Plus we bought in bulk to help Melbourne out.

We bought two and got one free.

I don't, nor have I said to have. You obviously do so by stating that you CAN afford him so publish these and that will be the end of that.

Well IL said it, so I'll take his word for it thanks

Who knows how much Leeds pay their players last season....Peacock, Maguire, Sinfield, Buderus??? I don't. Regardless of your players salaries I bet you spend up to the cap. Like we probably do year on year.

However you made your change at the end of the season unexpectedly (you didnt realise that Smith would want to come back so soon from RU), and you grabbed him straight away.

Without releasing anyone / putting anyone out on loan / re-negotiating salary with anyone....(spirit of the cap )

So how DID you do it?

It baffles me.

"Innovative" coaches come from Australia to this side of the world and want to take standards up but once again the majority of Rugby League in this country is crying it's unfair.

It's the same psyche as "Wigan are winning everything, it's unfair". I am convinced that although it wasn't the only reason the salary cap was introduced it was partly the reason it was introduced.

If the boot was on the other foot I'm sure they wouldn't have been whinging about it. No doubt an opposition fan will give me some kind of "moral highground" lecture on clubs getting into financial difficulty (sighting Wigan and the sale of Central Park as an example) being the sole reason for the cap being brought in.

I await with bated breath.

Anyway, I disgress.

P.S. Meow, yes. The claws are out

No need to publish anything. If we couldn't afford him we couldn't sign him. As it stands we are signing him so we obviously can afford him. As has been mentioned numerous times before , the cap is live. Simples.

Why are you even persuing this? What answers do you expect to get from us?

But that's exactly the point; I don't need to.The RFL already do a live check, so before we were able to re-sign him we would have had to have the figures checked and approved by the RFL. In other words they WILL have all the wages paid etc. You, on the other hand, are questioning that the RFL have got it right, without any acces to the figures at all so, not unreasonably, I'm assuming you have some insider knowledge that the rest of us or, indeed, the RFL aren't privvy to. Don't tell me you haven't and all your spouting is just the usual drivel and sour grapes that we get from opposition fans on here? Surely not?

How did the Leeds meeting with HMRC go?

Was it a song or instrumental ?

I know there seems to be a precedent, but for the sake of 2 months it leaves a bit of a bad taste and looks like Wigan trying to wangle out of a (rightly imposed) drugs ban by crying that Hock might not be up to speed when his bans ends . . . . well d'uh, that's what a ban from training does and what it is meant to do.

Not great PR.

When was that due to be held Rogues?