When contracts start/end will be when players start/stop counting, so there'll be big changes on the day standard contracts come in to force.

But there are adjustments across the year. If a team signs a player on month's loan in April for £5000 for that month, he will count as £60k on the 'salary cap year', but only for a month. It may be that the club was already at the cap. My suspicion is that if the loanee is coming in to replace an injured fed-trained player earning £60k per annum or more, for example, that injured player can be de-registered, and then when the loanee goes back to the parent club, can be re-registered. The club never exceeds the cap, despite spending an extra £5000. Variations on this scenario could answer a lot of the 'how come...?' questions about the cap.

I've seen one or two sensible objections to this theory, but none of them are compelling IMO. On the other hand nobody has ever asked the question, so far as I know.

AP in we are at cap limit shocker, so for all those that derided me about us not having cap space and that we didn't need to sell westerman as I stated to stay under the cap, where are your chiding voices now?
IF and that's a big if, we were to sign Lee Smith that would undermine everything the club has being selling/telling us, i just hope it isn't so, i wouldn't take him if he was playing for nowt.
I find it interesting that mention/rumours of interest in a big name signings when clearly we never had any scope to do so came right at the time of the push to sell passes/memberships

I'm thinking that you are right on this one and we've been mis sold or decieved in order to sell passes whatever the real reason we i feel have not been told the truth and it's all a case of smoke and mirrors with Pearson.
I bought a pass on the strength of the Pritchard signing alone but all this talk of signing Carney or a n other top strike player but then the next be told we are at full cap and are happy with what with have well someone's telling us porkies and having us over.
And as if the case with the cap why sign players we don't need in Washbrook and take Smith on loan?

The point that I was making (labouring ) above, is that you could possibly both be at the cap limit and have room for another signing (by allocating your cap differently). It's a little misleading, but not necessarily untrue.

This would (if true) allow clubs who spend a bit more to down-play this and assign more of their success to developing youngsters, investing in infrastructure and other things considered virtuous. It would also allow clubs who spend less, to be able to say they are at the cap and resist demand to splash more cash from success-hungry fans.

Because it offers most value if you have top-tier, high-earning fed-trained players in your squad, it'd also be another reason why the best british players tend to congregate at a handful of the wealthiest clubs, with the most expensive-looking squads.

AP also said "We are always looking to add one more". Best to speak about the full answer he gave, rather than just one part of it, put's it into context (despite the statement being somewhat ambiguous).

People rightly derided you because you put forward opinion as fact (see your last sentence for example) without the slightest hint of humility. You throw enough mud at a wall some of it will stick as the saying goes.

None of us know what's happened or how it was done, how much space we do or don't have, it's all guesswork. Hopefully someone can ask the right question at the forum and get a clearer answer.

Spot on, and something some of us pointed out at the time. But some bought the 'we'll invest Westerman money' line.

His cap space was never available and his fee has paid for the 23's this year. Nothing wrong with it, just wish the club would be honest.

There are a few that owe you an apology, no doubt.

A player only counts on the cap if he plays a salary cap game. We could have £3m worth of talent, but only £1.6m worth can play a game.

The cap can be 'broken' so to speak in the off season if there is provision there to release players / sell players / loan players before the next season starts. This has to be all confirmed with the RFL.

I'd presume the fact we had to move on a non fed player would have freed up some cap space for carney?

Unless we have some cap space, how can lee smith be on trial with us unless we would maybe loan out a squad player to sign him? He's shoite anyway and even wakey didn't want him so I really don;t see what he would add to our squad

I don't think that is right anymore.

I think it is the top 25 registered earners at any moment that count. So even if a team only used 24 players all season, player 25 would still count.

As I've outlined in dully obsessive detail, I also suspect that you can have more talent play, by moving it and out of the top 25 registered players.

A player who played a small number of games would certainly count at that time, but if he is subsequently deregistered he no longer counts. I think fed-trained players can be re-registered in the same season, so effectively might only count when they're playing, if that suits the club - out the team, providing the option of off the cap, and a degree flex in the cap.

Quote: *1865* "A player only counts on the cap if he plays a salary cap game. We could have £3m worth of talent, but only £1.6m worth can play a game.'" Quote: *1865* " A Club’s “Players” are the 25 Players registered with the Club and eligible to play in the Super League who have the highest Salary Cap Values at the time in question, whether or not they have played for the Club in a Salary Cap Relevant Match in the Salary Cap Year to that date, in addition to all other players at the club who will or do play in a Salary Cap Relevant Match. '" www.therfl.co.uk/the-rfl/rules/i ... section=E1

Quote: *1865* "A player only counts on the cap if he plays a salary cap game. We could have £3m worth of talent, but only £1.6m worth can play a game.'" Quote: *1865* " A Club’s “Players” are the 25 Players registered with the Club and eligible to play in the Super League who have the highest Salary Cap Values at the time in question, whether or not they have played for the Club in a Salary Cap Relevant Match in the Salary Cap Year to that date, in addition to all other players at the club who will or do play in a Salary Cap Relevant Match. '" www.therfl.co.uk/the-rfl/rules/i ... section=E1

He said tonight that some players would have needed to be loaned out if we'd have signed Carney and that's still the plan anyway
Think fash downes turgut will all start the yr or have most of on loan in the champs.

Would they be among Hull's top 25 earners though? Perhaps more of a budget constraint than a salary cap one? The rule Mr Superbeetle has posted isn't the clearest bit of text I've ever read. More confused than ever.

I guess you'd want those young players back from loans by the time the under-23s starts.

Speaking to some1 in the club a few weeks back a lot of the fringe lads will prob do loans, guessing on those I named. 23s will be more of a speeding up process for the likes of Dean and litten etc who could still play 19s