Exceptional cases are not the rule. Yes, Saints have been (incredibly) fortunate with Lomax. But what about other positions? Considering the success of Saints our record of producing quality props (I don't mean world class - just good enough to make a solid career at the club) has been nothing short of abysmal. The last prop Saints produced before Graham who went on to become a veteran at the club was Paul Forber (Platt became a prop but he wasn't born one, Jon Neill was transferred in from Cumbria and John Harrison was a Parkside open age player).

Granted, Union aren't likely to go after props. But, say, fullbacks they certainly are. Our last fullback was Prescott. That's dreadful. And let's not forget that Saints have one of the BETTER youth development schemes.

It would be nice to think SL could put together some kind of a war chest for players. But I honestly don't think there's enough money in the game. The current economic climate is knocking the stuffing out of gate receipts. Union isn't as badly affected because their fans often have more disposable income than RL fans living in some of the most deprived regions in Britain. And Union has never failed to attract big crowds (or sponsors) for the internationals.

In the case of Eastmond Saints bid up to Sale's offer. But here the ERU intervenes by topping up contracts centrally and arranging third-party sponsorship deals. The truth is they tapped up Eastmond years ago when Woodward took a gaggle of SL's most promising kids down to Twickenham and filled their minds with the wealth of Croesus. And let's not forget that in some cases money isn't the issue. It's enough simply to offer the kind of nationwide media exposure League cannot compete with.

If we are not careful we are going to end up in the mire. I remember the dark days of the early 80s when League was little shy of a dead duck and the warning signs are very much present right here, right now. Certainly if the current economic gloom (where low-income salaries are flat-lined whilst inflation creeps steadily higher) doesn't lift soon we'll be up the creek without a paddle.

Good post.

You were weaker. You won the same fixture last season with Pryce and Cunningham in the team.

I agree with the fact you may find another high quality player from somewhere to replace Graham but lets be frank the chances of them being as good as him are very, very slim.

Its sad to see him leave as its one less player too hate in the derby

Im not sure if i can hate Foster/Lomax the same

Trust me, you'll grow to hate them!

Hopefully starting at Old Trafford in October...

Will they be shouting obscenities at our players from the sidelines then or something?

I've been thinking about the problem of Union poaching for much of the day and it is very difficult to find a solution. I don't think we have the money to out-bid Union. Indeed, I'm not sure it's in any way wise to get involved in a Dutch auction against an adversary which can inflate our wage structure out of existence and bankrupt the game.

The problem is the two codes are just too close together in terms of skill set. Aside from prop (which is a highly specialised role in Union and League converts would be putting themselves at considerable risk of injury) just about every position is interchangeable (yes, second row is a thorny issue because of height but League players can move into other pack positions - as Farrell was able to).

IMO, the only sure-fire way of making League players less attractive to Union is to increase the level of specialisation in our game. Yes, it means tinkering with the rules but we have done this before. And many fans have been openly critical of over-utility in the sport where a player can go from centre to wing - to second row - to full back (and more) often in one game. It might even be a good thing for the game.

Unfortunately the major stumbling block is the international game. The NRL is awash with cash and possesses a first rate junior development programme which means it need not fear Union - even if a few players go off to earn big money - and has no reason to change its rules.

But what can we do? I'm kind of at a loss, TBH.

Maybe - we could be so far in front Roycey gives them a rest for the last 20.

touche, i have no comeback

The international arena and increased exposure combined with the extra cash available in union makes it appealing. Until we improve on all three of these fronts, RL will lose the odd player here and there. It's a fact.

I'm afraid mugwump that you'll never be able to make the halfback positions and general back positions any more specialist than they already are. Our forwards can't hack it in union which is why they come after our backs. I couldn't give a toss about the NRL coming for our players. It's Union i'm more worried about.

I think you're sadly right. The Aussies are doing so well, and as it's the usual case with them of "I'm alright, Jack," they'll see no reason to change the game they love. If we then veer away on our own, we really are doomed.

The only things I think we can do in the short-term are allow players to negotiate their own sponsorship deals away from the salary cap, and maybe discount club-trained players from the cap. That way we might at least give ourselves a little bit of financial leeway. Some kind of war-chest must also be put together, so that again at least we have something to fight back with when it comes to marquee players (it worked with Radlinksi and Cunningham - and that was well worth it for the British game). In the long-term, we perhaps should try to persuade the Aussies that the internatinal game needs to be properly revived. Maybe we can find a way to have the international tours again. Going on tour was one of the greatest things a British player could aspire to at one time.

The only one who got in a "biding war" from what I remember was Betts. The others had already signed before the NRL/ARL thing blew up. The point still stands that they decided it was time to move on to a much better competition, and they did it in a time there wasn't a salary cap to blame all the ills on the game on.

You've got to love the language of someone who doesn't have a clue what my views on the cap are. When in doubt just make things up eh? You're pretty good at it.

There is no appetite for it.

The RFL don't want to change anything as they are living in the 19th Century. Heaven forbid anyone with an ounce of vision or marketing expertise getting a job there. They would be coughing into their pints of mild.

The Chairmen of the clubs don't want to raise the CC since it would cost them more money

Sky is happy with RL as a filler (Football and increasingly Rugby Union are their main sports)

Half the "supporters" of RL just can't see what is happening to the game. (In fairness many are too young to remember how it used to be).

The players? Well let's be honest, some, not all but a sizeable majority, whilst not exactly "happy" about the low wages on offer, have little choice if they are not good/desirable enough to be attractive to RU, other than to stay in RL.

£40k as an RL player or £15k on a production line.

As stated before, the long term situation is that the cream of the crop leave, the dross remains. As the realisation that it doesn't pay to play RL dawns , the key players, the ones who are lucky enough to be desirable leave at an earlier and earlier age, e.g. Ashton, Eastmond.

The final, and most worrying, step is for players simply not to take up RL in the first instance. We will never know just how much this has hurt the game. Maybe we would have to do a poll of the number of "northern accents in the RU premiership...........


However, all these points have been made before.

You dont need to worry about kids not taking up the game of RL because luckily for us parents tend to see union as a rougher more dangerous game and would rather their kids play league. It also helps that about 9 in 10 kids probably want to play football too so Summer RL for kids would be the simple step forward. I know my kid brother has wanted to do both for years but, as my dad is a trained football coach and coaches his football team, he has stayed with football until Dad leaves at the end of this season and then he is off to play RL for Haydock I believe. Anyone on here for under 16s/next age group at Haydock know if they need a FB?

Anyway back to the main point of this whole thing: The NRL is bigger in Australia because they have so many of their own codes that "soccer" is an irrelevance over there if they produce a good player then they come over here and its only just beginning to gain any sort of speed over there like the MLS is in America so RL will probably be no.1 for a while there.

The problem in RL is not the salary cap, its not RU taking players its that we have no money.

We have no money because so many clubs have small attendances and they do nothing to promote the game and make sure those attendances get higher. I cant help but think that certain clubs once their older fans die off will just disappear and it's a horrible thought. Granted the Salary Cap does need raising but its not the only issue and it cant be done until these deeper problems are addressed.

Widnes may seem the best choice for SL next year but will they really improve the attendances that much? I know us and Leeds dont really have that much of an issue but we really should be hitting 20k week in week out but the away followings in RL are shocking from certain clubs. As a 21 year old student it's hard for me but when i graduate very soon and get a job then all games that arent on Friday (away wise) will be a viable option for me.

The problem is does everyone remember the uproar that started when they raised Season Ticket prices by about £10 not long ago? People went mental! The only way RL is going to have the money it needs to challenge the big spenders (idiotic but still big spenders) in RU is to put prices up slightly every year until we have enough money in the sport to start doing things like raising the cap.

Tbh though if the cap was abolished I dont see the big problem. The money wouldnt be there for big bad Wigan and Leeds to go and spend 3 million and poach all the best players (which lets be honest is the real reason theyre too scared to do it) because the teams would go bankrupt and they just won't do it.

Graham, however, was on boots n all last night and he basically agreed that he wants to challenge himself in Australia which I totally understand and anyone who thinks he's gone just for money would be idiotic its like the spaniards that come to the Premier League in football, they might get the same money or more but they're here to challenge themselves at the top. Best example of that being the American Tim Howard who took a massive paycut to move to Everton so that he could actually challenge himself and play rather than being paid to sit on his bum week in week out.

If Graham had been offered 200k by Canterbury and 300k by Saints I still think he would have gone tbh.

Bold 1- Really? Ok.
Bold 2- Oh dear. Spoken like a 21 year old student........

As a kids game I'd much prefer my child to play union. Up until 10s (I think) they play tag which allows the child to develop skills without the fear of getting run over by some fat kid, for want of a better phrase. It's the whole tackling aspect of the game that puts parents off. Teach them ball handling skills and get them coordinated and into the game before they start tackling.

I digress, back on topic...

How is it spoken in that way? I am in a similar situation I can take a job as a teacher earn 15k for a year and then 24k next or I can take a sales job now and earn 18k immediately and work my way up I don't wanna teach so I'm doing that even though I can earn more money teaching.

Your post is particularly amusing given that you say in another post on this thread that the people blame all the ills of the game on the SC. I don't think any of the people who want to see the cap changed actually think it is responsible for all the problems in the game.

My own view is that the SC is only a part of a wider problem of poor management, which is seen in financial mismanagement by clubs, poor marketing, failures in the franchise system, poor monitoring and regulation by the RFL and misguided structures, such as the SC (the ludicrous 20/20 rule which was previously in place is another example of counterproductive systems).

Given how the vast majority of your posts seem to be about the cap and all it's ills I'm surprised you don't seem to read what others write about it. Then again given the bile and sh[ii[/ite they do, I'm not surprised you try to ignore it.

Player moves to Aus and not surprisingly the usually suspects turn it into the usual cap drivel, because of course top players didn't move to Aus before the cap did they?

And as I suspected you clearly don't have a clue of my views on the cap, and just decided to make things up. No surprise there.

Usual cap drivel?



What am I ignoring?

The point is (as made by others, "usual suspects" included presumably

) that Graham leaving is damaging because we have few star players these days. The cap plays a part in that, but it isn't the only factor.

The "vast majority" of my posts aren't about the SC but yes I do post on the SC and related issues when they come up on threads. What's wrong with that?

As per usual the "usual suspects" have to bring up the cap at every opportunity and constantly use it as the underlining reason, yet ignore the fact that these things happened since the days of Stevo and Mal Reilly, as well as the fact Graham has to fit into the NRL has a cap as well, with the considerably larger number of top quality players they need to fit in.

sorry deano but to a point im with w/l/a on this one..

i really dont think the cap has played any part in graham going to oz.. i think the chance to test himself over there and have a change in lifestyle was more of a head turner than being offered £££ by saints! i say good luck to the lad and hope it works out for him!

Well mind reading was never my strong point.

I can, however, point to the fact that the Australian CC is £3m The British one is £1.7m

You don't have to be a genius to work out that this will have a very significant impact.

Your definition of "vast majority" is a strange one...

The fact is that the game has few star players these days. Losing Graham is a blow. We need to look at the structures of the game, including the SC, which is a sacred cow to many in RL for some bizarre reason.

That isn't the point I've been making, though. It may be the point W/L Andy says I'm making...



The point is not what has motivated Graham leaving (though you could argue he might not be going for the challenge if we had a more competitive, higher quality SL, but that obvious point seems to escape many people for some reason) but that him leaving is a big blow because we have few star players at the moment.

We need to ask why it is that we have so few players of real class in SL and whether this is likely to get worse as the NRL and RU raid SL and what can be done to stregthen SL's position. There are many areas RL needs to improve on, one of which (but NOT the only area) is in the financial management of clubs, which includes the SC.

Or instead of asking these questions we can stick our heads in the sand ignoring the problems and criticising people in at times ridiculous terms in an attempt to silence them when they are only trying to talk about how we can protect the game in this country and encourage its development.