Quote: Bondi_Warrior "That would be going too far, I think that we should have reductions for players who come through the clubs academy but not removing them from the cap all together. I think everybody recognises that clubs should be rewarded and encouraged to produce youth.'"
Why is it going too far? Take any player that has been 'home produced' by the club off the cap completely. Reduce the amount you're able to spend on 'imported' players from both this country and abroad to a much lesser amount than the current cap, or even as a percentage of turnover. That would give the results the RFL is supposedly seeking with the cap i.e. preventing clubs from going bust and encouraging the development of home grown players.
Of course we know this isn't the real reason for the cap. The 50% safeguard was abolished several years ago, so this is no longer a function of the cap, and the RFL has year in, year out failed to implement any real changes to force teams to produce their own youngsters. They've paid lip service to it by reducing quotas etc. but the real answer is glaringly obvious as stated above. The real reason for the cap is to bring all teams down to the lowest common denominator fuelled by the self interest of the smaller clubs. I find it quite sad really that the teams that have been dictating policy are likely to be among the first to lose their franchises. If ever there was a case of the tail wagging the dog....