I didn't understand which teams you were talking about, which is why I said "who are you talking about" rather than "what".

Ah...so you did
I'd be very suprised if Harlequins, Cas, Wakey, Crusaders, Salford, Bradford, KR were able to spend the full cap without significant external "donations" to their revenues.

There's nothing in the regulations to stop all the SL clubs spending to the full cap now. Despite what Mr Hetherington may have said the reality is Harlequins, Wakefield, Salford, Castleford, Crusaders and Bradford surely cannot be spending anywhere close to the cap. If they are with the squads they have assembled I'm not sure an increase would be in their interests.



How many licenses will the RFL be handing out if that was a requirement now?

Forcing clubs to spend money assembling squads they cannot afford to run could be a difficult concept to sell to it's members.

I'm not sure about an actual increase in the cap limit but i would definately like to see all acadamy produced players have the 1st 20/25k of their wages not count on the live cap.

I'm impressed that the chief executive of one SL club is aware of the budgets and cashflows for 2010 of the other 13 teams in the division. Quality bit of industrial espionage GH, well done.

Alternatively, he could be speculating.

That's not what I was suggesting though is it?

IMO part of the licensing criteria should be that you can demonstrate a sound financial performance to be able to spend the full cap allowance if its required. Whether you choose to spend the full cap is different of course.

I still think a merged club Cas and Wakey as an example is going to be far more secure and much stronger than the relevant pish pot clubs we have now, regarless of what noises the fans make out they will do. Same goes for clubs like Salford, who simply should not be there ahead of a club like Widnes, who probably can meet the criteria I am talking about.

Believe in the sleeve and all that...

Not many go to the NRL for money though, the flow of players is the other way.

RU has had plenty of bloody noses in the acquisition of RL players and now seem wary of chasing them. They seem more interested at the moment in stopping the flow of players to France.

Instead of having two "pish pot" clubs you'll have one.

The only way these things can work is if they are effectively takeovers of one club by another (St George-Illawarra, Wests Tigers). At least in those scenarios the fans of the "larger" club usually remain with it and the ones from the smaller side are those fall by the wayside.

If you try to produce a merged club in the Calder Valley it'll have less support than either Cas or Wakefield currently get IMO. The idea that it'll bring with it the combined average attendances of the two clubs is pie in the sky.

Attendances come with results. Cas can be a well supported club with success. Wakefield has a huge catchment area, yet is not attracting new supporters.

Who said anything about the club has to have huge support from day one? If you merge those two clubs the business's in the area would back it, make it much more financially secure. Which in turn you would hope to see an improvment in results. Which in turn then attracts the fans.

Wakefield have had many years as we are now without improving. Cas have proven they can do it, but need the right foundations which they don't have now. Do you really think it would be a better option to have these two clubs seperately with a licence in another 10 years?

We really need the sport to get away from that.
Half the teams in the league will always lose more games than they win. If all teams are dependant on results for fans, half are always in trouble.

Besides, the merger didn't really work for Shuddersfield or Gateshull did it?

I think ground sharing would help Cas and Wakey but doubt they will ever merge!

Again it is a misunderstood concept.

Would I stop supporting Leeds if they were losing? the answer is no. But would I stop supporting Leeds if they were uncompetitive and poor to watch? The answer would be yes after a sustained period.

Results to me is in performance, not necessarily scoreline. When I said attendances would increase on results I meant performance.

I say again, that a strong performing club in that area would achieve higher attendances as one club.

x2

Why on earth should the salary cap increase?

These are difficult times for all, especially professional sporting clubs. Salary inflation has been at 0% for some time so what is the justification for an increase? Has club revenue increased significantly over the last 12 months?

Where will this extra money magically come from anyway?