Quite correct , it was in the NL's they overspent their salary cap , then again it was RFL money they were spending , so maybe that doesn't count

Would it be ok for Northampton to play to the same salary cap as everyone else, then have players travel/living expenses (up to a certain amount) excluded from their overall balance?

This could be for the first 3 seasons to help get them running, then get them on the same cap as everyone else.

In fact, sod that! (why did ever get sucked in?)

Let them start on the same playing field as everyone else. Northampton will be in the same boat as three other teams, so in effect thats 6 competitive games to start off with.

Plus Skolars, Gateshead and the Scorpions don't get players travel/living exemptions.


What has RLFANS done to me? I'm arguing with myself!

You

SWS,Crusaders, Gateshead,Skolers,Northampton plus 3 other new clubs,why is it even entering peoples minds to show favouritism to these clubs.

The C1 expansion clubs will get the same central funding, and be on the same salary cap, as everyone else. All clubs will get the same free travel for away games over a certain distance, but obviously the remote clubs will get travel paid every away match, when the traditional neighbour clubs might only get that for games in London, Northampton, South Wales, maybe Gateshead or Cumbria. Oldham will have to make their own way to Rochdale, but it won't cost to go to, say, Hemel. Employment law regarding overseas players minimum wage is the same for everyone.

The biggest challenge is finding a squad without being able to pay players to relocate. Swinton can always grab a player from St Pats or Miners and know they will be of a standard. The south has lots of talented players capable of playing at C1, but they are, mostly, in semi-pro union. There are local league players, students, servicemen, and juniors cing through, but it will take time and organisation. Hence a division of 4 new clubs, 2 welsh clubs, Skolars, thunder, plus 2 more, will be broadly competitive, as so many teams are in a similar position. The top amateur teams might beat them in the cup, but do we want a second pro club in Leigh, Warrington or Wigan. Give it time, and the expansion clubs will bring new talent and new money into the game.

If it's good enough for Starbore and SmokeyTA, it must be good enough for you; I'm sure at one point in the thread, the former made at least 5 consecutive posts in reply to himself. Bonkers!

Ooooooh no I didn't

It might have done, had it been enforced.

It doesn't stop it but it does make it less likely. Crusaders went bust the first time round because they were already in debt and accumulating CCJs before they joined SL. That's despite the RFL describing them as "financially stable" in their licensing decision. Had they not entered SL with debts, they might not have gone bust.

They had these debts partly because the RFL was turning a blind eye to them breaking the salary cap by importing Queensland league players on full-time contracts whilst in NL2. Had they not been doing this, it is unlikely that they would have been promoted to NL1 and thus been in a position to apply for SL.



Yes, the worst aspect of the salary cap was removing the restriction on %age of turnover thus allowing everybody to spend the full cap. Some clubs can afford the full cap and others can't but will spend it anyway.

It would be fine by me if they actually had the money to do this and not run up debts. My issue is that a blanket "salary cap restrictions should not apply to expansion clubs" is a) unfair (although I do agree about the player availability and travelling costs which perhaps should be taken into account) b) madness if the expansion clubs don't have the money (and they usually don't).

It's a dead-duck argument, as the expansion clubs aren't getting a different salary cap, and all teams will get the same central funding and travel costs over a set distance paid.

We're arguing about what "ought to be" not "what is".

Although I'd point out that Crusaders were breaching the SC as an NL club.

Times passed since the interview but he did clearly mention about going to SL. No mention of fast tracking or anything, just they hoped they could be in SL in a couple of years

They didnt spend it, so it made no difference.

I'm talking about pre-SL. The first Crusaders bankruptcy was supposedly due to debts run up chasing the SL dream. Crusaders clearly were breaking the NL salary cap even if they never got anywhere near the SL salary cap.

Welcome to rugby league northhampton, hope to draw you in the cup in the not to distant future, best of luck for the future.

You took your time didn't you ?

But they survived spending more than the NL cap, they played a Season of SL not spending the SL cap. Its simply speculation on your part as to whether the 'straw that broke the camels back' Was them spending over £300k on wages in the NLs rather than spending over £1m on wages in SL simply because of an arbitrary amount called 'the cap'.

In real terms they spent more in SL than they did in NL1, it is only your speculation (and pretty counter-intuitive speculation if we are honest) that says it cost Crusaders more to operate over a relatively small cap than it did under a massively larger cap.

into believing they were ready for SL , they weren't , as I and others who witnessed our matches at Brewery field tried to tell people , it just wasn't happening as it was being suggested at the time , I Sincerely hope they don't do it all again with somebody else

No, it isn't, it is a fact that Crusaders had accumulated CCJs before joining SL. This came out when the club went bust, if anyone had bothered to do any digging, it was on record at the time. If you are suggesting that a club accumulating CCJs can continue to survive indefinitely then I'd say that history shows otherwise.

It also a fact that despite the higher costs of operating in SL, it is a known that the revenues were also much higher so merely comparing salary caps is misleading. The difference in caps is 700k or so, remind me how much the Sky subsidy alone is? Not to mention the additional away fans.

Crusaders didn't even sign any particularly big name players when they joined SL. Their SL squad was pretty much the same team that "won" promotion plus a handful of Queensland league players. Their wage bill probably wasn't that much more in SL than it had been in NL1, at least for the first season.

Your definition of "counter-intuitive" seems to mean "focus solely on costs and ignore revenue", a rather odd idea and unlikely to trouble the world of finance.

No it allowed them to put out a better side in the NLs, but nobody thought that side would be the side they would put out in SL and indeed it wasnt

It wasn't all that different. It's not like they went out and signed Reuben Wiki and Stacey Jones as Catalans did. They hired a few more Queensland league players and got rid of the Welsh players but there were no big name signings. The Aussie core of the team was the same lads that had been playing in NL2.

It ' papered over the cracks ' in the business , it was off field that I and others were telling people , they struggled to cope when we visited , and as I have pointed out countless times , Mr Samuel was ' Hated ' by the local populace , hardly a recipe for success

Correct , it makes you wonder if Mr Samuels was just getting his money back , or if he had been led to believe it was possible to make money out of running a SL club ?