nathan_rugby wrote: ↑Sat Jul 15, 2023 7:21 pm
With Dansen in full control how will signings be different given we reportedly spend up to the cap?
The only changes can be:
1 - signing players for transfer fees
2 - going after different types of player than we currently do (I.e proven rather than project).
Regardless of the above, Radlinski will still play a large part.
There's more to it than that. In the past we've not really signed players from other clubs academies, because of the transfer fee. Plus, when 1st team players at other clubs have been available, but again with a transfer fee attached, we've ummed and ahh'd about signing them. From what I've been told, the thinking now is "just sign them, whatever the cost"
Don't transfer fees count on the cap?
I know.we got stung due to agent fees counting a few years ago.
These are two reasons not to trust people.
1. We don't know them.
2. We do know them.
nathan_rugby wrote: ↑Sat Jul 15, 2023 7:21 pm
With Dansen in full control how will signings be different given we reportedly spend up to the cap?
The only changes can be:
1 - signing players for transfer fees
2 - going after different types of player than we currently do (I.e proven rather than project).
Regardless of the above, Radlinski will still play a large part.
There's more to it than that. In the past we've not really signed players from other clubs academies, because of the transfer fee. Plus, when 1st team players at other clubs have been available, but again with a transfer fee attached, we've ummed and ahh'd about signing them. From what I've been told, the thinking now is "just sign them, whatever the cost"
Don't transfer fees count on the cap?
I know.we got stung due to agent fees counting a few years ago.
Yes got away with that by the skin of the clubs teeth I seem to recall
Sutty wrote: ↑Sun Jul 16, 2023 12:48 pm
There's more to it than that. In the past we've not really signed players from other clubs academies, because of the transfer fee. Plus, when 1st team players at other clubs have been available, but again with a transfer fee attached, we've ummed and ahh'd about signing them. From what I've been told, the thinking now is "just sign them, whatever the cost"
Don't transfer fees count on the cap?
I know.we got stung due to agent fees counting a few years ago.
Yes got away with that by the skin of the clubs teeth I seem to recall
nathan_rugby wrote: ↑Sat Jul 15, 2023 7:21 pm
With Dansen in full control how will signings be different given we reportedly spend up to the cap?
The only changes can be:
1 - signing players for transfer fees
2 - going after different types of player than we currently do (I.e proven rather than project).
Regardless of the above, Radlinski will still play a large part.
There's more to it than that. In the past we've not really signed players from other clubs academies, because of the transfer fee. Plus, when 1st team players at other clubs have been available, but again with a transfer fee attached, we've ummed and ahh'd about signing them. From what I've been told, the thinking now is "just sign them, whatever the cost"
Don't transfer fees count on the cap?
I know.we got stung due to agent fees counting a few years ago.
Exiled Wiganer wrote: ↑Sun Jul 16, 2023 9:21 am
I see Danson taking over as hugely positive. It gives us 3 new things: we can use the stadium as we like, make it feel like home and benefit from it, have unlimited resources to spend behind the scenes and on players (using all of the salary cap work arounds to the fullest) and Danson knows what a world class organisation looks like. I would be very surprised indeed if Radlinski’s role stays the same, but it may do: however, I would be astonished if we do not become best in class for comms, marketing, commercial development, player development and recruitment. Essentially, the areas where Saints - with a high achieving, rich, professional board in charge - have been ahead of us all day every day for the last 25 years.
Agreed. Saints have been better run than us for a while now. I hope this is a positive move to address that.
nathan_rugby wrote: ↑Sat Jul 15, 2023 7:21 pm
With Dansen in full control how will signings be different given we reportedly spend up to the cap?
The only changes can be:
1 - signing players for transfer fees
2 - going after different types of player than we currently do (I.e proven rather than project).
Regardless of the above, Radlinski will still play a large part.
There's more to it than that. In the past we've not really signed players from other clubs academies, because of the transfer fee. Plus, when 1st team players at other clubs have been available, but again with a transfer fee attached, we've ummed and ahh'd about signing them. From what I've been told, the thinking now is "just sign them, whatever the cost"
Don't transfer fees count on the cap?
I know.we got stung due to agent fees counting a few years ago.
No and we didn’t get stung by agents fees either such that we faced a major issue because of it. What we got done by which is perhaps what you are referring to is deferred wages. In 2006 the relegation battle year several players such as Harrison Hansen deferred their wages until later seasons so we could afford to sign Fielden and Dobson and not break the cap. And we didn’t break the cap.
Subsequently the RFL decided that wasn’t “in the spirit of the cap” despite there being no explicit rule forbidding it (there is now). It was common in Australia at the time.
If that is not what you are referring to then the money involved in agents feeswill be peanuts comparatively and would not result in major sanctions against the club.
Sutty wrote: ↑Sun Jul 16, 2023 12:48 pm
There's more to it than that. In the past we've not really signed players from other clubs academies, because of the transfer fee. Plus, when 1st team players at other clubs have been available, but again with a transfer fee attached, we've ummed and ahh'd about signing them. From what I've been told, the thinking now is "just sign them, whatever the cost"
Don't transfer fees count on the cap?
I know.we got stung due to agent fees counting a few years ago.
No and we didn’t get stung by agents fees either such that we faced a major issue because of it. What we got done by which is perhaps what you are referring to is deferred wages. In 2006 the relegation battle year several players such as Harrison Hansen deferred their wages until later seasons so we could afford to sign Fielden and Dobson and not break the cap. And we didn’t break the cap.
Subsequently the RFL decided that wasn’t “in the spirit of the cap” despite there being no explicit rule forbidding it (there is now). It was common in Australia at the time.
If that is not what you are referring to then the money involved in agents feeswill be peanuts comparatively and would not result in major sanctions against the club.
Its was either Hamlin or Frank-Paul but we went over the cap because agent of agent fees.
Now I'm not in the know for sports but if it's anything like business the fees will not be peanuts. Is some cases 15-20% of the wage.
Don't transfer fees count on the cap?
I know.we got stung due to agent fees counting a few years ago.
No and we didn’t get stung by agents fees either such that we faced a major issue because of it. What we got done by which is perhaps what you are referring to is deferred wages. In 2006 the relegation battle year several players such as Harrison Hansen deferred their wages until later seasons so we could afford to sign Fielden and Dobson and not break the cap. And we didn’t break the cap.
Subsequently the RFL decided that wasn’t “in the spirit of the cap” despite there being no explicit rule forbidding it (there is now). It was common in Australia at the time.
If that is not what you are referring to then the money involved in agents feeswill be peanuts comparatively and would not result in major sanctions against the club.
Its was either Hamlin or Frank-Paul but we went over the cap because agent of agent fees.
Now I'm not in the know for sports but if it's anything like business the fees will not be peanuts. Is some cases 15-20% of the wage.
Well it was, as I said peanuts. If you read the article:
"The club claim the breach was due to an administrative error arising from six small invoices of between £2,000 and £3,000 for agents' fees which were overlooked and meant they exceeded the £1.825million cap by 0.8 per cent."
That's £18k maximum which is nothing in the grand scheme of things and the points deduction was as IL said at the time OTT and the appeal was successful anyway.
