Leigh to ignore Salary Cap

[GaryO]

And how were Leigh able to quickly build a winning team after being on the verge of disappearing in 2011 (didn't Wigan bail you out)? Organic growth I presume. Or a cash injection?

Look i have no problem at all with an individual putting money into rl in any way, the more the merrier and it's the only chance my club and it's ilk have of ever climbing the ladder. Well done to the bloke for using his own money and Leigh fans are very lucky to be able to enjoy that backing. But that doesn't mean he can decide which rules he will agree to and which he will ignore.

In any walk of life rules are there to be challenged, especially ones that have only just come into existence to contest that they suit all parties involved. Exactly as I have asked the Angel, has Beaumont a case or not?

And, yes we Leigh fans are very fortunate in having a benefactor, and yes I sincerley wish it would happen for Workington, Whitehaven, Batley, Barrow et al.

,

[The Parksider]

Interveiw is here if anyone wants to watch it

 

 

 

Thank you for this, much appreciated

 

Once he has sought his legal advice he should approach the RFL or wait until the meeting later this month.

He craves attention like a spoilt child.

 

He makes a damn good case for my money.

 

I'd guess he has already been told the RFL won't change the cap OR they have stalled on any decision so he's had to act to secure the signings.

 

Certainly Solly was not for a cap change the Sunday after the Bradford.v.Wakefield game.

[GaryO]

Thank you for this, much appreciated

 

 

He makes a damn good case for my money.

 

I'd guess he has already been told the RFL won't change the cap OR they have stalled on any decision so he's had to act to secure the signings.

 

Certainly Solly was not for a cap change the Sunday after the Bradford.v.Wakefield game.

Well Parky, it could well be that Mr Beaumont's interview has won over some of his detractor's, I doubt that, but his logic may have made sense to some.

[Angelic Cynic]

but his logic may have made sense to some.

What is his logic? If he is to ignore the salary cap set for The championship,will he also ignore the salary cap set for Super League?

His logic was to announce 4 signings on a radio station - It seems to have gone quiet on the last of those 4 signings.

He stated the legal firm has 'experience' in this type of thing.When in the past has this London based legal firm involved themselves in a club ignoring the salary cap;and what was the result?

Why is Beaumont not coming under the same avalanche of abuse as was meted out to Dr Koukash,who only suggested that it be raised and gave reasons why he thought that?

[Padge]

What is his logic? If he is to ignore the salary cap set for The championship,will he also ignore the salary cap set for Super League?

His logic was to announce 4 signings on a radio station - It seems to have gone quiet on the last of those 4 signings.

He stated the legal firm has 'experience' in this type of thing.When in the past has this London based legal firm involved themselves in a club ignoring the salary cap;and what was the result?

Why is Beaumont not coming under the same avalanche of abuse as was meted out to Dr Koukash,who only suggested that it be raised and gave reasons why he thought that?

 

Because Bo Peep is the darling of the championship clubs, what they don't realise is that his selfish actions (if he has the balls to do it and get away with it) will lead many championship clubs into oblivion in an effort to keep up.

[Barnaby Reddin]

Well Parky, it could well be that Mr Beaumont's interview has won over some of his detractor's, I doubt that, but his logic may have made sense to some.

 

 

It makes no difference if he "has a point" or if the system is flawed....he has brought the game into disrepute by publicly declaring his intention to ignore legislation put in place by the RFL at the request and with the agreement of the member clubs.

 

It's not about hating Leigh...it's not about his personality either. It's about the Rules in place and his declared intention to break them!

[The Parksider]

It makes no difference if he "has a point" or if the system is flawed....he has brought the game into disrepute by publicly declaring his intention to ignore legislation put in place by the RFL at the request and with the agreement of the member clubs.

 

Not sure championship shenanigans are relevant to the games "reputation", if you however want a stronger argument on this then how about running an unfair/bent competition financially loaded in favour of half the clubs in it, being far more damaging to a professional games reputation? 

 

You need to find a decent argument against Beaumont's stance.

 

The member clubs actually did agree it for 2015, with the RFL agreeing to look at anomalies for 2016, and they have reneged on that by ignoring the main anomaly. 

 

As for the argument this will lead to Championship clubs bankruptcies, Beaumont is clear that clubs should be able to spend more if their benefactors have the money to gift, and the Salary Cap rules for SL now say that it is acceptable for clubs to spend more via Directors private money as long as it's a clear gift not a loan.

 

Posting the video and links to the cap rules clearly doesn't help the debate progress......

 

Try to deal with the point by pretending it's those nice Sheffield Eagles people who are upset over the unfairness, you may see the point more clearly.... 

[Padge]

Not sure championship shenanigans are relevant to the games "reputation", if you however want a stronger argument on this then how about running an unfair/bent competition financially loaded in favour of half the clubs in it, being far more damaging to a professional games reputation? 

 

You need to find a decent argument against Beaumont's stance.

 

The member clubs actually did agree it for 2015, with the RFL agreeing to look at anomalies for 2016, and they have reneged on that by ignoring the main anomaly. 

 

As for the argument this will lead to Championship clubs bankruptcies, Beaumont is clear that clubs should be able to spend more if their benefactors have the money to gift, and the Salary Cap rules for SL now say that it is acceptable for clubs to spend more via Directors private money as long as it's a clear gift not a loan.

 

Posting the video and links to the cap rules clearly doesn't help the debate progress......

 

Try to deal with the point by pretending it's those nice Sheffield Eagles people who are upset over the unfairness, you may see the point more clearly.... 

 

The problem is that if you are allowed to spend up to the benefactors limit then you introduce another anomaly, Leigh will have one cap and the others will have a different cap. All clubs in the same tier absolutely have to have the same cap.

 

If you want to get rid of the anomily of what happens in the middle eights with the cap, then the easiest thing to sort it out is scrap it.

[Barnaby Reddin]

You need to find a decent argument against Beaumont's stance.

....

No I don't as I am neither arguing for or against his stance.....I am pointing out that he behaved like a child when he declared he'd ignore the cap. If he does I hope the rfl throw the book at him and Leigh!

[The Parksider]

The problem is that if you are allowed to spend up to the benefactors limit then you introduce another anomaly, Leigh will have one cap and the others will have a different cap. All clubs in the same tier absolutely have to have the same cap.

 

The rule for SL is that you can all spend up to the same cap, not the "benefactors limit" as such. They may help fund it, if they want to gift it. All clubs can spend the same if they have it. Wakefield didn't.

 

If "all the clubs in the same tier have to have the same cap" that means in the qualifiers this isn't the case. If all clubs in the "Championship" should have the same cap then in practice it isn't the case here either.

 

If you could explain?

[The Parksider]

I am pointing out that he behaved like a child when he declared he'd ignore the cap.

 

He didn't behave "like a child" on that video - he makes a coherent argument.

 

It's an argument many of us on here made, well before he made it.

 

Don't get your personal prejudices mixed up with a fair assessment of the situation.

 

The situation is rich owners in the Champioship cannot bankroll their clubs the same as rich owners in Superleague.

 

The situation as Brian Smith and others see it is the qualifiers best chance of "working" was this year.

 

I think it's a fascinating scenario of injustice and politicking, and really would like to know what's going on. That Beaumont is "acting like a kid" is silly with respect. Like any owner, Like Koukash or Davey he just wants to invest in his club the same they can.

 

Forget the person answer the point.

[GaryO]

I will endeavour to try my question once again,

After viewing the video, does anyone think that the RFLcan put up a strong enough defence to Mr Beaumont's argument that the system is out of sync in respect of both factions, SL & Championship clubs competing like for like in the same competition in the qualifying 8's, if this went to a judiciary?

Irrespective of me being a Leigh supporter, I cannot see that the RFL has a case.

What Parky says is quite correct, the rules that are being contested are the rules for 2015, the RFL have agreed they need adjusting. Mr. Beaumont is doing nothing more than requesting a shift on the financial structure.

Last question, why is the RFL seemingly averse to to giving Championship clubs an even opportunity to gaining promotion?

[Barnaby Reddin]

He didn't behave "like a child" on that video -

Struggling to find where I said he did!

He doesnt agree with the restriction so he said he would break the rules......regardless of if we agree or not he acted like a child

[Derwent]

I will endeavour to try my question once again,

After viewing the video, does anyone think that the RFLcan put up a strong enough defence to Mr Beaumont's argument that the system is out of sync in respect of both factions, SL & Championship clubs competing like for like in the same competition in the qualifying 8's, if this went to a judiciary?

Irrespective of me being a Leigh supporter, I cannot see that the RFL has a case.

What Parky says is quite correct, the rules that are being contested are the rules for 2015, the RFL have agreed they need adjusting. Mr. Beaumont is doing nothing more than requesting a shift on the financial structure.

Last question, why is the RFL seemingly averse to to giving Championship clubs an even opportunity to gaining promotion?

1. The RFL does not need to "have a case". If it went to anything judicial, which it won't, even if Leigh won it'd be a hollow victory that would achieve nothing. No court can impose competition rules on the RFL, they'd simply say to Leigh "well done on your victory in court - now, do you want to play in our competition under our rules or not ?"

2. Of course any system was/is going to be weighted towards incumbent SL teams. There's a reason for that in that they earn the money that the rest of the game depend on. The only way the RFL will ever get SL clubs to agree to a P&R system is if it is biased in their favour. Don't forget that the Sky contract is not held by the RFL but by SLE, they could breakaway and take their contract with them if they wanted just like the Premier League did in football.

[GaryO]

1. The RFL does not need to "have a case". If it went to anything judicial, which it won't, even if Leigh won it'd be a hollow victory that would achieve nothing. No court can impose competition rules on the RFL, they'd simply say to Leigh "well done on your victory in court - now, do you want to play in our competition under our rules or not ?"

2. Of course any system was/is going to be weighted towards incumbent SL teams. There's a reason for that in that they earn the money that the rest of the game depend on. The only way the RFL will ever get SL clubs to agree to a P&R system is if it is biased in their favour. Don't forget that the Sky contract is not held by the RFL but by SLE, they could breakaway and take their contract with them if they wanted just like the Premier League did in football.

1. Well that would make wonderful Headlines wouldn't it, "RFL don't get their own way, so they take their bat and ball home" and don't for one minute think that all the detractors would just sweep it under the carpet.

2. That puts a totally different slant on my question, I asked why was the RFL averse to giving the Championship clubs a fair crack, you answer it by suggesting that it is not the RFL's decision but SLE that are making the decisions, and the RFL are doing what they are told. I would not have thought that a swap over in the P&R sense would affect at least 8 clubs in the SL, in fact, some like Wigan, Saints Wire Leeds Hudd and Cas may even welcome it, if say Bradford or Leigh Replaced Wakefield, they would most probably expect a larger travelling support to their grounds.

[The Parksider]

....regardless of if we agree or not he acted like a child

 

Barney, don't go in circles please.

 

Just deal with the disparate cap

 

 

Before Beaumont did or said anything the problem was highlighted by many on here and it was wishful thinking we would not get the near obvious result of no P & R.

 

Brian Smith predicts all four SL clubs will be stronger next year and if Bradford cut costs and reduce their playing strength, and Leigh continue to be handicapped on the cap then we are even more likely to get the same result next year possibly with no shock results.

[Derwent]

2. That puts a totally different slant on my question, I asked why was the RFL averse to giving the Championship clubs a fair crack, you answer it by suggesting that it is not the RFL's decision but SLE that are making the decisions, and the RFL are doing what they are told. I would not have thought that a swap over in the P&R sense would affect at least 8 clubs in the SL, in fact, some like Wigan, Saints Wire Leeds Hudd and Cas may even welcome it, if say Bradford or Leigh Replaced Wakefield, they would most probably expect a larger travelling support to their grounds.

 

I didn't say that SLE are making the decisions at all. But, if you look at the voting structure of the RL Council, it only takes one solitary SL club to vote against a proposal for it to be defeated. Therefore, the RFL has to first and foremost appease the SL clubs in order to push through it's proposals.

 

There's nothing new about that, its basic politics and diplomacy. In this scenario, the RFL wanted a new structure for the game and needed SLE to back them on it. So, SLE clubs get an uplifted salary cap, a new marquee player cap exemption and additional funding. The RFL get to create the illusion of opportunity for the Championship clubs, the SL clubs get to maintain or increase the gap that keeps them in situ. Its a win-win for both parties.

 

Meanwhile, the Championship clubs will bleat a bit about the unfairness of it all, but won't rock the boat too much in case SLE decide that they no longer wish to give those £750k cheques away and would actually quite like to keep it all for themselves.

[The Parksider]

1. The RFL does not need to "have a case". Of course any system was/is going to be weighted towards incumbent SL teams. There's a reason for that in that they earn the money that the rest of the game depend on. The only way the RFL will ever get SL clubs to agree to a P&R system is if it is biased in their favour. Don't forget that the Sky contract is not held by the RFL but by SLE, they could breakaway and take their contract with them if they wanted just like the Premier League did in football.

 

Interesting.......

 

I asked why was the RFL averse to giving the Championship clubs a fair crack, you answer it by suggesting that it is not the RFL's decision but SLE that are making the decisions, and the RFL are doing what they are told. I would not have thought that a swap over in the P&R sense would affect at least 8 clubs in the SL, in fact, some like Wigan, Saints Wire Leeds Hudd and Cas may even welcome it, if say Bradford or Leigh Replaced Wakefield, they would most probably expect a larger travelling support to their grounds.

 

It's a point, but not THE point.

 

Solly obtained money for the Championship clubs on the basis that "they (would help) earn the money that the rest of the game depend on"  So I'm not quite 100% with your point Derwent, the Championship clubs now ALSO help provide the entertainment on TV and not just the SL clubs.......But they are I admit paid for that.......

 

I can however go with the SL clubs ensuring that the Championship clubs do a job to create more "interest" as Solly put it, whilst ensuring their own interests are intact through an unfair cap system to prevent P & R working thus maintaining a closed shop.

 

That fits far far better than the answers I've kindly had suggested to me so far.

 

And if that fits then why should Mr. Beaumont put a penny into his SL ambitions if the SL clubs will not play fair??

 

It was suggested that he was a fool because if he broke the cap they would penalise him. That is assuming he stays around to be penalised.

 

Beaumont has simply stopped playing the game here, and challenged SL clubs on maintaining a status quo which would really mean he's looking at wasting a lot of time and money if they will not play fair.

 

I think the situation is grossly unfair, you provide the logical answer to it and that really means that if Beaumont  lost a legal challenge or was penalised under the existing rules or both his position has to be walk away or badly lose face....

 

Shame that the interviewer didn't ask him that one Gary?

[The Parksider]

Its basic politics and diplomacy. In this scenario, the RFL wanted a new structure for the game and needed SLE to back them on it. So, SLE clubs get an uplifted salary cap, a new marquee player cap exemption and additional funding. The RFL get to create the illusion of opportunity for the Championship clubs, the SL clubs get to maintain or increase the gap that keeps them in situ. Its a win-win for both parties.

 

Meanwhile, the Championship clubs will bleat a bit about the unfairness of it all, but won't rock the boat too much in case SLE decide that they no longer wish to give those £750k cheques away and would actually quite like to keep it all for themselves.

 

There's a third party of an ambitious club who want to genuinely challenge for Superleague. 

 

And they ARE rocking the boat...........

 

The other three are clearly happy to be Patsies in the sham.

 

What do those who have excused the RFL/SL and condemned Leigh say now??

[Derwent]

There's a third party of an ambitious club who want to genuinely challenge for Superleague. 

 

And they ARE rocking the boat...........

 

 

 

They're not rocking the boat, not really. They may think they are by way of some inflated self-importance but that's a different matter.

 

ATEOTD the RFL/SLE do not need to appease Leigh or any other Championship club. It is a like it or lump it situation.

[The Parksider]

They're not rocking the boat, not really. They may think they are by way of some inflated self-importance but that's a different matter.

 

ATEOTD the RFL/SLE do not need to appease Leigh or any other Championship club. It is a like it or lump it situation.

 

Well that's where we have a difference because it can be a like it or walk away situation?.

 

Any comments from the Leigh lads here????

 

To me he hasn't any room to back down, he's not just moaning. I recall the Leigh board moaning publicly after their license rejection and being slapped down.

 

Breaking the rule and lining up a legal challenge seems more like all or nothing??

[GaryO]

 

There's nothing new about that, its basic politics and diplomacy. In this scenario, the RFL wanted a new structure for the game and needed SLE to back them on it. So, SLE clubs get an uplifted salary cap, a new marquee player cap exemption and additional funding. The RFL get to create the illusion of opportunity for the Championship clubs, the SL clubs get to maintain or increase the gap that keeps them in situ. Its a win-win for both parties.

.

So in your opinion (unless Derwent is the pen name of a higher official) SLE purposefully set out on this game of charades to hoodwink the Championship clubs with as you say "to create the illusion of opportunity" to "maintain or increase the gap that keeps them in situ"

So please explain how it would be a win- win for both parties, and of course the "illusion" has now been seen through and the concept/rules are being challenged.

Someone on this thread -maybe it was your goodself - said that Mr Beaumont was bringing the game into disrepute by having the intention to break the cap, if your assumptions are correct the charge against him is miñiscule compared with SL bringing the game into disrepute, it is neither ethical or caries any semblance of sportsmanship.

You seem to think it is all one way traffic, but if SLE really had any inkling of having a closed shop and keeping all of the SKY funding to themselves, why not just do it? I would say there would be some massive fallout by taking such action that they could/would not do it.

My guess is that the cap will be increased for the Championship clubs, to what level remains to be seen, we keep seeing the word SKY on these pages along with RFL and SLE, it is SKY at the end of the day who calls all the shots, and they have had another competition to air which has proved very entertaining, I am sure they will insist it will still be in place, and like it or lump it, Leigh were and next year will still their big draw card.

[Angelic Cynic]

When will Chase be officially announced as being signed;or have the RFL blocked it?

 

What have the experienced Legal firm come back with?

 

When can we expect further signings?

 

Should I be patient until the meeting with other Championship clubs results in the green light for every club to ignore the salary cap?

[GaryO]

When will Chase be officially announced as being signed;or have the RFL blocked it?

 

What have the experienced Legal firm come back with?

 

When can we expect further signings?

 

Should I be patient until the meeting with other Championship clubs results in the green light for every club to ignore the salary cap?

Don't know

Don't know

Don't know

Yes.

[Derwent]

1. So in your opinion (unless Derwent is the pen name of a higher official) SLE purposefully set out on this game of charades to hoodwink the Championship clubs with as you say "to create the illusion of opportunity" to "maintain or increase the gap that keeps them in situ"

2. So please explain how it would be a win- win for both parties, and of course the "illusion" has now been seen through and the concept/rules are being challenged.

3. Someone on this thread -maybe it was your goodself - said that Mr Beaumont was bringing the game into disrepute by having the intention to break the cap, if your assumptions are correct the charge against him is miñiscule compared with SL bringing the game into disrepute, it is neither ethical or caries any semblance of sportsmanship.

4. You seem to think it is all one way traffic, but if SLE really had any inkling of having a closed shop and keeping all of the SKY funding to themselves, why not just do it? I would say there would be some massive fallout by taking such action that they could/would not do it.

5. My guess is that the cap will be increased for the Championship clubs, to what level remains to be seen, we keep seeing the word SKY on these pages along with RFL and SLE, it is SKY at the end of the day who calls all the shots, and they have had another competition to air which has proved very entertaining, I am sure they will insist it will still be in place, and like it or lump it, Leigh were and next year will still their big draw card.

1. No hoodwinking needed, the Championship clubs like Leigh were so desperate for a change in the route to SL that they accepted the first option that came along without contemplating the pitfalls and grabbed those big cheques while they could.

2. Are you serious ? The RFL win by being able to say they've provided the opportunity for Championship clubs, SL clubs win by not having too much of a challenge to the status quo.

3. Nope, nowt to do with me.

4. The RFL and its member clubs voted to accept the recommendations of the Watkins Review document. Restoring a pathway of P&R was one of the recommendations to be implemented. Job done. If it doesn't work then at least they've tried, then they can revert back to a closed shop.

5. Got any evidence that Leigh are a big "draw card" for Sky ? I don't know but I'd guess the viewing figures were small compared to SL games, unless you know different ?