the argument is Rot, the players will already have left before they become "marquee"
Already a large number of junior players are defecting to union as the union clubs are now starting to run more junior sides and have better facilities to offer than many amateur league sides.
the same three clubs that currently win the prizes on a regular basis will be the only clubs to afford a "marquee" player and so will be the only ones to cash in on any potential revenue ...... and be able to afford a marquee player.
That wont attract spectators to the sport in general, low crowds, one sided games, lack of growth, so why would players rather play league?

It worries me when I agree with every word Thewlis has to say - but I do. This benefits the few with no benefits to the many, the wider game or the future of the game. Of all the changes needed to Rugby League in this country, this wouldn't reach the Top 100 in my priority list.

It's hard to argue with any of the club statement, I don't see it making any difference at all the same clubs who have won everything will continue to do so, There may be a few more quality youngsters come available from the likes of Wigan ( we have done very well from them in the past ). we'll have to wait and see.

The one thing it will not do, is stop our players going to Union, It has left league way behind in every aspect other than on the field ( and that's debatable with the super twelve teams ) Whether we like it or not they know how to run their sport, they are a truly world wide sport that is awash with money, I don't care how good a player is at League, if Union come along and offer him the right deal he will be off, Just like Harris, Robinson, Farrell ,Edwards and countless others, even Sir Kevin.

If our best players continue to go to Union ( which they will ) and we just ship in Aussies who are past their best it will be a disaster. I do want to watch top class players, but will we get them.

I can see the argument for developing more youngsters, but the more you do ,the more Union will take and they will take the cream.

we will have to watch this space i suppose

but as a Giants fan its not something to get excited about, maybe if your a warrington/salford fan it is..some league fans may also look forward to seeing some quality players come in or be kept in SL

As pointed out by a Cas fan - the NRL can't stop their players going to union-so this marquee signing rule certainly won't!!!

The fanzine are looking to do an article about this in the next issue I wondered if there was anyone on here interested in arguing for or against the idea?

How many clubs can afford a marque player? Surely the whole idea of the salary cap was to create a system of equality now the RL are taking a backward step by bringing in a system that will only benefit the richer clubs.Would it be a fair comment to say the richer clubs have in the past disregarded the salary cap and maybe are still doing so and this marque rule will allow them to progress at the expense of the run of the mill clubs. Hardly a level playing field.

Yeah thats a good idea maybe just take some opinions on the whole matter.

The thing is there is absolutely no need for this ruling. Any club can pay a player what they want. Want to pay SBW £500,000 a year? Of course you can. Oh, you'll have to fit the other 24 of your first team into a £1.3 million cap but that is WHAT A SALARY CAP IS FOR.

Honest question. Can anyone name a single top class player that has gone from a top 4 club to a club lower down the table for Cap reasons? I mean a genuine world class International in the prime of their careers.

Leeds won 5 titles and still retained Maguire, Sinfield, Burrow, Hall and have added the likes of Burgess, Hardaker, Moon as well as bringing through youngsters like Watkins, Ward and Sutcliffe.

The cap doesn't work because it doesn't force teams to manage budgets. That means that either a) The cap is too high or b) Players wages are too low.

chase, he went cos Salford could afford him and cas couldnt under the cap.

Cas are hardly a 'top 4 club' !! Salford and Cas in my eyes are about the same - not quite what was being suggested.

Hock? wasnt a SC reason though, or waybe it was

That'd be Cas that haven't ever won the league and finished 12th out or 14th the year they lost Chase? Not sure they are the best example of a "top 4 side".

If the Giants signed SBW tomorrow who would be still arguing against on Friday.

me, possibly, because we have never really been a team of "stars" but a good honest hard working group, i wouldn't want one man to jeapordise all that.

saying that, he would be a fantastic signing!

To me SBW would be a true 'Marquee' player - he's one of the best in world, players wouldn't resent him being paid more than them and he would probably attract a least a few more regular fans and sponsors. The trouble comes when clubs start to sign players below that standard as a so-called 'Marquee' player...

Exactly what Iv'e said earlier, Will we get true Marque players ? We might at Wigan, Leeds, Saints , and Warrington but they win everything anyway.

I don't think even SBW would increase the crowd much at the Giants, They seem to have reached their level, Only being genuine contenders would work in my opinion and that's not certain by any means.

So why the outcry against it, I can see the point meast made, but what has this " good honest hard working group " got to show , Hodgson could be said to have been a Marque player and he was worth every penny, ( pity somebody didn't think so ). How much notice did we take of Wakey fans who used to winge about KD's cheque book, we were just glad we could spend a lot more money than they could, even if we did stay under the cap.

The clubs who can afford such players will get them, Wigan have a big crowd of fans to keep happy, they haven't got a big fan base because they are lucky, They have worked hard to be where they are and they will do anything they can to keep them turning up. Same with the others mentioned.

Anything that lifts the standard for me is good for the game, I would suggest that League is viewed by the majority of people in this country as a minority sport, played by and large in a couple of counties, More or less where it was a hundred years ago. It get's a fraction of the money that Union gets from Sky, ( despite being a better game ) the rest of TV virtually ignore it all together.

So what are we saying ? More of the same for the next hundred years. Not for me, What's best for our own club is not necessarily best for the game, That way of thinking is what has kept League in It's place . If clubs are sick or seeing the same clubs win everything year on year ( me for one ) the answer is to get up to their level, not stop them getting better.

So given your final conclusion how does this system - where only those same clubs who have been winning can buy a marquee player - help in that goal?

What would be better?

Ring fence 24 players. Apportion an amount of SKY funding to pay them a wage and distribute them among the 12 Superleague clubs. Centralise the academy to create a number of elite junior sides to play in a competition and then create a draft for them to join the Professional ranks. Introduce revenue sharing. Stop the stupid wasteful system whereby every club negotiates it's own kit and merchandising deal and negotiate one to cover the whole of Superleague. Stop the idiocy of P&R but create a vibrant self serving league below Superleague with it's own trophies. Use this league to expand into new areas. Offer incentives to the richer clubs to develop partner teams in areas like Coventry, Wales et al. Introduce a proper expansion draft whereby new clubs to the league can pick 2 players from every Superleague club (except for 8 players that that club can name as protected). Introduce a proper affiliatiuon system whereby clubs can develop young players in a league but can't just use it to get certain players fit. Introduce Waivers.

Otherwise can the RFL and SKY please stop pretending they want every team to be capable of beating everybody else.

Have you ever thought of applying for a job at Red hall, They are desperately short of people with your kind of thinking.

lineham not very marquee going to warrington

I just want to see the best players that I can, If the club that I happen to support can't afford them , so be it. that's no reason to stop other clubs from acquiring them. I watch quite a few Giants games but I watch a lot lot more on sky (who have bought the game ). Why should I not be able to watch better players just because the Giants or Wakey haven't got a Marque player.

Since S league started, 4 clubs is it ? that have won the grand final, That doesn't look sett to change, with or without Marque players. ( though we can hope )

It will take something along the lines Mad jack has suggested, but lets face it do we have anyone in the game with that kind of thinking, I think not , the people running League give the impression of Flat capped people who's biggest concern is that the Gravy doesn't dry up, and the majority of fans care more about their own club than about the game its self.

So while marque players might not be good for the Giants and others, It will be good for the game in so much as money goes. I would guess that for every fan who goes to a match, there will be 50 who watches a game on TV, The better the players on view , the more will watch, The fact is that should they stop watching on TV , That will be the end of league as a true pro sport.

Oh no there ARE those in the game with that kind of thinking- there were those within the RFL who proposed the draft system, and even introduced the regional academies as a first step to do so. (Now moved on to union) I was told this by someone directly employed by the RFL to begin the implementation of these ideas in those academies. Unfortunately there were certain people within the game who buried the idea- funnily enough some of the same who have voted in the marquee player idea- those that moan that the "lower clubs" shouldn't drag the "top clubs" down to their level but should do better to compete "let them eat cake......."

It's not rocket surgery. I claim none of those ideas as original. I've nicked most of them or modified them from the NHL. A sport with similarities to RL ie A small market sport, dwarfed by bigger rivals, that is trying to expand into new areas while retain it's traditional strongholds. It seems to me that RL people all talk about what the Premier League does or the NRL or even NFl, but those are massive sports with massive markets (Ok compared to RL even the NHL fits into that category). As a sport we can't afford to lose any clubs we have and yet everything always seems to be about the "big clubs" and let the smaller clubs go hang.

That doesn't surprise me at all. The people at the top both at club level and the RFL will be looking after NO 1, and more talented people go to Union.

People like yourself and 50,000 others who are committed fans, who put their hard earned through the turnstile every week have views that are totally understandable, They quite rightly want to see a level playing field, There has never been a level playing field, thought it has never had the slopes it's acquired since S league came into being,
It's just human nature, If you were a Wigan fan and you have won 20 C Cups whatever, Why do you care about whether Oldham have never won the cup.

It's generally recognised that Sky came along and saved RL from bankruptcy, It probably did, but the whole thing was decided behind closed doors, by What at that time were regarded as the 12 big clubs, There was nothing fair about any of it, such was the greed to get your hands on a slice of the pie, That's where Sky's virtual ownership of League started.

So now here we are 20 years later Still dependent on Sky to such an extent that should they pull the plug, the game goes down the Pan, And what do Sky want ? they want you and everybody else sat on the couch with your 6 pack on match day, They don't care if the stadiums are empty, they are not paying League 300 million or whatever for the fun of it.

League like every club in the game has a committed die hard fan base, but the huge majority of people who watch league have probably never been to a live game, They want to watch the best they can, they want to see the big hits and the spectacular diving tries, they are just not bothered who has got a Marque player or not because they are not committed fans like you, or even me, and they are the ones funding the game.

Marque players or not, Nothing is set to change until league gets some people with the Guts, bottle, sense or whatever, to implement ideas along the lines Mad Jack was talking about, I feel more and more that if that happens it will have to come from Sky, at the moment they are at the gimmickry stage with Video screens and things that they feel makes good TV, The long pause, is it a try, isn't it a try, come dancing sort of stile.

I took on board what you were saying about people going to Union, I agree with what you said, Union will take the cream of everything League they can get hold of. They have spent a hundred years trying to kill league, I think their thinking has changed. I think they now just work to keep us in our place, They are awash with money and they now see League as a additional source of talent .

So that's why I'm in favour of Marque players, Bit long and drawn out , sorry.