It certainly does, The storm dominate NRL yet the cap's working in Oz...

4 years ago 6 clubs were spending the cap, 5 years ago Leeds had just won SL and the League Leaders shield by a record margin,

4 years ago Leeds and Bradford had contested the GF

hey ill take a bet that the competiton with 5 years will be much more competitive than today.

its inevitable no matter how many words you post here.

the RFL clearly have seen it working in australia and are copying it to the letter.

yeah its all the refs faults they dont win every year.

TRANSLATION: Yes, I have no argument left, it has been destroyed. I was wrong about the storm I am wrong about the cap, I may as well resort to being pathetic.

here ill quote what an acclaimed RL administrator says about the cap :

"We believe the cap has delivered a distribution of playing talent which wasn't there prior to its implementation," Gallop said. "The benefits have been that fans of every club can turn up to the footy with a well-founded expectation that their team is a chance of winning. A competition where purchasing power is the determining factor is bound to be predictable. No one likes to know the end of the movie, and no one wants to go to a sport with the feeling that the result is a foregone conclusion."

so who do you think knows more about RL, the administrator or the 2 gloryhunter fans?

i understand the yorky accent is difficult to understand but dopey, its a computer.

theres no need to translate posts in english.

unless of course you dont understand the language very well,which would explain a bit.

Where, you mean in the Melbourne dominated NRL you mean?

hmm in one corner weve got David Gallop.

and in the other corner theres lenny the loiner.

let me get back to you once ive worked out who has a better idea about RL.

One has a pecuniary interest in retaining the cap, get back to me when you've looked the word up.

you are right he wants to see RL growing.

he gets paid to make the sport succesful just in case you dont know

And how does the salary cap do this? By making it more competitive? The evidence is that in neither hemisphere is it working. A small number of clubs dominate over here, Melbourne dominate over there.

have a look at the crowds for clubs after they win the competition, especially if its been a while since they won it.

off the top of my head, the wests tigers crowds jumped from around 12,000 to 18,000 after their grand final win.

the roosters when they were succesful went from 12,000 to 18,000.

indeed when teams start making the semi finals or even losing a grand final their crowds jump.

the cowboys were getting 13,000 when they were not a succesful club. once they started making the semis their crowds jumped up to over 20,000.

now apply that to SL.

Do they not slump again? Look at Bradford.

if you dont understand how the salary cap works, just start at page 1 of this thread.

you will understand it eventually.

If it did work I'd be in favour of it. The evidence in a small number of clubs dominating over here and Melbourne in Oz indicates otherwise.

nope you said you were in favour of a percentage based cap which doesnt even the competetion.

now you are making a silly argument that melbourne dominate the NRL.

keep shifting those goal posts.

they are heavy, eventually youll stop.

average crowds have been rising in the nrl.

a big part of that is that one team doesnt dominate.

from a purely selfish point of view, if we stick with the SC in its current form, Leeds will bee picking up their 7th title in 7 years in 5 years time,

but with my altruistic hat on, hopefully before then we have a rethink and put in place rules to force clubs to do what we want them to do, and forget this idiotic notion that how much you spend automatically makes you successful,

Just one last thing, you do understand Leeds didnt spend the full cap last year dont you?

and bradford have done a poor job keeping them

wigan have the 2nd highest crowds in the league and they havent won a comp. since 1998

its about marketing.

if you need to keep winning the title to keep crowds at an acceptable level then your marketing is s**t.

aaverage crowds have been rising in the SL, yet Leeds have won 3 out of the last 5,

wanna bet on that?

money for jam

what odds would you give me

leeds crowds have peaked.

unless they fix headingly even if they keep winning they wont be growing their crowds much or helping the average to rise,

if say huddersfield or hull won it, they would add probably 5000 to their averages overnight.

thats why if every club could win it, you would get much greater crowd growth

odds?

looks like ive won this little debate then!