God you're pushing some boat out there.
Kevin Penny's better than half of them

i wouldnt take Kevin Penny over any of them, who would you take him ahead of?

its good seeing the salary cap start to work in SL

the decline of leeds this year is a very pertinant example and a reflection of the competition developing

its good seeing new clubs at the top of the table

st helens / leeds GFs were getting really boring

So you're saying Leeds would be weaker under this system? That sort of contradicts your long held opinion on excellence doesn't it?

Player's ability changes over time. Just because a player played for GB in 2001 you are saying they are the same as a player who has been a regular international for years. Go back to any point in history simply increases the range of quality of players you have in your 'star' group.



You've opened it up to a huge number of players by including those who played for Wales and Ireland. Making it incredibly difficult for players who have represented these teams (who range in quality massively) to make it in SL.

There is a system that has been invented that closely matches a players value to a team to how much they count under the cap. It's called a salary cap. For instance Solomona will cost less to Warrington than he did to Bradford as a reflection of his loss of form since that tri nations victory.

At 21 years of age and looked way out of his depth for three years i'd still take him over D Hodgson, Gilmour, Wild (shot to pieces), Reardon, Platt, Sykes, Calderwood, Cusack and Lauaki all of which offer absolutely nothing as 'stars' in a team. He's bloody gash but at least K. Penny can do something special once in a while

They would need to lose some of the players they have brought in. I am more than happy for us to improve ourselves and the quality of our league through developing quality young players. It is the sustainable way

No im not, im saying that it would be up to a coach to build the best squad they could under these considerations.


the number isnt that big. You are massively over-estimating it again.

If a player isnt good enough to get a spot, they arent good enough to get a spot.

No it doesnt. If this were the case we could simply pay players centrally and share them between clubs, but as we know there are many many variables which go into which team and for how much a player decides to play.

Ellis for instance choosing to play for leeds for less than he was offered at Wakefield. Hardly sharing the talent. In fact in this instance the SC only entrenched the positions

I disagree, i would take all those players over Penny.

And that is where the quality of coach comes in. If he thinks he can get better value from Penny he is free to pick him up

We're in agreement there. The development of young players is not an overnight thing though is it and clubs are at different stages of their youth development maturity.

Hull KR for example being relative newcomers to SL are still a bit behind many other clubs, while we have brought some players through to the SL squad from our youth development system, by all accounts our best prospects are still in the under 18's (where we have more or less had parity in recruitment with our more established neighbours) so it may be a few years yet before this system (or at least this aspect of it) would be entirely fair.

Perhaps it might be more viable if the intention to implement this system was declared for some stage in the future, allowing all clubs a resonable time to bring their youth development system to a broadly similar level.

Even then there is still the prospect of wealthy teams signing up the best young talent because they can pay more than other clubs in that area.

I dont disagree that Hull KR may be behind in this respect. And we all know the reason why.

So, if we are to 'play fair' they should be behind the other clubs in the league. Yes they should be given time to get their house in order, but whilst they are doing that they dont deserve to be given a 'leg up' at the expense of other SL clubs.


waiting for Hull KR to catch up isnt really a sensible or fair option.
competition for youth isnt a bad thing, and i cant imagine 'huge' amounts of money being thrown at 16/17 year olds which is when they would need to be getting them

I used Hull KR as an example. The same would apply to any newly/recently promoted team. I imagine that Widnes or Leigh currently cannot compete for the best young players in their area and would not be able to until being in SL for 4 or 5 years or at least it would take that long before they saw the benefit of that in their SL squad.

I can easily imagine enough being thrown at the cream of the young talent for some clubs to be disadvantaged by more cash rich neighbours. I don't suppose it would take a fortune to persuade a really good young player to travel a few miles further.

true that.
But then again, isnt that what we want? the best athletes/youngsters in an area being tempted to league?
just saying like..

Well that is another side to the argument and one which I hadn't previously considered. Yes, if the elimination of a monetary cap resulted in young players choosing RL over another sport that could be a positive.

My argument was solely considering the lads who play RL and will probably only play RL. In which case I'm not convinced that say Leeds wouldn't be able to use their cash resources to entice the best young players in West Yorkshire with the promise of higher salaries both immediately and in SL. Of course these players would then "cost" Leeds the same points as the "lesser" players that Wakey/Cas would bring through, being the ones left after Leeds had cherry picked the best.

I'm not saying it would happen, just that it could and the history of RL has shown if a club can "buy" an advantage, then they will regardless of the long term consequences for the game.

it would indeed, at that always would and will be the case. I dont mind them being given 4 or 5 years to see that benefit, what i object to is them being allowed to buy loads in overseas players and pay lots of money to them so they can finish ahead of other SL teams who are investing in youth, and giving them the chance in the first team. Harlequins for example have spent the last 3 or 4 years pretty much struggling because of the investment they have made in the youngsters which is only now even beginning to show any benefit, Hull KR meanwhile have brought through next to no youngsters, have lots and lots of overseas players and seen the play-offs. I dont think that is really 'fair'.

exactly, it doesnt take a fortune, or even a meaningful amount of money. Pay isnt really the issue at that age, the differences will be pretty much miniscule. What will convince players is the facilities, the size of the club, the coaches, their history of giving youngsters a go all these things will be much more important to any 17 year old who actually has the mentality to make it than what will in effect be maybe £1k