[quote="DSJ1983":3ebj530m]Rovers obviously see Macdonald as a big upgrade on Evalds at fullback but want quota and cap dispensation to make it work. Even if Salford don’t get any short term investment (I think they might anyway with these Aussies ) [b:3ebj530m]I’m not sure the other clubs will just let Rovers have it, especially the likes of Hull and Leigh who would argue that we have cap space[/b:3ebj530m] already to take players and the likes of Wigan, Saints and Wire especially might just see it as only working to strengthen a rival in Rovers if they’re not desperate for any Salford players themselves. He’s a top player but I agree with one of the posters above I’d just stick to our target of Cross as safer longer term option. It’s a gamble that Rovers might want to take because it might be the difference of a trophy for them this season but we’re not at the level and Macdonald would mean a lot of wriggling around cap and quota when any potential dispensation ended in 2026. Cross on a three year deal would be a good signing, he’d add that pace to the centres that we lack, fits within our cap and non quota and maybe Salford would be willing to do a deal anyway if it helped them keep the bigger stars. Sneyd I’d think would be the last player they’d want to lose. From our end I’d like it to happen and think a Sneyd and Sezer would work well but if it was a straight shoot out I think the Leigh move would be his choice. Like I said a few days ago though think the reports of the ‘Salford fire sale’ are coming from a journalist with a well placed source at one club, might not be representative of what the whole league wants anyway. I suppose we’ll likely find out later when they meet.[/quote:3ebj530m] It will 100% get agreed upon as if it doesn’t, Salford will go under and not be able to get rid of players due to most teams being near caps / also Salford would want to maximise potential bidding wars for their players so they’d also want the rules flexed From a playing field perspective maybe some teams would opt out and say no, but if Salford go under in a few weeks that’s a team lost which would be far worse than letting a few teams have players As for his position if he did end up at rovers he wouldn’t see full back, he’d be up against gildart/broadbent for centre, my guess he would slot straight in

[quote="Theeaststander1":ht912c5x]if youre referring to nene we have 3 great centres all capable....he would be brilliant but not needed whatsoever i think the genuine conversation that needs to be addressed now is we are about to have an 11 team league, which will put a lot of strain on clubs[/quote:ht912c5x] Salford would be uncompetitive with a decimated squad anyway. The only person wringing his hands is you as you see that glimmer of hope disappear

Agree with a lot of the above however, I think if there was the slightest chance of a take over or anyone buying into the Salford club in the short or even medium term the clubs would have perhaps held off and granted them more time and perhaps even helped them out, but I guess therefore by their strong actions after a short meeting that's not the case and its unlikely to happen. Perhaps even they see Salford as a lost cause!!! The clubs always think about themselves but the fact that they ruled, in the first instance, against a free for all and rather restricted deals for their players to clubs with cap space left, indicates that they perhaps feel betrayed buy the lack of openness of Salford and now their main concern is for the competition, their television commitments and the fixture list being intact and honoured by all 12 clubs. With the caveat included about further changes ie cap expansions etc. being an option points to the fact that getting the £700,000 one way or another is an imperative. As I said previously the whole fully professional game is on the edge here and we have to find a way of resolving things, before the dominoes start to fall and other clubs are impacted. I wonder how many more clubs can sustain the losses they are posting for much longer. I think had Salford come clean at the end of last season when they obviously knew what was to unfold then we would have seen perhaps Toulouse in, in their place, but they have kept their problems under wraps so that now despite their losing players the Super League Clubs have no option but to keep them in the competition for another year. As I say I don't think Salford have been as honest as they could have been. The fact that there are reports in the media that since last Friday the players have been in Portugal on a warm weather training camp is quite frankly mind boggling. You have to feel for the Salford fans don't you they must wonder what the hell is to become of their beloved club. As always they are the innocent ones in all this and will feel quite helpless particularly after all the pledges and whip rounds they have put into the club over the last few years.

[quote="Marcus's Bicycle":1y5rehfn]Override the vote allow the dispensations and save Salford (for now) and ruin the integrity of the competition. Rock and hard place.[/quote:1y5rehfn] Exactly. A club with no money or a club with no team - neither works. The only thing that’d help is new investment. I think it is probably the best of the bad available options to let nature take its course. Remembering what ‘help’ did to Bradford, for example. If the worst happens they’ll likely do something similar to when Crusaders went under.

I’d have thought that if Salford lost their 4-5 top earners, that would easily cover the £700k cost reduction. Of a player’s base salary is £100k, then by the time you add in NI, car and house allowances (these are allowable outside the cap), then you are looking at nearer £140-150k. Therefore, it may be that they let 7-8 top earners go and bring in some cheaper replacements or loans. It will make Salford much weaker, but hopefully gives them time to get a new buyer.

[quote="Rugby Raider":4cagbdd4]I’d have thought that if Salford lost their 4-5 top earners, that would easily cover the £700k cost reduction. Of a player’s base salary is £100k, then by the time you add in NI, car and house allowances (these are allowable outside the cap), then you are looking at nearer £140-150k. Therefore, it may be that they let 7-8 top earners go and bring in some cheaper replacements or loans. It will make Salford much weaker, but hopefully gives them time to get a new buyer.[/quote:4cagbdd4] They need 700k asap as reported, not overtime, hence why the fire sale in imminent