For many years, there has been a suspicion that the RFL are not equitable in the treatment of different clubs. The published decision from Wigan’s appeal available today makes some very interesting reading. As a summary of points 6.3 and 6.4, it seems that the RFL have paid a proportion of a Wigan player’s salary in an agreement that the appeal panel describes as “confidential, and perhaps surprisingly, only offered to certain clubs”. https://www.sportresolutions.co.uk/uplo ... ed._v2.pdf Discuss.

For many years, there has been a suspicion that the RFL are not equitable in the treatment of different clubs. The published decision from Wigan’s appeal available today makes some very interesting reading. As a summary of points 6.3 and 6.4, it seems that the RFL have paid a proportion of a Wigan player’s salary in an agreement that the appeal panel describes as “confidential, and perhaps surprisingly, only offered to certain clubs”. https://www.sportresolutions.co.uk/uplo ... ed._v2.pdf Discuss.

I think this should be called "several unnamed clubs and the RFL". But it is an interesting read. It seems a confidential "RFL ambassador" scheme was set up to help people players in England. At best guess its perhaps only offered to clubs that are at risk of losing players to the NRL? Or an addition to home grown clauses? It would be interesting to learn more. It's obviously not confidential anymore so someone is going to have something to say about it. Probably Andrew Chalmers. He loves a bit of drama. Especially when it's nothing to do with him.

It depends whether it is confidential between the RFL and the club or confidential between all clubs and not the public.

True. Do all the clubs know about it or just those involved? I would have to assume all clubs know about it, these things usually have to be agreed by all SL clubs. If all the clubs know about it and agree to it then it's a non issue really. But if its confidential to the public then why not redact it like they did with the player in question?

It's simple, it is called cheating, if Wigan, or any other club are getting preferential treatmemt. The RFL are as corrupt as Putin!

It’s quite clear in the published report that this was a “confidential agreement that was only offered to certain clubs.”
Also interesting to note the agent involved is the same one that lured Denny Solomona to breach his contract and move to RU. Ironic given the purpose of the RFL payment is meant to be keeping players in SL. Why anyone deals with such a snake is beyond me.

Its obvious its confidential, and it's obvious it hasn't been offered to all clubs, but it's not obvious if other clubs knew about it. It was an RFL initiative put forward by Nigel Wood too, so we cant blame the clubs for taking up an offer. It's an odd one. I assume more details will come out as more people ask questions. It's not going to go away any time soon.

I was hoping this report would answer a few questions but it seems to ask more than answer them

Wasn't there an example of Wigan and the RFL with the Quentin Pongia affair, the RFL did not disclose the full facts on the lines of confidentiality and I seem to remember the Wigan players were innoculated but the rest of the super league players were not protected. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/23794 ... scare.html

Wasn't there an example of Wigan and the RFL with the Quentin Pongia affair, the RFL did not disclose the full facts on the lines of confidentiality and I seem to remember the Wigan players were innoculated but the rest of the super league players were not protected. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/23794 ... scare.html

If it was known by all the other clubs, I’m not sure why it would be “confidential” in any other way though. The panel have highlighted that it was a “surprising” agreement and one that wasn’t available to all clubs. It leaves the massive question of “why not?” hanging over the RFL.
Due to the very poor redaction of the document, it’s obvious the player in question is George Williams. However, there’s no mention of any RFL contribution to his salary in any of the press releases when he signed his marquee deal in 2017. How many other clubs knew the RFL were contributing to Wigan’s salary expenditure? How may other clubs are in benefit of similar RFL contributions to a player’s salary?
I’m afraid I’m erring on the side of thinking this is corruption and the RFL giving secret financial payments to selected clubs.

The ones who have marquee players? Just a wild guess, mind.

I doubt that to be honest. The general idea of the payment seems to be to stop players going to the NRL, but most players on marquee money are from there (Hurrell, Merrin, Austin, Sandow, Roberts etc).
It’s also seems that these payments do count on the salary cap of the club they play for. If so, why do Wigan (and possibly other clubs) deserve money from the RFL and others don’t?
It’s more than suspicious if you ask me. Secret payments to certain clubs and players from the sports governing body is outright corruption at the highest level.

The "ambassador" rule has been in existence for a couple of seasons now. Doesn't Cas Tigers get some sort of dispensation for Mike McMeeken ?

I thought we did. Wasn't it 25 grand or something similar? Don't Saints get it for Lomax too?

Come to think of it, Saints get something for Jonny Lomax too dont they?

*posted this at the same time as the one above, Jinx!*

Let’s get all this muck raked over, for years the mystery alleged payments to Saints “Lomax”. Watkins Leeds, and others who belong to this protected secret species, who have dispensation because they are deemed susceptible to being signed by the NRL or the rugby union. I don’t care either way if these contract awards are right or wrong, but lets have some transparency who gets dispensation, and consequently more room on the cap.

Yes, but the Lomax and McMeekan agreements were different in that they were made public knowledge and the additional contract is directly between the player and the RFL. In Wigan’s case it seems that Williams has had some of his Wigan playing salary paid for by the RFL in a secret arrangement.
Some very important differences there.

That’s the odd thing though, in that there is no salary cap dispensation in Wigan’s case. The payment from the RFL has counted on Wigan’s salary cap.

Perhaps, but it’s still xxxxxxx£££ given to Wigan, while others are not subsidiaries, let’s have it out in the open Nottingham tiger

So basically you’re saying we’ve been mugged right off whilst others are getting these payments knocked off their cap allowance?

Seems as plausible as yet another non event thread about Wigan being cheats, started by somebody who hasn’t got a clue what the facts are (and nor have I).

Yawn

The thing is, the facts are now there in the public domain in terms of the Wigan issue. Anyone who doesn’t have suspicions when the document clearly states that the RFL have entered into a confidential agreement in regards to a paying part of a player’s salary, that wasn’t offered to other clubs, is naive in the extreme.
My understanding about the Lomax and McMeekan agreements is that this is done externally between the player and the RFL. So in a way, yes, it seems Wigan have got the rough end of that particular stick (why didn’t the RFL just agree a similar deal with Williams?).
Worth pointing out that the issue here is with the RFL, not Wigan. If the RFL are offering to give them money, they would be completely daft to turn it down.

Tell you what I’m saying NickyKiss, not Wigan bashing, but would like to know whom is privy to these central contracts, and exactly how it’s decided, transparency would be nice, because for example if George Williams is leaving, and the bond to keep him in super League has failed, do Wigan now pay this money back. Cloak and daggers as per usual.

The title should probably be changed then but without 'Wigan' in the title it's just not to drag in as many of the usual suspects!

I've so far seen Lomax, Watkins and McMeekan mentioned so we've potentially got four and who knows how many more there are. If they're on the list then I guess guys like McGillvary, Hill, Currie and others may be on there. Take Catalans away and London who have just come up and we might be left with a maximum of 2 or 3 clubs without these payments and if have they haven't produced anyone worthy of it then I'd probably concern myself more with why that is the case!

Why would union want to sign lomax? There are about 100 half backs better in union

Absolutely. The question isn’t the likes of McMeeken and Lomax though, who have an open and transparent contract with the RFL that was announced publicly. The question is how many other secret agreements have the RFL made with clubs to subside the playing contracts of players.
The reason it’s Wigan under discussion as they are the club who have now been named in a published document. To me it’s more about the sport’s governing body making secret arrangements with certain clubs to contribute to player wages.

Think you’ve missed the point Ruune, these central contracts were brought in to protect our top players from being purloined, by the NRL or the RFU. It’s not about Lomax it’s about the secrecy.