The fanzine are looking to do an article about this in the next issue I wondered if there was anyone on here interested in arguing for or against the idea?

How many clubs can afford a marque player? Surely the whole idea of the salary cap was to create a system of equality now the RL are taking a backward step by bringing in a system that will only benefit the richer clubs.Would it be a fair comment to say the richer clubs have in the past disregarded the salary cap and maybe are still doing so and this marque rule will allow them to progress at the expense of the run of the mill clubs. Hardly a level playing field.

Yeah thats a good idea maybe just take some opinions on the whole matter.

The thing is there is absolutely no need for this ruling. Any club can pay a player what they want. Want to pay SBW £500,000 a year? Of course you can. Oh, you'll have to fit the other 24 of your first team into a £1.3 million cap but that is WHAT A SALARY CAP IS FOR.

Honest question. Can anyone name a single top class player that has gone from a top 4 club to a club lower down the table for Cap reasons? I mean a genuine world class International in the prime of their careers.

Leeds won 5 titles and still retained Maguire, Sinfield, Burrow, Hall and have added the likes of Burgess, Hardaker, Moon as well as bringing through youngsters like Watkins, Ward and Sutcliffe.

The cap doesn't work because it doesn't force teams to manage budgets. That means that either a) The cap is too high or b) Players wages are too low.

chase, he went cos Salford could afford him and cas couldnt under the cap.

Cas are hardly a 'top 4 club' !! Salford and Cas in my eyes are about the same - not quite what was being suggested.

Hock? wasnt a SC reason though, or waybe it was

That'd be Cas that haven't ever won the league and finished 12th out or 14th the year they lost Chase? Not sure they are the best example of a "top 4 side".

If the Giants signed SBW tomorrow who would be still arguing against on Friday.

me, possibly, because we have never really been a team of "stars" but a good honest hard working group, i wouldn't want one man to jeapordise all that.

saying that, he would be a fantastic signing!

To me SBW would be a true 'Marquee' player - he's one of the best in world, players wouldn't resent him being paid more than them and he would probably attract a least a few more regular fans and sponsors. The trouble comes when clubs start to sign players below that standard as a so-called 'Marquee' player...

Exactly what Iv'e said earlier, Will we get true Marque players ? We might at Wigan, Leeds, Saints , and Warrington but they win everything anyway.

I don't think even SBW would increase the crowd much at the Giants, They seem to have reached their level, Only being genuine contenders would work in my opinion and that's not certain by any means.

So why the outcry against it, I can see the point meast made, but what has this " good honest hard working group " got to show , Hodgson could be said to have been a Marque player and he was worth every penny, ( pity somebody didn't think so ). How much notice did we take of Wakey fans who used to winge about KD's cheque book, we were just glad we could spend a lot more money than they could, even if we did stay under the cap.

The clubs who can afford such players will get them, Wigan have a big crowd of fans to keep happy, they haven't got a big fan base because they are lucky, They have worked hard to be where they are and they will do anything they can to keep them turning up. Same with the others mentioned.

Anything that lifts the standard for me is good for the game, I would suggest that League is viewed by the majority of people in this country as a minority sport, played by and large in a couple of counties, More or less where it was a hundred years ago. It get's a fraction of the money that Union gets from Sky, ( despite being a better game ) the rest of TV virtually ignore it all together.

So what are we saying ? More of the same for the next hundred years. Not for me, What's best for our own club is not necessarily best for the game, That way of thinking is what has kept League in It's place . If clubs are sick or seeing the same clubs win everything year on year ( me for one ) the answer is to get up to their level, not stop them getting better.

So given your final conclusion how does this system - where only those same clubs who have been winning can buy a marquee player - help in that goal?

What would be better?

Ring fence 24 players. Apportion an amount of SKY funding to pay them a wage and distribute them among the 12 Superleague clubs. Centralise the academy to create a number of elite junior sides to play in a competition and then create a draft for them to join the Professional ranks. Introduce revenue sharing. Stop the stupid wasteful system whereby every club negotiates it's own kit and merchandising deal and negotiate one to cover the whole of Superleague. Stop the idiocy of P&R but create a vibrant self serving league below Superleague with it's own trophies. Use this league to expand into new areas. Offer incentives to the richer clubs to develop partner teams in areas like Coventry, Wales et al. Introduce a proper expansion draft whereby new clubs to the league can pick 2 players from every Superleague club (except for 8 players that that club can name as protected). Introduce a proper affiliatiuon system whereby clubs can develop young players in a league but can't just use it to get certain players fit. Introduce Waivers.

Otherwise can the RFL and SKY please stop pretending they want every team to be capable of beating everybody else.

Have you ever thought of applying for a job at Red hall, They are desperately short of people with your kind of thinking.