19% over cap

[butt monkey]

ancientnloyal posted:
how?

retirement payouts to Rads and SeuSeu??

loaned Dobson

Fielden couldnt be on massive money for half a season??

Retirements, payments would have been payed out by the insurers.

[thegimble]

If this is true then Mo needs to go now.

Otherwise GMR need to sack there reporters if they are wrong.

[Fraggle]

ancientnloyal posted:
how?

retirement payouts to Rads and SeuSeu??

loaned Dobson

Fielden couldnt be on massive money for half a season??

Not to mention the money saved from also getting rid of Moran, Sculthorpe, Brown, Beswick, Hargreaves, Jonkers, Wilkes, James, and I see to remember Sean Gleeson being out on loan as well. We can't have paid full-season salaries for that lot either.

[medlocke]

butt monkey posted:

ancientnloyal posted:
They may have read it off RLFans... 19%?? how the hell can we spend 69%????????????

I cant see it, 19% over? thats awful but I cant see it.

It's something like a £323,000 overspend!

DV's wages maybe

[Cruncher]

ultimate warrior posted:
Just been on GMR that we are reported to be over the cap by 19%.

If this is the case, it was a good job that the old punishments apply for the breach, or I think this would have meant a 12 point loss

Reported by who?

Was it a GMR reporter with 'inside info' or was it yet another hot-headed fan ringing in outraged about something else Wigan have supposedly done?

Even if it's the former, we ought to be wary of these 'revelations'. Look at some of the other things the press have been certain about with regard to our club in recent times: we were signing Hape, we were signing Ryles, we were signing King, Brian Noble was going to Leeds. Even one of our own posters - a guy more respected than most for his 'backroom knowledge' - was so certain that we'd be getting a crushing deduction that he told us Mo would be happy with 8 points.

None of these stories came true, and maybe this one won't either. If the decision reached last Thursday proves anything it's that NOBODY can second-guess the outcome of these complex legal matters.

Wigan have said they don't believe they broke the salary cap in 2006, and are preparing a detailed defence. I think we should reserve judgement until the case is closed.

[GeoffN]

Cruncher posted:

ultimate warrior posted:
Just been on GMR that we are reported to be over the cap by 19%.

If this is the case, it was a good job that the old punishments apply for the breach, or I think this would have meant a 12 point loss

Reported by who?

Was it a GMR reporter with 'inside info' or was it yet another hot-headed fan ringing in outraged about something else Wigan have supposedly done?

Even if it's the former, we ought to be wary of these 'revelations'. Look at some of the other things the press have been certain about with regard to our club in recent times: we were signing Hape, we were signing Ryles, we were signing King, Brian Noble was going to Leeds. Even one of our own posters - a guy more respected than most for his 'backroom knowledge' - was so certain that we'd be getting a crushing deduction that he told us Mo would be happy with 8 points.

None of these stories came true, and maybe this one won't either. If the decision reached last Thursday proves anything it's that NOBODY can second-guess the outcome of these complex legal matters.

Wigan have said they don't believe they broke the salary cap in 2006, and are preparing a detailed defence. I think we should reserve judgement until the case is closed.

:eusa2: :eusa2: :eusa2:

[waterside glens]

where we not cleared by the rfl to sign fielden, so how can they punish us

[DaveO]

waterside glens posted:
where we not cleared by the rfl to sign fielden, so how can they punish us

I could be nothing to do with Fielden's wages. One rumour is the RFL's auditors counted Radlinski's full year salary or counted payments from the RFL to Radlinski on our cap when previously they didn't count ("club GB" money).

We will find out in due course but its clear there is a difference of opinion between Wigan and the RFL about how much our cap spend was or we would not be contesting this further.

Once I heard we had won the argument about which rules applied then I expected us to simply take the punishment be that two, four or six points. The fact we are contesting it further means we must think we have a case to get any penalty reduced or overturned completely.

I would love it if Wigan have exploited a loop-hole and the RFL cave in. I am sick of being told by fans of other clubs things like offshore payments are allowed in the rules so its OK to practice tax avoidance or its OK to have a team full of Kolpacks because the rules allow it.

Well if the rules allow us to have done whatever it is to get under the cap for 2006 that will be very sweet.

On the other hand if we have just overspent and have some lame excuse that is clearly covered by the rules it will be very poor and very stupid to contest it in the first place.

Dave

[- psycho -]

DaveO posted:
I could be nothing to do with Fielden's wages.

you in on this dave :sly:

[GeoffN]

According to today's WEP (who, of course, know no more than any of the other rumour-mongers):

It is believed Warriors will be docked four points...

http://www.wigantoday.net/warriors-news ... id=3032339

I haven't bothered posting it in the news section, because there's no real news in the article.