You stated that St Helens have nobody on their board with any RL experience, considering we are talking at board level here where the main financial decisions take place then Tony Colquitt has huge experience when it comes to rugby league financial matters in his previous role with Gillette both in the UK and Australia.

I couldn`t care less even if your currently talking to the pope, you have been proven wrong with what you stated. I don`t need to say anymore, the link backs me up and your the sort that will argue till closing time even when your wrong, anyway speaking of closing time thats what i`m doing here as ive nothing to prove as ive given you the evidence to prove you wrong regardless of what cobblers you try and come up with.

The really funny - or tragic, depending which way you look at it - thing is how some people have massively got the wrong end of the stick. The image rights tax issue is something that is going to affect lots of clubs in both codes of rugby and football too. The only reason our name is getting banded around alot is purely because we ARE well run finanically, NOT because we aren't!

It's because we are the first club to attempt to tackle the problem - just like we are often first in many other areas such as salary cap audits, franchise appraisals etc - that our name is cropping up. And not only are we trying to tackle it before it hits us instead of waiting until afterwards, but we are also in much better health to deal with it than most.

I would have thought that cullens contract extension would have been decided by moran, or at least with him having the final say.

I would also expect that the scandalous decision to extend reardons contract was made by cullen.

In both situations it would be very difficult for the board to go against both morans and cullens wishes.

Where have I been proven wrong?

So, explain to me how being the Sales & Marketing Director of Gillette would enable Colquitt to decide if Cullen and Reardon should have received contract extensions? He had NO experience of RL financial matters prior to joining Saints. Does that mean every sponsor has RL financial knowledge?

Closing time or not, I will be here waiting for you to explain the above.

This is boring, I'm not sure why people keep having a go at Gatcliffe. Well I do, it's because we are losing.

He may have been too loyal to Cullen, but apart from that, I'm not sure what other issues we have.

I'm not sure what he does, just like 99% of people on here, but I do know that our club is pretty well run for a RL club, and the financial position has been turned round.

Half a million may sound a lot, however some clubs are losing more than that each year anyway!

The reason we are being headlined as being in trouble is due to a number of factors.

A) Letting one of our "high earning" centres go to one of our rivals mid contract.

B) One of our antipodean suggesting he is looking for a move. ( could be reported as wants out because Warrington Can't afford his wages any longer).

C) Media love nothing more than to see failure. How "Big spending" warrington have the wolves at the door. Watch the media frenzy when the wheel falls off at Chelsea. I suspect there will be little sympathy.

2+2=5.
I stopped off to see the shoe shine man at Lunchtime to ask him what the word on the street was and he reckons that if we have to pay £1.00 back then you can double it for Wigan.

I was always under the impression that tighter controls were first introduced by a guy called John Smith who was the first to try and put right some of the financial problems at the club.

As I said, he's an effective, able, manager. He does not come across to me at least (in the few times I have heard him speak publicly) as an inspiring ambitious leader of a multi-million pound turnover sporting organisation aiming to be the very best in Northern hemisphere rugby league raising the bar of sporting excellence.

But ask yourself how many RL clubs could attract, and more importantly keep, a dynamic business leader? For example; Peter Deakin. As soon as he made a name for himself RU came knocking and desite us luring him back, it didn't last very long before he went returned to RU.

Now this may sound incredibly negative, but I would imagine the primary function of an RL club administrator is to minimise losses. Effectively, stay solvent first, win silvereware second.

Wouldnt say no to a RL man in a non executive role with the board to offer input.

Shouldn't be at the expence of the more than capable management we already have though.

The lack of one hasnt been the reason we havent been succeding on the pitch.

Even for Grade A SL Franchises aiming to win SL operating at full cap?

You know I bet Paul Caddick/Gary Hetherington and Tony Colquitt/Eamonn McManus are not thinking that way. I bet they want to be up there striving to be the consistently best teams in SL. They would not have achieved what they have if that wasn't their goal.

I want more from Gatcliffe/Hoyle than balancing the books.

Wigan probably won't have to pay anything back as they never had it in the first place.
Whelan never allowed Wigan to undertake schemes like the Employer Benfit Trusts or Image Rights for players. There were rumours about image rights being used in his later days as owner but never confirmed.
This problem has been coming for some while so whether Ian Lenagan has started using them I don't know.
It was stated that four clubs were not involved.
I do believe Wigan would be one of those four.
BTW all the publicity is about image rights but I'm pretty sure HMRC are investigating the Benefit Trusts as well.
I doubt they will clobber the clubs or players for every penny owed. The HMRC usually come to an "agreement" which is acceptable to both parties.
It will be better for all when it's sorted and all clubs can use the agreed figures which HMRC will finally allow.

I would say that is exaclty what McManus did when he first turned up.