Jump to content


Rugby League World Issue 400 - Out Now!

RUGBY LEAGUE WORLD MAGAZINE - ISSUE 400 - OUT NOW!
84 pages, 38 years of history from Open Rugby to the present day.
Click here for the digital edition to read online via smartphone, tablet and desktop devices including iPhone, iPad, Android & Kindle HD.
Click here to order a copy for delivery by post. Annual subscriptions also available worldwide.
Find out what's inside Issue 400
/ View a Gallery of all 400 covers / WH Smith Branches stocking Issue 400
Read Jamie Jones-Buchanan's Top 5 RLW Interviews including Marwan Koukash, Lee Briers, Gareth Thomas, Steve Ganson & Matt King OBE


League Express

Podcast

Photo
- - - - -

Salary Cap


  • Please log in to reply
200 replies to this topic

#81 Wolford6

Wolford6
  • Coach
  • 9,593 posts

Posted 21 September 2010 - 07:38 AM

QUOTE (Lounge Room Lizard @ Sep 21 2010, 08:33 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
SL is not even at all as the usual suspects are always in the grand final. So the cap has failed.


So, if this year Wigan and Hudds are in the grand final, the salary cap is a big success?


Under Scrutiny by the Right-On Thought Police


#82 shrek

shrek
  • Coach
  • 5,833 posts

Posted 21 September 2010 - 07:43 AM

The arguments for and against the cap clearly haven't changed over the years, my problem with it is that we have a system that I just don't see how the RFL can police it. There is no transparency to the system, we have no idea who earns what at each club yet that doesn't stop the acquisitions flying around that some clubs manage to squeeze more players in than others.

In the last RL World feature there was a quote in there from one of the Chief Executives saying that the accountant of the Grand Final winning team should also receive a ring, thats just wrong!

There are so many ways to bypass the system I am sure there are a few trying it on, players wife's on the pay roll, off shore payments, payments directly to players through other companies that the RFL has no vision off or is it possible, financial dealings within transfers to get money directly to the player and I am sure there's a whole lot more that anyone with any sort of qualifications in this field could roll off the tip of the tongue.

Also, why is the punishment always at club level? Given that clubs are often caught after the event, the players/administrators who benefited/were guilty of the crime could well have moved on, yet its the club and fans who are penalised with the docking of points/stripping of titles.

Why not make any penalities result in the players paying back over payments and administrators being banned from the game for a length of time determined by the severity of the offense.

Also doesn't it even out the comp, or just keep the top clubs safe at the top knowing clubs further down the ladder will never be able to take the risks they took in order to get there? I've yet to see a headline grabbing transfer thats made me sit up and think, wow, without the cap he'd never of gone there. We still say the best youth, even once established in the first team gravitating towards the more successful teams, for those saying it evens out the comp, how long do you expect it to take before we see a Castleford, Salford or Wakefield team qualify for the grand final?

#83 StevieM13

StevieM13
  • Coach
  • 182 posts

Posted 21 September 2010 - 09:01 AM

QUOTE (shrek @ Sep 21 2010, 08:43 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
The arguments for and against the cap clearly haven't changed over the years, my problem with it is that we have a system that I just don't see how the RFL can police it. There is no transparency to the system, we have no idea who earns what at each club yet that doesn't stop the acquisitions flying around that some clubs manage to squeeze more players in than others.

In the last RL World feature there was a quote in there from one of the Chief Executives saying that the accountant of the Grand Final winning team should also receive a ring, thats just wrong!

There are so many ways to bypass the system I am sure there are a few trying it on, players wife's on the pay roll, off shore payments, payments directly to players through other companies that the RFL has no vision off or is it possible, financial dealings within transfers to get money directly to the player and I am sure there's a whole lot more that anyone with any sort of qualifications in this field could roll off the tip of the tongue.

Also, why is the punishment always at club level? Given that clubs are often caught after the event, the players/administrators who benefited/were guilty of the crime could well have moved on, yet its the club and fans who are penalised with the docking of points/stripping of titles.

Why not make any penalities result in the players paying back over payments and administrators being banned from the game for a length of time determined by the severity of the offense.

Also doesn't it even out the comp, or just keep the top clubs safe at the top knowing clubs further down the ladder will never be able to take the risks they took in order to get there? I've yet to see a headline grabbing transfer thats made me sit up and think, wow, without the cap he'd never of gone there. We still say the best youth, even once established in the first team gravitating towards the more successful teams, for those saying it evens out the comp, how long do you expect it to take before we see a Castleford, Salford or Wakefield team qualify for the grand final?


Parksider will be along in a moment to show you the error of your ways cool.gif



#84 Lounge Room Lizard

Lounge Room Lizard
  • Coach
  • 6,362 posts

Posted 21 September 2010 - 10:17 AM

QUOTE (Wolford6 @ Sep 21 2010, 07:38 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
So, if this year Wigan and Hudds are in the grand final, the salary cap is a big success?

Wigan are one of the usual suspects.Huddersfield are only where they are due to Ken Davy.Even with his money and influence they have won ###### all.

And clubs both in SL and the NRL have cheated.And when caught has done nothing but leave anger,frustration and a bad taste not just to the club but the game as a whole.Ask the players and fans of clubs who lost to Melbourne Storm feel now years after the event. The cap creates more problems than it solves. How do you or the RFL know with 100 percent accuracy not one sl club has cheated the cap in some way in the past 2seasons?

#85 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 16,863 posts

Posted 21 September 2010 - 05:12 PM

QUOTE (Lounge Room Lizard @ Sep 21 2010, 08:33 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
The idea has failed then as aftet all these years we do not have even 6 well supported big clubs with good marketing and well run businesses that see clubs that are self sufficient with good stadiums, thigh turnover and good local academies.
SL is not even at all as the usual suspects are always in the grand final. So the cap has failed.


The point was once we had 14 big cash/fan/young player rich clubs the cap would then keep the competition even.

The cap was certainly created to help achieve these things by restricting wages such that clubs could spend more on facilities, player development and marketing.

But only 6 big clubs have materialised - that is no fault of the cap. So the cap hasn't failed - it just keeps six clubs in check at the moment. I think we may all agree such as Wire, fartown, Hull, Leeds, Wigan and Saints are capable of getting to big finals and all six have done just that in recent years.

So it works......




#86 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 16,863 posts

Posted 21 September 2010 - 05:26 PM

QUOTE (shrek @ Sep 21 2010, 08:43 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Also doesn't it even out the comp, or just keep the top clubs safe at the top knowing clubs further down the ladder will never be able to take the risks they took in order to get there? I've yet to see a headline grabbing transfer thats made me sit up and think, wow, without the cap he'd never of gone there. We still say the best youth, even once established in the first team gravitating towards the more successful teams, for those saying it evens out the comp, how long do you expect it to take before we see a Castleford, Salford or Wakefield team qualify for the grand final?


The top clubs have rich backers so the cap puts a squeeze on them. Release the cap and would Mr. Moran spend a few million? Would Lenegan and Davey follow??

"Further down the ladder" would Huges spend more? Would Hudgell spend more?? or would they say "I can't compete with Moran".

If every club had a rich backer itching to spend millions then of course the cap should go, but you tell me who the cap is actually restricting, because the only flash the cash merchant I can see is Mr. Moran?

If Cas or Wakey don't get a ground I don't see either qualifying for a grand final. If all three calder clubs end up in the doldrums who's to say they won't merge, attract investment and go for the big time?

You also know the Salford plan for the stadium and afterwards. They too want to build for the big time.

But you are right to point out the "how long". I'd think it would take a Calder club 10 years to get to a grand final, Salford maybe 8 if all goes well, expansion clubs another generation possibly. If this all sounds too far in the future then the reason is that once SL was open for big investment, it simply never came.

#87 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 16,863 posts

Posted 21 September 2010 - 05:30 PM

QUOTE (StevieM13 @ Sep 21 2010, 10:01 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Parksider will be along in a moment to show you the error of your ways cool.gif


Or maybe you will be along to show him laugh.gif

Is it worth continuing our debate? I thought you had a couple of good points in your last post, but you now seem to want to drag things down?




#88 Lounge Room Lizard

Lounge Room Lizard
  • Coach
  • 6,362 posts

Posted 21 September 2010 - 05:47 PM

QUOTE (The Parksider @ Sep 21 2010, 05:12 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
The point was once we had 14 big cash/fan/young player rich clubs the cap would then keep the competition even.

The cap was certainly created to help achieve these things by restricting wages such that clubs could spend more on facilities, player development and marketing.

But only 6 big clubs have materialised - that is no fault of the cap. So the cap hasn't failed - it just keeps six clubs in check at the moment. I think we may all agree such as Wire, fartown, Hull, Leeds, Wigan and Saints are capable of getting to big finals and all six have done just that in recent years.

So it works......

Wire and Huddersfield are only getting where they are due to the backers they have. Without Davy Huddersfield would be a struggling championship side.Even throwing tickets away they have not captured much attention of many in the town. The academy is full of youngsters from Halifax-Dewsbury etc as few youngsters sadly play the game in the Huddersfield area.
Warrington would be the struggling SL club like Wakefield-Castleford often are without moran.The vap has not aided Warrington and Huddersfield in becoming successful top clubs ran well.The success of Warrington and Huddersfield is down to sugar daddies.

#89 Lounge Room Lizard

Lounge Room Lizard
  • Coach
  • 6,362 posts

Posted 21 September 2010 - 05:48 PM

QUOTE (The Parksider @ Sep 21 2010, 05:12 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
The point was once we had 14 big cash/fan/young player rich clubs the cap would then keep the competition even.

The cap was certainly created to help achieve these things by restricting wages such that clubs could spend more on facilities, player development and marketing.

But only 6 big clubs have materialised - that is no fault of the cap. So the cap hasn't failed - it just keeps six clubs in check at the moment. I think we may all agree such as Wire, fartown, Hull, Leeds, Wigan and Saints are capable of getting to big finals and all six have done just that in recent years.

So it works......

Wire and Huddersfield are only getting where they are due to the backers they have. Without Davy Huddersfield would be a struggling championship side.Even throwing tickets away they have not captured much attention of many in the town. The academy is full of youngsters from Halifax-Dewsbury etc as few youngsters sadly play the game in the Huddersfield area.
Warrington would be the struggling SL club like Wakefield-Castleford often are without moran.The vap has not aided Warrington and Huddersfield in becoming successful top clubs ran well.The success of Warrington and Huddersfield is down to sugar daddies.

#90 Lounge Room Lizard

Lounge Room Lizard
  • Coach
  • 6,362 posts

Posted 21 September 2010 - 05:48 PM

Sorry phone sent message more than once.

Edited by Lounge Room Lizard, 21 September 2010 - 05:51 PM.


#91 shrek

shrek
  • Coach
  • 5,833 posts

Posted 21 September 2010 - 06:02 PM

QUOTE (The Parksider @ Sep 21 2010, 06:26 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
But you are right to point out the "how long". I'd think it would take a Calder club 10 years to get to a grand final, Salford maybe 8 if all goes well, expansion clubs another generation possibly. If this all sounds too far in the future then the reason is that once SL was open for big investment, it simply never came.


So if I give you 10 years with Salford, the extra 2 as a cushion, if they've not managed at least an appearance in the Grand Final will you then be willing to admit the caps a failure? Because I am pretty sure if the boards still going we'll still be having the same discussion with the same points of view!

I can't see Calder attracting fans from the 3 existing clubs never mind a rich backer, but thats another thread altogether!

#92 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 16,863 posts

Posted 21 September 2010 - 09:26 PM

QUOTE (Lounge Room Lizard @ Sep 21 2010, 06:48 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Wire and Huddersfield are only getting where they are due to the backers they have. Without Davy Huddersfield would be a struggling championship side.Even throwing tickets away they have not captured much attention of many in the town. The academy is full of youngsters from Halifax-Dewsbury etc as few youngsters sadly play the game in the Huddersfield area.
Warrington would be the struggling SL club like Wakefield-Castleford often are without moran.The vap has not aided Warrington and Huddersfield in becoming successful top clubs ran well.The success of Warrington and Huddersfield is down to sugar daddies.


I agree with that, and you could argue Hull have really lost their way to the top.

Leaving Wigan, Saints and Leeds well out in front in trms of being self funding successful clubs.

But I don't see what this has to do with the salary cap. Do you?

I do see the lifting of the cap allowing one ot two rich guys to round up all the talent.

Don't you???


#93 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 16,863 posts

Posted 21 September 2010 - 09:52 PM

QUOTE (shrek @ Sep 21 2010, 07:02 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
So if I give you 10 years with Salford, the extra 2 as a cushion, if they've not managed at least an appearance in the Grand Final will you then be willing to admit the caps a failure?


Sorry mate, I don't see what the cap has to do with the fact several SL clubs can't even match it and several don't have the grounds, the marketing or the youth development we wish they would have.

The cap was put in in the hope it would restrict spending on wages and allow clubs to spend on these other things, but several of the clubs have failed to make any money to really invest and grow because their crowds are too small.

These clubs who have failed to make enough money either have someone rich to keep them afloat like Hudgell, Hughes, Davey, Moss, OR they have no big investor and have to spend below the cap like Cas and Bradford and probably Wakefield now Richardson is skint. And two of these may slip out of superleague.

But how is that the fault of an inanimate monetary figure desinged to stop clubs spending too much on wages?

Which most of them don't because they are skint

And can you explain how the salary cap is supposed to facilitate the rise of Salford to the top??

Is there some sort of idea here that if the cap was lifted then the Superleague clubs would all be able to spend a load more money on their clubs???

Because I pick up the fact that at Salford they have been tight with money, At Quins Hughes can't go on putting what he does in already, at Saints they are called the "skints", Wakefields gaffer is skint, Cas have no money, Hull.k.R. have a whopping debt to Hudgell, Wigan apparently lost 27,000 last year, Bradford are skint big time, Crusaders according to Noble aren't investing enough, there's no sugar daddy at Hull, Caddick is Carnegie far more then Rhinos, so the only British club that seems to have a splash the cash man is Warrington.

How can the cap be responsible for the failure of most clubs to grow their businesses?

If they removed the cap then anyone who has extra money can spend it - but who has the money??

Mr. Moran and Mr O'Connor have the money maybe. If the cap was removed maybe they'd want to give the top players bigger wages and take them off Leeds, Saints and Wigan then maybe we'll get back to the old Wigan-Widnes days when two clubs tried to outbid each other for all the talent, only it will be Warrington-Widnes.




#94 Steve May

Steve May
  • Coach
  • 10,111 posts

Posted 21 September 2010 - 10:15 PM

QUOTE (The Parksider @ Sep 21 2010, 10:26 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I agree with that, and you could argue Hull have really lost their way to the top.

Leaving Wigan, Saints and Leeds well out in front in trms of being self funding successful clubs.

But I don't see what this has to do with the salary cap. Do you?

I do see the lifting of the cap allowing one ot two rich guys to round up all the talent.

Don't you???



Wigan, the same Wigan sold by multi-millionaire Dave Whelan (Times rich list 2010, 190million) to multi-millionaire Ian Lenagan (Times rich list 2002, 37million)?

And Saints, the same Saints owned by multi-millionaire Eamonn McManus, formerly the Chief Executive of HSBC in Asia and once one of the "50 most influential international financiers" in Forbes magazine? There are some other big hitters on the board as well. Mike Coleman, Fergus Lyons, you should look into these people.

Or Leeds, owned by Paul Caddick of the Caddick Group, who this year The Times lists as having a personal wealth of 220million?

It's not just Huddersfield that relies on a wealthy benefactor, far from it. I'm not sure any SL club is "self funding".

That's me.  I'm done.


#95 Steve May

Steve May
  • Coach
  • 10,111 posts

Posted 21 September 2010 - 10:15 PM

Double post.

Edited by Steve May, 21 September 2010 - 10:18 PM.

That's me.  I'm done.


#96 Steve May

Steve May
  • Coach
  • 10,111 posts

Posted 21 September 2010 - 10:21 PM

QUOTE (The Parksider @ Sep 21 2010, 10:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Is there some sort of idea here that if the cap was lifted then the Superleague clubs would all be able to spend a load more money on their clubs???


If the cap was lifted then Wigan, Leeds, Huddersfield, Warrington, St Helens and possibly Hull KR would be able to spend outrageous sums of money. The rest would end up spending money they don't have to keep up and they would go bust.

I remember the bad old days. We have very few financial crises at the top in the game these days and that is largely due to the salary cap.

That's me.  I'm done.


#97 Manx RL

Manx RL
  • Coach
  • 1,230 posts

Posted 21 September 2010 - 11:11 PM

QUOTE (Steve May @ Sep 21 2010, 11:21 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
If the cap was lifted then Wigan, Leeds, Huddersfield, Warrington, St Helens and possibly Hull KR would be able to spend outrageous sums of money. The rest would end up spending money they don't have to keep up and they would go bust.

I remember the bad old days. We have very few financial crises at the top in the game these days and that is largely due to the salary cap.


HMRC have a surprise instore pretty soon which will lead to a few financial crises at the top of the game.

- Adepto Successu Per Tributum Fuga -

#98 shrek

shrek
  • Coach
  • 5,833 posts

Posted 21 September 2010 - 11:15 PM

QUOTE (The Parksider @ Sep 21 2010, 10:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Sorry mate, I don't see what the cap has to do with the fact several SL clubs can't even match it and several don't have the grounds, the marketing or the youth development we wish they would have.


Nope, me neither, but you said;
QUOTE
But you are right to point out the "how long". I'd think it would take a Calder club 10 years to get to a grand final, Salford maybe 8 if all goes well, expansion clubs another generation possibly. If this all sounds too far in the future then the reason is that once SL was open for big investment, it simply never came.


I don't think the cap will do anything to level out the competition, in fact, I am certain there are breaches going undetected season after season simply because the RFL cannot police it.

QUOTE
Which most of them don't because they are skint


I've never seen the stats of who spends what, how many spend the full cap then?

Clubs not spending to the full cap should take a leaf out of Widnes's books, if they turnover in there first season back in Super League what they did this, then add the additional TV money they'll be hitting the cap limit from year one should the wish....................if the accounts are to be believed.

QUOTE
I do see the lifting of the cap allowing one ot two rich guys to round up all the talent.

Then we'd end up with the same grand finalists for what 3 maybe even 4 years! tongue.gif

As an aside, I can't find the quote, but I am sure someone out there has it, but hasn't Mr Leneghan at Wigan gone on record as saying the club needs to be self sufficient and live on its own income? Does that not take him out of the sugar daddy category?




#99 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 16,863 posts

Posted 22 September 2010 - 06:12 AM

QUOTE (Steve May @ Sep 21 2010, 11:21 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
If the cap was lifted then Wigan, Leeds, Huddersfield, Warrington, St Helens and possibly Hull KR would be able to spend outrageous sums of money. The rest would end up spending money they don't have to keep up and they would go bust.

I remember the bad old days. We have very few financial crises at the top in the game these days and that is largely due to the salary cap.


Thanks for the view on who has got wealth Steve, I suppose it then becomes down to what are they prepared to spend on their Rugby league clubs.

If you feel that Lenegan (Wigan) McManus (Saints) and Caddick (Leeds) could/would let loose with the cheque books (should we add Moran to that) then the effect of lifting the cap may well be (and this is what the norm is in unregulated pro sport funded by rich men) that all the best players gravitate to these four. If they all hold their nerve we'll have quite a mini league, if anyone drops from the bidding war for players it may end up with three or even two clubs right out there in front.

Do other clubs then chase the clubs far out in front, is it worth it?

Would the competition become a four, then three, two or even one horse race in time?

Under the cap the rich clubs of Leeds, Saints, Wire and Wigan can be kept up with by Huddersfield and Hull and other clubs have the chance to build and get near. I feel without a cap there will be clubs pulling away at the top and other clubs falling away at the bottom.

I don't see why that analisys isn't a fair one, it's not as if we didn't see blowout Wigan scores.v.the rest in the 80's, it's not as if Chelsea aren't scoring shedfulls of goals.

Here's the solution - lift the cap and ask the rich men to put some money into the bottom clubs biggrin.gif


#100 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 16,863 posts

Posted 22 September 2010 - 06:31 AM

QUOTE (shrek @ Sep 22 2010, 12:15 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
1. I don't think the cap will do anything to level out the competition, in fact, I am certain there are breaches going undetected season after season simply because the RFL cannot police it.

2. I've never seen the stats of who spends what, how many spend the full cap then?

3. Clubs not spending to the full cap should take a leaf out of Widnes's books?

4. Then we'd end up with the same grand finalists for what 3 maybe even 4 years! tongue.gif

5. As an aside, I can't find the quote, but I am sure someone out there has it, but hasn't Mr Leneghan at Wigan gone on record as saying the club needs to be self sufficient and live on its own income? Does that not take him out of the sugar daddy category?


Great points.....

1. Fair view, but when Melbourne were detected look what happened. Not sure it's a good principle to abandon laws if the detection rate is low. If it was we should disband the police and scrap criminal law.

2. Hetherington once said 8 out of 12. Taking notes of various comments I feel Cas, Cru, Bradford and Salford spend short, and HKR Quins and Cats make the cap but don't have the advantage of that many quality home grown.

3. Yes and drop lucky on a sugar daddy. I'd love all 14 clubs and NL clubs to have sugar daddies.

4. The sarcastic remark that the cap is ineffective becuase it's always Saints and Leeds is ok, but the fact is for me that the salary cap has nothing to do with the grand final contestants.

Hetherington knew what Superleague was all about long before the others. He was first to set up a serious young player development policy years ago, and with Caddick ensure full cap was available too. That reaped great rewards. Saints also managed to find full cap funding and they carried on their record of finding great young players to go with well chosen imports. As we know Wigan had a tendency to reject many of their good young players and rely on imports, Hull's youngsters largely didn't develop into real top players and Fartown and Wire spent too long shipping all their players in.

The success of Leeds and Saints is down to good management, not throwing money about and clubs are following. Wigan have started to look to their home grown as have Wire and whose to say these two may not have the silverware this year.

The cap simply is not responsible for Saints and Leeds being out in front.

5. I suppose it could. Lenegan's 37M fortune may be in property or businesses he isn't going to sell. There a difference between having money and spending it, that's why for me the indications are that in removing the cap a couple of chairmen may go wild and others will simply sit back and let them.

But the bottom line here is people blaming the cap for ills that are nothing to do with the cap, and calling for it's removal that would create greater ills.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users