www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/leag ... mpkf5.html It will also help Super League clubs to attract and retain English stars like Samuel Tomkins, Samuel Burgess, and Kallum Watkins.

www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/leag ... mpkf5.html It will also help Super League clubs to attract and retain English stars like Samuel Tomkins, Samuel Burgess, and Kallum Watkins.

It says in the article it will only apply to home grown players?

Doesn't this suggest players from anywhere?

judging by Simon Moran's comment, it will only be one player per team....Either a home grown player who is paid more than £200k would not count on the cap at all or an overseas player who is paid more than £200k would only count as £200k on the cap....

Shouldn't far less of a home grown player's salary count on the cap? Otherwise where is the incentive to develop your own talent if the exemption is exactly the same for an overseas recruit?

Edit: Hang on, have I misinterpreted that? The home grown player gets his [ientire[/i salary off the cap? Or just anything over £200k?

I think it's the same as the overseas one where it's over £200k that isn't counted.

To be fair I don't think the aim of this measure is specifically to encourage producing home grown players but to try and keep hold of the ones we've got.

Maybe if this had been place a few years ago then the likes of Eastmond, Joel & Sam Tomkins might not have left SL in the first place.

Some still will, in some cases the wages on offer from the NRL/Union will still be too high to compete with & in some cases players will still fancy the challenge of something different. But it gives us the opportunity to compete.

Still nice to play in Australia with the beaches and Sun.

Yep.

Homegrown player who is paid over £200k = £0 on the cap
Overseas player who is paid over £200k = £200k on the cap.

This is where there will be accusations about clubs and individuals doing naughty things. For example a club decides to pay a home grown superstar £12m per season. He then decides completely of his own volition to invest money in a new company. A company owned by a partnership featuring 24 players that coincidentally play for that same side.

Provided they arranged it in conjunction with HMRC so it was okay from a tax perspective, how could the RFL/SL do anything?

I'd love to know how far the salary cap checking actually goes. Is it just audit of the club as a company, so wouldn't pick up third party payments from owner's company to the player? Or do they require proof of all assets involving the player? Seems to me the cap is just a trust based arrangement and that any owner that wanted to pay beyond the cap could quite easily do so.

Its probably about keeping talented British players in Super League rather than attracting has been and never was players from the NRL, or i would hope so.

Not a cat in hells chance!

There's talk of the perennial crock called Kurt Gidley being SL standard

and the sad part is that clubs here are considering signing him



You at leastsee the attitude of the majority of SL clubs to "development", training, and assisting the game as a whole.

Buy! Its easier than hard work.

Or, in the real world, clubs know that having seasoned and experienced veterans around will aid the development of the younger players around them.

On a Brass Plaque outside Red Hall I believe!

That's a failed argument due to the fact that we haven't beaten the Aussies in a series since 1970 and we haven't won a world cup since 1972.
The only answer is to phase out the imports over a period of time forcing British clubs to take junior development seriously.

There's nothing wrong with having a few imports. They increase the quality of the competition. The aim should be a max of 3 per club in my opinion.

Which was the original target of the NFT rule when it was brought in. For some reason and without explanation or announcement that was scrapped and bizarrely a rise from 5 to 7 was implemented.

We're still better than we were several years ago and some clubs are doing better at producing players. We now need the 2 or 3 clubs lagging behind in that department to catch up and the other 5 or 6 clubs who are now doing better to go from simply producing adequate squad players to producing quality players regularly.

But those players are aided by having quality imports alongside them. We can't wall ourselves off. Even the amazing, wonderful NRL needs imports.

What, completely? Way to kill the game! Some restriction on numbers, possibly, yes. But there can't be value in isolating ourselves (and optimistically claiming it's a world sport at the same time?).

And thats a failed argument too.

Imports arnt the reason we can't beat the Ozzies. It's their biggest game in their most populated areas. In the UK, or even just England RL is a minority sport and we need to accept that for now at least. If RL was the major sport in London, Manchester and Birmingham we'd regulary thrash them.

How?

Really? with 30 million extra potential players you dont think we'd have a few better players? plus the extra cash injected into the game from sponsorship etc?

Saint Simon is right. And really, is it just me who fails to suffer too much from the label of "never beating the Aussies".

Does football suffer agonies of insecurity cos we *never* beat the Germans/Brazilians/Spanish etc etc? Yes, of course I'd like to beat the Aussies more often. But, as noted above, the main reasons we don't are clear.

So if it goes through which club is going to bankrupt itself first bringing over a billy slater? My money would be on Wigan. Koukash might have a dig but Salford are going to burst the minute he walks anyway so they are on borrowed time. Pearson is tight so can't see hull going for anyone. Leeds are cash rich so no doubt will go after someone. Moran might splash some cash to get a big name to market. St's will feel the need to keep up with the jones's and could get themselves into financial strife if they try too hard. The other clubs can't afford anyone you'd think.

No way that it would be Wigan... Not under the current stewardship...

The fact the Aussies had to cheat to beat us in their backyard might suggest that the gap isn't as big as people love to make out.

The fact that we were told our best players were sub-NRL then our best players went over and smashed the NRL might suggest the gap isn't as big as people make out.

Who the hell are you? And what could you possibly want.