: Fri Apr 17, 2009 4:11 pm  

The reason we are being headlined as being in trouble is due to a number of factors.

A) Letting one of our "high earning" centres go to one of our rivals mid contract.

B) One of our antipodean suggesting he is looking for a move. ( could be reported as wants out because Warrington Can't afford his wages any longer).

C) Media love nothing more than to see failure. How "Big spending" warrington have the wolves at the door. Watch the media frenzy when the wheel falls off at Chelsea. I suspect there will be little sympathy.

2+2=5.
I stopped off to see the shoe shine man at Lunchtime to ask him what the word on the street was and he reckons that if we have to pay £1.00 back then you can double it for Wigan.

: Fri Apr 17, 2009 4:11 pm  

getdownmonkeyman wrote:

The same Andy Gatclife who came when we were still at Wilderspool and were losing hundreds of thousands per year?

I was always under the impression that tighter controls were first introduced by a guy called John Smith who was the first to try and put right some of the financial problems at the club.

: Fri Apr 17, 2009 4:54 pm  

sally cinnamon wrote:

These criticisms of Andy Gatcliffe are unfair, the club was run poorly before he got there and we were always losing money. Since Gatcliffe has been in charge we've run a much tighter ship. I know we have had investment from Simon Moran but Gatcliffe had turned the financial situation around before Moran became the majority shareholder. We are never in trouble with the salary cap and we don't have Guardian "save the club" campaigns and talks of CVA etc now Gatcliffe is here, we don't have to sell players because we are skint any more. In times of a recession when you need someone who knows how to run a business cost effectively and keep it out of trouble then I'm happy to have him at Warrington.

As I said, he's an effective, able, manager. He does not come across to me at least (in the few times I have heard him speak publicly) as an inspiring ambitious leader of a multi-million pound turnover sporting organisation aiming to be the very best in Northern hemisphere rugby league raising the bar of sporting excellence.

: Fri Apr 17, 2009 5:21 pm  

Wires71 wrote:

As I said, he's an effective, able, manager. He does not come across to me at least (in the few times I have heard him speak publicly) as an inspiring ambitious leader of a multi-million pound turnover sporting organisation aiming to be the very best in Northern hemisphere rugby league raising the bar of sporting excellence.

But ask yourself how many RL clubs could attract, and more importantly keep, a dynamic business leader? For example; Peter Deakin. As soon as he made a name for himself RU came knocking and desite us luring him back, it didn't last very long before he went returned to RU.

Now this may sound incredibly negative, but I would imagine the primary function of an RL club administrator is to minimise losses. Effectively, stay solvent first, win silvereware second.

: Fri Apr 17, 2009 5:33 pm  

Wouldnt say no to a RL man in a non executive role with the board to offer input.

Shouldn't be at the expence of the more than capable management we already have though.

The lack of one hasnt been the reason we havent been succeding on the pitch.

: Fri Apr 17, 2009 5:41 pm  

getdownmonkeyman wrote:

Now this may sound incredibly negative, but I would imagine the primary function of an RL club administrator is to minimise losses. Effectively, stay solvent first, win silvereware second.

Even for Grade A SL Franchises aiming to win SL operating at full cap?

You know I bet Paul Caddick/Gary Hetherington and Tony Colquitt/Eamonn McManus are not thinking that way. I bet they want to be up there striving to be the consistently best teams in SL. They would not have achieved what they have if that wasn't their goal.

I want more from Gatcliffe/Hoyle than balancing the books.

rl : Fri Apr 17, 2009 6:34 pm  

Wigan probably won't have to pay anything back as they never had it in the first place.
Whelan never allowed Wigan to undertake schemes like the Employer Benfit Trusts or Image Rights for players. There were rumours about image rights being used in his later days as owner but never confirmed.
This problem has been coming for some while so whether Ian Lenagan has started using them I don't know.
It was stated that four clubs were not involved.
I do believe Wigan would be one of those four.
BTW all the publicity is about image rights but I'm pretty sure HMRC are investigating the Benefit Trusts as well.
I doubt they will clobber the clubs or players for every penny owed. The HMRC usually come to an "agreement" which is acceptable to both parties.
It will be better for all when it's sorted and all clubs can use the agreed figures which HMRC will finally allow.

: Sat Apr 18, 2009 8:21 am  

Wires71 wrote:

Even for Grade A SL Franchises aiming to win SL operating at full cap?

You know I bet Paul Caddick/Gary Hetherington and Tony Colquitt/Eamonn McManus are not thinking that way. I bet they want to be up there striving to be the consistently best teams in SL. They would not have achieved what they have if that wasn't their goal.

I want more from Gatcliffe/Hoyle than balancing the books.

I would say that is exaclty what McManus did when he first turned up.