Not I, though.
The decision making process within the RFL is a dark and murky hidden world of reasoning.
Koukash says Salford didn't exceed the cap. The RFL says they did. Neither are exactly reliable fonts of honesty and clarity.
My view is that it would seem odd to make payments to players through third party companies unless the intention was to hide the payments for some reason. If they kept within the cap, why not just pay them normally?

For the same reason that some teams play on the margins of the laws of the game, to get a potential advantage over your opponents .... and (perhaps) you do it because you believe that's what others are doing too ?

But what is the potential advantage of you are under the cap anyway?

Unlike half of Castleford, I'm no legal 'expert' but I do know the difference between evidence and opinion. Wishful thinking on your part doesn't make it true. MK has already said that with the third party payments we were still under the cap, and the issue that has been debated today is all about the registering and de-registering of players. Specifically Jake Mullaney and Kevin Locke. Which is where the alleged breach took place.

Interestingly, although I do work in employment law, this is not a legal case. It's a case of whether or not a club failed to abide by competition rules. There is no legal argument.
If Salford were still under the cap my understanding is that it's okay to pay players through third parties. The questions are:
1. Why would you want or need to?
2. If the payments were under the salary cap, why didn't the club declare them to the RFL?

I also remember Martin Koukash saying he would sue Gareth Hock, Leigh Centurians and Kevin Locke. Just because he says something, doesn't mean it is true. He says the club didn't break the cap. The RFL say they did. This appeal will decide who is right.
Edit - I'm also pretty sure his comments that he would break the cap haven't helped his cause.

Oh fek who woke Rumpole of the Lace Market up.

Off topic, what's happened to your board? Barely anyone on here anymore!

It might be boring, but it would be interesting to know your thoughts on the questions. There may be good reasons for paying players through third parties and not declaring these to the RFL, but if the club was always under the cap anyway I just can't see why this would be necessary.
In a way I hope you get the points back as it might encourage the RFL to get their house in order.
However, we are sliding dramatically towards to bottom 4 and play Catalans and Warrington, so maybe you could have them back for the start of the middle 8s instead?

The RFL agreed to Koukash's request to have the appeal heard by Sport Resolutions, a London-based arbitration service which has the power to quash the initial verdict, lower the penalty or increase it to as much as a 20-point deduction.

20 pts sounds fair.

No, despite your mild hysteria. Sports resolutions is mentioned in the RFL operational rules as an appeal body.

It appears Salford have lawyers who actually read the rules rather than a town who think they are all legally qualified on visas, contracts etc.

Lost appeal