Fact...montoya6....for a first post..That was excellent my friend. totally agree with what you put..

TOP banana ! !

I'll go along with all of that (except the "fact" bit as pointed out by DILLIGAF. Doh! )

We have what we have. We can't change that, whether we like it or not.

I'm a Bulls supporter and win or loose that's what I'll do (though I reserve the right to moan on occasion )

heard you guys are also in for Jordan James, the signings just get better and better at Odsal

Fact Note

I think that sums it up very well.

Bumped into the burgess brothers last night, ok i didn't i looked up to them 17 years old haven't been full-time training yet and they are f00king massive units, hope for you guys they turn out to be as good as sam

I couldn't sleep last night with excitement! The Sculthorpe transfer is the best bit of business Wakefield have done this year! Thanks again! Ha ha ha ha!

that pretty much is the way im looking at the signing. The only thing I'd add to that is i dont really expect to see a great deal of sculthorpe unless we're struck with injuries. I still expect to see hall used mainly in props. assuming langley and menzies are both automatic picks that only leaves 1 2nd row spot and a bench spot to share between donaldson, worrincy, whitehead and olbison. I'd expect whitehead and donaldson to both get more gametime this year plus theres talk of the twins moving into first team squad in which case I suspect we'll start filtering them in toward the back end of the year. I see sculthorpe as a signing made primarily for injury cover and not likely to get a game if everyones fit. certainly no need for some the doom and gloom on here in the last day

Think thats right, especially with the way Macca sounded about this one.

of course you are skint mate. get used to it. wakey has had to survive for years on a shoestring you have been spoiled. you might enjoy the roller coaster ride now you are one of the mid table teams. thank your lycky stars there is no relegation.

What's a lycky star?

Indeed. (Although I'd be interested in your definition of "many" given what the club said at the time about other leavers and the reasoning)

One little point that never really comes out though, that may have had more than a little bearing on things:

A sizeable chunk of Harris' income came from sale of and services provided by him in respect of his image rights to Publico. And seemingly he did a lot of work for them to justify the payment - two nights a week we heard, but make of that what you will. Same way as e.g. Scully and his substantial income from Gillette. The club viewed this as being outside the cap, same as Saints did with Scully's image rights income, although for reasons its clear the club were never happy with these payments were subsequently judged to be within the cap. I don't think such a situation ever arose at Saints, btw.

Now the implications of this for the salary cap breaches have been discussed on these forums any number of times, although for too many posters it remains an inconvenient truth (by the time the RFL decided it was a breach for year 1, we were already well through year 2 so we got hit with breaches for two years with no opportunity to mitigate).

But the other implication is that it seems clear that a source of income had been opened up for Harris that I suspect would not have been available for Peacock. It may have been because Harris was seen as being more marketable, eloquent and higher-profile...the reasons are not for here. But why this may be significant is that the "extra" money that Peacock complained was suddenly available to pay for Harris but not for him may well have been precisely that. Peacock clearly felt he had been lied to by Caisley, and if so you can understand his anger. I would have gone apoplectic in that situation. But it is not inconceivable that Caisley actually told him the truth?

Would anyone be surprised to find that Sam was able to receive income from outside for sale of HIS image rights too? We saw he was announced as the new face of Lexus Bradford the day before his new contract was announced, and we saw his face grinning at us promoting England shirts on this very forum, to point out two possible (although I am guessing) examples. If such sources of income were not available to (say) new players after Sam leaves, given that Sam (like Harris) may well have been viewed as pretty high-profile and unique by potential users of his image rights, then those players would presumably need higher packages than might otherwise have been the case? Or maybe Sam needed a lower package from the club than might otherwise have been the case? Speculation, but I'd suggest it might be a tad naive to assume that the club is necessarily able to get a player worth the same as Sam to replace him, within the cap?

I do keep making the point anyway on here that the bang you can get for your bucks within the salary cap depends very much on how much of your players' total income comes from bog-standard salary and benefits, and how much comes from "escalator" devices such as payment for image rights, payments by "unconnected" third parties, payments into Employee Benefits Trusts, use of offshore vehicles and personal service companies, payment devices like the Singapore Sling, payments to pension schemes and the ubiquitous brown paper bag. And how much of all this is actually within the rules - RFL, tax or moral.