If it's a company not connected to the club then that would be fine. But the moment that company is contacted by the club/owner then it is connected to the club and that money would count on the cap.

The not telling the RFL bit gets very sticky from a fraud point of view, same as Melbourne with the dual contracts. I'm not sure many clubs would be willing to take that risk, especially with RL being a small world in which people talk.

'strengthen the underbelly of our club' is strange phrasing. 'Foundations' would be better.

un·der·bel·ly
noun \ˈən-dər-ˌbe-lē\

: the bottom part of an object or an animal's body

: an area that is easy to attack or criticize

: a part of society, an organization, etc., that is hidden and usually unpleasant

As soon as a player plays 1 game for the club whatever he is paid for that year is counted on the cap. Otherwise, like you say, you'd have Sam Burgess for rounds 1-14 and then SBW for Rounds 15-27!

You can't possibly think it realistic that an RFL demand to see the books of Caddick Construction or SJM would ever be met with anything other than a howl of laughter

Auditors can though.

no they can't. The Auditors wouldnt even get inside the building. These are companies turning over hundreds of millions of pounds, with hundreds if not thousands of employees, some of them are publicly listed.

They arent opening their books to an audit because Blake Solly asked them to.

Like Financial (Anything But) Fair Play, that would just lead to a 'rich get richer, poor get poorer' scenario.

I think the Golden Ticket idea isn't particularly very good but I do like the marquee player system. It doesn't even necessarily mean having to bring in a superstar. Wigan probably could have kept Tomkins and gone out to get another very good player if the system was in place.

I'm not sure that is the case, since we moved to the live cap system. There was an unusually intelligent and non-adversarial discussion between Rovers and Hull fans about this on their board a while ago.
What I took from it wasregistered[/i earners.
As so often, the rules are a little opaque. So it is only really a theory. But for me it is one of the more rational (partial)explanations for how two clubs, both 'spending the up to cap', can end up with squads of quite different quality.

Many years ago I was in a Casino watching Roulette and actually saw an East Asian Grocer place £5000 on Black and £5,000 on Red. Red won and he then cashed all chips and asked for a cheque so he could declare as Gambling Winnings. Very clever eh?

Until it comes out green

So is it the fault of Leeds, Wigan and Warrington that have people who know what they're doing and how to generate a profit as well as marketing the team and bringing in big sponsors?

Warrington secured EMIRATES ffs, if the rich get richer it's only because they work bloody hard at it, incentivise clubs to get off their backside, the more they bring in the more they can put out, but at the end of the day everyone is working at X% so it's fair as long as you can generate income.

From what I understand, the top 25 players salary cap values are assessed as soon as the contract is lodged with the RFL and that counts on the clubs salary cap. The players beyond the top 25 only count when they play a game. But de-registering a player wouldn't affect the clubs salary cap. The only way it would give the club more cap space is by the player moving clubs.
But like you say the rules are a bit vague on it.

I never said it would. But if Leeds were paying a player through Caddick Construction and NOT declaring that to the RFL then they'd be committing fraud, ala Melbourne with the dual contracts. I don't think any club here has the appetite to take on that kind of risk. All it would need is one disgruntled player or employee to whistleblow.

As I said, RL is a small world.

They wouldnt be committing fraud. They may be breaking the salary cap, but they arent committing a legal offence.

and besides, a disgruntled player can make all the allegations he wants, they need proof and i would highly doubt the RFL fancied litigation with Caddick construction, or could in any way, shape or form have any legal strength to punish the Leeds club for the actions of Caddick Construction.

Caddick Construction are free to pay whoever they want, whatever they want, for whatever they want. Mrs Player X is free to earn whatever she wants, from whoever she wants. The RFL have no control over either of them, and cannot realistically hope to oblige the player, or the club to declare a relationship between a different business and a different person.

regardless, even on a practical leve, how many companies do you think someone like Caddick or Lenegan hold shares in? What if Caddick owns shares in WH smiths and Mrs Player X gets a job stacking shelves there, are the RFL policing that? Are the RFL expecting Leeds Rhinos to declare a relationship on the cap there? no of course not, it would none of Leeds Rhinos business and they couldnt hope to force the player to divluge that information to them.