i have not berated any policy, its disingenuous at best for you to say i have, or even come close to saying so,

im more than comfortable in trusting hetherington and caddick to implement and work such a policy in a non-SC world as much as an SC world,

and again, the cap doesnt ensure clubs dont go to the wall, plenty of clubs have done in the last ten years, it also has no link to a clubs financial status

so then if Clubs were run responsibly an SC clearly isnt needed is it?



ahh, so your impression of Simon Moran is a good enough reason for a salary cap then?

that is correct, but pay say Brian O'driscoll more than he is paid in RU, and he plays League, and all of a sudden GB have another good player in the squad

they are there, believe me,

we have also lost Smith, Walker, Myler, Farrell, all players who were british SL players, all replaced by overseas players




it isnt, the gap isnt huge when it comes to wages, we can and do compete, certainly not between the GP and SL


so on the basis that the leeds players who get paid more have won less, picking an arbitrary amount 10 years ago and allowing clubs to only spend that on wages whether the can afford it or not is a good idea?

So, Smokey, in short, you want rid of the SC because you know that your club's future will be secure thanks to your multi-millionaire backer?

You could have just written that and saved all that wristwork for other pursuits.

last time there wasnt a SC leeds almost went broke trying to pay the same wages as wigan

the price of course was the club was sold to an owner whose main interest was union and now union pollutes the hallowed headingly turf

If Rugby League clubs were willing to pay every player a wage that Rugby Union offers them then most teams would be bankrupt anyway.

And all of the players could get "the wage that they deserve" if they went to other teams, no doubt.

.............and Wigan almost followed suit.

no, i trust my club, along with almost all others in SL, would be secure because they are run well,

i am sure that should we allow clubs to spend what they can afford, or we point them in the direction of doing what we need to do to be a successful sport, that they are very able to do so,

i think a flat cap----with very minor exceptions----doesnt go anyway to acheiving that

union also pumps millions in to the parent company,

dont you worry, Leeds Carnegie more than pay their way

Changed your tune there sunshine



Are Chelsea or Man city well run ?

Just on a small point though dally, your cap over there is higher (by quite a lot) and includes scope for marquee players, our's doesn't.

You've also not got the same competition sport wise in that your sports are more regionally orientated (e.g. RL in Queensland and NSW) and no serious mega bucks competitor like football (or soccer as you'll no doubt refer to it). I'd be surprised if Australia would still be producing a seeming production line of Inglis, Hayne, Folau etc if football was a big sport in Aus

IF Caddick and / or Hetherington wanted out, there would be no shortage of people wanting to buy the club, in whatever state it was in ....

Not to mention the cap space it generated at Wigan when he'd gone .... IIRC, Farrell was on about 50% more than any of the best paid players in the current Champions

The quality of the Crusaders squad and their performance in Super League has a direct effect on every other club, including Leeds.


Pay Leeds players a bagillion bagillion dollars, they would still just been Leeds, no better.


Hold on......thats what Warrington are trying to do!

Give over, everyone knows that all their players are playing for 2 crusts of bread a week and that's why they can still get Fuifui Moimoi, Kevin Sinfield, Danny Tickle & James Graham under the cap.

Just to pick you up on this point, the reason Australia is so strong is because it's the number one code of football in 55% of the country (population wise), it is THE sport to play for kids, it is THE sport that gets the most media coverage and that's not because the kids can earn the most money playing RL far from it! RL in Aus has a profile akin to Association Football in England, the player pathways, the sponsorship etc etc all stems from that, the NRL also has a very strict Salary Cap and one that works very very well.

If you think the reason Australia are ahead GB/England is because of the Salary Cap I would say you are very wrong.

Who was that guy on here last week saying all the different ways you could make your money go further on the cap.
That explains Warrington methinks.

And we all know it.
Even though we get Freaky and crew going oonn and ooonnn.
THE best athletes play League, everyone says you could field 4 teams to beat us, you couldn't..nowhere near, but in your First/Second choice positions you have ATHLETES that we just dont have. If you took your first choice player from each position you'd still have a VERY strong team but I think we'd stand a much much better chance. You certainly dont have 4 that would beat us e.g. Look how Ellis has gone over there.
The nearest thing we have to your freaks is Burgess, who at 18 was a big game player

You miss one major reason we are good.


We have the most dynamic mix of players and coaches from so many different backgrounds, giving so many different perspectives.

That means things get tried, tested, people learn from their own mistakes and the mistakes of others. The game and the players evolve as changes are made.

In England, none of that happens. You're still in 1982 wondering how the f*ck Australia got so good all of a sudden, then you look at your own belly buttons and think the answer will come from there!

Loads of ways you can make you cap go further around how you pay appearance and win bonuses, and the granularity of payments versus the assumptions you are told to base payments on in the Salary cap rules. E.g. appearances are to be based on a figure of 18 per season.

pay your player 2k per appearance it's 36k on the cap even if he plays 21 games at gets 42k from it

pay him 14k every 7th appearance, and it's only 28k on the cap even if he plays the same 21 games and gets 42k from it

Just a tiny example, i'm sure somebody with a bit of savy at possibly more than one of the clubs has spreadsheeted and analysed this and all the other rules to determine the 'optimal' way to pay a player to create as big a difference as possible between his earned income and his 'salary cap value'

The way most clubs get players on good salaries at low cap figures is a brown paper bag full of money.

Whilst slightly harsh on the last paragraph (I think some are acutely aware how Australia got so good, just maybe it's only just sinking in with some of the people who can make the decisions), you're dead right. Whilst we remain a pretty insular sport over here in coaching respects - the RL old boys club if you like, we're never going to take a large step forward, we need to be inclusive of ideas from all sports and all nations. Bring in as many different views and ideas as possible, and work a damn site harder and have the patience to see it through rather than expecting quick results.

Possibly, I just can't comment on that type of thing due to the AUP.

It just show's over here though there is a lot of scope to work within the rules and pay more for less cap figure - I suspects some clubs have better accountants than others

I want Warrington and Russel Crowe's accountants.


They have worked miracles in the last few months.