erm, except the club who couldnt spend up to the cap offered him MORE money, so the salary cap had no influence on his decision, it didnt do what you said it would




like expecting them to develop their business, the SC hasnt and doesnt bring them any closer

and again you have failed to give any examples of how the SC has managed to allow clubs to invest in long term due to the SC

Aye, and a crucial part of that is improving their product. Which is SL rugby. Which is improved by the salary cap.

really? is the quality of SL better now than in 98?

Nobody knows that you thick get , even you

Yes. The product is improving - more people are watching it each year.

Just because more people watch something does not mean it is better

Is it? Evidence?

It is a good indicator that it is a better product - one that more people want to watch.

I take it you're a Sun reading Boyzone fan.

I know the cap didn't do what I said it would do: As not all clubs in SL can afford to spend up to the cap the SL salary cap is, currently, less effective than it could be.

In a more competitive league players would not need to move clubs to find success.

The Sun is one of the best tabloid newspapers. Boyzone is one of the best boy bands. As evidenced by their popularity. What's your point?

The way to bring a competitive league is not to encourage the crap clubs to do better not penalise the good clubs for being successful.

Popularity does not naturally equate to quality. Only an idiot would think so.

So, along with players that move to a club to win things, you want to hand teams like Leeds and Saints an even greater advantage by allowing them to outbid other clubs too! Hmmm....

So we end up with one or two superclubs and what else?

That explains Smokey then