Re: Salary cap amendment : Wed Nov 09, 2011 3:12 pm  

Northampton_Saint wrote:

If the salary cap is scrapped then British RL is dead. Simple. I for one will not enter another RL ground if it ever happens - I don't see what would be the point, frankly. If Wigan or anyone else are that determined to make a mockery of the sport and cheat and buy their way to meaningless trophy wins in this way then let them sod off to RU and do it there and leave those of us who actually love the sport instead to continue enjoying it. B******s....

Good Lord.
There is nothing to suggest that the salary cap is being scrapped (other than a wind up post from Saddened - and not even one of his better ones).
There are some amendments being made to the regulations that's all - this is not unusual. The rules have been amended and tinkered with many, many times since the inception of the Salary Cap.

The public communication hasn't been great. Perhaps if everyone just waits and has a read of the amended regulations when they're published it will turn out that the sky isn't about to fall in.

Re: Salary cap amendment : Wed Nov 09, 2011 3:58 pm  

According to Andy Wilson in his Guardian blog, there is no new 'Marquee' dispensation on the cap. Apparently Wigan have taken advantage of Sean O'Loughlin qualifying for the 10 year dispensation (and presumably the salary freed up by Joel's departure) to rustle up the cash for Sam. http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/20 ... CMP=twt_gu

According to Andy Wilson in his Guardian blog, there is no new 'Marquee' dispensation on the cap. Apparently Wigan have taken advantage of Sean O'Loughlin qualifying for the 10 year dispensation (and presumably the salary freed up by Joel's departure) to rustle up the cash for Sam. http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/20 ... CMP=twt_gu

Re: Salary cap amendment : Wed Nov 09, 2011 4:07 pm  

Dux wrote: According to Andy Wilson in his Guardian blog, there is no new 'Marquee' dispensation on the cap. Apparently Wigan have taken advantage of Sean O'Loughlin qualifying for the 10 year dispensation (and presumably the salary freed up by Joel's departure) to rustle up the cash for Sam. http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/20 ... CMP=twt_gu Which completely contradicts what was published the day before: The Telegraph wrote: Lenagan revealed Wigan have taken advantage of amendments to the Super League salary cap to help keep Sam Tomkins in the game. The Rugby Football League are sticking with a £1.7million ceiling but clubs are to be given permission to make allowances for long-serving, marquee and home-grown players in an effort to prevent a drain of talent to Australia and the 15-man code. Which leads me to suspect that if the RFL and Wigan don't properly clarify what they've done, Wigan are being allowed to breach the cap to keep Sam in the sport. Another point which contradicts it just being them using the allowance for O'Loughlin is Leneghan's comments that Wigan can beat any offer any League or Union team can make to a player.

Dux wrote: According to Andy Wilson in his Guardian blog, there is no new 'Marquee' dispensation on the cap. Apparently Wigan have taken advantage of Sean O'Loughlin qualifying for the 10 year dispensation (and presumably the salary freed up by Joel's departure) to rustle up the cash for Sam. http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/20 ... CMP=twt_gu Which completely contradicts what was published the day before: The Telegraph wrote: Lenagan revealed Wigan have taken advantage of amendments to the Super League salary cap to help keep Sam Tomkins in the game. The Rugby Football League are sticking with a £1.7million ceiling but clubs are to be given permission to make allowances for long-serving, marquee and home-grown players in an effort to prevent a drain of talent to Australia and the 15-man code. Which leads me to suspect that if the RFL and Wigan don't properly clarify what they've done, Wigan are being allowed to breach the cap to keep Sam in the sport. Another point which contradicts it just being them using the allowance for O'Loughlin is Leneghan's comments that Wigan can beat any offer any League or Union team can make to a player.

Re: Salary cap amendment : Wed Nov 09, 2011 4:20 pm  

Saddened! wrote:

Which completely contradicts what was published the day before:

Which leads me to suspect that if the RFL and Wigan don't properly clarify what they've done, Wigan are being allowed to breach the cap to keep Sam in the sport.

Another point which contradicts it just being them using the allowance for O'Loughlin is Leneghan's comments that Wigan can beat any offer any League or Union team can make to a player.

My suspicion is that this is poor journalism creating something out of nothing.

Re: Salary cap amendment : Wed Nov 09, 2011 4:29 pm  

Either way silence from the RFL. Not a clarification for everyone. Nor a denial of any rules change just silence.

Is the media face of the RFL taking a collective holiday during the four nations.

We moan at a lack of publicity but this is something to keep rugby league on the pages yet no comment at all.

Re: Salary cap amendment : Wed Nov 09, 2011 4:38 pm  

Dux wrote:

My suspicion is that this is poor journalism creating something out of nothing.

Poor journalism by the Telegraph? Potentially, but given how big a deal a cap ammendment would be, surely there should be clarification somewhere.

How would you explain Leneghan's comments about Wigan being able to offer a better deal than any league or union club? Or about the reports from Wigan of Sam being the highest paid league player in the world. It doesn't add up.

Re: Salary cap amendment : Wed Nov 09, 2011 5:10 pm  

Dux wrote: According to Andy Wilson in his Guardian blog, there is no new 'Marquee' dispensation on the cap. Apparently Wigan have taken advantage of Sean O'Loughlin qualifying for the 10 year dispensation (and presumably the salary freed up by Joel's departure) to rustle up the cash for Sam. http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/20 ... CMP=twt_gu If this is the case, you're right. It's a non story, other it being a hugely brave move by Wigan to commit so much of the cap on one player. A long term injury to him, and all of a sudden your thinned out squad minus it's marquee match winner looks somewhat brittle.

Dux wrote: According to Andy Wilson in his Guardian blog, there is no new 'Marquee' dispensation on the cap. Apparently Wigan have taken advantage of Sean O'Loughlin qualifying for the 10 year dispensation (and presumably the salary freed up by Joel's departure) to rustle up the cash for Sam. http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/20 ... CMP=twt_gu If this is the case, you're right. It's a non story, other it being a hugely brave move by Wigan to commit so much of the cap on one player. A long term injury to him, and all of a sudden your thinned out squad minus it's marquee match winner looks somewhat brittle.

Re: Salary cap amendment : Wed Nov 09, 2011 5:14 pm  

Maybe the RFL have told Wigan they can break the cap and they will turn blind eye.

Re: Salary cap amendment : Wed Nov 09, 2011 5:27 pm  

St pete wrote:

Maybe the RFL have told Wigan they can break the cap and they will turn blind eye.

That is certainly the suspicion. I don't see how they would get £100k cap room made available and Sam on the biggest deal for a RL player in the world. (£100k+ cap room available is a direct Leneghan quote).

Re: Salary cap amendment : Wed Nov 09, 2011 5:33 pm  

Saddened! wrote:

That is certainly the suspicion. I don't see how they would get £100k cap room made available and Sam on the biggest deal for a RL player in the world. (£100k+ cap room available is a direct Leneghan quote).

How, it could just be Joels salary plus the £50K allowance from O'Loughlins (something I mentioned earlier in this discussion)

As I said, keep checking the RFL Operational Rules.