When he was summoned his address was Eccleston

Whoooooosssshhhhhh!

Stop making things up about Warrington and tell us again did Paul Sculthorpe come through the Oldham ranks?

Yes
A ST HELENS rugby star has appeared in court charged with maliciously wounding and assaulting a child.

Saints winger Dom Feaunati, of Brentwood Close, Eccleston,
rlhttp://www.thefreelibrary.com/STAR+ON+CHILD+HARM+CHARGE;+Saints+RL+ace+is+accused+of+wounding.-a0122510191rl

Whooooooossshhh x2

BRILLIANT!!!! hahahahahahahahahahahaha

No Scully was signed at a young age by Warrington and was put into the rose bridge team like a lot of their signed pros were.

Houses, cars etc. do count towards a clubs aggregate 1st and 2nd tier liability list, however, when Ben and Rhys arrived at Warrington, aged 14, they would not have counted on this list.

There's been a lot of rubbish spouted on this topic (mostly by Masked Magician) which states completely inaccurate information. Most clubs are competing for the same players and using a variety of methods to do so. However, to state that the Evans family were relocated to a nice house alongside giving the parents well paid jobs is ludicrous, as is bringing the signing of Ben and Rhys into a conversation on Warrington salary cap.

Everyone firmly believed that Saints were cheating with new "loopholes" a few years ago with the squad we had assembled under the cap (one of the years we didn't break it!) and like us back then whatever Wire are doing to stay within the cap its working - with the live Cap they'd have been caught before the start of the season... Given the amount of big signings in the last 3 of 4 years you can understand why some people my think something might be a tad dodgy, unless they are doing a Melbourne or perhaps some very well paid cleaners, they either have some form of master negotiater battering agents down or contracts weighted at the end in some cases, but unless they can be proved to be doing something dodgy its all speculation and fair play to them.

The signings are good for the game - especially paying for players that had pretty much died out 5 years ago and now with someone pumping a bit of money into the game its got to be a good thing in general and investing in the future with their own money is also good for the sport and should be encouraged - the cap currently ensures they can't simply buy up promising junior and keep them all by the time they get to SL level so it benefits the sport not just Warrington.

The only problem Warrington would face is if Moran decided he had spent enough of his money and started to run the club more as a business that generates its own budgets for buying and developing players... Its a sad case for all of us at the momnet but there just isn't enough money to do even half of what Warrington have done without a significant backer.

And?

You do know it was the lads decision don't you?

Also they came up here to take up Rugby league as Brynteg wasn't allowed to carry on in Carnegie Champion Schools competition, alot of the Brynteg players went to play Union but they didn't want to not just because they wanted to play league but because Opsreys have no youth development until 16.

Also if Celtic Crusaders had a Scholarship set up at the time they would not of moved

From the mother of the lads...

To get back to sensible debate on the subject (whilst Chris Saint has made an effort to) I would say that perhaps perversely one of the reasons that has assisted Warrington in staying under the cap is that they have been willing to pay big, in a strictly rugby league sense, transfer fees.

Because Warrington were willing (and financially able) to match the fee estimates that Salford, Wakefield and Hull put on Myler, Atkins and Carvell respectively they found themselves in a single track negotiation situation with these players. Now whilst this does not necessarily mean Warrington get these players on the cheap it does, I would contend, mean that they got them at true market value salary wise rather than an inflated salary caused by a bidding war against other interested clubs. This is pretty much the position that clubs are in when extending players contracts with a year or more to go and thus Warrington will not, to my mind, have paid a “big-name-signing-premium” on these players despite what people have suggested on this thread. Obviously Warrington would have been bidding against the players’ current clubs but offering salaries in competition with Salford and Wakefield does not compare with doing the same against say St Helens and Leeds. Whilst with Carvell it was a special case as he just wanted out (in strange circumstances) but I’m sure people on this board will remember him being heavily linked with Saints who fell away when they wouldn’t match Hull’s valuation in the transfer market leaving Warrington to match (you would suspect) his salary at Hull that had been agreed with Hull having the benefit of re-newing rather than signing the player.

I would imagine for example that if, as the internet would have you believe, Leeds, Saints and Wigan are competing for Shenton’s signature when his contract expires then his ability to negotiate a higher contract will be greatly increased by playing one club off against another. Paying a transfer fee of £150,000 last year could have secured the player and saved tens of thousands over a four year deal and keeping that inflated element of the contract off the salary cap.

If you don’t think competition adds to a player’s worth salary wise can I present prosecution exhibit number 1: David Vaealiki.

Warrington have therefore used their willingness to pay transfer fees to assist them in managing and balancing their squad under the salary cap.

You mean like Wigan did with Fielden?

And Gleeson.

No, different scenario as Wigan were desperate and had to compensate Fielden for giving up his testimonial the following year as well as entice him to move from Super League's most successful club to a club in turmoil bitterly fighting against relegation. Hardly equates to moving from Wakefield to Warrington.