So basically - the only party to benefit from the new marquee player ruling is Wigan. Great stuff.

They've spent the money investing in their players development, so why shouldn't they benefit from a rule that allows them to keep them?

I thought the marquee player rule was designed to bring in new players from either NRL or RU - or is it a gimmick to stop current players leaving ? If its the latter then all we are doing is topping up their pay packet.

And what's so bad about that?

God forbid a team should get rewarded for spending a fortune of cash and effort on young player development.

Anyway, i see it as good for SL in general that we appear to have stopped another player doing one to the southern hemisphere.

So what if we top their pay packet up? Thats a good thing.

EDIT - just re read and found this little diamond " or is it a gimmick to stop current players leaving?"

Seriously? eh??

More crucially to help RL keep it's best players.
Williams certainly comes into that category or, do you think he's an "average Joe".

There is no way that, even with the marquee player rule, RL can entice top RU or NRL players as their respective caps dwarf ours.
You could say that once again the RFL have "mis sold" the idea but, if it allows Wigan (or any other club) to hang on to the best British players, that has to be good for the game.

Why is it a gimmick the best players not leaving? Surely this is a good thing.

I think RU players get an exemption if they bring someone in from RU as well. So Williams & Tomkins could be their marquee players, and they could sign Eastmond and he would get part of his wage exempt from the cap too.

I don't get the part about topping up his pay packet. You want to watch the best players, you have to pay for it. You would rather we don't spend money on the best players and see them go to the NRL? Lets just go back to semi-pro rugby as being FT is just "topping up pay packets" as you put it.

I just don't understand how anyone can find a negative in one of the leagues best players staying in SL.

Ok then - I ask you this. Why is only one club out of 12 using the MP rule ? It's certainly not financial.

Cause over the last five years that club have had their best homegrown players tapped up to play NRL/RU. Not imports, our youth. Our conveyor belt of youth that has been the club's strength for years and years.

BTW - How's Solomona doing these days? With all the bitching and wailing on social media over that one maybe we thought you'd understand the importance of keeping the best players in SL.

It certainly is financial.

Except for Salford, where Koukash is sulking.

We are raising the cap over the next 3 years - shouldn't that be the aim of keeping our best players financially happy ? The marquee player rule was put in place for recruitment purposes initially wasn't it like Pritchard and Sandow ?

That is why we have agreed to raise the salary cap (see post above).

Mark Percival has now signed a new 4 year deal at Saints.

That is how it was "sold" to the public but, SL will not attract any current NRL stars.
The best we can hope for are players that may have played SOO but are no longer quite good enough and that fancy spending a few seasons in England (or France) but, anyone who thinks Billy Slater or his ilk may be coming to SL are kidding themselves.
We still get back to the situation where it is better to have Tomkins (if not injured) and Williams playing in SL, than it is to have them playing Union or in the NRL.
Having said that, raising the cap further would solve the problem and we wouldnt have to have the marquee rule.

I could score 20+ tries a season on Wing at Cas.
Carney did it.
Edens doing it.
Minikins doing it.
Joel Monaghan has 4 in a couple of games.

I wouldnt pay him what he wanted anyway.