This.

As Richie says more details are required before working through the positives and any negatives (including unintended ones.)

__________

If it transpires the RFL are paying some or all of this contract perhaps they should be placing Tomkins in the re-branded London Broncos side where his presence may actual make a difference to the profile of the sport amongst the southern based/biased media?

Do you really think sam tomkins 300k is coming off a 1.7m cap?

The cap has been altered...... we dont know to what extent yet.

I wouldn't be surprised if he was totally exempt from the cap now.... best case 50%

Wasn't that Harold's lad?

My concern regarding this almost immediate relaxation in the SC rules since Joels defection and Sam's new pay rise as a result, is how it will be policed and how relaxed the rulings will be

Where do we draw the line before salary cap is broken by any SL side?

Given the desire of our game to produce higher quality younger players, wouldn't it make more sense to give each club an "X players under 23(?) years of age are exempt from the SC", thus meaning clubs can benefit from investing in young talent without it hitting their cap allowance, but with the number low enough to stop any club from stockpiling the best young talent? I say 23 as this is the age at which clubs can get compensation for younger players leaving I think????

Anything relating to only one player per club will inevitably lead to disharmony within the club.

I think the RFL need to get some clear information out regarding this new rule, as it is it's turning into the usual RFL comedy show, changing rules to suit and keeping everyone like mushrooms

I think you're right....make an age when players become live on the cap....

you can then develop your players off cap in the first team.... works nicely.

So long as union is raiding our ranks, we have to give clubs the ability to at least have a chance of keeping star players. I doubt the RFL have fully thought the whole thing through, but TBH if it keeps the likes of Tomkins in the game I'm not bothered whether the rules have been bent in Wigan's favour.

The reality is the competition is already hugely unbalanced because whilst a couple of clubs spend at/near the cap, a lot don't spend anywhere near it - because they can't. At present the main aim of the cap ought to be to enforce solvency (if possible).

I think the best alteration to the cap would be to make players who are developed through a clubs academy only count 50% on the cap. Its a simple rule, and would allow a top player to be paid close to what they could get elsewhere. It would also promote clubs developing their own talent as you could get much more bang for your buck.

I doubt this salary cap flex thing is designed to favour Wigan, but it is certainly going to benefit them most in the short term.

Having said that, they have suffered the poaching from Union worse than others, with Robinson, Farrell, Ashton and now Tomkins all going that way.

The RFL have to be seen to do something about it, otherwise we'll become a sport which feeds the RFU with their backs

There is a reason for that. They didn't manage the cap properly, and the reason was because they never embraced the concept and always wanted to loopholes to get rid of it.

That's why it was easire for union to raid them for specific individuals, as others in the side were paid way over the odds.

I agree. There should be a reward to clubs that produce and nurture young talent which should include an incentive to pay them more to stay at their clubs as they develop.

Granted, Robinson was a big loss but Tomkins, whilst still a loss, won't be missed anywhere near as much.
In Farrell's case, he more or less retired to Union which was no big deal to Wigan by then, he was pretty much worn-out.
Ashton was largely unproven (assuming the Ashton I'm vaguely remembering is the one you mean ) .
When you spread that over more than a decade, it's hardly the end of the world, so I'm fairly sanguine. (Not complacent, just sanguine).
I was initially aghast when Iestyn left Leeds but, in the end, it was a silver lining, we had to start being a team.
Plus it was a good laugh watching the unionistas trying to justify saying that he couldn't and would never hack it, despite him being repeatedly capped for Wales.

Anyway, I await more detail on how these exemptions from the salary cap will work, I want to hear that it's not just a knee-jerk and that there are clearly-defined rules around it all, rather than the sort of back-room deals we used to see with the man with the satchel.

Farrell was reaching the end of his league career its true, but he was still an international, as well as the heartbeat of Wigan (probably the only thing keeping them going at the time).
His leaving left a hole, the same as Harris leaving did to Leeds. I'm not saying all the players leaving for Union are stars, and will be missed massively (Chev Walker, Lee Smith etc), but they all were decent England quality players that the game will miss. Wigan will replace J.Tomkins well enough. But losing S.Tomkins is a lot harder. The RFL needs to address this in a logical and though out manner. Scrapping the SC is not the answer, or anything as knee jerking as that, but it must make some effort to keep home grown players in the game where possible and financially reasonable

I think that the RFL have made a massive rod for their own back with this seemingly kneejerk reaction to Joel Tomkins' defection.
If Hetherington was angry with the RFL about the events surrounding the Crusaders' demise he will (& should be apopleptic with rage) over these events.
I hope that he isn't the only one.