' What the RFL have done with the OR , we shall have to wait and see ' ?

Surely on something as major as changes to the Salary Cap , they should have announced them first before using them ?

Sam could have been promised the cash for a couple of months while things were sorted and then announced ,

Cart leading the horse ' again '

But Sam Tomkins doesn't qualify for any of the current allowances.

It will be interesting to see what teams do with the new allowances anyway. My suspicion is that a few will use it to shoehorn a further NRL signing into their cap.

Er, which would be exactly why "Lenagan revealed Wigan have taken advantage of amendments... "!


I suppose they could restrict it to just any player who is qualified to play for England, as if it can be used to drain a player from Aus [iinto[/i England that doesn't make much sense, [iif[/i the objective is to help prevent players [ileaving[/i SL.

the single most obvious thing is that Wigan no longer feel the salary cap applies to them, Lenegan has stated "I am confident that, for the right person, we are able to offer a more attractive package than any club in either code", so in effect, he believes he can buy anyone he wants.

Or not. Since Wigan are the first to take advantage of the new amendment, having used it on Tomkins, they are now the [ionly[/i SL club who can NOT spend any more extra on a marquee player (since there can be only one). So I am confident that pretty much [ievery[/i SL club, and Onion clubs for that matter, can offer a more attractive package than Wigan for 2012 signings.

But well done Wigan for moving quickly and retaining Tomkins.

have you heard the noise coming from you lot. if there has been an amendement in salary cap that will apply for all teams in the league not just wigan. Mr leneghan is allways transparent to the Rfl in all hes doing to the point when wigan make a bid for a player he sends the proposal straight to the RFL something which most clubs don't. All the teams in the league should be happy that the RFL have woken up even if it was a wigan stick what proded them. Salford have felt they have had there talent poached off them be warrington well now there should be no complaining

The SL clubs will have been involved in agreeing the new SC rules so will know all about them. Why does there need to be an announcement?

When the 2012 Op Rules are published on the RFL website everyone can scrutinise them as much as they like.

because we bought Richie Myler off them?

A lad from Widnes...... hardly poaching is it.

95% of games at FB for Wigan

He left end of 2007, Tomkins debuted in 08 and SL in 09 iirc

Although not directly replacing him straight away, im just saying Ashtons departure allowed the aiding of Tomkins development.

Over the past few years they have allowed Robinson, Brown, Aspinwall and a few others to leave which has allowed them to bring youngsters through.

I am in total agreement with you that its not poaching and its the same situation with ratchy as hes a wiganer but some salford fans dont agree but surely with the new rules this can prevent this? If it doesn't then they can blame the club.

ratchford left the club when his contract ran out.... so warrington signed a free agent... just like salford did with Vinnie Anderson a year previous.

This ruling wont help a club like salford keep players like myler and ratchford.

Maybe they would of been able to offere them more who knows.

He would surely qualify for the club trained allowance. There's £50k of his salary exempt already.

If there is a new category of Marquee player then presumably Leeds could apply all 3 to Sinfield as a long serving, club trained, marquee player and get £150k exempt off his wages

I think it will. If Ratchford was Salford's marquee player they could give him more money. Ratchford won't be Warrington's marquee player so they'll pay him within the regular cap (And brown envelopes, obviously

).

Only if Salford were already spending the full cap. If they weren't then it wouldn't make any difference.

you know your own tricks best Pemps

Tomkins can play s-o or Ashton could play Wing. The point you seem to be missing is that it isn’t an either or situation. Wigan shouldn’t be limited to Ashton or Tomkins, they should be able to have Ashton AND Tomkins. They went out, scouted, developed and brought them through, they deserve the rewards of that.


There is no reason that Ashton’s development would have hindered Tomkins. It wouldn’t be Tomkins looking for a contract right now it would be Richards, Finch, or Roberts. and we would have one less overseas player and one more quality british youngster.

Maybe to actually come across as having a ' levelish ' playing field ? , so that you don't actually p155 off fans of your member clubs ?

How hard would it be to publish the OR before clubs are allowed to use them ? , and to highlight important and potential controversial changes ?

Doesn't bother me as it doesn't affect my club or competition , but it seems to have upset a few SDL fans

, you almost have to ask , Who is actually running the Sport ? The RFL , or W1g4n ?

No more questions, your honour

Lets not get too concerned about this until we have seen the details.

I am fully in favour of the cap remaining at the current level. However I would also like to see an allowance for only the first £175000 of a players wage to count against the cap.

That way clubs could keep high profile players and even pay for the best NRL players to play which would increase standards in SL. At the same time it would still prevent richer clubs buying up all the best available talent and making the league uncompetitive and keep the need for player development.

Nothing in the report indicates a less than level playing field as it's clear that the change in the OR applies to all clubs. No previous changes have been specifically publicised. Trying to legislate for the paranoia of RL fans is an exercise in futility anyway.

The SL clubs run SL, more or less. Lots of stuff that the RFL gets blamed for is actually decided by the clubs.

If I've read the cap regulations correctly, transfer fees are exempt - so as well as Joel's wages he could have picked up the 250k transfer fee paid by Saracens.

If you mean Wigan could have given the £250k from Joel's transfer to Sam, no, that would not be legal. He would need to pay tax on it and it would count on the cap as it would just be Wigan paying him an extra £250k. Unless Sam owned Joel personally.

It's possible I'm misinterpreting the 2009 cap regulations but pages 30/31 state:

5.0 NON-SALARY CAP RELEVANT INCOME
5.1 Sale Proceeds from the sale of assets.
5.2 Transfer Fee Income received.
5.3 Any Challenge Cup Prize Money as per the schedule issued from time to time should be excluded from income providing the following is observed.
5.3.1 The prize money is paid to the players within 60 days of receipt by the club.
5.3.2 Any excess of bonus over prize money received and paid out by the club is
classed as Salary Cap relevant cost.
5.3.3 Any excess of prize money over bonus paid out may be included as Salary Cap relevant income.
For the avoidance of doubt, any payments paid out by clubs prior to receipt of prize money, cannot be retrospectively or notionally set off against prize money.

That just means transfer fees paid do not count on the cap. So if Wigan bought a player the fee would not count. ANY payments made to the player would though.