New signings for next year

[pedro]

The % rule does still apply. It is 1.85m or 50% of turnover whichever is lower.

quite sure it doesnt as Leigh wouldnt have been able to do that last year but openly did.

http://www.rugby-league.com/operational ... html#p=282

[DaveO]

The % rule does still apply. It is 1.85m or 50% of turnover whichever is lower.

quite sure it doesnt as Leigh wouldnt have been able to do that last year but openly did.

http://www.rugby-league.com/operational ... html#p=282

You have missed the bit about the Sustainability Cap

In advance of each Season each Club is required to submit to the Rugby Football League an Operating Budget for the Season (in a standard form). This is scrutinised, where appropriate supporting evidence required and then signed off. This agreed Budget determines what a Club can spend on players to either breakeven or make a small permitted loss – this is called the Club Sustainability Cap.

Under the Salary Cap Regulations each Club is restricted to spending on players the lower of the finite Cap and its Club Sustainability Cap.

From here: http://www.rugby-league.com/financial_sustainability

SL clubs have to follow this according to section 3.1.1. For the Championship just about the whole of section 1 of their version of the salary cap rules are about preventing clubs trading beyond their means and protecting them from insolvency. Section 3.1.1 for the Championship SC rules also starts by saying a club must ensure its aggregate liability must not exceed the Club Sustainability Cap. Same for the League 1 version of the SC rules.

What does this mean in practice? Well for smaller clubs the only way they can pay up to the cap limit is if they get a huge sponsorship. They aren't going to be making enough income from gates receipts and other items the RFL tots up to to give them their Operating Budget.

Whether Leigh spent up to the cap to achieve promotion we don't know without looking at their accounts. They most likely outspent every other side in the Championship though. So much for a level playing field enforced by the SC!

I bet HKR have done the same this season. So P&R is a bit of a sham. The relegated SL sides are most likely to be able to retain their income and keep a squad of players likely to compete for promotion the season after. The only way this won't happen is if another team gets a huge sponsorship to allow them to compete.

This flies in the face of the stated aim of the salary cap (as in the SL SC rules) which is to ensure success is based on on-field excellence and not financial clout and also means should they lose that sponsorship if their sugar daddy walks away then they will be in breach of the rules.

A couple of interesting things I noticed in looking into this.

1. The expense of running an academy side reduces the Operating Budget so lowers how much a club can spend on the cap.

2. If a club makes a loss outside that permitted, that must be made good the next year or the Sustainability Cap is reduced by that amount.

I am not sure if these two rules apply to SL clubs as they are in the League 1 version of the rules but they are the only version of the SC rules that define what makes up the Operating Budget within the actual SC rules themselves. I have not had time to hunt down any other rules about it that may apply differently to SL or Championship sides on the RFL web site.

[pedro]

Leigh spent it Beaumont said so, like you say it makes a mockery of the system. The % doesnt apply this year its why the sky money was given to every club so the full amount so they could spend 100%.

[DaveO]

Leigh spent it Beaumont said so, like you say it makes a mockery of the system. The % doesnt apply this year its why the sky money was given to every club so the full amount so they could spend 100%.

That is only true for SL. 80% of the Sky money over the next five years goes to SL clubs. 8% goes to the Championship which works out at an average of around £243K per club per season. I think it is less than that because the relegated club got something like £900K to cushion the blow. Clubs finishing 1st and 2nd in Championship got around £500K also with a sliding scale for the rest. League 1 clubs were due £75K each.

If all RL teams in SL, Championship and League One were getting £1.825m a year the five year £200m Sky money would not last three seasons.

So for Leigh to pay £1.825m Beaumont gifted Leigh a "sponsorship" for one season of over a million quid, a level Wigan can only dream of!

[pedro]

Leigh spent it Beaumont said so, like you say it makes a mockery of the system. The % doesnt apply this year its why the sky money was given to every club so the full amount so they could spend 100%.

That is only true for SL. 80% of the Sky money over the next five years goes to SL clubs. 8% goes to the Championship which works out at an average of around £243K per club per season. I think it is less than that because the relegated club got something like £900K to cushion the blow. Clubs finishing 1st and 2nd in Championship got around £500K also with a sliding scale for the rest. League 1 clubs were due £75K each.

If all RL teams in SL, Championship and League One were getting £1.825m a year the five year £200m Sky money would not last three seasons.

So for Leigh to pay £1.825m Beaumont gifted Leigh a "sponsorship" for one season of over a million quid, a level Wigan can only dream of!

yep it is, what I meant is that the % cant be true as they already get the full cap amount paid to them.

[DaveO]

Leigh spent it Beaumont said so, like you say it makes a mockery of the system. The % doesnt apply this year its why the sky money was given to every club so the full amount so they could spend 100%.

That is only true for SL. 80% of the Sky money over the next five years goes to SL clubs. 8% goes to the Championship which works out at an average of around £243K per club per season. I think it is less than that because the relegated club got something like £900K to cushion the blow. Clubs finishing 1st and 2nd in Championship got around £500K also with a sliding scale for the rest. League 1 clubs were due £75K each.

If all RL teams in SL, Championship and League One were getting £1.825m a year the five year £200m Sky money would not last three seasons.

So for Leigh to pay £1.825m Beaumont gifted Leigh a "sponsorship" for one season of over a million quid, a level Wigan can only dream of!

yep it is, what I meant is that the % cant be true as they already get the full cap amount paid to them.

Who gets the full cap amount paid to them? If you mean Leigh and now then yes because they are a SL club. They didn't get it when they were in the Championship.

[Wandering Warrior]

The cap will not matter a jot if we don't sign anybody!

[pedro]

That is only true for SL. 80% of the Sky money over the next five years goes to SL clubs. 8% goes to the Championship which works out at an average of around £243K per club per season. I think it is less than that because the relegated club got something like £900K to cushion the blow. Clubs finishing 1st and 2nd in Championship got around £500K also with a sliding scale for the rest. League 1 clubs were due £75K each.

If all RL teams in SL, Championship and League One were getting £1.825m a year the five year £200m Sky money would not last three seasons.

So for Leigh to pay £1.825m Beaumont gifted Leigh a "sponsorship" for one season of over a million quid, a level Wigan can only dream of!

yep it is, what I meant is that the % cant be true as they already get the full cap amount paid to them.

Who gets the full cap amount paid to them? If you mean Leigh and now then yes because they are a SL club. They didn't get it when they were in the Championship.

meant for SL clubs, I know Leigh last year were bankrolled bt Beaumont. What I meant was that the cap is the same across all leagues so cant by a % as SL teams get the cap paid to them. Which like you said is a joke as the main reasons for the cap being brought in looks like they have been nullified and may aswell get rid of it now.