I think its safe to say that we can none of us read the mind of Mr Graham. It would be also fair to assume that he would be unlikely to say to the press or fans "Well i'm going because its more money". I also feel it would be naive for people to believe that the monies involved are not a massive incentive.

One also has to factor the strong Aussie $ in to the equation.

That will only affect any savings he may bring back in 3 years or more, by which time things may have changed again.

You can earn more in Oz, but the cost of living is proportionally even higher, thus it's not actually that lucrative at all, and in most cases more expensive.

Graham has won all he can in SL, the move to any other club Wigan,Leeds, Wire will not give anything he has not already earned. I think he is the type of player to move for a challenge but the money on offer will not be any less than he was being offered from Saints.

Good luck to him, he will do well in the NRL a better player than Ellis or Burgess in my opinion.

Your definition of what you post about is even stranger - especially given it's wrong.

The actual fact is top players have moved down under when we've had lots of top players and little, no cap and a cap. However as per usual the thread turned into a cap bitch fest from you and the usual suspects, ignoring the very facts above. You just can't help yourself can you. You even outed yourself after my original post - as expected.

Good luck to Jammer i say for trying his luck in the toughest comp,it clearly takes a very special player to make it out there
I wonder if any of Wigans english players will have the bottle to test themselves out there?

hopefully not, keep them in Wigan shirts and we can continue to slap you stains around like usual

yeh right

Will you be laughing this time torrow?

Maybe maybe not, but we'll definately be a team to beat in the play offs or challenge cup this season and that will keep me hoping

like last season

I thought you were on about this season?

Cap bitch fest?



Let's take your contention that players have always moved down under. OK - how many currently play in Oz and how many played there 20 years ago?

But even if you're right - that players have always moved to NRL in similar numbers to today (ignoring of course the raids from RU and the possibility that the raising of the SC in Oz will lead to more raids from NRL clubs) and so you think it isn't an issue, then that is in any case an entirely different point from the one that I was making.... which is that SL today doesn't have many world class players and so the Graham move is very damaging, much more so than it would have been in the past.

Here's my very first post on this thread:



Yes I mentioned the SC towards the end of that post and I make no apology for doing that. The whole point of this board is for discussion on RL topics, and players leaving to go to the NRL is a valid topic and the SC is clearly an issue related to that.

and the season before that?

Where exactly have I said that players have always moved "in similar numbers"? Because of course I haven't but that wouldn't suit your argument. Like I've said already you're very good at making things up, especially when your argument is as p[ii[/iss weak as it currently is.

And of course at no point have I ever said it isn't damaging that the few world class players we have are leaving the comp. MY original point which you seem to have lost after being outed by your cap obsession is that the best will always ultimately want to test themselves against the best - which is in Aus. They did this when we didn't have a cap as well - but of course that wouldn't suit your argument so you you keep trying to ignore it.



And yet there is a cap in the NRL as well which while considerably higher, has to fit in a considerably higher number of quality players as well. It would be interesting to have seen yours and the other obsessives reasons for players leaving pre-cap. However it's the usual default position to whinge and whine about the cap as you seem unable to do anything else, hence my original point where you couldn't help yourself.

So you think that more players are moving to the NRL now than they did in the past?



I have not tried to ignore the fact that players have gone to the NRL in the past. You accuse me of "making things up", but seem quite happy to do so yourself.





Players leaving pre-cap presumably went for a number of reasons, including in no particular order, money, a new challenge and living in a different country. Just as they do now.

The SC in this country, which as you point out is much lower than the Australian cap, is I believe one factor in why the game is at present lacking in players with genuine world class talent.

The lower quality competition here makes it more likely players will go to Australia, as do the lower player earnings here (and it is not just salary we are talking about, the restrictions on endorsement earnings in the UK don't help either). There are other factors at work as well, particularly the poor media profile of the sport. If you look on this thread you'll see that I posted a list of a number of the areas which RL needs to address.

Your posts are littered with references to me making things up, whinging, whining, being obsessed, not being able to help myself....

I am capable of acknowledging if I get things wrong - as we all do from time to time - and of acknowledging that the problems the game has are complex - I certainly don't believe all the ills of the game can be blamed on the SC, as you have accused opponents of the SC of doing.

I'm not obsessed by the SC (or indeed any of the other serious issues facing the game), but I make no apology for having and expressing views on the SC, it's an important topic and this is a discussion forum after all....

Nice attempt at a dodge, but do you actually want to answer the question this time - where did I say they went "in similar numbers" as you claim I did? Because of course I didn't - like I said you're making things up.



Thanks for proving my point - see it's easy if you try and actually look at things without the words salary cap clouding your judgement. Makes you wonder why again the thread had to be turned into another cap bored fest doesn't it?



But not James Graham, who is a world class talent and who the thread is about before turning it into another cap bored fest?



When your posts are dominated by the cap, even on topics that even you now seem to be accepting isn't a major factor, don't be surprised if you get called out - especially as you were so polite in self-selecting.

Not sure why you have such a problem here with what I said - you said:



and



I think it entirely reasonable to infer from your posts that you mean similar numbers of players have always moved, if not you should say so. The only alternatives are that more players used to move than today (clearly not the case) or that more players move these days than they used to, which isn't good for your argument and of course leads to the question of why that is. If you DO accept that more players are making the move then that's great news because we can move the debate on to why that is.

It is simplistic to say that the only reason James Graham is moving to Australia is directly because of the SC. There will be a number of causal factors at work and indirect as well as direct causes. The SC doesn't directly affect Graham's decision - but it does have a powerful indirect effect both in terms of the financial benefits he can earn here compared with Australia but also in terms of the impetus to move for a challenge (since the competition here is poor compared with Australia, and this is partly the result of the SC). But here again the causal factors are complex because the inferior challenge and experience of being a player here compared with Australia is not solely down to the SC, other factors are at work such as a bigger player base and a higher media profile of the sport in Australia (and some of these factors reinforce each other, so that a higher media profile attracts more players into the game, for example). So, in brief, complex factors are at work but an important one is the SC. (The SC needs to be reformed not simply because of player drain to the NRL, but discussing those other issues would be going off-topic..

If you don't agree that more players are moving than they used to then I would say (and this was MY original point) that we now have so few genuine stars in the game that losing even one of them is damaging and we need to look at doing everything we can to keep them in the British game. That will mean that the sacred cow that is the SC will need to be looked at, along of course with other issues, but people in denial (I'm not saying you are, by the way, so please don't accuse me of making that up!) need to accept that everything in the SL garden isn't rosy and face up to reality.

bringing in Laffranchi for Saints is a world-class signing, akin to us signing Hoffman, think he will go great for them

No only someone who was making things up could possibly assumed that any of that meant similar number of players have moved over to Aus.



I actually agree with a lot of that but my original post still stands that the default position of many used the cap as an excuse ignoring many other factors such as this used to happen in the days well before the cap. At the Bulldogs alone a host of British players have moved there including:

Jonathan Davies
Gary Connolly
Mick Adams
Doug Laughton
Brian Lockwood
Eric Hughes
Colin Whitfield


Merv Hicks
Alan Burwell

and not all of them on the short term deals when the seasons were different. People like Graham will have seen what Ellis and Burgess have done and decided he'd like some of that as well. I bet Graham could have commanded similar remuneration over here if he wanted to stay.

Plus a testimonial approaching soon, which would have substantially boosted this.

The salary cap can in no way be used as a reason for Graham leaving. He is a world class player who wants to prove himself in the world's best competition. The SC (or CC

) obsession is tedious.

I've explained what I inferred from your posts, which was reasonable and your accusation that I'm "making things up" is just a poor debating ploy. You say players have always moved to Oz, so are more moving now (presumably you won't want to admit that, but if you do then great!), are fewer players moving these days (clearly that isn't the case) or is it similar numbers (which I thought you were saying but you are now saying you didn't say

)? Which is it, come on spit it out!

And just to prove my point again that you make things up. So based on what I wrote you think I'm saying it's "similar numbers".

How anyone can make that assumption only you can tell us.

Given the names I posted last which were British players who went to the Doggies alone it should be pretty obviously what has happened in the past - no doubt you'll make up that I said it was "similar numbers" based on the "assumptions" you have to make when you have as a poor an argument as you currently do.

And I have told you!



You on the other hand keep refusing to say whether a similar number or more or fewer players go to Australia these days than they did in the past.



It should be obvious what has happened in the past - really? Why don't you enlighten us, because if we guess at what you think is obvious, then however reasonable those guesses are you'll say "we're making things up"!

To be honest I haven't totted up the number of players, but what I haven't said is that they were "similar numbers" like you claim I have. If you need me to count the number of Doggies players for you as I post earlier you have real problems. Given you've outed yourself as salary cap old woman no wonder you now have to focus on something I haven't said anyway.