Thats not what we were told on here about clarks multiplier contract

Yeah most reports state King is one of our Marquee players, so the extra marquee rule is perfect to bring him back and not worry about his wage on the cap.

The cap issue for Toby is good ...is his attitude going to be any better coming back though?

Ah okay. I must have misunderstood.

How did we fit Widdop and Williams in at the same time? Was there a clause in the cap rules? Or did Clark only get an improved deal as Widdop moved on?

Double post

On the King element. I’m not sure the money is the issue. Yes, he is overpaid and the club fell for some very clever work by his agent, but the narrative was that he was seen to be a bad apple. So much of a bad apple that he needed to be immediately removed from the squad and it was also justifiable to loan him to one of the title contenders while contributing to his salary.

So is he now a reformed character. Or was this narrative false all along and it was actually a finance decision to free up cap space to bring in forwards?

I don’t mind King as a player. And I don’t particularly mind that he and his agent took the club for mugs and cashed in, that’s the board and Powell’s problem. But, he’s on a hiding to nothing coming back here unless there is some clarity on why he was moved on in such a fashion. If the club let us believe that he was a bad apple, he will be under the microscope from minute one.

I'm not a fan of King one those wages, and he was a bit of a weak character at the time by all accounts.

However... (and that's a big HOWEVER)... Powell did say he was sending king out to 'freshen him up' in a new environment. Despite the rumours on social media, I haven't seen anywhere that Powell isn't prepared to give him a second chance. We know that King wasn't buying into the 'one team' idea with the motorway services debacle, but he was sent out to Wigan to grow up a bit, and maybe that is working. Powell certainly has a record of improving players who for whatever reason didn't reach their potential, so maybe shipping King out is part of the plan. Maybe he'll come back with a clean slate and an open mind and we can start from scratch with him.

I haven't seen King show a massive improvement at Wigan, but then their style plays on his current strengths rather than developing a new side to his game. Let's hope the change of scenery has reset his attitude a bit.

You can still pay players over the cap amount without declaring them as the marquee. I'm guessing that's what we did, as the cap is just about big enough to do it.

For example with the old rules, you pay three players £250k. Register two on the cap (£150k counted) so have a total salary counted toward the cap at £550k instead of £750k.

re. Mata'utia
Centre is a position were players get really exposed & in particular right centre. If you look at the clubs, dear to our heart, Wire/Wigan/St Helens ... Mata'utia, King & Hurrell have all looked vulnerable & been criticised on their "fans" forums.
Mata'utia has been so valuable this year & he's had some good games at SR/LF/HB & we know he can play FB. There are not many who can do that. He would have got in our pack virtually every match this season if he hadn't been required elsewhere. He's good at tackling forwards, tough, with good hands.
Powell will probably not be thinking about Mata'utia as a first choice centre but may still want someone with his versatility about.

I agree up to a point with Matautia, when we 1st signed him I was a bit meh, but thought we get a centre solid in defence, but would help the team dynamic.

Defence wise he has been woefully last year (most were) but the element I didn't reckon on was how poor he was in attack as a centre. He very very rarely puts his winger in and there is no point having the speed we have in the back line if you are not going to pass the ball.

His best games for Warrington have been ironically when has hasn't been at centre.

I'm not against retaining him because he is an awesome guy and can provide cover at a number of positions but he should never be our 1st choice centre, but how many utility players can we have and how much in doing so does this prevent the development of our youngsters.

"His best games for Warrington have been ironically when has hasn't been at centre."
I think you are right. It is going to be very interesting where he plays this week.

King and particularly Hurrell post great numbers in attack that's why they are there. Batchelor covers so much for Hurrel defensively that it works.

Assuming he isn't considered a starting player I wouldn't have too much problem with another year from Mata'utia, it's a squad game and between Ratchford and Mata'utia we probably have every position covered bar prop (and I even think Mata'utia would go ok there too).

My only real concern would be Quota spots and are they taking a place from a younger player gaining experience?

Mata'utia isn't for me I'm afraid and I get the versatility, good bloke, if we can tempt him for one more year at a reduced rate thing. I'm sorry but I have been underwhelmed, particularly him playing at Centre from Day 1 and I had nothing against Powell bringing in who he thought were good characters.

I've no real reason to rant on such a beautiful morning, but there are times when he looks like he's retired already, never mind at season end or as some would have it the year following...and this Peanut moniker winds me up as IMO nicknames usually apply to folk that have done a bit and earned it. It's a status/acceptance thing as far as I'm concerned and he's achieved little in my book, he's not been here long enough for the longevity award, or done something heroic or game changing and Ok he might not have given that name to himself. .

Perhaps his other strong suit is reliability, I'm just not convinced that's sufficient, but hope he is enthused enough for the remainder of his time here to make me eat my words starting this weekend please Mr Peanut

Matautia underwhelmed to say the least his contract has been extended.