Honestly, PT I posted this at the time of the deal and I still pretty much feel the same. Aside from the last sentence. As it's clear Dagger is more than cover for full back. Dagger can go onto win the man of Steel from here but for me the deal to get him at that moment in time was a poor one.


Dagger had a year left on his contract. Hall was contracted to 2024 with us. So you'd think logic would suggest we'd be crazy to accept a straight swap.

Hull KR have been after Hall for a significant period of time and they like him alot.

Hull KR are weak in the centres and have injuries. So it's s position they desperately need to strengthen.

I just don't get it. How can this be defended?

We might have multiple Centres at the club. But, 2 are in questionable form (lynne and Langi) and 1 is Gaskell.. The best Centre we had at the club was Hall. The player with the most potential at the club was probably Hall. But it's OK. We've now got full back cover for a few months!

There is if it goes in the players pocket. That's the kind of deal that gets you points docked.

To get away with that you'd have to use someone not associated with the club......and I'm sure they'd still investigate it.

Would it matter who paid as long as you stayed under the cap?

No it wouldn't.....and I think we have loads of cap room.
But that's not what Wrencat said. I was answering the bit about not affecting the cap.

Payments made direct/indirectly to a player are still subject to Tax & NI and therefore count on the salary cap, if not then there is also an element of tax evasion which would land all parties in the do do if found out

Sponsorship is just another income stream and will be included against the cap.