Seems the reasons behind their desperation to have the cap increased are becoming clear now

Is this right? So after all the moaning about the cap and keeping hold of Sam, it turns out they needed the increase to sign an NRL centre after all and not to keep Tomkins.

Gelling sounds like a lovely chap.

And, are they really abusing the cap when all SL clubs have the same rules applied to them?

They've lost Gleeson, Hoffman, Deacon, Coley, Cross, Coley and O'Carroll from last season's squad. I reckon they might have a bit more space under their cap now.

The amendments to the cap are surely a good thing, it will benefit the British game, and don't Wigan have the right to use it to their full advantage?

Saddened's obsession with Wigan shows no sign of ending, shock

I'm not saying they've breaking any rules. But why demand a rule is changed only to give the benefit to a disgraced NRL player?

If as you mention they've got room for three new signings and had cap room why did they require the ammendments in the first place?

Do they really need to sign another NRL back? Wigan surely have enough quality in their academy sides to promote a centre rather than sign this fool?

Ian Lenaghan last week, "we could go to the NRL and sign a middle-of-the-road centre, but we don't want to do that".

Hmmm....

Don't be so defensive. If you can answer the questions then add your contribution to the discussion.

It just seems odd that they demand the rules are changed under the premise of keeping Sam in the sport, then go and sign three new players including an NRL player?

No.

Saddo doesn't like rational and logical answers to his attempts to attract outrage from passing Wiganers.

Isn't it time Saddo had his own "sticky" for his Wigan obsession. I emphasise the sticky bit.

This lad must be on 20-30k a year and we've lost Coley, Hoffman, Deacon, O'Carroll, Davies and obviously Joel Tomkins.

I think the RFL need to investigate!

But no one has offered a logical and rational answer.

Why did Wigan want the rules changing if they had so much cap room available anyway?

The lads not from the NRL and he won't be classed as middle of the road. He's a total punt, a junior who may play hardly any games for us.

Lenagan meant we could sign a player with NRL experience but who's talents aren't all that and would ask for money they dont warrant.

Im not being deffensive, I merely highlighting your obsession with Wigan. I dont really care, I find it funny how you talk about them more than I do. I quite enjoy the fact that everyting they do manages to wind you up so much.

What Wigan wanted was something that should have done along time go to help keep our talent in the game and is a positive thing. Had it been done earlier maybe you guys could have kept Eastmond.

Why? To enable Wigan and other clubs to offer a more attractive package to those players who may well be targets for other codes/countries with deeper pockets.

If we hadn't lost Coley, Gleeson, Deacon, Hoffman et al this season and wanted to keep Sam for Wigan and England RL, the same principle applies. The 'extra' added on if used for Sam is well worth it.

It is reasonable to suggest that Wigan can use their existing cap space to recruit players to replace those that we have lost.

To be fair, George Carmont was a middle of the road NRL centre when Wigan signed him. He's not done too bad though

If wigan want to sign a centre from the NRL they can do - there's nothing wrong with that, and indeed Carmont has been a good player (as he was in the NRL). I'm just pointing out that Lenaghan's recent quotes regarding how the club wasn't going to look to the NRL for a centre seem at odds with signing a centre from the NRL less than a week later. If he is just a punt on a junior then fair enough, let's hope that some of the other British junior centres at Wigan also get a run this year.