Agree. Let's go with that.

Alongside a clearly stated policy publicised in advance as to what happens if a club suffers an insolvency event. Suggest 10 points deduction for going into Administration and relegation if you actually go bust.

it's upto everyone else not to go bankrupt? If you haven't got the money don't spend it, it's just sport, I can imagine a lot of crystal palace fans and Stoke fans had the same view of city when a cash rich owner took them over? It's just sport you can't just take your ball home because someone else has something better than you have, it's life get on with it.

Leeds won 5 SL titles in 6 years. Nobody died because of it. Some poorly run clubs did even though we had a salary cap. This is a 'ukip' argument, one based on fear but not very many facts.

its one of a multitude of options we have instead of an SC> We could simply say that a club must have 7 academy products in a matchday 17. We could say that a 25 man squad has to be made up of no more than 5 NRL players and no more than 10 players who have played in SL for somebody else (loans discounted), we could look at the points based system suggested by the NRL. We could say that for every player earning over £200k in the 25 man squad, you must have an academy product under 23 In the squad.


There are an infinite amount of things we could do that isn't just relying on us thinking owners are stupid, the only thing that stops them running their clubs in to the ground is being able to exploit players.

Wigan have vastly improved their training facilities, academy and back room staff as a way of investing cash in other facets of the club as they cannot pay the players any more because of the cap.

My main issue with the cap is that we are losing players to RU and NRL who have a much higher cap. The reason for the higher caps in both these other sports is TV revenue. The poor deal with Sky that was agreed earlier this year will limit our cap until the end of the decade. The RFL/SL need to point out to Sky that unless they double, or preferably treble their payments to allow a cap that can compete with the other two competitions then they will be televising an increasingly poor product that will ultimately lose them viewers.

4 clubs want it because they've got rich backers. 8 clubs dont because they can see where it will lead to. For the first time next season we should have every SL club able to pay the full salary cap. Let's give it a couple of years to see if the level salary cap, cough, actually brings a more even playing field.

Something has to happen quicker than two more years.

Much as I think it would benefit RL in Europe just to scrap the salary cap at all levels (along with something like MC suggested) I'd be happy for 2015 to keep the salary cap but with each club's highest salary cap value player exempted - so long as the decision is made before the 2015 Super League season kicks-off.

That could well mean we get Sam Burgess back in Super League in time for the 2015 NZ tour here. (Burgess is a FORWARD. But it's looking like he won't be in the England RU team - they don't want skilled rugby players in their forwards - they just need people who are good at "specialised jobs"icon_wink.gif.

that's not true. 3 clubs want it because the businesses can afford it and they see the damage of not having it. 2 clubs want it because they have rich backers. 1 club doesn't want it because they have bought themselves a massive new asset and are happy to see the player paying for that, 2 clubs don't want it because they are a financial basket case operating at a level above what their finances can sustain and 4 clubs don't want it because they can't afford it and believe that rules should be put in place to keep them competitive.

We have had the same salary cap for 10 year and it is lower than it was 13 years, and wages themselves are far lower than they were 15 years ago, not just in real terms adjusted for inflation but in absolute terms.

The top clubs have been going backwards for 15 years in terms of wages, some clubs STILL haven't caught up and they have STILL spent themselves in to oblivion and the STILL got the facilities they need to compete. At what point do we accept that they aren't catching up? 20 years? 50 years?

Which is great, but if thing keep going, the awesome facilities and grass roots work at Wigan and other such club are just going to become a nursery for future RU and NRL stars.

Like I said this next season is the first year all 12 clubs can afford full cap. Players earn what the game can afford, it's not like clubs are using the spare cash they are making to pocket it or give it to share holders. When the game can get a bigger tv deal and more people through the gate the players can earn more. I've got no problem with a comp basing on a reasonable medium its salary cap to keep the games competitive as possible.

If we were losing 15-20 players out of the comp fair enough, but we aren't and won't.

Some clubs do have spare cash that they are giving to shareholders. Some have money they are desperate to spend. We have lost our best halfback, best back, and best forwards, but keeping businesses who haven't invested in and grown their businesses sufficiently competitive is clearly the most important thing .

Of the 12 clubs that will start SL in 2015 how many had cash to spare at the end of 2014?

well Leeds, Wigan, Wire, Salford and Hudds have all told us they want to spend more money, so at least 5. The RFL have told us they think more should be spent on wages so id expect more, but some find it quite beneficial to run the clubs at a loss whilst paying back directors loans to themselves.

I don't know as all the super league chairman? I doubt they'll tell you tbh though.