Hood has stated that we're pretty much to the cap limit. Perhaps we're not making the best use of the cap in some areas The fact the the top clubs all have rich backers is coincidental.

There is no policable salary cap. The succesful teams are doing what we did when we had a fantastic squad.. Unfortunately we were paying for success with money we didnt have whilst the current high flyers are being paid by rich backers who havr figured a way to reward players without it counting on cap.

TBH the scoreline today flattered Wigan. The utter shambles that was Bradford's defence in the 2nd half is what should be addressed.

On paper we have a better squad that last season and arguably better than under McNamara...yet we are getting worse week by week!

NO difference to the performances of last season, turn up for 1 game then get hammered for the next 3....

Air bus for Potter i'm afraid.

I know i'll get a slating for this but the guy has proven that he can coach given the fact that he has a track record of getting teams into the top 3 previously (Catalans and Saints) so don't think it has anything to do with his style. Maybe he's just out of touch with modern coaching techniques after being away from the NRL for so long.

I think the whole situation is cancerous. There's no sign of it stopping and the only thing I can think of is to start from scratch (i.e. Brian Smith style). A completely new coaching team (get rid of Potter, Cummins & St Hillaire, Evans) is needed who will make the tough decisions (playerwise) and bring in a new coaching/playing style that has been so successful for Wigan, Warrington, Huddersfield etc. No surprise they all turned it around by employing coaches straight from the NRL.

On hindsight I think it was a bad decision all round to bring Potter in. The club has lost 2 years from not being able to make the real changes needed and Potter has lost any sort of reputation that he may have built up whilst in Super League (meaning that he'll probably have to go back to oz as an assistant again).

A very sad situation all round!!!

I believe we are.

I also suspect we are not, for example:

- employing players who receive very substantial image rights payments form "unconnected" third parties, meaning they are happy to play for a lot less than they might otherwise require.

- employing players who have a lucrative image rights, consultancy or other deal with one of the rich owner's pals, meaning they are happy to play for a lot less than they might otherwise require. And meaning the rich owner is so chuffed that his business gives his pal's business some nice juicy contracts...

- employing players as above, but where the deal is with a business otherwise connected with the rich owner, but no-one can prove it.

- employing players as above, whose partners have a nice lucrative job with one of said other businesses.

All of which arrangements might - strangely enough - mean the player may be delighted to play for the club of his dreams for a lot less wonga than he would otherwise need. Which means you could squeeze a lot more talent within the salary cap.

Now, whether any of those OTHER clubs are, especially those with wealthy owners, is of course a matter for pure speculation.

As it is a matter for pure speculation only whether, if you were ever able to add up the sum of what (net of tax) every club's players receive from every UK-related source, you would find some glaring disparities between the clubs. Despite the elephant in the room known as the "fixed" salary cap.

Salary cap? If I was a wealthy club owner, I could drive a coach and horses through it and almost certainly get away with it within the rules. But they are all honourable men, so there must be some other explanation for the disparity of squads we see on the park.

On current showing he won't. But let's give him at least till the '10 games' !

He doesnt deserve one at this rate, however I'd wish him all the best because hes tried hard to fix the car wreck that Macca left.

Has he? Well as long as he has tried hard then thats ok.

I think he has so far. The job is just beyond him, there's only one man for this job and he goes by the name of Brian.

Brian Potter?

Would probably do better.

Yes, Brian Potter, no, really.

It's a pity Brian Clough isn't around any more

Indeed it would. Profoundly so. And the wage bill that goes through the books and the salary cap process probably is, since all those clubs are saying they are spending the salary cap. And yet those clubs clearly have far superior (and therefore more expensive, you would assume?) squads than us. I am sure that third party-paid image rights have a lot to do with it - indeed, we used that when we had players that could command good promotional values from third parties. Scully/Gillette was maybe the supreme recent example that we know of. It hardly seems right though in salary cap terms if a player can get a shedload for his image rights, and therefore play for a much lower salary than otherwise might be the case? Assuming of course that that speculative scenario actually happens... Even if the third party is truly unconnected with the club.

The other scenarios involve dishonourable (IMO) conduct, or worse, and so we can surely rule them out since surely no wealthy club owner would wish to be considered to be acting dishonourably?

None of the speculative scenarios I posed would be affected by the Rangers/HMRC issue. That was, as I understand it, primarily regarding the use of EBTs to save tax and therefore get more net pay to players for your salary cap bucks. Pearson at Hull just shelled out £1m to settle their EBT exposure. Bulls have stated we never used EBTS - although, like most other clubs, we ARE in the frame for club-paid image rights.

But the above scenarios all considered image rights and other payments made to, or on behalf of, players by "unconnected" third parties. No tax issues for the club, although there might just be issues elsewhere in some cases.