I'm still concerned about the whole "we're not playing as we're coached" I'm sure that's not the first time that's been said either.

So that leaves us a few explainations.

1. McNamara has a discipline problem. He can't enforce his ideas and tactics on the squad and it's left the squad unsure as to what they're supposed to do in given situations

or

2. The team want rid of McNamara and are purposely playing poorly.

Personally I hope it's 1 and if McNamara had a more seasoned hand guiding him a la Tony Smith & Jimmy Lowes at Wire, that the team would be able to turn it around. I'd hate option 2 to be correct. Because if it is then every single player that's turned out this year has spat in the face of the Bradford fans and don't deserve to play the game let alone wear Bradford colours

Either way it can't be let to continue.

No it can't. The club MUST do something now before we slip any further. But without knowing exactly what the root cause of all this is there's no way of saying what the right solution (if there is one) would be

[size=200Exactly[/size

So bloody frustrating, isn't it?

There is option 3) The players are not good enough to consistently play the way they are coached.

Seems to me that its basically a recruitment rather than a coaching problem. If you continue to recruit inconsistent players (Solomna, Platt, Jeffries, Sykes etc) you get inconsistent performances.

As i stated earlier, players like the aforementioned were consistent performers at previous clubs. It doesn't take a genius.

That's not what the Wakey fans told us about those we signed from them...

That probably is a part of the problem.

The confidence factor and losing becoming "habit" must also be starting to take effect.

These are obvious things looking from the outside in though aren't they?
It is the deeper rooted, covered problems I (and the rest of you) want to know about.

So your salary capped team is getting walloped by other salary capped teams because of the salary cap?

I've already pointed out early the teeny weeny logic errors in what he said.

And we have only been actually walloped twice so far - although I suspect few doubt it will be three times after Friday.

But if we are talking use of devices to...stretch the cap - like payment for image rights, use of offshoring, employee benefit trusts, the Singapore Sling - as well as the ability of some clubs players to secure massive external image rights payments - it would be interesting to see the comparison then?

Meh - speculation as to which clubs use these and to what extent.

Anyway, if all of those things were permitted under the cap, then more fool those who didn't bother IMO.

And if all or some were not, then more fool those now having their collars felt by HMRC . . .

Anyway, back to the original topic . . .

Your team at the moment isn't exactly brimming with youngsters, throwing a couple in (a la Ainscough and Tomkins at wigan when the chips were down) isn't going to do them any harm.

It's a cop out as far as I'm concerned and rather than interpreting the "we're not playing as we're coached" line as a prompt to shift blame from the coach to the players, I would ask myself why the coach isn't able to get the players to listen to and act upon his instructions (which after all is his job).

I really like Steve Mac, but I think he's a little out of his depth. Someone made a very interesting point on here recently when they said it would be intriguing to hear an (honest) assessment from the likes of Menzies and Morrisson.

I would think that the clubs involved are more concerned about the impact this will have on contracts going forward than a (potential) retrospective tax bill.

If they were looking into these schemes they obviously wanted to pay more cash to players, so doing so (be it in the form of extra tax or otherwise) is unlikely to be too much of a pain.

I'd be very surprised if it was applied retrospectively anyway, but that's another matter.

Adey will know far more than me about this, but I'd bet a LOT of money that HMRC 100% WILL apply anything that applies retrospectively. They are not noted for "letting people off".

I also don't follow why having to find money for past underpayments is any better than having to find money for future tax etc payments, the past money will have to be found, the future money will also have to be found.

If anything the future money is easier to deal with, as contracts can always be varied, but what's due is due.

Not if tax laws change and you can no longer apply the old rules to existing contracts to get under the cap - you're left with disgruntled overseas players having to take a "paycut" since a greater proportion than promised of their pay is going to the taxman.

I'm not sure what you're getting at, but my clear understanding is that payments were agreed with players on the basis of what specific amount the player would receive. And in HMRC's eyes, if the sum paid is taxable, then it is deemed to have been a net sum, and the employer is deemed to have deducted the relevant tax - but failed to pay it over.

Whether the player in future "had to" take a pay cut would depend entirely on how the contract was worded.

...and by the RFL who, anecdotal indications suggest, have been more than a bit surprised and concerned by some of what has been unearthed along the way?

Ah, but what if tax laws have not changed (and they have not, unless something turns up in the Red Book which I suspect is quite possible)? What if the tax laws were what they always were, but some people chose to break them? And in doing so, cheat the exchequer and cheat the cap compared with those who chose to follow them?

"GOVERNMENT SAVINGS
• Tax loopholes and schemes identified which could provide £1bn of extra revenue over the next three years if closed "

Taken from budget snapshot;
[urlhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8011882.stm[/url

Is that £1Bn just from wire and saints??





If Mr Darling has his eyes on rugby league tax backpay to help fill the black hole you can bet HMRC wont be letting anyone off.

When I have the time, I'll have a good trawl through the Red Book to see if there is anything specific in there...

Then that's an entirely different matter then isn't it my accounting chum



If the "loophole" referenced doesn't actually exist then we're doomed (Dad's Army stylee).

But at least I got to go to Wembley a few times and we picked up a few hubcaps

Ay, that you are laddie...

Jeez...268 pages of it (when I can get it to download). Don't hold your breath...

I don't think there is much to speculate about is there....