Saint Helens salary cap breach...

[robjoenz]

Do people think that Saint Helens should have been more severely punished than they were? All they were guilty of was a minor breach because they paid bonuses to two young GB players. Should that have been ignored from the cap and Saint been let off without a fine?

It would be interesting to hear what people opinions are now they know that Wigan were found guilty of a greater breach of the cap.

[cpwigan]

No, the criteria for scale of punishment was set down and that was fine. I do have an idea that perhaps the % a team is over the cap should be deducted from the amount they are permitted in the following season. Likewise teams underspending by X%should be able to carry that forward into the next season.

Given I am anti cap I cannot condemn anybody who breaks it.

[Fraggle]

pie eaters posted:
No i do not think they should have been more punished. They were over the cap by 0.8 percent and it was not because of wages being paid to players but to two players receving bonus for representing Great Britain. Its like Saints would be being punished for producing two players (Gardner and Graham ) who have made it to that level.

I agree, and said so at the time. The fact that we punish clubs for having their players represent their country is ridiculous. Worse, international appearances are the RFL's responsibility, yet the salary cap covers the Superleague which is a different competition. Bonuses for RFL-related activities should be kept completely separate from penalties applied to the Superleague competition.

[JIMH]

you have to realise it was st helens choice to make these bonus payments. St helens will have offered these lads an incentive on their contract to get gb honours, it was a taqctic st helens used when negoitiating these lads contracts. they shouldnt have offered them this deal if the could not have afforded it under the salary cap. I have no sympathy whatsoever

[jaws1]

JIMH posted:
you have to realise it was st helens choice to make these bonus payments. St helens will have offered these lads an incentive on their contract to get gb honours, it was a taqctic st helens used when negoitiating these lads contracts. they shouldnt have offered them this deal if the could not have afforded it under the salary cap. I have no sympathy whatsoever

Thought there was a get out clause in the salary cap as long as you told the RL that you are paying bonuses out .

[Matthew]

cpwigan posted:
No, the criteria for scale of punishment was set down and that was fine. I do have an idea that perhaps the % a team is over the cap should be deducted from the amount they are permitted in the following season. Likewise teams underspending by X%should be able to carry that forward into the next season.

Given I am anti cap I cannot condemn anybody who breaks it.

Me too

[Spanakopitta]

can i just say is having to include players bonuses for GB appearances on the salary cap a bit stupid?

1 - you don't know who will get called up when you're budgeting for your expenditure so you'd have to underspend just to be on the safe side

2 - it penalises teams that have GB calibre players in their squad

the salary cap attempts to level the domestic playing field but in doing so impedes the improvement our competitive position internationally

[robjoenz]

Spanakopitta posted:
can i just say is having to include players bonuses for GB appearances on the salary cap a bit stupid?

1 - you don't know who will get called up when you're budgeting for your expenditure so you'd have to underspend just to be on the safe side

2 - it penalises teams that have GB calibre players in their squad

the salary cap attempts to level the domestic playing field but in doing so impedes the improvement our competitive position internationally

It's something the club decided to write in players contracts as far as I can see. It gives the players extra motivation to perform.

Getting done on the cap is a bit of a kick in the balls to Roby and Graham because they obvious didn't think they'd make it so soon.

[robjoenz]

Matthew posted:

cpwigan posted:
No, the criteria for scale of punishment was set down and that was fine. I do have an idea that perhaps the % a team is over the cap should be deducted from the amount they are permitted in the following season. Likewise teams underspending by X%should be able to carry that forward into the next season.

Given I am anti cap I cannot condemn anybody who breaks it.

Me too

That explains why you are both so adament Wigan have done no wrong.