Take a look at this article by the Wigan Chairman Ian Lenagan: www.wigantoday.net/sport/wigan-w ... -1-5625250 Is it me that thinks 'what a bell' when reading this? It is the incredibly insular people within RL like Ian Lenagan, Gary Hetherington and Adam Pearson that will ultimately be the death of RL in this country. That article is a complete nonsense, especailly this part: Quote “WE have no problem with the salary cap at all,” the Warriors chairman said. “I don’t think it should go up. I'M perfectly comfortable with it. WE'RE not having a problem with it. “Why would I want to pay more money than WE are?'" It's all about what happens at Wigan: that is such a damaging way to look at situations like this. Take, for example, the youth re-structuring. Hetherington and Lenagan were quite happy for reform because they were happy to take Hunslet and South Wales. That is something that people are now regretting and the RFL did not want. What a stupid decision that was. Pearson was quite happy to save a bit of cash in this area as well and Lee Radford came out and, rightly, criticised the decision of his club the other week. I understand that a RL owner is going to be looking at the interests of their own club, but surely it is in the interest of Wigan RFC and Leeds Rhinos to have a great competition? Oh, but it's ok at Wigan so Lenangan couldn't give one about anyone else. I admire the way he has negotiated deals for all their players that have gone, but on crucial decisions on the sports future he has dropped the ball IMO. Their insular views could kill the game. I know we need more money to come into the sport before any rise is viable, but to completely disregard any notion of a rise is down right stupid and comes across quite arrogant. I don't know McManus' or Moran's view on the salary cap, so any criticism of them is unjustified. However, they were more than happy to oppose the youth re-structuring from the off and that shows that they do not hold the attitudes of Lenagan and Co. This is what happens when you allow people who have conflicting interests to vote on matters that are crucial to the future of the sport.

Take a look at this article by the Wigan Chairman Ian Lenagan: www.wigantoday.net/sport/wigan-w ... -1-5625250 Is it me that thinks 'what a bell' when reading this? It is the incredibly insular people within RL like Ian Lenagan, Gary Hetherington and Adam Pearson that will ultimately be the death of RL in this country. That article is a complete nonsense, especailly this part: Quote “WE have no problem with the salary cap at all,” the Warriors chairman said. “I don’t think it should go up. I'M perfectly comfortable with it. WE'RE not having a problem with it. “Why would I want to pay more money than WE are?'" It's all about what happens at Wigan: that is such a damaging way to look at situations like this. Take, for example, the youth re-structuring. Hetherington and Lenagan were quite happy for reform because they were happy to take Hunslet and South Wales. That is something that people are now regretting and the RFL did not want. What a stupid decision that was. Pearson was quite happy to save a bit of cash in this area as well and Lee Radford came out and, rightly, criticised the decision of his club the other week. I understand that a RL owner is going to be looking at the interests of their own club, but surely it is in the interest of Wigan RFC and Leeds Rhinos to have a great competition? Oh, but it's ok at Wigan so Lenangan couldn't give one about anyone else. I admire the way he has negotiated deals for all their players that have gone, but on crucial decisions on the sports future he has dropped the ball IMO. Their insular views could kill the game. I know we need more money to come into the sport before any rise is viable, but to completely disregard any notion of a rise is down right stupid and comes across quite arrogant. I don't know McManus' or Moran's view on the salary cap, so any criticism of them is unjustified. However, they were more than happy to oppose the youth re-structuring from the off and that shows that they do not hold the attitudes of Lenagan and Co. This is what happens when you allow people who have conflicting interests to vote on matters that are crucial to the future of the sport.

It's a none issue. Insufficient numbers of clubs can afford the cap as it is, raising it is simply not possible.

Erm aren't there another 12 clubs to vote against anything they propose? and Ian Lenagan is doing a great job at Wigan.

Get your facts right,radford had a go at the rl system of getting rid of the old a team matches, not against hull fc

Is this the same chairman that asked for and got permission to break the salary cap so that they could keep hold of Ratface??

Dont you think that perhaps this was a response to Dr Koukash's remarks that a salary cap of £1.65m was "crazy"?
At the current amount Dr K can't just go out and buy a new squad.
The DR is mentioned in the full statement anyway!

If there was no cap certain clubs, Salford being one would just go out and pay silly unsustainable money for players. They would be the Man City of Superleague which would be great for them until the good Dr got bored or kicked the bucket then they would sink faster than the titanic just as City would do if Monsour (sp?) did a runner.

The previous regime at Wigan would have done exactly the same (as they did before ) but I doubt Pollard would. Saying that no cap or a significant increase would just widen the rich and poor gap even more than it already is and make SL even more boring an predictable

Talk's cheap and Dr Koukash certainly seems to like a headline. Mind you appointing Brian Smith as coach would have made one hell of a statement but apparently his wage demands were too much; funny that there's no cap on coaches wages.

To be fair Nobby has a better record than Smith when it comes to winning things



Personally I'm glad he's gone british .

Yes, but if we have rich men wanting to throw money at our game, we shouldn't be stopping them.
Clubs should have a cap to keep them safe, but if someone like the doctor could personally guarantee / finance contracts in excess of the cap, then why should we stop them? It would certainly help keep our lads in our game.

Sadly it appears Dr K has not taken the time to understand the salary cap. The actual figure £1.85M. An extra £200K may be added by clubs with players with 10 yrs plus service + producing a number of international players. It just so happens salford rate poorly in those areas. i am sure that if Dr K is patient and invests extensively in youth development then in 5/6 years he will have a higher cap.

I do say that it probably isn't viable at this stage, but my point was that he seemed to be ruling it out all together.



But these two clubs are probably the leading clubs in SL right now and if they do not want change then why will the others? If these two aren't bothered about the implications of the Super League effectively being a departure lounge, then who will be?

Ian Lenagan may well be doing a great job for Wigan (I think I acknowledge this in the OP), but he won't be able to do that job if there is no more SL FT, will he?



I have got my facts right thanks. Hull FC voted FOR the changes, so in effect, he was having a go at his club's DECISION to vote FOR the changes.



Possibly that was the prompt, but if you read the quotes from Lenagan he is making a point that because Wigan are alright the cap can stay where it is.

The only justification for raising the cap would be if all clubs were spending it and had revenue to spare. That's not the case. For a competition in which one or two rich clubs spend far more than the rest, see the early 90's Wigan domination. That was fun. Not.

Nail hit.

Most Club Chairman are as bad as each other, they are far too Parochial as are some loud mouthed players in the media, who think more money for us! note no mention of Mr McManus which side of the fence is he on?

Rugby League is going backwards not forward! calls for less teams in Super League, what will that produce more money for each club, they think! and back to playing each other 3 or 4 times a season, relegation & promotion, people claim the excitement of the Premiership & Championship last week in football, yes the likes of Leeds United & Wolves, once great clubs who never may be again! as it is all down to money! and if football can't pay it's way Rugby League Never Will!

Leneghan and Hetherington aren't going want the salary cap increased - one's club has won the title 4 out of the last 5 years and the other has his team sitting on top of the table (an worked very hard at their club to acheive this). Both od thse clubs have very healthy crowds and balance sheets. An increase in the salary cap would allow someonelike Koukash to buy a winning team which would be in direct competetion with them.

As I said, clubs should have a salary cap to keep them safe, but wealthy benefactors should be able to fund star players past the cap as long as they, or their company, take responsibilty for the entire length of any contract. This will allow us to get star players over from Aus, or keep british players in the game without jepordising the financial security of the clubs.

Most top clubs break the cap in some shape or form. What annoys me more is this duel registration scheme tossing aside the u16 & u19's comps etc. Our lifeblood. One positive as Saints is this coaching with Rushie at the helm will never stop & we'll continue to develop homegrown talent.

The change in age groups was wrong! for younger players, but All Clubs really invest in youth these days you can't claim it is Saints only!

I think people have either not read my OP or have just completely misunderstood the point I was trying to make.

I am not for one second suggesting we raise the salary cap RIGHT NOW as this poster seems to think:



I am saying that the views of chairman, like Lenagan and Hetherington, are potentially damaging as their insular view on the salary cap could mean that SL will retreat to a position of no return. If they are just thinking about Wigan and Leeds then their insular view of 'we're ok, sod the rest' is worrying. That is my point.

I'm not an idiot, I do understand that raising the cap now should not even be on the agenda before most clubs spend up to it (maybe 4/5 consistently spend the cap?), but dismissing it outright is what is worrying me.



If you actually read the OP, you will see what I say about McManus and Moran.

I think you have the wrong idea about both these two, based on a limited newspaper interview.

To give you an idea of how "insular" these two guys are, both have been very generous lending London loan players over the last four or five years when London's been under threat of going under. They do this because both Hetherington and Leneghan are aware of the importance of not retreating to an M62 ghetto, and because they didn't want to see London go under.

Some other clubs, including our own, were unwilling to do the equivalent of urinating on London even if they were on fire.

I know that attitudes to London are hardly the only decider or whether one has an insular attitude to the whole game, but it's a useful pointer. In my experience, Hetherington has consistently, for two decades, been supportive of trying new ideas both on and off the pitch, to try and expand our game and win new followers and new sponsors. Leneghan has also got a decent track record of putting his money where his mouth is, and is generally supportive of the game as a whole. Not all SL chairmen can say that.

You need to look at this article in a different light, I think. Koukash at Salford has turned heads, but it's a one-off. The rest of our clubs are struggling financially except for Wigan, Leeds and Warrington. If we lifted the cap, without any question the three clubs who would rapidly depart from any meaningful competition with the rest of the league would be Wigan, Leeds and Warrington, and I doubt Koukash will spend consistently as much as would be needed from his own pocket at Salford to remain in competition for very long.

So you could interpret Leneghan's opposition to raising the salary cap as a very enlightened view which is actually to the detriment of his own club, but for the benefit of the majority of other clubs in the league.

I can't believe you're making me defend a pie.

Great, finally someone who is going to debate the thread properly





I'm not actually sure what hit the nerve about this article, may be it's just a culmination of bad news coming from RL in general (and Saints' poor performances!) that I've put into reading this article and going a bit OTT - Uni finals are not helping either!

I suppose it's all about interpretation, but I see the article as 'we're ok with the salary cap at x, so we aren't bothered'. Maybe that is wrong, but I do question the rationale for giving such quotes for an article. Maybe it is, as you say, regarding Koukash at Salford and showing that we need to develop SL clubs sustainably. But these views (from Hetherington at least) existed far before Koukash sat next to fat Nige on that plane. So maybe I'm a bit cynical as to thinking that they are using Koukash as a vehicle for their own interests. Why woud they want to spend more money than they have to. It is working for them atm and any lifting of the salary cap will mean they will have to spend more money.

I know it probably would be a disaster for the salary cap to rise NOW, but to not entertain the possibility in the future is damaging IMO. Maybe the article is just poorly written and leading me to the wrong conclusions, but that's the feeling that I get from reading it. We need to be working towards a position where the salary cap will be lifted. Maybe that is Lenagan's point, but I question WHY he has given such quotes.

Based on experience of dealing with journalists, you'd be surprised how big the gap can be between what you say, and what they write down.

I think if every SL club was paying up to the cap each year with money to spare, you'd find that most people within the game, including Leneghan, would be happy to discuss raising the bar in order to allow us to compete a little more with Union and the NRL. The problem is that many clubs don't, and those that do are usually pushing their financial envelope to do so.

Albion, dont be such a a.rse, radford did not have a go at the club, why didnt you say he was having a go at st helens then ? Talk about trying to stir something up

on subject, we clearly need things to change, a lot of clubs having a rough time, rl is such a great sport and long may it continue to be,

Because St Helens voted against the changes. Hull FC voted for them.

He wasn't expressly having a pop at the club, but do you think that having a go at a system (that his club voted for) is congratulating the club on a fanastic decision? I don't.