Saints fans seemed to think he was contracted until 2013 anyway, I havent looked into it.

And i am quite sure that the Fozzard deal is a pay as you play one, So its not such a big risk

if that's the case then you have a good deal,
I would also like to see win / lose pay like in the old days when players played for pride and the back pocket, as hard as the game is now its too easy to sit back

there is one problem with pay as you play, injury or lack of form ain't going to feed the family

I know absolutely shiit all about most things but if Fozzard is on a pay as you play deal i'll eat my own turd. Why on earth would he accept that and risk getting injured when he could no doubt get a proper deal elsewhere?

Because he's gone to Cas and it fits their arguement?

All pay as you play deals will have a minimum value, Could be say £20k .. And then he earns so much per game on top. Obviously the figures arent accurate, but his wage does depend on how many appearences he makes

Just out of interest if Fozzard is on a pay as you play deal as you claim, how does this fit in with the salary cap???

As you have said yourself it could be as little as £20k but there is obviously a possibility of it being so much more.

They could make the allowance for him playing ALL matches and meet the salary cap, so if he doesn't play all games, then they have money spare. I guess it is very much like someone having a basic salary and commission on top (pay as you play).

So why sign a player on a pay as you play if you are going to make provisions for playing every game? I am sorry but that makes no sense.

Why?

They have to account for it on the salary cap in case he does play every game.

If he doesn't they save some money, and are below what they predicted for cap spend.

Not sure which bit doesn't make sense.......other than signing the dinosaur in the first place

The same dinosaur you tried to get , but he turned you down, local boy too ... hmm

Maybe we did, doesn't mean I can't call him a dinosaur.

Quite frankly I'm glad he turned us down (if that's what happened). Not a player I would be happy if we had signed to be honest so take that back to your pit village and shove it where the sun don't shine.


But thanks for your input as always, you always add so much to every debate.

Sorry if youre offended, lets see how the dinosaur goes then.

When did being ignorant qualify for a debate ? ....................... just asking.

time for that chip removing from your shoulder sonny

No chip on my shoulder, just fed up of you thinking you know everything about Wakey.

FWIW I think if you've got him on the pay per play deal everyone says then it is reasonable business but as I said he's not a player I would have wanted us to sign.

It is freezing money that (in all fairness to Cas and other clubs) could be put to better use and reduces your salary cap spend by taking a chance on a maybe. That's what doesn't make sense.

Yeah we get, we got it first time we were told he turned us down and surprise surprise WE STILL GET IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Are Cas spending all the way up to the limit though? By leaving a small allowance in the cap available, it gives the option of playing him every game if needed/possible.

Bless ya , if you think we can spend up to the limit, were solvent but not by much

Isnt it funny how peoples views of a player alter depending on where he signs

To be fair St Helens fans have said he's gash for a while. I'm not sure what you're looking for? Fozzard use to be a uesful prop, however, time takes it toll on everyone. He'll probably only be 5th or 6th choice prop and just help take a little burden of the younger props.

I'm glad we haven't signed him, but a pay as you play contract isn't such a bad deal

If he can pass a bit of nous to the young uns and put a few 15 minute spells in when needed he will be worth it,

You just dont become a bad player, just a slower player, but if the heads right ........................ who needs that pace when you have young uns to do all the running about.

I don't know who is just under the cap and who is far from it. I don't have any opinions on Cas's finances at all, I was just answering someone else who was wondering how they would theoretically fit his pay as you play wages under the cap - and even then with a rolling salary cap teams aren't able to get over the limit as they are monitored by the RFL. Nothing to worry about it that sense in my book.

If Fozzard chose to play for Cas rather than Wakey then fine, he has to do what is best for him and his family. I'll never a criticise a player for that. Not all Wakey fans are so tribal as some on here, as is the case with all other clubs. Players have to chose what they see fit at the time, especially when coming to last few years of their career.

I believe a team has to allow an amount in the cap. So if they expect him to play 75% then that's what they alllow.

2 posts on page 18 of the rumours thread, both not in the "we want him camp" HTH.

Isn't it funny, well it would be if true.




































63+++++++++++++++++++++++

Doesn't matter if you're not spending upto the cap though, really does it though? I'd expect, if that was the case, they would account for all his wages on the SC, not some of them. Win-win situation then.

"We are all just going to have to wait and see regarding players coming in. Even if we don't get the amount of players in that we are after may not be the worst thing in the world because it means we can blood some of the youngsters who look prmising such as Wildie, Cowling, Davey and Annakin? (Is he still ate the club? Looked promising a coupple of years ago)."

Why don't we get some of these youngsters on better/longer deals. Does the club not believe we will get a SL licence?