Yes, they do seem strange dont they.

Not really, he's suggesting that he wants to spend beyond the cap to cover injuries

But I doubt you guys have been spending to the cap(like I said, maybe apart from this year)so for Rule to suggest he wants to spend over the cap seems a little strange.

Maybe we're at the cap now and can't bring in needed palyers?

Are you really this stupid?

And maybe not.

I dont think you get my point!

You'd be wrong.

We've been spending at or near cap every year except last year. We've been pinged twice for going over it FFS.

Last season we had Horne, Raynor, Yeaman, Calderwood on GB increments plus Berrigan, Manu, Lauaki as internationals. We didn't get Crocker but we did bring in Tansey, Broughton and Cordoba and Moa. At some point we paid off Dykes and Raynor as well.

Your point is that you are hypothesising about how much we spend on player salaries when you have no idea whatsoever, yet seem to ignore the fact that our chief exec is saying he feels there needs to be a mechanism in place to allow teams with significant injury problems to spend over the cap.

Did you go to an east hull school?

I'm guessing we spent close to the cap when we were deducted 2 points for breaching it in 2003!!! And again in 2006 when we get a slap on the wrist for another breach. Absolutely nothing to brag about, far from it, but it does suggest the club utilise the cap to the max.

I've got sympathy for Hull's injury plights of recents seasons - it could and will be us one year - so I see where Rule is coming from. However it'd be open to abuse, so I don't think it'd be workable. Planning ahead by having a bigger squad with one or two fewer big names, or leaving some cap space free is always an option. Even now, a player out for the season can be deregistered and removed from the cap.
As to changing the cap, the current system has the virtues of being simple to administer and raising competitiveness. Hull are not rewarded for their profits, but that is different to being punished. Profits are their own reward, perhaps? Still if the 50% rule increases stability I'd be happy to consider it - if it comes down to it, an unbalanced competition is better than no competition at all.

I miss read the title of the thread, thought it said "James Rules on the take from the salary cap"

they cant be removed from the cap

you could remove them from the 20/20 when that was in place, that was all

In theory with a live cap, we could, release 3 or 4 players towards end of season, and use their monthly wedge on one player, SBW (visa wont make that work) to win the playoffs.......

But you get the idea....