Re: James Graham (Transfer Watch) : Fri Nov 19, 2010 10:48 pm  

Saddened! wrote:

The money doesn't even go on British players on the whole, it goes to Australian players.

Exactly right and the sooner SL clubs wake up to this the better off they will be.

Re: James Graham (Transfer Watch) : Sat Nov 20, 2010 5:17 am  

At the moment, it would be reckless and detrimental to the competition to raise the salary cap just to please a few clubs such as Saints, as about 8 clubs would struggle to manage a higher salary bill (just look at the financial results this year of Hull KR and Crusaders) and then there will be clubs losing top players to stronger clubs at a higher rate than we already have.

As for McManus and Graham, I can understand McManus' concerns and why he has spoken out. He is running a business and if the top players leave not just saints but the other Super League clubs, the competition can lose appeal, therefore could impact sponsors and supporters. Graham has never hid the fact of a desire to play in the NRL and who can blame him? The NRL is the biggest competition and every week is a huge challenge.

For England internationally it is better that these players are going over, for saints and super league its bad news. The only way to have some sort of prevention to this is the clubs who nurture the players such as Graham, Roby, Ashton, Burgess, Tompkins etc receive compensation, unfortunately to do that it would become all legal and through courts etc.

Re: James Graham (Transfer Watch) : Sat Nov 20, 2010 8:11 am  

Rogues Gallery wrote:

Morley came back from Aus signed for Wire, that's life.

What I do find interesting is your chairman moaning about the possibility of losing players. Did he moan when Wigan lost Robinson and Ashton? Did he moan about Leeds losing Ellis or Bradford losing Burgess?

Was he complaining about Cas losing Shenton or Quins losing LMS after those clubs had invested a lot of time and money in their development?

McMannus has a choice, he can pay Roby, Graham and Eastmond a big salary or risk them leaving. It really is as simple as that.

Why would our chairman comment on ashton, robinson, ellis or burgess going ?

It has nothing to do with him what happens at wigan, leeds, bradford.

If you don't think the is going to be a problem with all local talent being tapped up by aussie clubs then your living in another world. It won't be long before the aussies will be tapping up sam tomkins.

What sir mac is saying is spot on.

Re: James Graham (Transfer Watch) : Sat Nov 20, 2010 8:15 am  

Rogues Gallery wrote:

Because they will pay them more.

If Mcmanus wants to keep Graham he can, but it'll cost a lot of money. Would you pay
£200 - £250K to keep him?

This may seem mad as jammer imo is the best prop in this country and one of the best props in the world but i don't think the loss of jammer will as massive as losing a top class scrumhalf, stand off or hooker.

As long as saints replace him with a good prop i'd rather us keep eastmond, roby and pryce.

Re: James Graham (Transfer Watch) : Sat Nov 20, 2010 10:21 am  

I feel it is just not about the money with Graham, he is young and wants to try the good life that such as Burgess is having down under, is that a crime, just as Louis for some reason wants to try out St Helens instead of London, but this time it is because he wants success and can you blame him, but Quins RL have put a lot of time and money into him grooming him and it is just like the Graham situation.

No way can the salary level be increased to please or or two clubs, if so we will take the game back to the old days of just a few clubs winning all the time which is not good for the sport.

The Truth is only perhaps one or two clubs are making money! the rest are running at a loss and if they do not have big backers such as David Hughes at Quins running up debts, this can't go on forever, something is wrong with our game and it is time those who run the game from Clubs stop thinking just about their own club and success.

Re: James Graham (Transfer Watch) : Sat Nov 20, 2010 12:01 pm  

St pete wrote:

Why would our chairman comment on ashton, robinson, ellis or burgess going ?

It has nothing to do with him what happens at wigan, leeds, bradford.

If you don't think the is going to be a problem with all local talent being tapped up by aussie clubs then your living in another world. It won't be long before the aussies will be tapping up sam tomkins.

What sir mac is saying is spot on.

Both Tomkins brothers have stated they don't want to head to Aus, but it's hardly earth-shattering, all the inbreds in Deliverance stayed near the river.

Re: James Graham (Transfer Watch) : Sat Nov 20, 2010 1:11 pm  

Carlos Alberto wrote:

Both Tomkins brothers have stated they don't want to head to Aus, but it's hardly earth-shattering, all the inbreds in Deliverance stayed near the river.

More likely they're frightened of the flying monkeys and the wicked witch they saw on the film.

Re: James Graham (Transfer Watch) : Sat Nov 20, 2010 7:47 pm  

Cragganmore Kid wrote:

More likely they're frightened of the flying monkeys and the wicked witch they saw on the film.

Re: James Graham (Transfer Watch) : Sat Nov 20, 2010 7:47 pm  

If he goes, he goes. The club will continue as it always has done.

Re: James Graham (Transfer Watch) : Sun Nov 21, 2010 11:37 am  

Carlos Alberto wrote:

Both Tomkins brothers have stated they don't want to head to Aus, but it's hardly earth-shattering, all the inbreds in Deliverance stayed near the river.

Sam was fed up down under on the tour according to the paper as he was missing family and friends which means at least we can keep him a few more years.