise certain teams in order to bring them down to the level of others. It should be the other way round.