But it's not two clubs is it. Bradford are currently not getting their Sky money, so it's actually only one payment saved.

But the salary cap did not get increased the money just went to the clubs and that's for 1 season only. Long term SL needs to get rid of the 2 worst on field and off field performing clubs.

Not going to quote your reply Dave0

Its so bloody simple if the RFL cut 2 club thats 300k. Should be you can play 1 marquee player what you like upto 500k per season. I am right in thinking that Sam is on approx 300k per season so if you add that to the 300k from cutting 2 SL clubs it would give 600k to us in extra cap space without the top earner on it. So you could divide the 600k around some of the better players in the squad.

Only issue you would get is the lesser clubs could not do this but its not the lesser clubs that are losing players to the NRL. I can see a tinkering in the cap in the next 2 years which might end up with something like i have mentioned.

Do we have the product that would play Sky and BT to bid off against each other?

Arguably not.

On the contrary.

Our sport is far better than the middle class/media supported sports such as cricket, tennis, golf and rugby union.

That is supported by the Superleague viewing figures.

Our viewing figures are probably even better than all the above boring dross put together.

Maybe it's a game of numbers ?

On the M62 corridor, I know personally many,many people, who subscribe only for RL.

We live in a populous area. These people pay SKY to watch RL.

Lancashire and Yorkshire are very populous areas of the country.

Advertisers pay to have their ads broadcast, Regional identity does not go amiss.

m.watoday.com.au/rugby-league/le ... 2opac.html

m.watoday.com.au/rugby-league/le ... 2opac.html

The Twittersphere seems to have exploded....

I'm not surprised if Twitter has exploded, this is disastrous if true. Well done Lenaghan in getting rid of possibly the greatest ever British player in my lifetime incl. Boston and Hanley.

You seem to have inside knowledge that this is IL doing and not Sam's, care to share?

Sam has just tweeted

@ samtomkins1 Plenty of rumours on here today...

You also have to watch that you don't spend more than you have coming in and no matter how much money we get in our game, it will not be enough to attract the top players from down under as in their country Rugby League is like football in our country. At the same time, if our game was to be flooded with players from down under, how would it benefit our International team. A catch 22 situation if there ever was one.

Tomkins is contracted to us and is constantly telling all and sundry he is focused on Wigan and England. Lenaghan is where the buck stops at Wigan. It is within his gift to make Tomkins see out his contract. Is this a bit too difficult for you? How is losing Tomkins early good for us supporters in any way? We won't see his like again for a generation yet we appear to be only too happy about it!

Let me ask you a question. If its not IL's doing who is it and what do you make of it? Be careful, a truthful answer may cause you to be critical of the club or an individual and I know how much that would hurt.

Like you i have no idea what has been said between the parties concerned, nor have i seen any official announcement. You should accept that players can hold a club to ransom too, and you started by accusing one party of being at fault with no proof to back it up. I just wanted to balance your accusation.

If you think i want Sam to leave early you need your bumps feeling...

And like you I know that Tomkins' contract specifically forbids him to be talking to anyone about a move until after the end of next season. So, assuming he isn't, who is? There's a fairly short list of suspects....

Personally I'm getting increasingly sick of the whole scenario. Make him see out his contract I say. What's he going to do? Dummy spit for 3 1/2 yrs?

Know this was a fair few pages back but this was a point that needed making to be fair if our Salary Cap was on par with the NRL's it doesn't mean all the teams need to spend it but it does mean that the teams that can will have the option.
They say its unfair but look at the premier league they've actually had more different champions of the Premier League than we have the Super League and they don't hold back the top teams. PLUS they say that if we were allowed to spend that much then us Wire and Leeds would run away with it every year well no that wouldn't happen look at the PL Man Utd won this year despite Man City and Chelsea having way more money to spend (and having actually spent way more on wages) Arsenal had no money but still managed to beat Chelsea to the title that year and also Everton are penniless in comparison to Liverpool but still finished above them.

If Wigan had the option to spend that much they wouldn't be buying up all the best players theyd just be able to keep their academy players.
Wire wouldn't be buying all the Aussies because they won't all come as they have no real reason to but there would be more coming to this country than are now PLUS we may be able to get players back that have gone. Mossop, Graham, the Burgess bros. etc etc I think we should be doing it.

Its restriction of trade basically.

It isnt a bad thing to be allowed to have that much.

Cue "angry of Wakefield".....

Well you started by saying that the club are talking, and maybe they are, he is their commodity to sell if you want to look at it that way. I would hope that the club is not just looking at the here and now, unlike us fans, and are looking at how things will affect us in the future. Making Sam sit out his contract may not be the best course, if you want him to come back, if indeed he ever does.

From Sam's personal point of view, surely it would be financially better to wait until next year?

I would hazard a guess that any transfer fee required to release him at the end of the year, would drop significantly at the end of 2014.

This would then allow him to ask for a higher contract?

It would also shield him from any Wigan fan nastiness for leaving his contract early.

I would sooner have a lower fee in return for having him stay another year

I could give less of crap about a transfer fee i want our best players to stay at wigan, not be farmed out early

Sam would be in breach of contract if it was his doing as he signed one that specifically stopped him speaking to other clubs at this time. It's obviously 100% correct to say even if Sam did do so, IL has to be complicit in any move away from Wigan and if he has facilitated such a move he can get on the plane with him. The last thing we need is a chairman who gets rid of our best player.

Well, if true..and as being behind Lenegan 100% since he took over, this is very poor..12 more months he had on a no speak contract, we can't buy a replacement..money in the bank for someone??

Gah, can't be d...

Wigan R L official online Happy Clapper, maybe if you could be d to read between the lines you may be slightly more concerned.

Perhaps his Gaffer Dave has told him to get shut, out of spite.

If this is true, not happy with this at all.



Talk about a 'statement of intent' from the club.