I don't think Saints are spending anywhere near the cap. Indeed, I reckon we could be in or near the bottom third for total wage bill in SL.

I think we're scrimping and squeezing every last penny for the ground and McManus is telling everyone we're spending high because we can't afford to lose ANY season ticket revenue.

We had four world class players in the squad in 06 in Lyon, Long, Cunningham and Scully, and a pack strong enough to leave Fozzard and Anderson out of final squads. We now have Graham and Roby and kids filling the squad past the first 13.

We were getting good value, but are we this year? I think that there are probably a similar number of average players in there, but there are far more kids expected to be first teamers, and I don't think it's them taking up all the cap space.

What and the hundreds of shareholders, who are mostly small holders and fans like myself choose not to tell anyone?

Its definite not as good value as our 2006 squad, of that there can be little arguement, but is it good value compared to the other top 7 squads?

The problem is that it's getting worse and even though I agree with the aim of replacing from within with youth, I'm not sure the players coming through are good enough to take over.

I'm not sure it is a better squad than Wigan, Wire, Leeds and Hudds though. There are players that are individually better, Roby, Graham, etc. But is Gardner better than Lawrence or Cudjoe? Is Meli? Is their coach just getting more out of his players than ours is?

Of course it could just be the competition evening itself out as more teams spend up to the cap, and that can only be good for the game.

I think think it is about evening out, which unfortunately means the very top teams like us are going to get worse.

I'm sure we have our fair share of high-earners i.e. Pryce, Wellens, Graham, Wilkin and Roby . But if we are right up at the cap - and given the hefty number of inexperienced kids playing first team football - we either have to believe that McManus (arguably the most financially astute man in SL) has chosen to grant them all pay deals that are above and beyond the market rate for their level of achievement or he's not telling the truth.

Don't forget that it was McManus himself who stated over two years ago that we needed to cut our cloth accordingly in order to secure the stadium - which meant getting rid of the experienced high-earners and going with less expensive (but precocious) academy lads. If we're bang on the cap then what's happened to the cost-cutting? What was the point of getting rid of, say, Willie Talau (when we couldn't afford to) if we were just going to carry on spending like were champions?

I'll go back to the point about paying over the odds for our kids. If we are doing precisely that then what happens when all of them mature (as they all will in the next 18-24 months) and improve dramatically? If we're up at the cap we won't be able to give them any kind of pay rise and they'll be off double-quick. I suppose we could pay them more if Wellens retires or Meli leaves. But if we pay them with that money what's left over to replace Wellens and Meli?

It just doesn't add up.

Under the cap rules, if a player is long serving (can't remember the exact number of years) doesn't only half their salary count towards the cap?
If so, we are trying to replace KC, Scully and Longy on half the wages we were actually paying them.

Chill Frosties. It's not even our board. If someone came on SS shouting the odds he'd get chased off the board with axes!

Nope. There is 50 grand that can be a reduction on players wages with over 10 years service. Thats 50 grand in total not each player. But you could spend it on one or many players with over 10 years.

The rhinos have sini, senior, Jjb, Bailey, burrow, McGuire. Disco goo until he moved on.

So say senior who will be on reduced terms, may only be taking up 20 grand on the cap but getting 70K but no reduction on anyone else.

This is correct, at Warrington we have Jon Clarke, Lee Briers and Paul Wood all with more than 10 years service but we are only allowed £50,000 in total spread across one or more players.

Seems a shame really that if a player stays at a club for ten years then the club should be given an incentive to keep him on the cap by allowing £50,000 for each player.

There is also (as an extra to the 10 year allowance) a £50K allowance for the top earner who has come through your academy system.
I would guess Roby at Saints, Burrow or McGuire at Leeds, O'loughlin at Wigan, Paul Wood at Wire.

We are not scrapping the barrel with our kids as some doom mongers would suggest


1. Wellens (1st choice)
2. Gardner (1st choice)
3. Shenton (1st choice)
4. Wheeler / Lomax (1st choice)weirdly enough
5. Meli (1st choice)
6. Gaskell
7. Wheeler / Lomax
8. Perry (1st choice)
9. Roby (1st choice)
10. Graham (1st choice)
11. Flannery (1st choice)
12. Puletua (1st choice)
13. Moore (2nd choice but not youth player anymore international hooker with many years of experience at SL)

14. Clough (1st choice)
15. Ashurst
16. Magennis / LMS
17. Foster (should be on the field IMO, but a kid all the same)

So I make that 11 first choice players. We are hardly in a war with this casualty list.

Dux and I watched a game from last year on record t'other week, and the line up whas very ropey. We're doing alright, I just think the amount of shuffling round messrs Wheeler/Lomax/Eastmond/Gaskell/ Foster have done over the past 2 years has meant that we don't really know (or perhaps are confident in knowing) what our actual starting line up should be.

Maybe not scraping the barrel overall, but the above is the real negative.

Lomax got some extra responsibilty in a game towards the end of las t season (was it Bradford at home?) and had a stormer! Maybe moving him closer in with Wheels in the centre will help bring out his best.
Gaskell is a good 1st receiver and although his kicking is inconsistant, it does have potential, so will hopefully improve as he gets more game time.
The key (as so often) in the forward. If we defend with authority and crash the ball up well, make the offloads and the back row offer the runners, our young half backs will have a chance.
If the forwards play like they did last week, it would be a case of our youngster not standing a chance.

alright don't throw your handbag.

Don't know if it is anywhere else on this thread but I noticed in the St. Helens Star that Clough is or has been suffering from tonsilitis. Hope he is OK to play on Saturday.

Luckily you don't need much talking in a Leeds match. Anything above 2 syllables would confuse these Yorkshire folk.

It's a clutch

Spot on, if we are to progress we need to give the likes of Gaskell, Lomax and Wheeler time to bed in at half back.

Gaskell has had 5 games as the solo half back. Give him a partner who will share the work and see how he goes. Looked much better with Pryce along side him. Supporters will say give youth a chance, stop buying aussie journey men, but then critise the very same young players when they have had less than a hand full of games at first grade.

Ideally Gaskell would have maybe played a couple of 20 mins this season so far. Instead he's got to step up , but lets give him a chance.

Young players will not progress or develop unless there is someone showing them how. We don't currently have an old head in the side capable of encouraging and advising a young half back. Leon in the side with Gaskell would be fine, I'd have no problems with that. It would be a really beneficial thing for Gaskell's development for him to play alongside Leon.

BUT without him in the side it's akin to having a formula one car and a baby in the driving seat. You are not going to get very far and could easily be detrimental to his development.

As i work for myself, i've been to work with proper flu, and every type of cold or hangover. I had tonsilitis once and was in bed for a week. If Cloughys got that he wont be near the team for a couple of weeks

Not every flu, there's no way on god's earth you would have made it to work, if you had contracted the mythical man flu. Even the best men fall victim to that foul illness.

That's fair enough but there is not alot we can do about it, our 2 first choices are can't play and won't play. Our first main choice for back up is Wilkin also injured.

I doubt any other team could offer any more if they had their first 3 creative players out.

Take Maguire, burrows and Sinfield out of Leeds.
Tomkins, Lululi and Deacon out of Wigan
Brough, brown and robinson out of huddersfield

you get the point, when your top 3 choices are out you have to put the kids out there and they have to learn on the job. Fans just have to accept the mistakes and not get on the kids back too much expecting them to be what they are not.

Some youngsters will be a hit from game 1 others will take half a season to get up to speed. I think this will all serve Gaskell well come next year, and with another half back like lomax or Wheeler, until Pryce and Wilkin return, it will take the pressure of him, unlike when he had eastmond alongside and had to do everything.

When you read Any Wilsons blog in the guardian after the Saints match, it starts of with a commentry on why poor Eastmond did not perform, but then almost every sentence about the match had Gaskell name in it doing good things and bad things. Basically it's all going through him and with that pressure he will make mistakes.

I still think he should be our 6 or 7 next year with someone of experience alongside. The mistakes will get less and less and the quality will improve as the season goes on so long as he gets some kind of support from another half back of any quality.