Jump to content


Rugby League World Issue 402

Try our Fantastic 5-Issue Bundle Offer! For just £18, a saving of 10% on the regular cover price, you’ll get:
The Play-offs Issue - pictured (out 12 Sept) – Covering the climax of the Super League & Championship seasons
The Grand Finals Issue (out 17 Oct) – Grand Final excitement from both sides of the world plus Four Nations preview
The Four Nations Issue (out 21 Nov) – Fantastic coverage of the Four Nations tournament down under
The Golden Boot Issue (out 19 Dec) – A look back at the 2014 season plus the big reveal of the winner of the Golden Boot
The 2015 Season Preview Issue (out 23 Jan) – How will your team perform in 2015? We preview every club.


League Express

Podcast

Photo
- - - - -

Dr Koukash on FiveLive


  • Please log in to reply
411 replies to this topic

#101 Saintslass

Saintslass
  • Coach
  • 4,471 posts

Posted 21 March 2013 - 09:02 PM

Yeah, cos clubs don't go bust with a salary cap do they?

Exactly. People are talking as if having such a low salary cap has actually helped clubs to stay afloat when actually the size of the salary cap does not appear to have any impact at all upon the ability of a club to stay afloat. Whether or not clubs stay in business appears to depend on the management of those clubs. As we have heard more back story to Wakefield, Bradford and Salford, all appear to have had terrible management structures and practices and it was these things which caused the clubs to go under, regardless of the salary cap. And now comments have been made about Castleford and the attitude towards management matters there suggesting that their difficulties again have foundations in the way the club is run rather than the salary cap limit.

Personally I don't think there should be a free for all but I think the time is overdue for a rise in the cap. Taking the socialist approach is not working, in fact it could be said that it is holding the better managed clubs back.

A very good example of a club run on a shoestring budget that is doing incredibly well is Sheffield. There is a business model that perhaps some Superleague clubs could follow.

Edited by Saintslass, 21 March 2013 - 09:03 PM.


#102 l'angelo mysterioso

l'angelo mysterioso
  • Coach
  • 40,908 posts

Posted 21 March 2013 - 09:04 PM

Yeah, cos clubs don't go bust with a salary cap do they?


of course they do.

having a salary cap means there's less chance of it.

I'm still not sure how not having a salary cap evens thegame out. The clubs with the most money to spend will sign the best players

Edited by l'angelo mysterioso, 21 March 2013 - 09:05 PM.

WELCOME TO THE ROYSTON VASEY SUPER LEAGUE 2015
Keeping it local

#103 l'angelo mysterioso

l'angelo mysterioso
  • Coach
  • 40,908 posts

Posted 21 March 2013 - 09:07 PM

Exactly. People are talking as if having such a low salary cap has actually helped clubs to stay afloat when actually the size of the salary cap does not appear to have any impact at all upon the ability of a club to stay afloat. Whether or not clubs stay in business appears to depend on the management of those clubs. As we have heard more back story to Wakefield, Bradford and Salford, all appear to have had terrible management structures and practices and it was these things which caused the clubs to go under, regardless of the salary cap. And now comments have been made about Castleford and the attitude towards management matters there suggesting that their difficulties again have foundations in the way the club is run rather than the salary cap limit.

Personally I don't think there should be a free for all but I think the time is overdue for a rise in the cap. Taking the socialist approach is not working, in fact it could be said that it is holding the better managed clubs back.

A very good example of a club run on a shoestring budget that is doing incredibly well is Sheffield. There is a business model that perhaps some Superleague clubs could follow.


good point

I think the cap is a good thing, but it should always be under review
WELCOME TO THE ROYSTON VASEY SUPER LEAGUE 2015
Keeping it local

#104 Ponterover

Ponterover
  • Coach
  • 1,786 posts

Posted 21 March 2013 - 09:12 PM

of course they do.

having a salary cap means there's less chance of it.

I'm still not sure how not having a salary cap evens thegame out. The clubs with the most money to spend will sign the best players


So it's not evening out the game, it's not preventing clubs going bust, we are agreed it seems.

What then is the point of the salary cap?

#105 getdownmonkeyman

getdownmonkeyman
  • Coach
  • 1,746 posts

Posted 21 March 2013 - 09:20 PM

Are we excluding the 700k lent to Crusaders secured against the Race Course ground?


Yes.

#106 Viking Warrior

Viking Warrior
  • Coach
  • 5,126 posts

Posted 21 March 2013 - 09:33 PM

obviously a lot of you don't remember the days wigan dominated the game because they had the most money to buy the best players. like hanley, offiah, lydon, gregory etc etc no other club could compete with their financial muscle, then the salary cap was introduced and lo and behold other clubs were able to compete with wigan and sign the best players, and we have an even playing field whereby any club can spend the same amount if they want to, but some clubs spen up to the full amount without a regard to the income generated by the club on matchdays. hence some clubs overspend and get into financial difficulty. but we have witnessed warrington become one of our top teams by massively increasing matchday revenue thus generating more funds to get the best available players. the gist of my prologue is i would rather have a salary cap which ensures that all clubs can compete on a level playing field than total domination of our game by one club only.........
"Why is Napoleon crying ?" said one sailor to the other, "poor ###### thinks he's being exiled to st helens" came the reply.



https://scontent-a-l...276002364_n.jpg

#107 Ponterover

Ponterover
  • Coach
  • 1,786 posts

Posted 21 March 2013 - 09:40 PM

obviously a lot of you don't remember the days wigan dominated the game because they had the most money to buy the best players. like hanley, offiah, lydon, gregory etc etc no other club could compete with their financial muscle, then the salary cap was introduced and lo and behold other clubs were able to compete with wigan and sign the best players, and we have an even playing field whereby any club can spend the same amount if they want to, but some clubs spen up to the full amount without a regard to the income generated by the club on matchdays. hence some clubs overspend and get into financial difficulty. but we have witnessed warrington become one of our top teams by massively increasing matchday revenue thus generating more funds to get the best available players. the gist of my prologue is i would rather have a salary cap which ensures that all clubs can compete on a level playing field than total domination of our game by one club only.........


I get where you're coming from, but wouldn't all the other teams turning pro and having access to vastly increased resources have had the same effect?

Also, the bunch of players you name are probably the last generation that were household names across the UK, enforced mediocrity has done nothing to generate the column inches that we need in the press.

#108 jpmc

jpmc
  • Coach
  • 502 posts

Posted 21 March 2013 - 10:11 PM

Spot on

IMHO the salary cap should be scrapped.

It holds out game back, it doesn't produce an even competition and it doesn't stop clubs going bust. I'm struggling to find a use for it.

The SC exists to protect failure.In any other walk of life it would would not be accepted.I take it all the unions are still strong in yorkshire

#109 Pie tries

Pie tries
  • Coach
  • 466 posts

Posted 21 March 2013 - 10:18 PM

paragraphs are your friend


Like !

#110 Pie tries

Pie tries
  • Coach
  • 466 posts

Posted 21 March 2013 - 10:19 PM

paragraphs are your friend


Like !

I think it's great to have the good Dr involved in rugby league.What a breath of fresh air ,and he is ruffling a few feathers along the way.Most people think the game is under marketed and his bit of hype
is getting publicity for the game.


Quite agree - get used to it, well done the doctor !

#111 Ponterover

Ponterover
  • Coach
  • 1,786 posts

Posted 21 March 2013 - 10:31 PM

The SC exists to protect failure.In any other walk of life it would would not be accepted.I take it all the unions are still strong in yorkshire


Wouldn't know about unions, I'm self employed, no one looking out for me except me.

#112 jpmc

jpmc
  • Coach
  • 502 posts

Posted 21 March 2013 - 10:37 PM

Wouldn't know about unions, I'm self employed, no one looking out for me except me.

Same here

#113 shrek

shrek
  • Coach
  • 5,864 posts

Posted 22 March 2013 - 07:27 AM

I understand Wigans income 20 years ago was £6m pa with no Sky funding.

Why reach for the stars when the weeds are closer.

No idea about income, but the wage bill has certainly come down alot;

Wigan, who spent £3.2m on players' salaries last year, said they could not get below £2.3m for next year because of existing contracts.
So the Super League clubs voted 10-2 in favour of allowing Wigan a £2.3m ceiling in 2002 provided they reduced the figure to£1.8m in 2003.

Taken from here - an article quoting everyones favourite RL administrator in the forums most popular news paper! :ph34r:


then the salary cap was introduced and lo and behold other clubs were able to compete with wigan and sign the best players, and we have an even playing field whereby any club can spend the same amount if they want to

Not quite how I remember it, Saints won Super League 1 without the salary cap being in place and when Wigan finished 4th in Super League 2 (unless I'm mistaken the first year played under the salary cap) I'd suggest it was because the club was being mis-managed at the time rather than any overnight success of the salary cap. Which also don't forget until the early part of the 2000's was based on a % of income, not a flat cap so clubs were not spending the same amount.

#114 markleeds

markleeds
  • Coach
  • 1,641 posts

Posted 22 March 2013 - 08:12 AM

If the RFL do the right thing and raise the cap then the caveat should be that the quota drops to 2 non European BORN players, then teams can sign some big names from the NRL without affecting development of homegrown players.

IMHO the salary cap is holding the game back. Rasing the base cap to £1.8m with the current extras will help the game to grow.

Also a rule where if a player pays into a pension then a % of the contribution should not count on the cap.

Edited by markleeds, 22 March 2013 - 10:43 AM.


#115 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,170 posts

Posted 22 March 2013 - 08:16 AM

Yeah, cos clubs don't go bust with a salary cap do they?


They didn't when it was 50% of revenue.

#116 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,170 posts

Posted 22 March 2013 - 08:20 AM

Nope, that's why I proposed monitored spending, or did you just choose to ignore that point?


I can't ignore what is not there.

You made some vague point about growth being "monitored" withoue bothering to specify what that meant.

#117 Dave T

Dave T
  • Coach
  • 14,772 posts

Posted 22 March 2013 - 08:40 AM

I can't ignore what is not there.

You made some vague point about growth being "monitored" withoue bothering to specify what that meant.

plus you can monitor all you want - if there are no rules in place then you cant say or do anything about it.

#118 Derwent

Derwent
  • Coach
  • 7,910 posts

Posted 22 March 2013 - 08:54 AM

Perhaps Dr Koukash should concentrate on paying the club's creditors within the game before he stamps his feet about not being allowed to spend more money. I imagine the likes of Leigh Sports Village (owed £138,000 for training facilities) and Shaun McRea (owed £103,500) are overjoyed to hear that the Salford club has pots of money to spend......

Edited by Derwent, 22 March 2013 - 08:54 AM.

Workington Town. Then. Now. Always.


#119 hindle xiii

hindle xiii
  • Coach
  • 21,071 posts

Posted 22 March 2013 - 08:57 AM

Perhaps Dr Koukash should concentrate on paying the club's creditors within the game before he stamps his feet about not being allowed to spend more money. I imagine the likes of Leigh Sports Village (owed £138,000 for training facilities) and Shaun McRea (owed £103,500) are overjoyed to hear that the Salford club has pots of money to spend......

In his original press conference he did say all creditors would be paid in full.

On Odsal Top baht 'at.


#120 Segovia Carpet

Segovia Carpet
  • Coach
  • 1,419 posts

Posted 22 March 2013 - 08:59 AM

To be fair if the Dr is wanting an open salary cap that's the way I see it going if he gets his wish. You then will have Leeds.saints.wigan.wire.hudds.salford and maybe bulls and the 2 hull teams. So that's 9 teams for SL1 in an open salary cap comp but who would be the other team to make it 10? Catalans maybe? Then you can have SL2 with the salary cap it is at now in SL and the team that wins SL2 as the option of going up or not. I think that would work personally and it would make 2 great comps IMO.


Agree - a good way forward.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users