I have read with dismay today that Leigh are meeting the rfl with a view to getting dispensation on the salary cap on the basis they say that Leigh have the facilities and therefore that element should be available for player contracts.

I do not blame Leigh for trying this but if accepted it sets a precedent for other clubs for example that share soccer grounds to do the same its a way of fiddling the system.

I hope for the rfl to reject not because its Leigh because I feel you were shafted by the rfl with the relegation fiasco but because of the dangers I mention above.

Its nothing to do with the 'ground share' its to do with POTENTIAL INCOME factors not ground facilities, if that be the case then clubs like Rochdale, Oldham, and Doncaster would also be applying, a salary cap has never been challenged in law and it should be as it is a basic RESTRICTION OF TRADE.

The days of a level playing field are long gone. See Celtic/Toulouse and Gateshead. I don't see any reason why they shouldn't try, there are many arguments not least restriction of trade. After all the fact that RL is a sport is also questionable due to the myriads of 'dispensations' already in place.

Also the precedence HAS been set when they allowed Wigan to go over it a few years ago, as Leigh can argue that they had at least TWO contracts of high paid players in p[lace before the season started, now that is the systems fault NOT Leighs.

Welcome to RL of the 21st century Girl. Its like playing uphill at Batley for 80 mins every game, ask everyone whose played Gateshead ,CC, Toulouse, Sheffield (how many imports?), Salford in recent years.

Fred , that shed will never get put up with the time your spending on here

Well if we don't get dispensation we're fecked

Why oh why does everyone on this and other sites go on about Gateshead.

As the owner of the club I read with interest the comments raised about our club and its special arrangements. I can tell you all (from the horses mouth) that Gateshead do not get any extra funding from the RFL. It has 8 possible players it can field from other countries but it actually has 3 used as the other players all have UK and or EC passports and could have played for any club in the competition using their status.

We are a developing club that has just passed its 10 year history mark who had one year in the SL and had its licence taken from it to go to Hull because they could not manage their finances so expansion in 1999 was given back to the heartlands due to mismanagment by a hearland club and some reward that was for failure!.

I come from the so called heartlands and have lived with the game for all of my 54 years and decided to go to Gateshead to support my son who played for them back in the dark ages when they were bottom of the then NL2. We are no longer in that era due to some good management, a bit of luck and a few quid lighter in my pocket.

We have come along way since those days and have invested both on and off the field to gain credibility. We won the NL2 cup on well within the salary cap and have survived this year under the same cap and the same rules as every other club in the competition. We are a developing club with little or no amature clubs around us but that is changing for the better. Expansion takes time.

No one likes to go down a step and we know what it is like in the NL2 lower league as we were there for so long. I wish the club well and hope that you do a Dewsbury.



Kind Regards



Steven Garside

Steve

Any comp that allows rules for one and different rules for the next is wrong, so if your club are favoured in that way you will always get some flack. We will get some next year if we go down.

Gateshead SL were shafted and I welcome the games expansion in the North East via the correct channels, ie from roots up.

All the best for the future but dont defend the indefensible.

Neil

Steve you have 3 as opposed to 1 for everyone else, no one said anything about extra funding. I'm with Maurice on this one. As for UK and EC passports, thats a game/joke in itself.

Still with Mr Findlay on your books you should be a shoe in for 2012, especially if he leaves to rejoin the franchise committee in that year. Hey but I'm not bitter, just a soothsayer who won't be conned by the RFL anymore

Steve , do you find it fair having 3 overseas as opposed to everyone else having 1? well i dont ,expansion or not you should play with the same rules as everyone.If we get special dispensation for champ 1 how fair will that be for the rest of the teams ,not fair at all but we have had to put up with Gateshead,Toulouseand and Barrow all being favoured by the RFL so if we do get the rub of the green i for one will embrace it.

We or I didnt make the rules up regarding overseas players that was done long before I came to Gateshead. We are only playing to the rules set out

The EC/UK passport rules then they are the same for you and in essence you could play the same players at your club without breaking the rules however, I do believe in creating our own grown talent and that is what we are trying to achieve in Gateshead and that does take time. Till then it is only right that we do the best for the club within the rules even if those rules have been set by others I believe to balance the lack of home grown talent in the respective expansion area's.

Mr. Findlay came to the club as CEO because I could not run a full time Rugby Club in the North East while operating a business in Yorkshire and the Uk. I doubt that he has any influence within his old firm as now he has turned to the "Dark Side"!!!

Hearland v expansion will always be an emotive issue however both have their place in this game so long as we all can debate in a healthy manner then that has to be good for all of us.

The very best for you all next season and hope to see you at LSV and indeed at the GIS.

Kind Regards



Steven G