Leigh to ignore Salary Cap

[Padge]

This thread with its thus far 24 pages shows why people like me have considered the system a nonsense from day 1

[GaryO]

That's not the point is it Phil....

 

If Leigh had fallen to Bradford in a play off final in which both clubs were operating on a level cap then I would guess Mr. Beaumont would have had the good grace to accept that because it would have been a fair competition.

 

Then after pipping Leigh, Bradford could have been looking forward to being able to spend full SL cap, and could recruit as best possible given it's late season.

 

Then they would have a season free from relegation in SL in 2016 to get adjusted to Superleague and look to build again for 2017 in which relegation would be back on the cards. Their aim would be 11th. anything more a bonus.

 

Even if a Sheffield or a Halifax won it from 3rd. or 4th. they would have won it fair and square and they would equally have two years to build a side and get used to the higher level of competition with an aim to 11th. at worst 2017.

 

Les Catalans got just this protection in 2006 when they came bottom of SL. In 2007 they managed 10th. place and were nicely established in SL.

 

Hull.K.R.went up 2007 and managed 11th. first go as Salford had a very poor season.

 

Castleford went up 2008 and came bottom just short of Hull, the following year they came seventh that second year worked for them

 

Widnes went up 2012 and were bottom only just on points difference, protected for a second year they came 10th. It worked.....

 

It worked year after year that's the record, that's what the rebel clubs saw, that's what Martyn Sadler saw, that's what Derek Beaumont will be aware of.

 

But the RFL faction in the guise of Wood, Barwick, Solly, Hetherington, and their accountants KPMG saw something different, in a discredited abandoned system from Swiss Soccer that they decided to put in place because it would see "lot's of jeopardy" that would supposedly put crowds up in RL despite it's failure in Soccer. Padge did plenty of work to show that was nonsense, and the figures are now in to prove his point.

 

This was the most useless, brainless decision ever, in the face of a very workable alternative that the powers that be blocked from there being a vote on.

 

I'd have thought Solly now would be desperate to make it work, but suspect the SL clubs may not let him bow to Beaumont's very clever challenge. It's not that P & R didn't work this year that's the whole story, we have a stagnant Superleague in which Wakey or another could fail badly again and be trapped in a cycle of failure. We could easily see Bradford stepping down from being professional, or Beaumont cutting his investment, so the disaster could simply become bigger and bigger before the "Let's give it a chance" brigade start.

I made my mind up not to comment again on this subject, and await the outcome, but after reading this I could not let it pass.

I think that this post, though not really in keeping with the OP, is the best I have read re the whole P&R question, it simply deals with facts, with a touch of mind reading to conclude with.

Presented the way you have put it, surely the gang of four never even considered the two year cycle, had they done so they must have seen it to be the best solution, excepting of course they purposefully designed the system to maintain a status quo.

[Dave T]

This thread with its thus far 24 pages shows why people like me have considered the system a nonsense from day 1

i dont get your point. During licensing we had 24 page threads complaining about it too.

[The Parksider]

i dont get your point. During licensing we had 24 page threads complaining about it too.

 

I get it.

 

Yes there were many complaints about P & R and many complaints about licensing.

 

This system has neither delivered Licensing or P & R.

 

what's your point Dave?

[The Parksider]

I think that this post, though not really in keeping with the OP

 

The post is about Beaumont trying to change the system through breaking it's rules.

 

It could not be more in keeping with the debate on offer.

 

If you want to narrow it down to the simple fact he's breaking a rule or intending to break a rule and nothing else then you deserve all the....

 

He's arrogant

He's a cry baby 

Leigh have no class

Leigh don't deserve promotion

 

etc etc etc ad nauseum replies that you got and more.

[The Parksider]

Presented the way you have put it, surely the gang of four never even considered the two year cycle, had they done so they must have seen it to be the best solution, excepting of course they purposefully designed the system to maintain a status quo.

 

Of course they considered it, but it was the idea of their rival "rebel" clubs in a power struggle so they ploughed on and forced the vote their way.

 

The arguments between them extended to changes to the way SL was run not just this new system, but for the sake of unity, at a tough time for the game they accepted the proposal and the £200M.

 

Not sure they purposely designed the system to maintain the status quo??

 

The politics are intense, it may be Solly can't get approval to up the cap because certain clubs will not allow it.I really don't know, but Beaumont and Green have ended up in the middle of a mess.

 

For me Beaumont needs this system to work get his Leigh club in SL hence he pushes for a "tweak".

 

Mr. Green needs this system to fail quickly and be changed to some sort of  licensing to get his beloved Bulls back in SL hence he may give up competing in it by going part time .

[indomitable]

Just to correct one statement, Marc Green has not stated that he will be running a part time squad. The squad will not be as large as the season just gone, not surprising given the fact that a number of players never even figured in the first team or any Bradford squad. The aim is to recruit more quality than quantity.

[Dave T]

I get it.

Yes there were many complaints about P & R and many complaints about licensing.

This system has neither delivered Licensing or P & R.

what's your point Dave?

are you explaining Padge's post for him?

The system was never about guaranteed p&r. If they wanted guaranteed p&r, they would have introduced a system with guaranteed p&r.

It never, EVER, promised guaranteed P&R. It promised an opportunity, which was there, and I enjoyed watching.

[jpmc]

Of course they considered it, but it was the idea of their rival "rebel" clubs in a power struggle so they ploughed on and forced the vote their way.

 

The arguments between them extended to changes to the way SL was run not just this new system, but for the sake of unity, at a tough time for the game they accepted the proposal and the £200M.

 

Not sure they purposely designed the system to maintain the status quo??

 

The politics are intense, it may be Solly can't get approval to up the cap because certain clubs will not allow it.I really don't know, but Beaumont and Green have ended up in the middle of a mess.

 

For me Beaumont needs this system to work get his Leigh club in SL hence he pushes for a "tweak".

 

Mr. Green needs this system to fail quickly and be changed to some sort of  licensing to get his beloved Bulls back in SL hence he may give up competing in it by going part time .

Why would solly push for a increase in the salary cap ? his job is to do whats right for SLE and its members

[Philm]

That's not the point is it Phil....

 

If Leigh had fallen to Bradford in a play off final in which both clubs were operating on a level cap then I would guess Mr. Beaumont would have had the good grace to accept that because it would have been a fair competition.

 

Then after pipping Leigh, Bradford could have been looking forward to being able to spend full SL cap, and could recruit as best possible given it's late season.

 

Then they would have a season free from relegation in SL in 2016 to get adjusted to Superleague and look to build again for 2017 in which relegation would be back on the cards. Their aim would be 11th. anything more a bonus.

 

Even if a Sheffield or a Halifax won it from 3rd. or 4th. they would have won it fair and square and they would equally have two years to build a side and get used to the higher level of competition with an aim to 11th. at worst 2017.

 

Les Catalans got just this protection in 2006 when they came bottom of SL. In 2007 they managed 10th. place and were nicely established in SL.

 

Hull.K.R.went up 2007 and managed 11th. first go as Salford had a very poor season.

 

Castleford went up 2008 and came bottom just short of Hull, the following year they came seventh that second year worked for them

 

Widnes went up 2012 and were bottom only just on points difference, protected for a second year they came 10th. It worked.....

 

It worked year after year that's the record, that's what the rebel clubs saw, that's what Martyn Sadler saw, that's what Derek Beaumont will be aware of.

 

But the RFL faction in the guise of Wood, Barwick, Solly, Hetherington, and their accountants KPMG saw something different, in a discredited abandoned system from Swiss Soccer that they decided to put in place because it would see "lot's of jeopardy" that would supposedly put crowds up in RL despite it's failure in Soccer. Padge did plenty of work to show that was nonsense, and the figures are now in to prove his point.

 

This was the most useless, brainless decision ever, in the face of a very workable alternative that the powers that be blocked from there being a vote on.

 

I'd have thought Solly now would be desperate to make it work, but suspect the SL clubs may not let him bow to Beaumont's very clever challenge. It's not that P & R didn't work this year that's the whole story, we have a stagnant Superleague in which Wakey or another could fail badly again and be trapped in a cycle of failure. We could easily see Bradford stepping down from being professional, or Beaumont cutting his investment, so the disaster could simply become bigger and bigger before the "Let's give it a chance" brigade start. 

So you therefore meant to say that Wakefield would have been relegated and a Championship club (not necessarily Leigh) promoted.

[The Parksider]

Why would solly push for a increase in the salary cap ? his job is to do whats right for SLE and its members

 

I get your point as he's the "General manager" of SL??

 

But he was on the Radio droning on about making the middle eights a more effective competition in terms of Championship clubs having a better chance of competing.

 

Managing SL in the past was never about maintaining a closed shop otherwise how did Widnes get in?? They weren't SLE members were they?

 

What's "right" for SLE has always been having the biggest, strongest and richest clubs in Superleague. Therefore it would be right for Superleague if Leigh were in as their owner is prepared to invest more in a Superleague club than Wakefield or Widnes.

 

Isn't that what Superleague wants above anything - heavy private investment??

 

It would also be "Right" for Superleague if Bradford were back with their fanbase to booste crowds - isn't crowds what Superleague wants?. Many SL members would be happy to see someone go to facilitate that surely??

[The Parksider]

1. The system was never about guaranteed p&r. If they wanted guaranteed p&r, they would have introduced a system with guaranteed p&r.It never, EVER, promised guaranteed P&R.

 

2.  I enjoyed watching.

 

 

1. The point isn't about providing a "guarantee" you've added that, it's about providing clubs with a realistic chance of promotion and if you have a disparate cap you don't have a realistic chance.

 

Your point seems to be that this system does not guarantee P & R therefore if no club achieves it the system has not failed.

 

That's OK if the clubs failed because they were not good enough, but the difference here is that Leigh are stopped from being good enough by the disparate cap.

 

The point here is SL clubs can also be bad enough to deserve to go down but the disparate cap stops this.

 

2. I enjoyed watching. What is your point??

 

Pre-season Solly was going around declaring that the system would bring more interest and confirmed in an early statement that by that he meant bigger crowds, because not long into the season he was cherry picking stats to "prove it". When I heard him at the end of the season he'd abandoned the criteria for success in terms of crowds, for a new criteria of "more interest". He said he'd spoken to the clubs and they all felt it was more interesting.

 

An unquantifiable criteria for success nobody can fully disprove without access to the clubs. 

 

But even the "more interest" criteria is flawed when the alternative P & R system Solly helped block, could have allowed Leigh to spend their money, could have guaranteed a club went up, and could have given that club more chance of staying up.

 

Your point seems to be this system is more interesting than licensing, well it may be but it doesn't look anywhere near as interesting as what the rebel clubs were trying to table. 

[The Parksider]

Just to correct one statement, Marc Green has not stated that he will be running a part time squad. The squad will not be as large as the season just gone, not surprising given the fact that a number of players never even figured in the first team or any Bradford squad. The aim is to recruit more quality than quantity.

 

Jimmy spoke of cost cutting and although Mr.Green may have stopped short of going part time to do this he's cutting squad numbers as you state.

 

I'm not sure that cutting down the squad for a 30 match slog is positive news, as for more "quality" who have they signed then that is quality??

 

All I can see is some of the better players retiring, and professional player numbers being cut. Is that really mounting a stronger challenge for next year?

 

Bradford got near to Wakey this year, do we really think as things are going, that that small gap will get smaller??? Brian Smith doesn't think it.

[Dave T]

1. The point isn't about providing a "guarantee" you've added that, it's about providing clubs with a realistic chance of promotion and if you have a disparate cap you don't have a realistic chance.

Your point seems to be that this system does not guarantee P & R therefore if no club achieves it the system has not failed.

That's OK if the clubs failed because they were not good enough, but the difference here is that Leigh are stopped from being good enough by the disparate cap.

The point here is SL clubs can also be bad enough to deserve to go down but the disparate cap stops this.

2. I enjoyed watching. What is your point??

Pre-season Solly was going around declaring that the system would bring more interest and confirmed in an early statement that by that he meant bigger crowds, because not long into the season he was cherry picking stats to "prove it". When I heard him at the end of the season he'd abandoned the criteria for success in terms of crowds, for a new criteria of "more interest". He said he'd spoken to the clubs and they all felt it was more interesting.

An unquantifiable criteria for success nobody can fully disprove without access to the clubs.

But even the "more interest" criteria is flawed when the alternative P & R system Solly helped block, could have allowed Leigh to spend their money, could have guaranteed a club went up, and could have given that club more chance of staying up.

Your point seems to be this system is more interesting than licensing, well it may be but it doesn't look anywhere near as interesting as what the rebel clubs were trying to table.

1 - i dont disagree too much with the salary cap discussion.

2 - could you explain your last line a bit furtger? What was being tabled by rebel clubs?

[Angelic Cynic]

What's "right" for SLE has always been having the biggest, strongest and richest clubs in Superleague. Therefore it would be right for Superleague if Leigh were in as their owner is prepared to invest more in a Superleague club than Wakefield or Widnes.

 

      I think Mr O'Connor at Widnes may be able to spend far more than Beaumont but is prepared to conform to the salary cap - just as Leeds, St Helens and the rest of the super League clubs apparently do.

 

     With the World Club Challenge games due to be played fairly soon perhaps the club owners of the English participants should be asked if they fancy breaching the salary cap for these games.

It would also be "Right" for Superleague if Bradford were back with their fanbase to booste crowds - isn't crowds what Superleague wants?. Many SL members would be happy to see someone go to facilitate that surely??

 

    Crusaders got bigger attendances at Wrexham,in Super League,than they did at a lower level in Bridgend.Fat lot of good that did.

 

    When Gateshead thunder were forced to go to Hull they were having larger attendances in Super League than Hull were at the time.Fat lot of good that did.

 

    When Bradford were last in Super League they were getting better attendances then some other clubs.Fat lot of good that did.

    

 

[The Parksider]

 What was being tabled by rebel clubs?

 

Six SL clubs put forward the idea P & R should take place every two years.

 

This would give such as Leigh a year to get used to SL and be able to build a team protected from relegation.

 

As I set out above several clubs set to go straight down had found their feet this way because Catalans were protected from relegation and the licensing system also protected clubs from relegation after promotion.

 

So this was a "proved" system whereas the current system was a "failed system" as Sadler pointed out 20/1/2014 when he found out it was copied off Swiss soccer. 

[The Parksider]

I think Mr O'Connor at Widnes may be able to spend far more than Beaumont but is prepared to conform to the salary cap - just as Leeds, St Helens and the rest of the super League clubs apparently do.

 

You may think that but Widnes fans kindly set out right from the start of his reign the club had to stand on it's own two feet. That was repeated many times, by the man himself as well. He warned the fans he would not "sub the club" and aimed at 8,000 members (correction welcome) to create an income that would fund a professional club on full cap.

 

Only the other week Widnes fans pointed out that due to the low crowds they do not spend the full cap, and they could not afford to keep Clarkson who got a better offer from HKR.

 

Wakefield too admitted to not spending full cap. Many years back Mike Stephenson condemned clubs who came into Superleague who didn't spend full cap as being "criminal" because they weren't competing just surviving.

 

In contrast Mr. Beaumont wants to fund his club to the full Superleague cap and is being blocked. Super league needs clubs to be competitive, Leigh are offering more than Widnes or Wakefield on that score. 

 

There is an opinion Beaumont isn't rich enough to sustain a SL salary cap subsidy year on year, but the other two clubs named above exist in Superleague on the cheap.

[Dave T]

Six SL clubs put forward the idea P & R should take place every two years.

This would give such as Leigh a year to get used to SL and be able to build a team protected from relegation.

As I set out above several clubs set to go straight down had found their feet this way because Catalans were protected from relegation and the licensing system also protected clubs from relegation after promotion.

So this was a "proved" system whereas the current system was a "failed system" as Sadler pointed out 20/1/2014 when he found out it was copied off Swiss soccer.

thanks, wasnt aware of that proposal, where has that now come from, as it hasnt been discussed extensively here to my knowledge.

Also, any time somebody uses football as an example of p&r working, they get shot down and told we cant compare to soccer, so the same point should be made about the Swiss soccer example, surely?

[Spidey]

Only the other week Widnes fans pointed out that due to the low crowds they do not spend the full cap, and they could not afford to keep Clarkson who got a better offer from HKR.

.

On this point It was announced Clarkson ( & Isa for that mater) wanted paying outside of the clubs strict pay structure.

On some level it's affordability, however keeping those players on what they wanted to be paid would have broken the clubs own guidelines on players salaries, in isolation could have afforded them but the domino effect on the squad chancing their arm for uplifts that's what the club certainly couldn't afford

[The Parksider]

On this point It was announced Clarkson wanted paying outside of the clubs strict pay structure.

On some level it's affordability, however keeping those players on what they wanted to be paid would have broken the clubs own guidelines on players salaries, in isolation could have afforded them but the domino effect on the squad chancing their arm for uplifts that's what the club certainly couldn't afford

 

Thank you for that Widnes are certainly well run, fair play to them. 

 

any time somebody uses football as an example of p&r working, they get shot down and told we cant compare to soccer, so the same point should be made about the Swiss soccer example, surely?

 

No. it was nothing to do with P & R as such. The Swiss changed to the system we now have to up the attendances by making matches more "interesting".

 

The attendances did not rise, it did not work regardless of the additional "interest" which was dubious and in the end they abandoned it and.....

 

Attendances went up.

 

You cannot pay the bills with "interesting", and Solly is currently telling us how the system has been a success because "everyone" found it created greater "interest". This is highly dubious, as was KPMG's secret study and Solly's early season false declaration attendances were clearly up.

 

They were not......

[sweaty craiq]

They need tweaks to bring the uncertainty the fans need 1. Level cap 2. R1 SL v SL and C v C

[The Parksider]

      I think Mr O'Connor at Widnes may be able to spend far more than Beaumont but is prepared to conform to the salary cap - just as Leeds, St Helens and the rest of the super League clubs apparently do.

 

     With the World Club Challenge games due to be played fairly soon perhaps the club owners of the English participants should be asked if they fancy breaching the salary cap for these games.

 

Crusaders got bigger attendances at Wrexham, When Gateshead thunder were forced to go to Hull they were having larger attendances in Super League than Hull, When Bradford were last in Super League they were getting better attendances then some other clubs. Fat lot of good that did. 

 

 

Well clubs need to aim at low costs base, high attendances and private investment to balance the books or achieve investment. In all three cases that mix was not there, so to be fair Leigh may be the far better bet for SL because they have the low cost base and the private investment.

 

But this system stifles private investment in the search for higher crowds. No wonder Mr. Beaumont is challenging the RFL to allow that extra investment....

 

They need tweaks to bring the uncertainty the fans need 1. Level cap 2. R1 SL v SL and C v C

 

I can't believe you've posted that, in the light of this system failing you still think it needs tweaking rather than abandoning??

 

The Swiss said that the fans were not interested in mid table league competitions full stop. So much so that Mr. Freiburghaus of the Swiss premier league said the system in any form "is not even worth discussing".

 

Even if Leigh got level cap they'd still face last pick of the players on offer, after most have signed and would not be able to offer Superleague to players in any event. Do you really talk to "Derek" because if you do I'd be sure most of all he doesn't actually want this system.

[Padge]

      I think Mr O'Connor at Widnes may be able to spend far more than Beaumont but is prepared to conform to the salary cap - just as Leeds, St Helens and the rest of the super League clubs apparently do.

 

     With the World Club Challenge games due to be played fairly soon perhaps the club owners of the English participants should be asked if they fancy breaching the salary cap for these games.

 

    Crusaders got bigger attendances at Wrexham,in Super League,than they did at a lower level in Bridgend.Fat lot of good that did.

 

    When Gateshead thunder were forced to go to Hull they were having larger attendances in Super League than Hull were at the time.Fat lot of good that did.

 

    When Bradford were last in Super League they were getting better attendances then some other clubs.Fat lot of good that did.

    

 

 

 

FACT CHECK REQUIRED

 

1999 Average attendances, Hull 4346, Gateshead Thunder 3727

[Middleman]

Being able to run a team in SL to the full salary cap doesn't mean your team will automatically be able to compete, or be better than teams running on a smaller budget.

Just ask Salford , or London circa 2013. Or Hull.

I stand to be corrected but doubt Castleford spend the full cap under their present coach.

Throwing money at teams doesn't automatically make them better.

I don't begrudge Beaumont doing what he thinks neccessary to get Leigh to SL I just doubt it's guarantee of success, especially at the expense of their own Academy.

[GeordieSaint]

They need tweaks to bring the uncertainty the fans need 1. Level cap 2. R1 SL v SL and C v C

The fans need or your club needs? If the first, equal central funding to all Championship clubs also needs to be added to that list.