Stains sign ANOTHER NRL player

[pie eater and proud of it]

They have got to be breaching the salary cap

St Helens have strengthened their bid to retain their engage Super League crown with the capture of Sydney Roosters back row forward Chris Flannery.

Flannery has made 121 appearances for the Roosters

[ancientnloyal]

He isnt anything special IMO.

[faz13]

all i can say is if we got rid of 2 of our top earners in our team we would probably be able 2 sign 6 good players thats how much money we throw away at players just 2 get them 2 sign 4 us, saints are doing something right in the boardroom 2 get the players they get

[highland convert]

Recovering from a broken leg. Could be a cheep loan deal to get him match fit. Roosters may still hold his contract. first grade that may not be available in Sidney. IE loan player. HC

[ancientnloyal]

They're copying Wigan now by signing him... after his broken leg recovery by July

[butt monkey]

Fair comment HC, nevertheless, he would STILL count on any Salary Cap, either in the NRL or Super League.

They have done exactly what Wigan did when Hock and O'Louglin picked up season ending injuries, signing up (supposedly) cheap replacements, and yet still ending up being docked points for breach of the Salary Cap!

It is staggering to believe for one minute, that people can claim that all their players are playing for virtually nothing in order for the team to retain its dominance.

Professional players, play for money, if money wasn't the object they would remain amateurs!

[butt monkey]

butt monkey posted:
It is staggering to believe for one minute, that people can claim that all their players are playing for virtually nothing in order for the team to retain its dominance.

I remember Jason Cayless signing for the Stains and the furor it caused in Australia.

Sydney City were furious, claiming that the "signing on fee" alone would have broken most clubs Salary Caps. (They would have known the figures bandied about at the time by his agent).

[Sutty]

Does a "signing on fee" count under the salary cap. I bet this is a bit of a grey area. In theory we could have given Fielden a huge signing on fee and a rubbish salary for last season. Then, when this season starts he gets a nice pay rise and we have stayed under the salary cap. Is a signing on fee a salary or not? that is the question. :conf:

[GeoffN]

Sutty posted:
Does a "signing on fee" count under the salary cap. I bet this is a bit of a grey area. In theory we could have given Fielden a huge signing on fee and a rubbish salary for last season. Then, when this season starts he gets a nice pay rise and we have stayed under the salary cap. Is a signing on fee a salary or not? that is the question. :conf:

Signing on fees to a player count, fees paid to the club he's signed from don't, nor does the agent's commission.
Fielden's signing-on fee was a payment to Bradford as compensation because he was still under contract to them.

[cpwigan]

:conf: Does the salary cap only apply to Wigan

Saints have no money. They sign Flannery, a decent player. Hooper was ion a low contract. They nearly got rid of him before he retired. They must be paying their youngsters more too as they mature.

Hull sign 2 players from the NRL and neither comes cheap.