we are definatley over the cap!!!

[fitzy]

http://www.therfl.co.uk/~therflc/superl ... hp?id=8113

[highland convert]

Not necessarily. As you will note Wigan has pleaded not guilty. This has two options
1/ we dispute the fact for reasons of interpretations of accounts.
2/ The penalty is such that not to fight means religation.

The other two have minor breaches that will not affect their season.

[Matthew]

As there is no reduction in punishment for a guilty plea - there is little point in pleading guilty - unless an 8 point deduction will not make much difference to your position in the table.

The RFL looked at our records when we signed Fielden; so we can't have already been massively over at that point in the season. That said it seems likely that we are over the cap in the RFLs opinion.

I think that it is interesting that we are up in front of the RFL first and on our own - hopefully this is down to our not guilty plea rather than the severity of the breach

Either way it looks like we will be looking at another relegation dog fight...

[highland convert]

No we ain't. others 12/7, us 16/7. Sill leave us hanging for another ten days. HC[/quote]

[DaveO]

Matthew posted:
That said it seems likely that we are over the cap in the RFLs opinion.

At this stage we are over the cap in the opinion of the RFL's external auditors. The RFL employ external auditors to go through the books and they come to a conclusion on a clubs salary cap status.

It is now up to Wigan to dispute the findings (if they can) and convince the RFL Wigan are right and the auditors are wrong.

So technically it isn't in the RFL's eyes Wigan are over the cap but the auditors.

Whether or not the RFL will want to listen to Wigan or will simply have made their minds up already is another matter.

Dave

[LORENZO]

Quite right DaveO. I cannot believe that having been stung once that Wigan have not employed their own Auditor to ensure that they did not exceed the cap.
I am assuming therefore that any breach is down to interpretation.
Am I missing somthing here? Do people know more than me or are we jumping to conclusions that Wigan exceeded the cap more than Brad or Stains. Look on the bright side, it may be Stains and Brad with a 12 points deduction whilst Wigan only have a fine.
Otherwise it's a pretty red face for our illustrious owner who is fighting the FA on one hand re football
wrong doings whilst being guilty himself on the RL front.

[DaveO]

LORENZO posted:

I am assuming therefore that any breach is down to interpretation.

This is what I hope is the case and that Wigan can convince them our interpretation is the correct one.

The way I see it is if actual hard cash exchanged hands to the tune of more then £1.7m we have not got a leg to stand on.

If on the other hand income is being counted against Wigan's cap that the club didn't actually pay out, such as deferred payments or the club is being done for wages not actually paid to retired players for example then they may have a point.

I would even suggest if the latter is the case and the RFL ignore it, Wigan take them to court.

Otherwise it's a pretty red face for our illustrious owner who is fighting the FA on one hand re football
wrong doings whilst being guilty himself on the RL front.

Even if Wigan do get done DW will argue they should not have been so he won't see the two as the same thing anyway. I don't think I do either!

Dave