I coach kids at U16s. I chose that age to coach because that's "decision time" both in terms of choosing which sport, and in terms of choosing sport vs (but should be and) real work vs being a waster. On no occasion, has the ultimate renumeration ever came up as a factor in the decision between RU, RL and soccer. Enjoyment of the sport and chance of success have always been the factors.

Leeds have rarely spend right to the full salary cap, and Leeds, Wigan and Hull all continue to employ mediocre foreign players.

Nothing to do with that and probably more good players about who could have played rugby.My mate played footy when was at school in a football area, so never introduced to rugby.Now too old and is very strong and fast.Probably lots more in t country like that like the Liverpool area.We need to assess builds and get more variety of pt in schools.More players playing fulltime rugby will bring more competition.Just look at Australias strength in depth.

This why the Rfl need to bring rules into place, so only so many foreign players.

I say get of the playstation the lazy fat kids.

So, you seriously think, the above mentioned clubs have an additional £1.35 million per annum sloshing around in their coffers?

what is needed is more bigger games in the SL.

Take a look at the end of the eason Wigan played Leeds in the CC final, a week later played Wire which more or less decided where the shield went. not to mention stains twice with a match against Cats and crusaders. That is tough, take wire who didn't have a match during cup final week so they had two weeks to prepare for the shield match than also had a further weekend off when they won their play off match. In theory they should have won against leeds and in the past few seasons the team in that position has been fairly succesful.

Unfortunately the teams such as wigan, leeds, stains and wire the teams that make up the large proportion of the national squad only play a big game once or twice a month. The knock on effect is that when these player play in big games they can quite easilly as the week before and the week after the played London, Wakey, Cas. And use these matches as rest periods and just go through the motions.

Two easy steps would be in the play offs no fancy gimmicks. Keep it 8 teams but a straight knock out structure. Using the 2011 season table Wire would play Hull, Wigan v KR, Saints v Catalan and Hudds v leeds. Winners would go through to next round and the team who finished highest in the table would be at home. So in essence the two teams you would have expected to be in the GF would have been Wire and Wigan.

The second one would be introduce a state of origin tournament. Lancs, Yorkshire, Cumbria and rest of the country. Then when players start coming through at London and other expansion areas in the UK where they could field a team that could at least put a performance in then let them form one.

Also I would like a pathway for a player in the lower league to be able to progress into a superleague team. Instead of a team bringing in an ozzie or another foreigner why not bring a player in from the championship? a simple solution to this is if a player has been brought into a sl team from a championship team and if they have never played in the sl then they are exempt from the salary cap for the first year.

It may be true that they don't, but no mega-rich fan is going to invest to change that, because Rugby League doesn't want their money. If you want rich people's money, the only way they'll spend it is via a club, where they can feed their ego by trying to build a great team.

There are plenty mechanisms you can put in place to stop one team taking the p**s. Tough squad limits for one. The reason Wigan dominated when they outspent everyone was less to do with the 1st choice XIII, than it was the size of the bench. Not only did it mean Wigan could replace a missing international with another one, it meant other clubs didn't have the players to compete, because they were in Wigan's reserves. That can be fixed.

You can also 'tax' cap overspend to ensure rich investors money has some other benefit to the game.

Increasing the intensity of our game is the only way and I think we're seeing it, no matter what the naysayers keep saying. Our game has improved immeasurably over the past ten years but people keep forgetting that as our's increases so does the NRL.

I'm not so sure about that. The current cap, where we can guarantee a limit on player salary expense, that there will never be a race away of player salaries and we can put a fixed number on the expense needed to be construct a competitve team, is more likely to attract investment than discourage it.

Wiganers seem to be obsessed with raising the salary cap as they perceive it is "holding back" Wigan, with their sort-of rich backer, from buying up all the best players and dominating the game like what they did back in The Golden Age.

My club could legitimately outspend Wigan, and the rest of the league, if they chose. But I'd rather they didn't as it isn't in the best interests of the game for Leeds and Wigan and the Wire to hoover up all the best players in the league leaving the rest of SL a moribund mess. But then Wiganers never seem to consider anything other than the small-minded interest of their own club.

So a hint: what's "good" for Wigan is not necessarily what is good for the game.

Good to have you back sir.