Since the introduction of the salary cap we have had 4 teams win SL, in the two years immediately prior to the introduction of the salary cap we saw 4 different clubs contest the grand final. They were the same 4 clubs.

In the 14 seasons we have had the SC we have had 4 SL winners ,in the 14 seasons prior to the cap we had 4 different winners. In the 14 seasons we have had the SC 8 different sides appeared in the CC final, in the 14 years immediately prior to the SC 10 different sides played in the CC final.

The salary cap was sold on three basis, that it would stop teams dominating (it hasn’t) that it would stop teams stockpiling talent (the 25/25 does that) and that it would keep clubs solvent (it fails hugely and was always likely to)

This salary cap, in the form it has been and that it has now taken is an unmitigated failure, it is a blunt instrument trying to perform precision tasks. It is a disaster that damages our game and sees the best players excluded from our competition, it has made our competition second rate and second choice.

You're missing the point, 4 teams dominating is 100x better than 1 team dominating, imagine, in the current media environment how second rate the sport would look if Wigan went on an 1980s run again? Any competition is better than no competition. Without the salary cap all that would happen is it would be a genital measuring contest for club chairmen, with the winner merely the one who lasts longest, the sport as a whole would be in a whole worse state. Imagine the entire game being in the state Bradford is in right now. That would be the result.

The reality is we have 5/6 teams capable of winning. It only takes 1 clubs to break the psychology of only 4 teams can win it, whether it be Warrington Huddersfield or anyone else, they are CAPABLE of winning it, and that's truer than in most sports.

The salary cap depends on owners recognising what's good for them, limiting player spending is great in theory, but means owners lie to be able to spend up to the maximum. Remove the owners ability to lie, rigidly stick to within what they are capable of, far less wakefields and Bradford's happen.

In the 14 years of Salary cap we have had Leeds, Bradford, Saints and Wigan win the GF, in the 14 years prior to that we had Wigan, Saints, Bradford and Widnes and Halifax.

In the challenge cup under the SC we have had 5 different winnners, Wigan, Saints, Bradford, Warrington and Hull, prior to the SC we Had Wigan, Saints, Leeds, Sheffield, Halifax.

In the challenge cup under the SC we have had 5 different winnners, Wigan, Saints, Bradford, Warrington and Hull, prior to the SC we had 6 Wigan, Saints, Leeds, Sheffield, Halifax, Cas.

In terms of numbers, pre SC, Wigan won 8 challenge cups, Saints, 2, Leeds 1, Sheffield 1, Halifax 1 and Cas 1. Post SC Wigan won 3, Saints won 5, Wire 3, Bradford 2 and Hull 1.

Pre SC Wigan won 9 league titles, Saints 2, Widnes 2, Bradford 1. Post SC Saints 3, Wigan 2, Bradford 3, Leeds 6

In reality we aren’t anymore ‘competitive’ than we were pre-SC. We see its largely the same clubs winning things, and that those clubs are traditionally the biggest ones the salary cap hasn’t effected that. In fact it is has entrenched it, and the only 2 clubs who have joined those traditionally big ones are Warrington and Huddersfield, two clubs who have had massive investment from a sugar daddy.

The SC is a busted flush, a failure.

1. Warrington
2. Leeds
3. Wigan
4. St Helens
5. Huddersfield
6. Catalans
7. Salford
8. Hull KR
9. Hull
10. Castleford
11. Wakefield
12. Widnes
13. Bradford
14. London

But Smokey, you're seeing it as a zero sum game. You're taking the years prior to the salary cap and the years after it's introduction as exactly the same with no other factors. You're totally ignoring the fact that when the salary cap was brought in the sport was, effectively, just entering the era of professionalism. You're ignoring what would/might have happened without a salary cap. Yes Leeds have won it a few times these last few years. But considering the huge gulf in finances between Leeds and the rest what do you think would have happened if there'd been no cap? It also doesn't show Leeds as dominating the league. If they had then Leeds would have finished top of the league in these seasons and also won the cup.

We can create as many stats as we want, for instance Wigan winning it 7 times in a row whilst also winning the cup in each of those years. We've never seen that under the salary cap. But either way, it's not about comparing it to the past, because the past isn't what we have now. It's about comparing a salary capped SL to what a SL with no salary cap would be like. Which, in my opinion, would be a league dominated by 2 clubs, Leeds & Wigan. And when I say dominated I mean those 2 clubs being the only contenders for any trophy. It will also lead to a much reduced focus on player development, academies, backroom staff, facilities & sport science in the rush for spending on first team players.
The league and the sport, in my opinion, would be in a far worse state.

You are picking and choosing your stats to fit your argument. You cant on one hand argue that im ignoring the implementation of full-time professionalism when comparing pre SC to post SC, then go on to use Wigans success as a defence of the current SC.

If anything my ignoring the advent of professionalism worked in your favour, the fact we went from one maybe two pro clubs playing against Semi-pro ones, to 14 full-time pro clubs, and still haven’t seen a huge jump in competitiveness only strengthens the argument that the SC hasn’t worked.

Im sorry but this argument really holds no water, it is the invisible pink unicorn defence.

The SC needs justify its existence by its effect, the SC has not had the effect it was sold on, it hasn’t made the league more competitive, it hasn’t stopped clubs going bust and it hasn’t stopped clubs stockpiling talent (something else does that), The SC has failed to do what it was supposed to, it is a failure.

The fact that something else, could possibly be worse, even though it didn’t prove much worse when we did have it, and we also have a multitude of other options is not a strong argument.

What we can say for definite about the SC is that it has caused huge depression in player wages, and that we have seen more players go to Union and the NRL and less quality come back the other way.

You are also drawing something of a false dichotomy, in that we have a huge amount more options than the SC as we have it and completely unfettered spending on wages.

It should also be noted that the ‘golden generation’ of Leeds players were in and around the Rhinos prior to the SC’s implementation.

Please please please!!!

Which is exactly what I said 3.8232421875:5