Salary cap 2007/8

[Mike]

After the descision of the RFL this evening I am now concerned about the potential for salary cap issues in 2007 and 2008.

As I understand the situation, any salary cap infringments occuring this season will result in punishments in 2008 and from the start of 2008 the RFL will move to a pre-emptive system, where clubs will not be able to sign or renegiotiate player contracts without the RFL being informed.

Based on the transfers between the end of last season and the start of this one, and the size of last years breach, I can't see how we could be under the cap this year. 9 players had to defer 1/4 of their entire salary to make up the short fall. I'm starting to understand why we brought in (hopefully) cheap players Withers, Millard etc and released others and ended up with a paper thin squad. Depsite this, surely the arrival of Barrett has again increased our bill.

Lets say today's judgement is upheld and RFL are reasonable and don't decide to count the defered payments for this season too - I reckon there would still be a very good chance that we are still over and will pick up a points deduction in 2008.

If we appeal against the descision and win - I can't see any way that we won't be over the cap this year - we would be paying out an increased salary + the deferments.

Furthermore, what will happen at the start of next season if we are over - will we have to release players before we are even allowed to play a match?

Basically its the size of the breach that concerns me over 1/3rd of our squad defered 1/4 of thier wages - I just can't see us dropping that much cost in the offseason, especially with the arrival of Barrett.

[Cruncher]

Mike posted:
After the descision of the RFL this evening I am now concerned about the potential for salary cap issues in 2007 and 2008.

As I understand the situation, any salary cap infringments occuring this season will result in punishments in 2008 and from the start of 2008 the RFL will move to a pre-emptive system, where clubs will not be able to sign or renegiotiate player contracts without the RFL being informed.

Based on the transfers between the end of last season and the start of this one, and the size of last years breach, I can't see how we could be under the cap this year. 9 players had to defer 1/4 of their entire salary to make up the short fall. I'm starting to understand why we brought in (hopefully) cheap players Withers, Millard etc and released others and ended up with a paper thin squad. Depsite this, surely the arrival of Barrett has again increased our bill.

Lets say today's judgement is upheld and RFL are reasonable and don't decide to count the defered payments for this season too - I reckon there would still be a very good chance that we are still over and will pick up a points deduction in 2008.

If we appeal against the descision and win - I can't see any way that we won't be over the cap this year - we would be paying out an increased salary + the deferments.

Furthermore, what will happen at the start of next season if we are over - will we have to release players before we are even allowed to play a match?

Basically its the size of the breach that concerns me over 1/3rd of our squad defered 1/4 of thier wages - I just can't see us dropping that much cost in the offseason, especially with the arrival of Barrett.

So are you saying that the deferred payments, which Wigan hoped would not be counted as part of the 2006 spend, but which clearly were - hence the deduction, will also be counted as part of the 2007 spend?

Surely, if the RFL have decided that these payments were part of the 2006 spend, they can't then add them to the 2007 bill as well?

Hasn't this money got to be counted as one year's spend or the other - either 2006 or 2007? It can't be both.

[MrAlex]

I think he meant if they appeal and win, when will those differred payments come into the equation.

I might have got the wrong end of the stick too though.

[Mike]

Cruncher posted:
So are you saying that the deferred payments, which Wigan hoped would not be counted as part of the 2006 spend, but which clearly were - hence the deduction, will also be counted as part of the 2007 spend?

Surely, if the RFL have decided that these payments were part of the 2006 spend, they can't then add them to the 2007 bill as well?

Hasn't this money got to be counted as one year's spend or the other - either 2006 or 2007? It can't be both.

I mentioned both cases - the payments being counted last season, and us winning an appeal and counting them this year. Knowing the RFL there will be a third option where they count them both seasons!

I was just saying that, given the size of the overspend, and the current squad, we look like we could breach again this season, even if the deferred payments aren't counted.

Perhaps I'm wrong and we had to pay Moran and the others in full to get rid of them - in that case we might be OK.

[JIMH]

i would think that if they the deferred payments are counted for this year we should be ok, why would e try to do it otherwise? we wouldn't have had an arguement if we said "those payments arent counted for lastyear (2006) they are 2007 payments" it wouldnt have made sense, we will have deferred the payments as we would have been able to afford them this year.

[weststand-rich]

Hi Mike,

you'll recall I posted a while ago concerning this issue of deferred payments. I would imagine Wigan will very fully consider their position RE appeals otherwise you can see us having domino effect on points deductions for years to come. Deferred payment strategy will almost certainly effect this coming year..but which points deductions will apply???? It's interesting to note we haven't been fined either. Why?

It's galling to see how the RFL treat all these infringements differently. SH have breached their cap for the past 2 years ALBEIT only by tens of thousands by rewarding their players for international success. I would imagine they argued something along the line of " well a couple of junior players made the international grade and we weren't expecting them to...." So it's okay for them to overpay on the basis of unforseen success (or undeclared cash in hand - no proof whatsoever and a tenuous allegation :->)

..... but if we underperform and have unforseen failure and so renegotiate contracts on the basis of poor performance we're cheating the spirit of the salary cap. I'm sure we are/were (cheating the spirit) pursuing a legalistic argument here something along the lines of 'there's no binding clause in the salary cap regulations to say we can't change payments at any point in the duration of a contract', but if the RFL write regulations in such a vague and amatuer fashion they invite this sort of challenge. If our players consistently play badly enough to accept a pay cut surely just that's the flip side of performance related bonuses.

It's a shame to see our team penalised in such a way. We deserve our 4th spot solidly and to see team efforts against Bradford and Leeds efectively neutralised is sad.