surely thats got to be wrong or i am reading it wrong.
Wages already paid have to count.
Plus the severance package.
It would just be the future wages that did not then count on the cap ~ seeing as they would not be paid.

If that were not the case you could pay as much as you want then "negotiate" a severance package of ten bob to go on the cap!

Correct me if I am wrong but isn't Vievers the defensive coach, so it should be him helping Smith and telling him where to stand

No they don't. You can read the rules yourself at the RFL web site.

Gleeson's liabilty to Wire for example this year is zero.
So, if I'm following you correctly, we have to take all Gleeson's annual salary on our cap, but we lose all of Mathers'? If so, how have we fitted Gleeson in? He must be on more than double Mathers.

You won't hear this so often but here goes! DaveO is spot on with this one!

We've been having a PM salary cap debate for the last week or so and it's exactly how DaveO put it!

I think in Layman's terms the best way to put it is that at any one time you are not allowed to have a Wage structure that has you above 1.6m at any one time.

Example

If Wire were up to the Max on the Salary Cap & Gleeson was 120k a Year (10K a month) then they cannot replace him with a player (Or multiple of players) that earn above 10k a month!

You can't say Gleeson was owed 80k for the rest of that year and then Pay someone 20k a month for the next 4 months as for that 4 month period He would be earning 20k a month putting the club 10k Over the Salray cap for that Month!

If Wigan had 30k left on the cap and Mathers was on 60k a year that means we have 90K left on the cap.
Wigan could not then Pay Martin Gleeson more than 7.5K per month for the remainder of this year (90k divided by 12 months).

Even though Wigan were under the cap by 30k for the 1st 3 months of the year that money is now dead money as Gleeson's wages for the remainder of the year utilise Mathers/30k spare and this backdated over the 1st 3 months of the year.

Confused?

Come for a pint in the Anvil about 6 and I will explain However after 6 or 7 pints it could get even worse!

We take on 12 x Gleesons monthly wage whatever that is. That is 12 x his monthly wage is added to our salary cap liability. We lose all of Mathers and Wire take on 12 x Mathers monthly wage.

It doesn't matter which way the system works regarding the question of how we fit Gleeson in because if it were only 8 months wages not 12 on our cap you would assume that would exceed it given we only had £20K to spare plus what was left after losing Mathers wages.

I am also pretty sure that Mathers was released not transferred so that means there could have been a pay off to him in theory from Wigan which would count on the cap.

So yes it is a mystery how we got Gleeson under the cap either way.

One possibility is of course we paid Mathers quite a lot of dosh!

Dave.

12 x his salary @ warrington or his salary at wigan?

lets not forget, its not impossible that hes on less money than he was