https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/53314482 Details to be ironed out before resumption can take place, meeting on Wednesday for discussion.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/53314482 Details to be ironed out before resumption can take place, meeting on Wednesday for discussion.

And then there will be another meeting to discuss another meeting and so on and so on, just get the judean peoples front involved

Splitter.

Are they selling Jaguar's ear lobes, for the half time snacks?

Many people don’t have a job to return too.
Some told to reapply for their job against there workmate college as one will get finished up.
Many will be on reduced hours and have to claim benefits.
Many are working for less money.
I think some players need to smell the custard and realise the sacrifice season ticket holders have made, paying up front and losing....owners paying players wages when staying at home playing trick shots.

RL players don't get to work flexibly or work from home like many others in the economy. There's no social distancing, they are at high risk of catching coronavirus at the risk to their long term fitness and also increases the risk of their family getting it. Plus professional RL involves a constant underlying risk of suffering life-altering injury, see Ian Knott, Mose Masoe.

RL players are not earning footballer style salaries, the top players are well paid but many players salaries will be nothing special if you take into consideration they are on contracts of a few years at most, their careers are unlikely to last beyond their early 30s and they are trying to save and set themselves up for the future from what they earn now.

To restart RL we are asking players to take on increased risk and at the same time we're asking them to take a pay cut.

I want to see RL again but the players view should be respected here.

I preffered the Wolf nipple chips myself.

More chance of a player losing his 'career' to an injury on the pitch than by contracting the virus badly enough to render them unable to play again, so why do they risk playing the sport in the first place?

They are aware of the risk of career-ending injury on the pitch already and can make an informed decision about whether to play the game but if you start cutting their salaries that risk becomes relevant too. They have to be given a fair deal to get bashed about in RL.

With post-covid complications there are many unknowns. Lots of people who contracted the disease back in March/April are still suffering with 'long tail' symptoms - shortness of breath from mildly strenuous everyday activity, heart arrhythmia, severe muscle pains. I was listening to an NFL podcast the other day with some doctors that work with NFL clubs about the protocols they are developing for a return, and they have a lot of concerns. Basically they said the average public thinks that as these guys are super fit athletes, they will only get mild cases at best, which isn't guaranteed but also they have concerns because its a blood borne disease, affects multiple organs and causes the blood to clot - this can happen even to people that have mild symptoms in the first case. They are worried that players who appear to have recovered and are superficially healthy will still have some underlying effects going on which could be dangerous if they are taking multiple hits to organs, and that it may increase their risk of sudden cardiac events during strenuous activity. They are looking at things like advising some players not to play in away games at Denver at high altitude, if they have had covid. With all these things they just don't know what will happen but there are medical reasons to believe there are risks so they said we're basically rolling the dice and seeing what will happen.

The players are stepping into the unknown and taking risks so that the game can get open again. I'm sure most of them are willing to do that, but they are entitled to a fair deal in return, if they aren't getting that, they are entitled to say no and we shouldn't let whatever propaganda the league puts out in that situation turn fans against the players.

Sally, that's all well and good, but like everybody else they are now living and working in totally different times economically.

Realistically, they only have 2 choices, less pay with more risks, or a future doing something else for a living, which, for the vast majority of them, will be a less proseprous one.

I’d play for nothing to be a Wire.
Feck em. Close the door on your way out.

A few weeks ago, Gary Hetherington and some of the struggling Yorkshire clubs were trying to get the league to cut the salary cap to reflect the financial pressures on clubs.

We opposed that and signed Greg Inglis.

Presumably at the time we made those decisions, we had checked that we were able to cover the existing players wages?

No doubt most of us would, but I wouldn’t pay to see it!

If, when Inglis becomes employed by Wire, existing players are on reduced pay from their original contracts, then that is obviously wrong, however, are we certain that is the case?

It's said that 3 clubs have already come to agreements with their playing squads. Could Wire be one of those?... if so, then the Inglis argument is pretty irrelevant.

As for the argument about reduced pay for this season, then it's not like they are doing 'full hours' - the season is set to be reduced by a quarter, so a similar reduction in their pay for that period isn't that unfair?