I like the salary cap in that it stops clubs spending more than they can afford, that is a massive pro, and we may have seen a few clubs go under portsmouth style had we not had it in place, however I don't like how it restricts the earnings of some players (we lost Ashton because we could only offer him peanuts, if you believe Mo) and I don't like how there is no incentive to bring your own talent through the ranks.

On a slightly different note, isn't there a proposed salary cap increase in Aus??

For me that could be a disaster, especially considering the RFL are too inept to even consider changes until it's far too late. I was talking to Odem about it, and he's read somewhere that it could go up to A$ 6mil, that would be an absolutle nightmare. Aussie clubs could then offer the best wages, in the best league, and in a beatiful country.

"Hey Sam/Joel/Lee/Liam/Kyle/Any other english youngster with a bit of potential, fancy coming playing in Aus? We can double your contract, give you a house on the beach, and you'll be playing alongside/agianst Inu, Thurston, Folau, Lockyer and any other boy hood heros you have"

Who would turn that down!!

It would be near enough the end of the salary cap in Britain, or the end of RL as a top class British domestic sport.

I doubt it, the proposed rise is less than $1m, and i dont think that money would be used to entice British players, more like clubs trying to keep their own players. They are having all sort of problems with the 3rd party agreements, Scott Prince and the Titans have just been cleared of this.

Has any confirmation of new franchises been announced? They have been talking about this for a long time. Eventually new teams will be implemented but alot will depend on the next round of TV negoations. Im hoping for a new Queensland team and for the Central Coast Bear to come in.

If our best talent went to Aus we'd probably end up with a half decent test side in 5 years! If we want to keep our best youngsters and bring more through we have to make some sort of allowance on the cap for Academy products. Whether it be only 50% of their wages count or whatever.

The CC is a bad idea. End of.

challenge cup?

Hmmm aren't we trying to cut out aussie players coming over for a payday?

I dont agree with the cap even more so when rugby onion come and chuck a big wad of cash at our young players if we are going to keep the cap up it

I don't think there's any way of stopping the Aussies coming over for a payday unless the standard of the league increases dramatically. Why else would someone come and play in the UK rather than Aus, in a less respected league with a much lower profile? Reducing the quota would be a way of ensuring that the clubs should make sure they're getting someone who's going to work as well as get paid as they should be able to afford a player who's just waiting to retire.

The SC in it's current state is an utter waste of time; it was marginally better when the 50% rule still applied, now that any club can spend up to the max. (and possibly more than they can afford) we've opened it up to clubs going bust again, which is what the SC is meant to prevent.

The SC should be a percentage of earnings (say 50%) with no upper limit. This in turn will force clubs to generate higher attendances to be able to increase their spending power (you could even link it to franchises that to get a franchise 50% of your earnings must be equal to at least X). This would encourage teams to improve support, generate a higher turnover and would level the playing field somewhat (with a minimum amount each club must have available to spend on wages).

Chuck in that clubs get a reduction on (against the SC) wages for their own academy products and clubs will soon start investing in their academies too.

I think the cap was put in place as a way of saving clubs from themselves by preventing clubs A,B,C,D & E from spending much more than their income could sustain in the hope of competing with club F and club G who between them win almost all of the honours. Getting to and staying in the top flight and trying to mix it with clubs with far more disposable income was (and still is) killing many clubs. For that reason it should stay in place but I think we need to return to the 50% of income on wages limit. Hull KR are a club that recruited heavily for the season following that restriction being lifted and whilst they have finished higher they also have had large reported debts as a consequence of spending at or near the cap limit when income obviously could not sustain such spending.

For the good of the competition and the long term prospects of all clubs I also agree with having a cash limit in place as well. Yes players go to RU or to Australia when offered a bigger wage than their current club can offer, but it is personal preference as regards lifestyle, location, profile and international prospects that lead these players to take those offers rather than move over to another SL club, not just the salary cap limit. If our sport and our clubs cannot afford to match the sort of sum offered to the likes of Ashton or SBW then let them go, some other young lad will get a shot at their place in the competition and our clubs will not risk financial ruin just to keep one man in our sport.

Getting back to the benefit to clubs of a 50% rule and a cash amount limit. Having both gives clubs the stability from being less likely to spend more than their income in any given year as they have 50% of their income left to cover other costs and will not eat into the budget for day to day running (outside of players' salaries) by spending excessively for potential short term gain on the field. Having a cash limit as well allows for extra cash to be ploughed into the infrastructure.

As an example with a 50% rule in place and no cash limit Club X has a yearly income of £4million and can spend £2million on wages they do and fail to win anything, next year they bring in more new players on big money to try to buy success and this continues ad nauseum, the gound, matchday experience, youth development and crowd numbers stay the same or decline.

With a 50% rule and the existing limit of £1.65million Club X has an income of £4million but can only spend £1.65million on player wages so the extra £350k can be used to improve aspects such as youth structure, training ground, marketing, matchday experience, stadium facilities (put roof on toilets etc.) allowing the club to improve on the whole and improve its prospects for future years rather than frittering away money to try to buy a trophy and letting the rest of the club stagnate.

And what happens when he goes too? And the next one after him? And the next one after him?

For many reasons, I'm no longer as concerned about the cap as I was. But people are far too complacent about this particular aspect of it.

You need only consider when we last came close to challenging Australia's international dominance. The GB team was full of players like Hanley, Edwards, Davies, Lydon, Offiah, Betts, Myler, etc - most of whom, if not all, would not even have been in RL under the present cap system.

If every time a truly exceptional talent emerges he goes off to RU, then you're never going to have the sort of special team that can meet the Aussies on their own terms. And let's not do what fans of other clubs do and pretend this won't happen. Ashton was looking like an exceptional talent. Now we'll never know. Eastmond is really showing the goods - how long will he be around for? One year? Two at the most, I'd say.

While I agree that those who appear to be irrationally greedy - the Gasniers and SBWs of this world - will always want more than RL can provide and may as well leave, it's far too complex a situation to just say "anyone who wants a bit more can sod off". Some just want what they're worth.

With a bit of sense though that aussie coming over for a retirement fund can do your team alot of good. Brett Hodgeson at Hudders for example, he has been part of a revolution that has turned the club from average to getting to a cup final last year. Even if they don't add much playing wise some of these players simply know how to win, and can add some atmosphere to the dressing room. Read Andrew John's autobiography and see the effect he had on the Warrington players before the game in the dressing room.

Obviously there is a flip side to that, some players come over here and arn't very good, Vaeliki, or Matt King under anyone but Tony Smith. It's down to the Chairmen to find the right aussie players to come in and add something to the side that makes the deal beneficial to both parties.

agree with most on here!!

salary cap - if you are going to have one - should be a percentage of a clubs earnings i.e. 50% with no upper limit and players who have come through the academy system at that club shouldn't count on the cap.

Several clubs don't invest in their academy, they have a few that make it into the super league and then they will fill the rest of the academy with local juniors who are effectively just making up the numbers. Taking players who have come through the academy off the sc will encourage more investment in player development and finding the next Jason Robinson, Joe Lydons, Ellery Hanleys. Another point is we lose so much potential because these young players who break into the first team squad are often offered contracts in which they would earn more working in McDonalds. Many may not agree with premier league football size wages or in fact Fieldens lol but I believe wages should be on par with RU. Certainly wages should be higher so that they dont find other sports or other occupations to be more attractive than playing our great game.
Another point of the SC is that a player should be able to get other income such as image rights etc and not count on the cap and if a sponsor wants to pay to get a certain player and cover is wages or give them an house etc it should be allowed.
Better a player gets the more hes worth - clubs cant afford to keep hold of them so other clubs or others sports gain from our work and investment in that players develoment!!!

Agreed with most on here 50-60% salary cap and -50% salary cap for home grown players

Id also like to see academy players who break into the first team to not count on the salary cap for their first season, thus promoting clubs to give more young players a chance in SL

I agree that we should have an NRL style 3rd party payments, but there should be a limit on that (i think its currently $150,000 in Aus). I deffinately dont agree with a sponsor paying wages etc, that would go down a path that would ruin smaller clubs.