Who decided on £1.6 million as the sallary cap?

[jimofwigan]

I remember when super league first started the sallary cap was £2.3 million. In order to dum down the game to the lowest common denominator someone has awarded the rugby league players with an ever downward pay packet. Which other sport has ensured the dumming down of its own sport as much as Rugby League? Answer NONE
Rugby Union send their thanks for this dum down as it makes poaching players now so easy.
After listening to the discussion on the sallary cap after the Wigan v Leeds match it is obvious now that it is Wigan V The rest.
St Helens , Bradford ,Castleford Wakefield Halifax have all got one thing in common,they have all breached the salary cap in the last two seasons. However the rest of the superleague think it is only Wigan that have breached it.I hope Wigan fight tooth and nail to defend themselves this time round. Throwing themseves on the sward to appease the rest of rugby league gets you nowhere. We are a succesful club who,s spending ability is decided by the most unsuccesful. Wigan do more to put youngsters into the game than any other club but are not allowed to spend any more than the unsuccessful club. So lets fight for rugby league lets fight for wigan

[Cruncher]

jimofwigan posted:
I remember when super league first started the sallary cap was £2.3 million. In order to dum down the game to the lowest common denominator someone has awarded the rugby league players with an ever downward pay packet. Which other sport has ensured the dumming down of its own sport as much as Rugby League? Answer NONE
Rugby Union send their thanks for this dum down as it makes poaching players now so easy.
After listening to the discussion on the sallary cap after the Wigan v Leeds match it is obvious now that it is Wigan V The rest.
St Helens , Bradford ,Castleford Wakefield Halifax have all got one thing in common,they have all breached the salary cap in the last two seasons. However the rest of the superleague think it is only Wigan that have breached it.I hope Wigan fight tooth and nail to defend themselves this time round. Throwing themseves on the sward to appease the rest of rugby league gets you nowhere. We are a succesful club who,s spending ability is decided by the most unsuccesful. Wigan do more to put youngsters into the game than any other club but are not allowed to spend any more than the unsuccessful club. So lets fight for rugby league lets fight for wigan

You're absolutely right, and it's unbearably frustrating. But unfortunately, the entire history of Rugby League has been a history of the tail wagging the dog. Tiny clubs, who've never achieved anything and never will, have dictated to the larger clubs for the last century - something that I think stems from the game's working class 'equality for all' roots. Fair enough in normal life, but as is being proved now, intolerable (and unworkable) in professional sport.

The whingeing that's going on all over the game about Wigan at present leaves me indecisive - do I laugh or do I puke? What these people basically want is a big slice (Wigan's slice, in truth) of a cake they didn't make or even contribute to, and they don't just want it, they're stridently demanding it.

Unfortunately the game's bosses seem totally devoted to their salary cap at present, oblivious to the fact that it's dumming down playing standards, costing us players hand over fist and still isn't stopping clubs going out of business. The best we can hope for is that some useful alterations are made to it in the near future - discounting young players or home-grown players for example, so that at least clubs can start bringing on youngsters again without having to cut back on first team expenditure.

In the mean time, I agree - Wigan should fight to prove that they didn't bust the cap in 2006, but if that means they'll end up busting it this year instead (as is being suggested), they'll need to give it some thought. There'll be no relegation next year, so a big points-deduction then won't be the end of the world, but how long will our crowds tolerate the club swimming around in the bilge at the bottom of the table?

[Eaststander]

The one thing that stands out to me is the way Wiggy and Baldy keep going on about how the cap has made it a level playing field for all super league teams.
Well ask Salford if they think it's fair? minus 241 points and only 11 points. Stains have plus 318.
Is it a case of Animal farm:- '' All teams are equal but some are more equal than others''
ie:- Stains can do what they like buy who they like and get praise. Wigan get slagged-off week in week out and found quilty and accused of cheating by all and sundry before we have even had the hearing!
Now even Cas Tigers are trying to blame us for them going into NL1.
Wages go UP not down the cap should be made in accordance with rates of pay for all super league players.

[screamy18]

y is it that saints have been found guilty the last 2 seasons and had no point deduction at all !!

[thegimble]

People can say what they want about the cap being bought in to stop us. But it was brought in to stop the game from dieing.

Its a different scenarion now

Wigan - Saints - Bulls - Hull - Warrington - Quins have money now. Quins have the lowest attendances but the owner makes up the shirtfall.

Its the Wakey's, Castleford and others that are keeping the cap as they know theyd never be able to challenge the bigger sides.

The cap needs reforming. Any player who comes through the academy should not count on it until he leaves that club. That would force clubs into developing talent not steal from others as they do today.

[medlocke]

thegimble posted:
Wigan - Saints - Bulls - Hull - Warrington - Quins have money now. Quins have the lowest attendances but the owner makes up the shirtfall.

Its the Wakey's, Castleford and others that are keeping the cap as they know theyd never be able to challenge the bigger sides.

I was thinking about the cap the other night and come to the same conclusion, the big clubs are being punished because the bottom clubs can't afford to compete, i thought to myself why not make the clubs operate within a cap that has a cieling of £2 Million and a basement of £1.5 Million, if you can't afford to operate over the £1.5 then you do not deserve to be in SL, this would be ideal when the franchise system arrives. Super League is the highest level of RL in the country and should only have teams who can afford to play at that level, if all the top clubs can find Millionaire investors, why can't the lower clubs.

[- psycho -]

screamy18 posted:
y is it that saints have been found guilty the last 2 seasons and had no point deduction at all !!

doesn't matter how many seasons you go over, we all know saints just get a slap on the wrist whatever they do.

what matters is the percentage over. saints were 0.8%? we are more likely above 5%, hence the big deduction.

[Cruncher]

medlocke posted:

thegimble posted:
Wigan - Saints - Bulls - Hull - Warrington - Quins have money now. Quins have the lowest attendances but the owner makes up the shirtfall.

Its the Wakey's, Castleford and others that are keeping the cap as they know theyd never be able to challenge the bigger sides.

I was thinking about the cap the other night and come to the same conclusion, the big clubs are being punished because the bottom clubs can't afford to compete, i thought to myself why not make the clubs operate within a cap that has a cieling of £2 Million and a basement of £1.5 Million, if you can't afford to operate over the £1.5 then you do not deserve to be in SL, this would be ideal when the franchise system arrives. Super League is the highest level of RL in the country and should only have teams who can afford to play at that level, if all the top clubs can find Millionaire investors, why can't the lower clubs.

The franchise system should gradually weed out the persistant failures. More likely though, I reckon it'll gradually be watered down until it has almost no effect at all.

The emphasis should be on rewarding endeavour and ambition, not hanging on for dear life to the perennial losers at the bottom. But it never has been before, so why should that change now? It's much easier, after all, to keep on penalising the top clubs, because they'll keep paying their own way and getting good crowds whatever happens to them.

The people who run this game are, and always have been, pathetic.

[DaveO]

Cruncher posted:

medlocke posted:

thegimble posted:
Wigan - Saints - Bulls - Hull - Warrington - Quins have money now. Quins have the lowest attendances but the owner makes up the shirtfall.

Its the Wakey's, Castleford and others that are keeping the cap as they know theyd never be able to challenge the bigger sides.

I was thinking about the cap the other night and come to the same conclusion, the big clubs are being punished because the bottom clubs can't afford to compete, i thought to myself why not make the clubs operate within a cap that has a cieling of £2 Million and a basement of £1.5 Million, if you can't afford to operate over the £1.5 then you do not deserve to be in SL, this would be ideal when the franchise system arrives. Super League is the highest level of RL in the country and should only have teams who can afford to play at that level, if all the top clubs can find Millionaire investors, why can't the lower clubs.

The franchise system should gradually weed out the persistant failures. More likely though, I reckon it'll gradually be watered down until it has almost no effect at all.

I like the idea of minimum standards and in theory we already have them for grounds. I reckon Saints, Salford and Wakey would never be allowed into SL if they were in Nl1 and won the NL1 GF because their grounds would not be deemed acceptable.

However because they are already in SL they are not going tobe booted out and I think that is what will happen to sides who don't meet the franchise criteria. I am sure some excuse will be dreamt up so Wakey can contine in SL for example.

I also like the idea someone else mentioned about academy players no counting on the salary cap unless they leave the club they started with.

That would reward and encourage the development of players but you know what? Because we have a good system in place for that already it would be seen as handing us an advantage and that would never do. The fact it would be good for the game overall won't stop those in power from viewing it from the glass half empty side of the debate. They will see the negative and say "Wigan is too big a draw for youngsters so they will have the best academy and so the best players not on the salary cap."

I have seen this said by fans of other clubs already when similar ideas have been posted on rlfans. It is ridiculous and since sport is about competition shouldn't there be competition for who has the best academy? The whole purpose of the back room operation and junior set up is to further the aim of the club which is the success of the first team. It would not surprise me if they didn't start to count coaches and physios on the salary cap and placing a levy on clubs with good training facilities so they don't use their spending power to gain advantage that way!

Sometimes it makes you wonder why the club bothers with an academy. They cost money on the salary cap and when half a dozen end up looking like first team material we have to let half of them leave because of the cap.

Dave

[butt monkey]

But why does the Cap figure keep going down? No account of inflation or anything else, just a blind obsession to lower the Salary Cap amount each year. Hang the repercussions.

By default, clubs already over this years IMO WILL be over next year, with the possibility that more borderline clubs will also now fall foul of the lowering limit.