WiganWarriorsFans.com

Wintergreen wrote:The Salary Cap is killing the game. It was obvious that it would and it will continue to do so.

It certainly is. It is farcical when a large portion of each squad is made up of junior players. Some of these lads are going to be ruined before they even get started!

It is my belief that the salary cap needs raising. Let me put forward a suggestion for comment. The cap is raised by £500k, each team has to have a squad of 30 and the minimum salary paid to any player in the squad is £30k. Juniors are rewarded for making the grade, other juniors are encouraged to do so, the top players will still be rewarded by good salaries but clubs will be unable to pay silly money as the cap will be distributed better. Added to this I want to see every club run under 16s, 19s and U21s with three over age players being allowed to play in the U21s to gain fitness after injury or simply keep match fit if they are not playing first team rugby. Ten players in the first team squad have to come through the clubs' junior set up.

shaunedwardsfan​club​ wrote:

Wintergreen wrote:The Salary Cap is killing the game. It was obvious that it would and it will continue to do so.

It certainly is. It is farcical when a large portion of each squad is made up of junior players. Some of these lads are going to be ruined before they even get started!

It is my belief that the salary cap needs raising. Let me put forward a suggestion for comment. The cap is raised by £500k, each team has to have a squad of 30 and the minimum salary paid to any player in the squad is £30k. Juniors are rewarded for making the grade, other juniors are encouraged to do so, the top players will still be rewarded by good salaries but clubs will be unable to pay silly money as the cap will be distributed better. Added to this I want to see every club run under 16s, 19s and U21s with three over age players being allowed to play in the U21s to gain fitness after injury or simply keep match fit if they are not playing first team rugby. Ten players in the first team squad have to come through the clubs' junior set up.

The SKY money is 48 million a year ,12 teams in SL and they only get 1.7 Million each the rest is diluted across the RL surely the SL should have got at least 3 million and raised the cap to that level making all the SL teams on a level playing field.Get priorities right get a strong SL and the make the competition better with better players and keeping our good players from leaving to RU and the NRL.

jaws1 wrote:

shaunedwardsfan​club​ wrote:

Wintergreen wrote:The Salary Cap is killing the game. It was obvious that it would and it will continue to do so.

It certainly is. It is farcical when a large portion of each squad is made up of junior players. Some of these lads are going to be ruined before they even get started!

It is my belief that the salary cap needs raising. Let me put forward a suggestion for comment. The cap is raised by £500k, each team has to have a squad of 30 and the minimum salary paid to any player in the squad is £30k. Juniors are rewarded for making the grade, other juniors are encouraged to do so, the top players will still be rewarded by good salaries but clubs will be unable to pay silly money as the cap will be distributed better. Added to this I want to see every club run under 16s, 19s and U21s with three over age players being allowed to play in the U21s to gain fitness after injury or simply keep match fit if they are not playing first team rugby. Ten players in the first team squad have to come through the clubs' junior set up.

The SKY money is 48 million a year ,12 teams in SL and they only get 1.7 Million each the rest is diluted across the RL surely the SL should have got at least 3 million and raised the cap to that level making all the SL teams on a level playing field.Get priorities right get a strong SL and the make the competition better with better players and keeping our good players from leaving to RU and the NRL.

They could do as you suggest, but it will still not attract top players from Union or players at their peak from the NRL as here Union now has a higher profile than our game with its European Club and International Competitions, while in Australia, it is a major sport in New South Wales and Queensland and they don't have the counter attraction of Premiership Football rammed down their throats by the media like we have here.

The great days of Rugby League ended twenty years ago when Sky got Union to go fully and officially professional and introduce League and European club Competitions in addition to their existing bigger International scene.

Time that some faced up to the reality that the two Rugby codes have changed where finance is concerned!

You seem obsessed with union WW. A comparable cap to the NRL could see more, better NRL players heading to SL. Even now we get a few NRL players and they dominate SL.

Union has never been a big issue; two different sports.

Oh how I wish I could be a top supporter!? After fifty years I think I'd be there but I'm obviously not cos I don't comment after a win!!
Well I was pleasantly surprised on Friday with the win, and as a poor supporter I got as much pleasure as a top supporter did. Shame on me!!!

:eusa2:

Whelley Warrior wrote:
They could do as you suggest, but it will still not attract top players from Union or players at their peak from the NRL as here Union now has a higher profile than our game with its European Club and International Competitions, while in Australia, it is a major sport in New South Wales and Queensland and they don't have the counter attraction of Premiership Football rammed down their throats by the media like we have here.

The most popular sport in Australia is Aussie rules football.

RL is a pro sport and the players go where the money is. £3m is (or was until the £ started losing value due to the EU referendum....) about AUD $6m. That is easily enough to compete for players and to retain our own. They aren't going to offer silly money to the likes of Budgie when to do so would eat into their own cap. At the moment they don't have to.

With a higher cap here players like Pat Richards who fancy sampling another culture (as he did) will come but not for a huge pay cut as will other players.

The great days of Rugby League ended twenty years ago when Sky got Union to go fully and officially professional and introduce League and European club Competitions in addition to their existing bigger International scene.

Time that some faced up to the reality that the two Rugby codes have changed where finance is concerned!

Despite Josh leaving RL players are out of fashion in RU a bit at the moment and in any case a cap of £3m would again make poaching players far more prohibitive.

We do not have to match their salary cap, just make it much harder to buy RL players by making it more expensive to do so thus impinging on their own salary cap.

We have the money to do this now if it were not for the idiot set up of spreading the cash across the entire game. If we had more astute business people in charge at the time of the Sky deal we should have gone out to tender when we still had players like Sam in our game. Why Nigel Wood hasn't been drummed out of office is beyond me.

Correct me if I am wrong but I don't think the OP was about the lack of comments after a win but more about the amount of comments after a defeat!! :eh:

DaveO wrote:

Whelley Warrior wrote:
They could do as you suggest, but it will still not attract top players from Union or players at their peak from the NRL as here Union now has a higher profile than our game with its European Club and International Competitions, while in Australia, it is a major sport in New South Wales and Queensland and they don't have the counter attraction of Premiership Football rammed down their throats by the media like we have here.

The most popular sport in Australia is Aussie rules football.

RL is a pro sport and the players go where the money is. £3m is (or was until the £ started losing value due to the EU referendum....) about AUD $6m. That is easily enough to compete for players and to retain our own. They aren't going to offer silly money to the likes of Budgie when to do so would eat into their own cap. At the moment they don't have to.

With a higher cap here players like Pat Richards who fancy sampling another culture (as he did) will come but not for a huge pay cut as will other players.

The great days of Rugby League ended twenty years ago when Sky got Union to go fully and officially professional and introduce League and European club Competitions in addition to their existing bigger International scene.

Time that some faced up to the reality that the two Rugby codes have changed where finance is concerned!

Despite Josh leaving RL players are out of fashion in RU a bit at the moment and in any case a cap of £3m would again make poaching players far more prohibitive.

We do not have to match their salary cap, just make it much harder to buy RL players by making it more expensive to do so thus impinging on their own salary cap.

We have the money to do this now if it were not for the idiot set up of spreading the cash across the entire game. If we had more astute business people in charge at the time of the Sky deal we should have gone out to tender when we still had players like Sam in our game. Why Nigel Wood hasn't been drummed out of office is beyond me.

I am with you all the way Dave. To do nothing is not an option, it is quite simply suicidal. WW is the RFL in disguise, the great days of RL didn't end because of Union and Sky it started to go down hill because too many attached to the game buried their heads in the sand or started to look for excuses and settle for second best!

cpwigan wrote:You seem obsessed with union WW. A comparable cap to the NRL could see more, better NRL players heading to SL. Even now we get a few NRL players and they dominate SL.

Union has never been a big issue; two different sports.

Like I have said, what world are you in?

But I supposed making comments like the above will keep the 'hits' coming in.