]

So do you agree with Rule?

Nope, what I disagree with is the "no pressure" statement.

The pressure is only coming from the fans, Agar and the board seem very happy together.

Surely it must take some pressure of a poorly performing team if they know there's no relegation?

Seems very sensible to me. Set a limit of 3 months minimum for an injured player to be out, then de register him from the cap and use his salary on a replacement for that period. It's up to the clubs to operate in a prudent financial manner and clubs like ours are penalised for being profitable businesses whilst other clubs can lose £100's of thousands a year yet still spend teh same as us.

Worst thing they ever did was scrap the 50% of income rule. Will probably be the reason some clubs ultimately fail

Because he is cheap and does what they tell him to.

But it also breeds lethargy, there is no need to improve if you know nothing will happen as a consequence of being shoite.

So remove the cap altogether then? It was launched because many clubs could not be prudent. Many clubs still arent even with the cap in place.

I agree.

Where did I say remove the cap? I'm saying that clubs who can afford it should be able to field a competitive side even when they have significant long term injury problems.

Did you not read the part where I said they should never have binned the 50% of income rule?

Think your misunderstanding my reply. I didnt say you had said remove the cap. I'm proposing removing the cap to be debated?

I'd never have binned the 50% rule either. Defeats the object of the cap imo.

The cap has to be raised some time, and at present there is no reward for clubs who have prudent financial arrangements in place. One club can be in the black, and making money it can't spend on players, whilst another can be losing money hand over fist and still be able to spend the same. There could be incentives in place like a club that makes a profit of say over £50,000 on a years trading could be allowed to spend an extra £100,000 the next year on players.

I also think that ther should be a reward for clubs that included over a certain number of home grown players in their first team squads. At present the one size fits all cap is too rigid, and I believe too levelling, and does not reward enterprise off the field, profit making or good youth development enough. Of course with most clubs losing money this suits them but an incentive scheme would see a few clubs who are rubbish at managing their finaces encouraged to get their house in order or fall behind on the cap. Just of course my views.

Sorry, see what you mean now.

I'd reduce any club's salary cap for the following year by the amount they lost the previous season

You guys have been making a profit for a while now and for the last few years, I doubt you guys have been spending to the max on the cap(well maybe apart from this season). So what makes you think you will spend beyond the cap if you had the chance?

The comments of our chief exec maybe?