WiganWarriorsFans.com

weststand-rich wrote:You might not believe it but it's true. Fielden was one of a group of players who agreed to defer wages in order to keep Wigan under the cap limit. I can't be more categorical and clear than that. He didn't have to, but chose to.

This was done at the end of the season and the players involved effectively didn't draw a wage September / October (remember the salary cap year runs Nov to Nov).

Believe me or don't believe me. I've made my point.

Whether it is or not how does it affect the point anyway? This was back in 2006. All deferred contracts would have been played out by now and as noted he got a new deal in 2010.

So the only relevant point as to how much him leaving has freed up is how much he was on from 2010. Despite the injury record and while it was probably less than before it won't have been peanuts IMO.

DaveO wrote:

weststand-rich wrote:You might not believe it but it's true. Fielden was one of a group of players who agreed to defer wages in order to keep Wigan under the cap limit. I can't be more categorical and clear than that. He didn't have to, but chose to.

This was done at the end of the season and the players involved effectively didn't draw a wage September / October (remember the salary cap year runs Nov to Nov).

Believe me or don't believe me. I've made my point.

Whether it is or not how does it affect the point anyway? This was back in 2006. All deferred contracts would have been played out by now and as noted he got a new deal in 2010.

So the only relevant point as to how much him leaving has freed up is how much he was on from 2010. Despite the injury record and while it was probably less than before it won't have been peanuts IMO.

It doesn't affect the point - it was a sidetrack into minutae and the subtleties of the salary cap.

Your last assessment would have been broadly right. His last contract was nothing like his first or revised, but wasn't nothing either.

weststand-rich wrote:You might not believe it but it's true. Fielden was one of a group of players who agreed to defer wages in order to keep Wigan under the cap limit. I can't be more categorical and clear than that. He didn't have to, but chose to.

This was done at the end of the season and the players involved effectively didn't draw a wage September / October (remember the salary cap year runs Nov to Nov).

Believe me or don't believe me. I've made my point.

So your point is that Wigan signed Fielden on the 16th June 2006 and then asked him to "not take a wage" 3 months later so Wigan didn't break any "spirit of any cap".

Can I ask you why the club didn't simply pay Fielden a very small wage (or maybe none at all) until the following season?

That way, the club would never have broke the "spirit" of the cap", wouldn't have seen the farce of them attempting to get under the cap either nor end up having league points deducted.

It simply just does not make any credible sense whatsoever, especially such a short time after signing

butt monkey wrote:

weststand-rich wrote:You might not believe it but it's true. Fielden was one of a group of players who agreed to defer wages in order to keep Wigan under the cap limit. I can't be more categorical and clear than that. He didn't have to, but chose to.

This was done at the end of the season and the players involved effectively didn't draw a wage September / October (remember the salary cap year runs Nov to Nov).

Believe me or don't believe me. I've made my point.

So your point is that Wigan signed Fielden on the 16th June 2006 and then asked him to "not take a wage" 3 months later so Wigan didn't break any "spirit of any cap".

Can I ask you why the club didn't simply pay Fielden a very small wage (or maybe none at all) until the following season?

That way, the club would never have broke the "spirit" of the cap", wouldn't have seen the farce of them attempting to get under the cap either nor end up having league points deducted.

It simply just does not make any credible sense whatsoever, especially such a short time after signing

I have been doing a bit of digging and weststand-rich is correct.

Read this:

http://www.metro.co.uk/sport/extra/5873 ... nt-penalty

So I think the answer to the credibility question is it was a huge cock up. Why they didn't realise Fielden (and Dobson's) wage wouldn't take the club over the cap is a mystery.

Even so it has no baring on the current situation because as I said all this worked its way out some time ago.

My apologies to weststand-rich.

Like I said though. Still a massive cock up from the club and put themselves in an unnecessary precarious position re: points being deducted AND also left the club's reputation in tatters at the same time.

You are correct though DaveO that all this still doesn't explain why Wigan are supposed to have spent to the cap all ready with the few players recruited and experienced players going

- Apologies accepted. :LOL:

At the time, I think Maurice knew we were going to go over the cap as soon as we got Fielden and just weighed it up cynically. Go down or go over? Going over the cap and the consequence of that for the following year(s) were deemed the lesser of the two bad options and that's what he did.

As for now. I think what we're experiencing is a dumbing down across the league. There's limited talent, no Aussie superstars and the top clubs are spending to the limit of the cap. The agents aren't going to suggest lower wages for lower talent and so in a given pool thee club is paying the same for a relatively weaker squad.

I don't think it's just us. If you look at the big 4 clubs and look at their player rosters say in 2010, everyones squad is relatively weaker.

Maybe that's the key? You just have to be the best of a bad bunch??