I can't see anyone doing that, everyone agrees we were garbage!!

Re Mort, that is disgraceful if true!!!!

Positive from our point of view is that we'd have lost by 20 if we'd have played with last season's team!

Don't get my point do you?

Last year a SL team played a poor team from a division below and you all cheered every score just the way we did yesterday (and the Wire did last week).

SL V Championship SL = miles ahead
SL reserves (best of) V Championship = not much in it so we had more of a right to act as though we had won a cup (it was a WI&@n team don't forget so any victory is as good as winning a cup for us Leythers

)

So you'd be happy for Saints to say to Keiron Cunningham "you know that £150k we owe you for this year, well you're about to retire so why don't we pay you £200k over 5 years instead and use the extra £110k freed up this year to bid for Sam Tomkins."

Do you genuinely think that should be allowed under the salary cap? Effectively paying £110k over the fixed cap by deferring payments?

But if he has retired then you can't pay him as a player. So if Saints want to pay him as a coach for that period o.k. but once you say he is not playing you would probably then be up to your cap limit by paying another player.

Also would Cunningham accept a drop £110K drop in year one.
It's all immaterial anyway as deferred payments are NOW not allowed in the salary cap rules, which were changed after Wigans "breach of the spirit"

HTH
[urlhttp://www.therfl.co.uk/about/page.php?id=161&areaid=44[/url

It's all in there if you have time to read it.

I know, I just find it amusing that some people maintain that it should have been allowed.

They weren't allowed previously which is why we were rightly found guilty.

They've just updated the rules to explicitly show what we did as a real example of things you can't do. There are loads of other things that aren't explicit in the rules but would mean a club was in breach.

And you know those very same people would have completely the opposite view had it been say Stains or the Dire doing what we did. Then again, the same thing would happen with some of every clubs fans had they done what we did.

What's wrong with you? Are the club beyond criticism? A shoddy money grabbing excercise was exactly what it was. And for the record, your Haiti comment was in very bad taste.

1) Did you decide to go?
2) Did you enjoy it?

1) I did.
2) I did


And I thought it was value for money.

Pretty much agree with that Rogues with the addition of Ainscough who took his chance well and looked hungry for work (if a little rusty). Thought handling errors and Paul's kicking game was the difference today.

People can feel free to disagree about whether or not the match was worth £14, but I think it was well worth it from the young lads' POV and from Maguire's, as he's now assessing our strength in depth.

Those who didn't like the price didn't have to go. And if they felt they were being robbed of a major fixture, I'd argue than in a few weeks' time, whatever had happened yesterday and whoever had played, it would still be completely forgotten.

Yes I went and I did enjoy it. We'l have to agree to differ on the value for money though. I think Alex's post earlier sums it up nicely. I was always going and would have done had they announced it for what it was - a reserve game. I just think it should have been priced accordingly. Without being disrespectful, you'll have paid £7 I presume. For a family of four it cost £42.

I pretty much agree with that Cruncher other than to point out that my only criticism was with the way it was billed as a first team match when even Shaun Wane refers to it as a reserve match! As for "didn't have to go", well had they offered refunds on tickets then, yes, that would have been the case. They didn't.

However, I'd rather put this to bed tbh. I've said my piece and that's enough. I've no desire to drag it out beyond the game.

I did indeed pay only £7,



but the point I was making was that I enjoyed that game yesterday far more than Wakefield last week.

Those young lads did us proud, their effort in scrambling defence was outstanding, and no one on that ground would have begrudged them a draw they richly deserved, although I wouldn't have taken the penalty in a friendly.


Anyway, Warrington here we come.

I doubt anyone is arguing that it was a good game, but the reserves play plenty of good games throughout their season, none of which are charged at the same level.

The fact that it was close doesn't justify charging full price IMO - you pay full price to see the best players in the game (Tomkins et al) and you shouldn't be expected to pay the same to watch a youth team.

Great effort from the Wigan lads though and just underlines that they are comfortably the best crop of young players running around in England - look forward to seeing more of them at SL level this year.

Says who? Mo might be many things but stupid he isn't and there was [unothing[/u in the rules to preclude what Wigan did - either real or imaginary. Deferred payments had never been disallowed before that. That is why he did it and given it was common practice in Oz for NRL sides to do this it was not without precedent in the world of rugby league either.



There was nothing in the rules to stop the RFL from having decided deferred payments were within the rules. Just the same way they decided EBT's and image rights are withing the rules despite the fact they could in the past have been used to make the salary cap go further by avoiding NI payments or reduce a players tax liability.

Had any other club had done it under different circumstances no one would have batted an eye IMO because at the end of the day Wigan were not done for deferring wages but doing something that was considered against the spirit of the cap and deciding what is and isn't against the spirit of the cap is purely a subjective judgement as shown by the fact EBT's etc are allowed and deferred payments are not.

Dave

Exactly. That's no disrespect to the youngsters who played yesterday and who I was both happy to support and glad to see did us proud. It's merely a pricing issue. If anyone disagrees then feel free to pay £14 each time the reserves play. I'm sure the club will be glad of the money!

I still await an adequate explanation as to why deferred payments are against 'the spirit of the cap' and image right scams are apparently not. Could it be something to do with vested interest?? Surely not?

I agree. What would be the point in playing a full strength side with a few young players thrown in? If Wigan had played a strong team and the young lads in it were scoring walk in tries what would MM have learned?

He got a chance to see them against a (supposedly) better standard of opposition than they played last season in the A team games. A good test for them. If Wigan had put a first team out, scored 50, MM would have learned nothing about his first team players and nothing about any young players he did include as they would have had the luxury of running off senior pros who were outclassing Leigh. It would have been pointless.

It wouldn't have done Leigh any good either. They may not admit it but I bet their speccies preferred watching a close game and a win against Wigan than watching their side get taken apart. I am sure their coach did as well.

Dave

Did our points deduction pass you by?

Oh Joy yet another salary cap thread



lets sum that up with we didnt break any hard and fast rules, hence we were done for "spirit of the cap" which is a total cop out and has no legal standing, you cannot get done for breaking the spirit of a speed limit, or the spirit of road tax etc

anyway back to the leigh game because thats what i was reading before this thread got derailed

our lads can hold thier heads up high, i enjoyed the day out, yes £14 was a bit steep, but it was as good as any NL1 game and the same standard, so on that note it was value for money.

I had the joy of being in the man of the match presentation yesterday, when one of the leigh sponsors had go at the wigan club over the team they sent, which was a bit embarrasing really, but shows what leigh really wanted from wigan, and it wasnt a competative match. In fairness to Mick Hogan he came across as a very proffesional administrator, and didnt get drawn in.

No but the entire saga as to why clearly flew past you.

Dave

Life outside of SL and Sky hand outs is tough, I am sure Leighs revenue projections were based on the previous year something that wasnt going to happen once the team was disclosed.
£40k will be a big hole to fill. Although I am sure IM will be happy not to have any more injuries and the chance to try a few things out.

This thread has run its toll.