It's possibly the worst situation. It doesn't reduce the club's actual spend, as they are still paying their players to sit on the side-lines, whilst hurting the fans, and in turn gate receipts, by fielding an uncompetitive team.

[quote="St Helens Wolf":15hrqzyb]It's possibly the worst situation. It doesn't reduce the club's actual spend, as they are still paying their players to sit on the side-lines, whilst hurting the fans, and in turn gate receipts, by fielding an uncompetitive team.[/quote:15hrqzyb] Salford aren`t in a position to leave their top players on the side-lines and still pay their salaries. They would have to allow them go elsewhere and if it happened, I doubt any other club would pay anything other than a very modest transfer fee which would be tantamount to a free transfer.

[quote="St Helens Wolf":2ro37tgc]It's possibly the worst situation. It doesn't reduce the club's actual spend, as they are still paying their players to sit on the side-lines, whilst hurting the fans, and in turn gate receipts, by fielding an uncompetitive team.[/quote:2ro37tgc] That's a very Salford centric view though. The alternative is we have all this uncertainty and drama days ahead of the new season affecting all the other 11 clubs. Salford knew this was coming from November last year when it was made clear their bailout from Salford council wasn't forthcoming. They have struggled financially for decades. Truth is they haven't the means to be a SL club.

Maybe a solution for the ineptitude as a one off would be for the RFL to take over the players surplus to Salford in a player pool & hire them out to Salford if needed or to other clubs on a weekly or monthly basis then any take over at Salford could compensate the RFL expenses for this season.

So i assume either Salford have sorted finances as they've just brought Tiaki chan in on loan. Or They are selling a more expensive forward and needed a cheap replacement??

So just 7 nights to their first SL game. What cap are they going to be operating under? Are they intending to defy the RFL's imposed £1.2M cap? Are the RFL actually going to get a grip?

[quote="Wires71":9jpdgrtb]So just 7 nights to their first SL game. What cap are they going to be operating under? Are they intending to defy the RFL's imposed £1.2M cap? Are the RFL actually going to get a grip?[/quote:9jpdgrtb] No, they have known about this for months and in reality it’s gone on for years. Don’t get me wrong I don’t want to see any club go through what they have but like I said it’s been years and some form of punishment should have taken place. Like you say we are a week away from the start of season and it would be a mockery if anything happened now that would throw the upcoming season into shambles.

Just seen an article where Rowley says he can only pick a team that comes under the restrictions. So this week’s cup game he can’t go above the 1.2 million which he probably would not have done so anyway. But goes on to say he hopes it’s sorted by the time we get to start of the season properly.

[quote="karetaker":jyf9lcpm]Just seen an article where Rowley says he can only pick a team that comes under the restrictions. So this week’s cup game he can’t go above the 1.2 million which he probably would not have done so anyway. But goes on to say he hopes it’s sorted by the time we get to start of the season properly.[/quote:jyf9lcpm] If this situation is allowed to fester into their Super League fixtures it will make a mockery of Rugby League in the UK.

[quote="karetaker":2k3qq7c9]Just seen an article where Rowley says he can only pick a team that comes under the restrictions. So this week’s cup game he can’t go above the 1.2 million which he probably would not have done so anyway. But goes on to say he hopes it’s sorted by the time we get to start of the season properly.[/quote:2k3qq7c9] Thanks. So any visibility on which squad is registered or can he just pick and mix £1.2m worth from the players under contract? It's a farce.

[quote="BOSS HOG":1jzchi67]If this situation is allowed to fester into their Super League fixtures it will make a mockery of Rugby League in the UK.[/quote:1jzchi67] 100% and end of day it’s at the RFL’s door step. They should have enforced the restrictions regardless but it seems they have allowed Salford snowball them with the takeover that’s apparently meant to have been announced this week, yes 1 day to go but I wouldn’t be holding my breath.

Glad the takeover has happened, hopefully they can just crack on with playing now

[quote="Or thane":271w6z1l]Glad the takeover has happened, hopefully they can just crack on with playing now [/quote:271w6z1l] Agreed, and if it all goes according to plan I think that Salford will be in a good position and the area around the ground will significantly benefit too.

Yes glad it's sorted. So do the RFL now rescind the £1.2M cap they applied and get the £500K advance returned? Salford played this well in their interests and the RFL let them get away with it causing uncertainty and destabilisation up to 2 days of their first fixture.

[quote="Wires71":1f8xtnhd]Yes glad it's sorted. So do the RFL now rescind the £1.2M cap they applied and get the £500K advance returned? Salford played this well in their interests and the RFL let them get away with it causing uncertainty and destabilisation up to 2 days of their first fixture.[/quote:1f8xtnhd] So, in a nutshell, in mid-January (i.e., more than three weeks ago), Salford were issued with the reduced sustainability cap and ordered to sell players "without delay" by the Rugby Football League. Salford chose not to do that, but to instead wait for the takeover to be completed, and the RFL basically just climbed down and let them do that. As you say, Salford have played it perfectly, as things have turned out, and for them (and the league as a whole) it seems to be a case of "all's well that ends well". But the RFL's handling of the whole affair has been a mess from start to finish, and doesn't reflect well on them at all. As for your point about the £1.2m cap being rescinded and the £500k advance returned - yes, we have to assume that's what will now happen.

The 1.2 restrictions apply only for this weeks cup game they will be at full cap for 1st league game.

[quote="Wires71":4w7yi4bi]Yes glad it's sorted. So do the RFL now rescind the £1.2M cap they applied and get the £500K advance returned? Salford played this well in their interests and the RFL let them get away with it causing uncertainty and destabilisation up to 2 days of their first fixture.[/quote:4w7yi4bi] All turned out well in the end I guess. I doubt Salford will need to return the advance, they just won’t get it again when the rest of the clubs do. Could the RFL have legally been able to enforce the sale of players? I guess the sustainability cap would have forced Salfords hand eventually, but they rode it out and it paid dividends for them. Just need Cas to get their takeover and stadium plans sorted and the clubs look in a half decent state hopefully - though still heavily dependent on owner finance of course.

I’m glad they’re available to batter Saints next week.

https://www.skysports.com/rugby-league/ ... -st-helens

https://www.skysports.com/rugby-league/ ... -st-helens

[quote="karetaker":3sljb4dj]https://www.skysports.com/rugby-league/news/12196/13311139/salford-red-devils-could-face-penalty-for-weakened-team-during-record-breaking-82-0-defeat-against-st-helens[/quote:3sljb4dj] Salford certainly deserve to be punished, but sadly that will do nothing to redress the damage that has already been done to the integrity of the competition. Rowley behaved like a petulant child with his ridiculous team selection and the nonsensical reasons he gave for it, and Salford basically chose to screw over the rest of the league just to make a daft point. Rowley has always come across as a prickly character, and you can now even lose the 'ly character' part from that description, it seems.

[quote="The Speculator":2wpxghwq]Salford certainly deserve to be punished, but sadly that will do nothing to redress the damage that has already been done to the integrity of the competition. Rowley behaved like a petulant child with his ridiculous team selection and the nonsensical reasons he gave for it, and Salford basically chose to screw over the rest of the league just to make a daft point. Rowley has always come across as a prickly character, and you can now even lose the 'ly character' part from that description, it seems.[/quote:2wpxghwq] They & he have not done themselves any favours. I have moved them up the list of my least favourite teams (that will teach 'em).

https://www.rugby-league.com/article/63 ... ebruary-17

https://www.rugby-league.com/article/63 ... ebruary-17

[quote="karetaker":2xuishm3]https://www.rugby-league.com/article/63461/salford-red-devils-%E2%80%93-statement,-february-17[/quote:2xuishm3] Never liked Rowley, pity he wasn’t out there with a Salford shirt on facing the saints forwards, I’d would have paid to watch that

[quote="karetaker":2vi89kxg]https://www.rugby-league.com/article/63461/salford-red-devils-%E2%80%93-statement,-february-17[/quote:2vi89kxg] A slam dunk of a case - bringing the game into disrepute via the national broadcaster and 400K+ viewers*. *[url:2vi89kxg]https://www.loverugbyleague.com/post/bbc-viewing-figures-for-controversial-salford-red-devils-defeat-revealed#:~:text=St%20Helens%20v%20Salford%20on%20BBC%202%20on%20Saturday.&text=2.7%25%20audience%20share.,413%2C000%20peak.&text=The%20game%20picked%20up%20an,times%20the%20peak%20was%20recorded.[/url:2vi89kxg]

My opinion is nothing will come from it since this as gone on for far too long in the first place.