No but their’s a significant difference between someone that you’re paying with the sole intention of him being a player. Cas fans are coming out with some ridiculous ideas of what is comparable to try and justify this, kind of just highlights the problem with this doesn’t it.

Not really. It’s the other way round. Fans of other clubs are making ridiculous comparisons or arguments to somehow make it out to be some kind of scandal when it isn’t.

Based on what you are saying, Cas could say to him, we will pay you the same wage and offer you a coaching role for the season. Essentially that would take him off the cap and he wouldn’t be a player. What’s the difference?

Your arguments hold no water. Rugby players are his mates. I’m sure if Trueman asks for advice after his retirement, he isn’t going to say no is he?

As I’ve said in my original post, I’m wholly supportive of any club using the exemption. It would be insane to put anyone on the cap who is going to be ineligible in any game during that season.

What ridiculous comparisons are people making against this?

And no one is saying it’s a scandal so stop being melodramatic, just that it is a poor rule.

Just funny how if the likes of Leeds, Wigan or Saints used this rule then it’d be the usual “RFL pets” and bending the rules for the big clubs. One of the smaller clubs in Cas do it and it’s fine and nothing to see here.

Comparisons such as Walmsley last season, who played games.

Who is to say they haven’t? Because it hasn’t been publicised doesn’t mean to say it hasn’t been used.

The Hull Daily Mail seems to have received news/evidence it has been used in previous seasons. We won’t be the first and we won’t be the last.

Clubs at the bottom won’t use it because a few of them don’t actually spend the full salary cap to warrant using it (eg Salford, Wakefield).

1 - Walmsley wasn’t used as a comparison, if anything as a complete opposite, you might want to understand what comparison means.

2 - So there’s no evidence of it happening before, but it’s ok we can just guess that it did to justify it...ok then.

3 - If a newspaper had evidence that it happened before they would name the insistences when it did. A newspaper saying yes it happened, just believe us without details isn’t worth jack all and quite laughable you’d hang your hat on that, do you not know how newspapers work or operate? Them not naming names pretty tells you that they don’t have evidence.

Would you care to expand on your last paragraph concerning clubs at the bottom.

And if Cas weren’t spending the full cap they wouldn’t get dispensation, most clubs leave a gap in their caps to deal with such a scenario. So what’s happening is Cas are being let off with poor cap management, that’s why it’s a poor rule. That’s why is not comparable to other dispensations that Cas fans want to try throw around to make this sound fine.

Surprised there isn't something in the salary cap rules stating if a player is injured upto 'x' date they don't count on salary cap. Would take all uncertainty out of it.

Can you provide physical evidence of Cas’ salary cap management please rather than your assumptions? I only ask as you seemed pretty keen on needing evidence when the HDM published their article.

Maybe Cas aren’t spending the full cap and they do have plenty of room to sign a replacement without dispensation.....but that would only make the ruling even more stupid.

If Cas were already, lets say, £150/200k under the cap but still asking for salary cap relief when they have more than enough to sign a replacement then only highlights how ridiculous the rule is.

It wouldn't know would it? I imagine clubs would exploit the ruling to there advantage.

Don't see how anyone can have a problem with them being given an exemption if he's literally not going to play for the entire season. Other ways round it anyway even if the RFL didn't let them. Just loan him to a team with enough cap space (presumably only us, Salford and London) in exchange for a favour at some point, similar to the deal we did with Hull for Dean Hadley the other year.

How is that even remotely similar to the Dean Hadley deal? Dean played more or less the full season for us and was IMO one of our top performers, yes Hull needed to offload for temporary relief yet Dean was fully fit and highly regarded throughout the game, if we hadn`t of taken him there would have been at least 5 or 6 other SL clubs that would have.

Simon Grix deal was very similar though.

So would any other member of the coaching staff. Do they count on the cap?

Easy. There’s no use giving a dispensation to a club to spend more money when they can’t afford the existing cap, and can fit a player under it if they wanted to replace a player out injured long-term.