DOGFATHER

It is not really a case of how I would like the clubs to be regulated. My point is, why set up regulations and then not have adequate checks in place to ensure clubs are abiding by them? The RFL designed the salary cap with a purpose to ensure clubs "can only spend up to the salary cap if their finances allow" and to "protect them from financial difficulty and ensuring the long-term health of the sport". Whether you, I, or anyone else agrees or disagrees with having a salary cap is immaterial. The fact that the RFL decided that they needed to put it in place to protect clubs from themselves, as well as the health of the wider sport, shows that they felt they needed to do it. Therefore, I am not sure how they can remain blameless in this sorry affair, when the framework (Salary Cap) they set up to stop this from happening is not working. Who should ensure that clubs are abiding by the rules they set up, if not the RFL themselves? If what happened at Salford and Fev were isolated incidents, fair enough, but the sport seems to be in a very precarious position, with many other clubs on the brink of suffering the same fate as Fev. How would you protect the health/integrity of the sport?

Whilst I wholeheartedly agree with your sentiments. In an ideal world, club owners should be able to manage the finances of club they are in charge of. Sadly, we do not live in an ideal world though. How many more clubs facing financial ruin has there to be, to prove that is not happening and many clubs owners cannot do this? I'm sure I don't need to list them for you, but it's easier to name the clubs that haven't had financial issues than those that have. Not to mention clubs currently in SL that have been reporting huge unsustainable losses every season. McManus at St. Helens has been very vocal about this, but he is not alone. A quick search regarding the purpose of the RFL salary cap highlights the following:- Financial Sustainability: Stops clubs from overspending on star players for short-term success, protecting them from financial difficulty and ensuring the long-term health of the sport. How it Works (Key Aspects): Spending Limit: Sets a maximum amount clubs can spend on player salaries, with Super League's finite cap at £2.1m, but clubs can only spend up to this if their finances allow. Without micromanaging the finances of clubs, how do you expect the RFL to know whether the framework they have put in place is working, or serving the purpose it was designed to do? Which again begs the question, why have a framework such as this, if they are not going to monitor it? Which of the points above should the RFL be applauded for?

I'm not convinced fans can be blamed for any of this. I may be completely wrong here, but isn't the purpose of the salary cap to stop this type of scenario (clubs overspending/being unable to meet financial commitments) from happening? If not, why have a salary cap at all? The RFL ratify every signing a club makes, therefore they must know the salary of each player a club signs. They also have IMG scores based upon attendances and the clubs income for the season. You don't have to be Rachel Riley to work out whether a club can afford to sign a player based upon these figures. If they cannot afford it, why have the Rfl allowed a club to sign the players they have? If the clubs are fudging these IMG figures (income and attendance etc.) then what is the point of having these as criteria. What checks are made to ensure these figures are accurate? What are the consequences to clubs that are submitting inflated income/attendance figures? A simple check of the previous seasons accounts/tax bill should give a pretty accurate view of how accurate the figures were last season, and this season salary cap could be adjusted according to how accurate the previous seasons figures were, e.g. the following season's salary cap could be reduced by the amount of money they had overestimated the previous season, plus an additional 20% reduction of the overestimated amount as a punishment. None of this is rocket science.... Sorry, but to my mind, the blame for this lies entirely at the Rfl's door.

Maybe not, but how many clubs have gone into administration and how many times have the Rfl bent over backwards, given special dispensation, twisted their own set of rules and criteria when it suits them? Yet not this time... They are an absolute joke!!! I'm devastated for all of you, another nail in the coffin of rugby league.

Quite.

Quite

Please do not take my post as a pop at you personally. It was certainly not intended that way. Are you in charge of how the money in the club is spent? I didn't think so, maybe I'm wrong? I do support some of the investment in facilities, but my point is, there has to be some balance in what is spent on facilities and playing squad.

Whilst I really applaud the investment in the facilities and the ground, surely there has to be some balance. Every penny the club has had historically, is seemingly spent modernising this, that and the other, yet we never spend anything like what we should be doing on the squad. Without whom, we won't have a team to watch, the soul reason the club exists. Is the thought process, spectators will all continue to attend matches basking in light of the new TV in the bar, or perhaps taking a lovely winters stroll around the pitch, whilst enjoying a homemade pie under the best floodlights in RL, even though the team on the field is incapable of competing?

As has been asked elsewhere, what is the plan Kevin? Do you know something we don't? Is there a reshuffle of the divisions on the cards, therefore no relegation this season. Hence the lack of investment in the squad. I hear Moxon asked for 5 players at the start of the season and got 1, Kibula, who got injured and is out for the season. Are you bringing anyone else in, to at least try to avoid relegation? Have you thrown the towel in? It certainly looks like the players have. Do you not trust Moxon? If not, why appoint him? If you do trust him, then for god sake back him financially. I hear the club is currently running at a loss to the tune of £400 per week. I cannot validate this claim, just the word from the terraces, but if so, we are talking about an extra 20 fans paying at the gate per week to make up the deficit. We are not talking about thousands in losses. How much do you think the club will be losing if you continue with this lack of investment in the squad? I sadly cannot tell you an exact figure, however, I can guarantee it will be a damn site more than 20 that will be staying away, and losses far in excess of £400 per week.

...but at least we'll have the best floodlights in the rugby league. No players to play under them, because we've spent all the money on the lights instead of players. Neither will we have any spectators to bask under the lights, because they have got sick of watching the club implode, because Kevin has this crazed notion that sodding lights are the be all, and end all. Lights that are only likely to be used twice a season, at a push.

Completely agree, I'm also sure the IMG fiasco has had an impact on the fanbases of many clubs too. With effectively nothing to play for, for most clubs outside of SL, how many fans have already/will turn there back on the game completely?

Joe Arundel's next club named after exit from Bradford Bulls as part of mass changes - YorkshireLive (examinerlive.co.uk)

I hadn't seen that Bromley, very sad to see him go if true, he is the best acting HB distributor at the club IMO. Defensively, he needs a bit of work, but he is only young and would be well worth persevering with.