I always thought that the salary cap was linked to income. Now I'm sure the likes of Youngquest, Henderson and Branighan are not playing for peanuts, so to outsiders who can see Gatesheads posting crowds as low as 400 or so, it does look surprising to see these players at that club.

Now the Gateshead owner has already said the RFL do not fund Gateshead, but there are other ways around the cap. As far as I am aware, if a player is also employed by the club in some sort of community role, X amount of the players wages can be deducted off the cap. Quite a few people said that when David Peachey signed for Widnes, the 1st £30K of his wages could be used in this way. All you have to do is go to a few schools etc and you've been seen to make a contribution to developing the game.

Now I don't know if they were joking, but I also believe this was something Celtic Crusaders may have benefitted from. The RFL obviously pay people to be development officers in South Wales, but what made it look a bit dodgy was that the address for the South Wales RL development office was said to be Brewery Field, Brigend. What I would like to know is how much of Celtic's total wage bill did not count on the cap and instead was said to be 'development of the game'. Also I would be interested to know if any funding went to either Celtic or players of Celtic from the RFL for development of the game. Those 2 questions would also apply to Gateshead - basically do you receive extra funding from the RFL (in the name of development) and also does a lot of Gateshead players salary not go against the cap?

Not saying either Celtic or Gateshead have broken any rules, but just wondered how much extra funding or dispensation there is for development areas when it comes to employees wages and the salary cap. To an outsiders view, when you see a club that looks like it has very low income streams, it always raises eyebrows when you see them signing top class players. you automatically think 1) How can they afford them? and 2) How do they get around the 50% of income rule on the salary cap?

Some good questions here Viking 4 ever, and I can see why you would ask them, but there are a couple of things that need to be considered.

Income - I am pretty sure I am right in thinking that any funds donated by a finacial backer is classified as income for the salary cap calculation - so basically Gateshead's income is topped up by the financial contribution of Steve Garside.

Salary - the players you mentioned will be amongst the better paid players at the club, but I know that the some of the figures guessed at on various boards are way off the mark (Halifax will know what they have offered Branighan, so will have an idea of what he was on at Gateshead). In addition, the local and younger players are on very, very moderate deals - so the payroll overall will be nowhere near what some people think it is.

The 3 v 1 quota debate is an emotive one, people will only ever see one side of the argument and there really isn't any middle ground - from my experiencese of fans over the years, opinion is pretty much split and that is fair enough.

However, Steve Garside has commented on a few boards over the years, and so have I - and has said from the horses mouth that the additional quota is the only additional help Gateshead get - so in answer to your question, Gateshead don't get any additional funding from the RFL. I have also been told that when providing the RFL with their periodic returns with salary capm information - Gateshead are bound by the same interpretation as what counts against the cap and what doesn't as other clubs.

Fans of all clubs will always make their choice, as is their right, as to whether they believe this or not.

It will be interesting to see what happens with the Bramley - ish rumours. Personally I hope Leigh get a reprieve, and the Championship increases to 12 teams next season - mainly because it makes for a more sensible league format.

Thing is though , myself having had dealing with the RFL would not trust them as far as I could kick them

The Celtic visa situation is a disgrace , they [ RFL ] know exactly what visa.s were being used in my opinion and they were happy for them to be used

Sorry but my depth of feeling towards the people running our sport runs very deep

Have a talk with your own Ch Exec V4E he will tell you that the rules have now changed drastically on the matter of players working in the community dept of any RL club, and your club is one of the worst hit, (his words not mine im led to believe)

Hasnt Gateshead got the lawyer working for them that was employed by the RFL .

He is their Ch Exec, nowt like having a 'friend at court' ehh

Not just Celtic that are in breech of that though, apparently several other clubs have the same cloud hanging over them. My personal view is that Celtic were jumped on as a part of the 'old school' network that still pervades British politics and that wouldn't want to see a sucessful RL club in perceived RU territory.

I doubt it being 'Political' as such now if you'd have said Administritive as in Civil Service 'Old boys' network, then one could agree.

don't think it was ever put up on the internet because of copyright issues

Ta! Will have a gander anywho

In short to everyone we do not get any funding from the RFL at all. We get the same funding from the the RFL as all other clubs in the league.

Rod came to the club to take on the task of CEO from the RFL and it was a change he wanted to make to further his own knowledge and career within the sport. He has a knowledge of the workings of the RFL having worked their just as others who left Red Hall last year have. He is not the only legal eagle at Thunder just as I am aware that Leigh have legal representation on the board.

The salary cap is subject to scrutiny however, all clubs with low gates can apply for cirtain exemptions but the £400k (now to be £350k) stays the same. Over the past 4 years I have spent over £500k to keep professional RL alive in the North East. I will never get that back as it is spent on the club as it is classed as income the same way as sponsorship is. What I choose to spend my tax paid money on is my decision save for the fact that the RFL tell me that in essence I cant take it back should we get rich. A fat chace that will come into the equation!!!!

We were lucky this year at avoiding the drop. We did not get our full squad until the late and had to build on that. We had turmoil at the start of the season with the former head coach going and the appointment of Steve Mac was the right one to take hence his 3 year contract with the club.

I do not mind discussing the game with fans of all clubs and I post on our fans forum under the title "Rumpole".

I do not understand why others dont do it as I have never hidden anything about the club from anyone so my view if you have nothing to hide then why not post debates with fans.

You will always get those fans who know it all and do like to cause a stir but at the end of the day thats life and we all have our ideas about the game and the clubs.

For those who really know me they will be aware of my warnings about the Celtic Crusaders and what they were doing and for what it is worth all of my theories came to be nearer the truth thaan a chairmans rant at being thrashed by them.

As I have said earlier in my posts good luck for the season and I hope that we will meet again in the near future either at LSV or the GIS.



Kind Regards



Steven G AKA Rumpole

I applaud your openness and honesty, Steve. Whilst I am also opposed to the non-level playing field in the Championship (and elsewhere) - as I frequently say in my programme articles - I would wish harm to no RL club whatsoever. I don't believe anyone is truly 'getting at' Thunder - it's more the RFL's lack of transparency and inconsistency that grates. I guess it's unfortunate that anyone had to go down on 32 points, but that's life!

Good luck for the future!

Alan.

]

Barrow only used 1 overseas quota!!!
Which was Ned Catic.
What other dispensation did Barrow have??