Check out the RFL Operational Rules - Salary Cap section.

You are not allowed to bring a player in on a small salary in year 1, and then with much bigger salary years 2 onwards, under one contract. You have to average the total contract value over the contract years. This was brought in in response to the antics of Wigan when they broke the cap a few years ago - this was seemingly one of the devices they used.

Likewise, dual-code does not give a get-out any more - all counts under the cap.

How do much improved offers fit into that? Like myler at Salford to try and keep him, eastmond at saints? could Leeds offer him what space they have then sign a new deal next year?

Is there anything to stop him signing a 1 year contract now and then a different contract after?

Not at all. And if he signed a 1-year deal on a verbal promise of a much better contract for year 2, who would know? Or if a letter of intent was signed but kept confidential and not disclosed to the salary cap auditor?

you always a prick?

most of the time!

fair enough mate, anywho honest mistake now I know better aha

Funnily enough, although he works really hard sometimes to give the appearance of being one, its all for show. He'll hate me for saying it, and for blowing his cover, but he's actually pretty sensible...

Which means about as much as the two feet on the line rule.

All they have to do is prove one of those players in the squad is injured (at all) and they can bring in someone else. A tactic that's been used on more than one occasion by most teams (Saints seem to do it most) is purposely including an injured player so they can then play someone who the opposition wasn't expecting. Doesn't really work now though as everyone is expecting it, so pays very little attention to the 19.

Lee Smith signs 4 yr contract with Leeds and the RFL are happy for him to make his "debut" against Bradford on thursday

We must have had enough money under the cap to been able to sign him on a four year contract, have it authorised by the RFL and for him to play against you tomorrow.

Indeed, under the live cap.

Either that, or you've (sorry, HE'S) found an "unconnected" third party to pay loads for his image rights, or El Presidente knows where the bodies are buried at Rot Hall...

I'm surprised Leeds can afford him given the already ample squad they have assembled.

We must be very close to the cap now, and I suppose it makes sense that El Presidente has stated we can't recall BJB for salary cap reasons.

Still, I'd expect a few players not to make the cut at the end of the season, even if some of the oldies like Senior retire.

Good news from a Leeds perspective to have him back at HQ, and possibly from an England POV if he can rediscover some form. Good to see at the start of this thread some of you Bulls fans finally admitting that he's a good player. I expect normal service will resume shortly.

You're wrong.



Wait a minute. Leeds signed Eastwood last season and must have been able to pay him (even if he has only materialised this year), so you can take him out of the equation. Delaney was signed as I understood it as a replacement for Smith, so we have to assume that he is coming back on partially reduced terms and/or Leeds have a lot more space on the cap than many thought. Bear in mind that most clubs leave space for an emergency signing mid-season, and several Leeds players stated last year that they had accepted lower pay offers from Leeds to remain part of the GF winning team. I don't have any firm evidence here but unless anyone can produce any evidence to the contrary we must assume that Leeds are playing by the rules.

Well, given that we now have a live salary cap, Leeds HAVE to have the space to sign Smith otherwise the RFL would block the transfer.

but given the players in Leeds team, you do have to wonder if they're getting away with murder somewhere

Love this post

To be honest, I can't imagine how they untangle the whole Leeds Rugby/Tykes/Rhinos triangle. We have to assume it's all above board and I'm sure the Leeds club wouldn't do anything wrong, though I certainly wouldn't trust the RFL to boil an egg, never mind to have the capacity to run the rule over complex, financial business dealings.

Will a mod pleeeease merge these two Lee Smith threads.

Have look at G1's signature there's a clue there.

far be it from me to maybe point out something which may actually defend the whinos but, we all know that Hetherington mentioned only a few weeks ago that there where cap implications with bringing any of there loanee's back i.e. ben jones bishop.

I personally think that they will have resigned Smith on absolutely peanuts for this season, - baring in mind he will have been earning a higher wage in union for the last 6 months. His wage for the remaining term of his contract after this season (4 years I think) will be back up at the level which we would expect, and lets face it, they are likley to let Ali Tutti-frutti go (he has already let it be known he wants to go bcak to NZ), and I bet Senior won't be retained - which will slot Smith back in at centre. That will give ample space for Smith.

Just a thought.

Quote ="silsdenbull"far be it from me to maybe point out something which may actually defend the whinos but, we all know that Hetherington mentioned only a few weeks ago that there where cap implications with bringing any of there loanee's back i.e. ben jones bishop. I personally think that they will have resigned Smith on absolutely peanuts for this season, - baring in mind he will have been earning a higher wage in union for the last 6 months. His wage for the remaining term of his contract after this season (4 years I think) will be back up at the level which we would expect, and lets face it, they are likley to let Ali Tutti-frutti go (he has already let it be known he wants to go bcak to NZ), and I bet Senior won't be retained - which will slot Smith back in at centre. That will give ample space for Smith. Just a thought.'" Think your spot on, Smith will probs be playing for peanuts but that will be made up in the next few years. Senior will still be at Leeds next season. But your right about Ali he is thinking about going home. Donald and Buderus are out of contract too and at least one of them will head home imo. Interesting article regarding Buderus from a few weeks back: www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sport/ ... 5837155974 Buderus will free up more than enough to keep Smithy happy!

Quote ="silsdenbull"far be it from me to maybe point out something which may actually defend the whinos but, we all know that Hetherington mentioned only a few weeks ago that there where cap implications with bringing any of there loanee's back i.e. ben jones bishop. I personally think that they will have resigned Smith on absolutely peanuts for this season, - baring in mind he will have been earning a higher wage in union for the last 6 months. His wage for the remaining term of his contract after this season (4 years I think) will be back up at the level which we would expect, and lets face it, they are likley to let Ali Tutti-frutti go (he has already let it be known he wants to go bcak to NZ), and I bet Senior won't be retained - which will slot Smith back in at centre. That will give ample space for Smith. Just a thought.'" Think your spot on, Smith will probs be playing for peanuts but that will be made up in the next few years. Senior will still be at Leeds next season. But your right about Ali he is thinking about going home. Donald and Buderus are out of contract too and at least one of them will head home imo. Interesting article regarding Buderus from a few weeks back: www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sport/ ... 5837155974 Buderus will free up more than enough to keep Smithy happy!

Didn't think you could defer payments to later years in a contract, after Wigan were found guilty of having broken a non existent rule? Isn't the average of the contract over it's term used for the live cap.
Anyway which ever way it's done the RFL have accepted his registration so their total player payments must fit under the cap.

Dont think youre allowed to pay a player peanuts one year then make it up over remainder of deal, its against the spirit of the cap.

Dont think theres anything wrong in say Leeds giving him 80k a year and then a sponsor giving him say 60k a year if he does a couple of photoshoots etc as long as third company doesnt pay anything to Leeds for advertising their product in programme etc.