I know there are many who don't appreciate threads concerning Union, however, the supposed connection with Saracens makes this interesting reading. Saracens have just lost their Heineken Cup quarter final game to French side Clermont Auvergne and their director of rugby is blaming it (plus the absence of any English club left in the competition) on a lack of funds.

Saracens McCall said: "You could almost see the difference in the salary caps as you looked down on the pitch at various times today, there is no question about that. The squad they were able to bring is outstanding and the stats don't lie. It is getting increasingly difficult to get into the quarter-final stages." He goes on to say that the French operate a salary cap much greater than the £4.2 mio allowed for English clubs.

Given Saracens appetite for players with league connections and what seems a direct channel into the main artery of league talent, there could be a case for being a little less accommodating with what seems a bit of a trojan horse.

The Leicester coach was on Sky last night saying pretty much the same thing and wanting an increase in the cap so that they could go out and get more quality players into there squads.

He quoted a figure of an increase of £1m so increasing there cap to over £5m.

I really do not see how there club game can be viable with such an increase.

Quote: Pie minister "I really do not see how there club game can be viable with such an increase.'" It only is for those with deep pockets - like in RL. Wasps look in worse poo than us Bulls. www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/ap ... gotiations

Quote: Pie minister "I really do not see how there club game can be viable with such an increase.'" It only is for those with deep pockets - like in RL. Wasps look in worse poo than us Bulls. www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/ap ... gotiations

It's strange how some teams like Northapton Saints and Lecicester make millions each season I think Northampton had a profit of £13 million + last year but clubs like Sale and now Wasps seem to be leaking money and their debts constantly wiped out by their owners.

Northampton made a profit of around £800,000. Their total turnover was just above £13mil!

slightly related......any of you noticed the london 7's and baba ads running at the top of the page haha

And my degree is all about applied accounting , £800,000 for a Union side who where high in the league and got to the Heineken Cup final isn't as high as I was expecting. Their ticket pricing is a joke as well I don't know how any one can charge £40 for 80 minutes of club Rugby Union.

There are serious suggestions Farrell will be moving to his temporary English role full time and leaving Sarries. As for the Union threat I think most league supporters are over paranoid.

rlhttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/article-2122633/RFU-look-appoint-Andy-Farrell.html?ito
rlhttp://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/international/england/9190883/Can-Andy-Farrell-be-trusted-to-make-the-right-call-over-son-Owen-if-he-is-an-England-selector.htmlrl

Strangely we are a stronger side this year with out Joel Tomkins, Goulding has been far superior in the than Joel was or could ever be and our left defense is no longer horror show every game. Hock is simply a much better second rower than Joel ever was and his return has completely eased the loss. We have a production line of talent that will time and time again nullify the loss of any Union converts.

Until that production line get picked clean as well.

Don't get me wrong - I don't think Wigan are particularly in danger at present, due primarily to the club having our best lads tied up on decent deals. But I never get this argument that it doesn't matter if we lose them because we can always produce more. To me that's Aussie-style bravado which has no real place in the British game.

Think how potentially strong our international team would be if we hadn't lost the likes of Joel, Eastmond and Ashton AND had the new players that you're talking about.

Yes, the threat from RU does get overstated by some. But it isn't imaginary. Anyone at the club will tell you that RU scouts are regularly hanging around, and that some players's agents are never happy unless they are marketing their clients to RU, even though they are on existing contracts.

I think the problem with the Joel defection was that it proved no matter how loyal we may think a player is, how strong his family ties to RL, how deeply steeped he is in our game, how much we think he is securely contracted ... he can still be lured away if the money is right.

Ashton wouldn't get a spot in the current Wigan set up and with his ego I wouldn't want him around our club any way, as for Joel he be behind Ellis, Hock and Westwood in the pecking order. Eastmond is the only substantial loss to Union in recent years but Lomax his replacement at Saints is proving to be a quality player who I'm sure will be in the international fold pretty soon. The odd player will defect for money but thats their choice I certainly wouldn't a removal of the cap and teams going down the route of Bradford. IL showed we can compete to a certain degree with Union wages as shown with Sam's £300,000 a year.

And then may follow Kyle. Look, we all have our own opinions on the matter. For what it's worth, I wasn't talking about the cap, though that hasn't stopped clubs overspending. I don't know what the solution is re. union. I guess we'll just have to look after our own, and hope that IL can continue to hang onto the likes of Sam.

If you read McCall's quotes in full he actually suggests that yawnion should have a two-tier cap system that allows teams that play in Europe to spend more than the teams that don't. How that can possibly be fair I'll never know and sounds like pie-in-the-sky stuff to me. Still, any sort of cap raising going on in the dark side will get league folk in a right tizz