Admittedly, prior to Dr Koukash most Salford fans would not have called for an increase to salary cap. Not because we didn't believe it would beneficial to the game, but because we weren't able to spend up to the cap, so it didn't concern us. What you do have to consider, is teams like Widnes and London have proven it is not enough to spend the full salary cap when you're at the bottom and trying to progress up the table. Lower league teams have to pay higher wages for lesser players, so in this respect the salary cap is preventing teams moving up the table. Even Warrington struggled to break he status quo, in a time when pounds brought in better Aussies.

This said the last thing SL needs is to drive up the wages of average players, so the 2/3 marque players would seem the most sensible option. Successful businessmen and companies love the opportunity to associate with genuine top quality sportsman. Which brings us back to the doc's claims, people are willing to invest, and the chance to be linked with an SBW or Folau would bring in the extra investment.

If the powers that be aren't prepared to combat this threat and more quality players leave over the next couple of years, I think there would be a very strong argument to lower the cap to say 1m to prevent mediocre players being paid more. Perhaps they may have no option when there is a further drop in attendances, sponsorship and television revenue.

Further reduction of the cap will kill our sport dead in its tracks, simple as. The idea of marque players is that they will bring increased investment and media interest, raising the profile of our game will bring in extra tv revenue. The current rules are undoubtedly restricting smaller clubs from growing, the combined effect of players joining the RU or NRL has even made it difficult for a bigger team like hull FC to find the right players.

There's a saying, in business and sport, if you're not moving forward you're moving backwards, and SL has definitely regressed over the last couple of years.

Maybe it would but if there is no ambition to counter the problem by the hierarchy of the British game then I'd be loathed to see Joe Average getting an extra 10-20k a year in a diminished Superleague competition.

There’s more talk of a salary cap reduction for next season and the reintroduction of the limit that clubs can only spend up to 50% of their income on players. However, clubs could spend over that percentage if paid for or guaranteed by their directors. So if Koukash continues to put his money where his mouth is, this could benefit Salford. Particularly as it is almost certain that next year will be the last of a 14-team SL.

Its amazing the difference a few months makes. Close to administration and closure as a result of living beyond your means (as many many clubs have done), suddenly you have a sugar daddy and want the cap gone. I find in incredulous to be honest. No, it isnt perfect, and yes, it probably should be increased but it is needed. Even the NRL with its massive TV deal has a cap. Its there for a reason, and possibly the very reason that you managed to last as long as you did before it hit the fan.

The NRL has a salary cap, despite it being awash with money relative to SL; so as a principle, it works.

Where the SL cap fails is allowing clubs to spend up to a maximum, there should be a minimum spend say £100k below toforce clubs to get their commercial operations up to the ante and make SL a true level playing field.

Creating a sustainable business model should be the priority of any owner, throwing money into a black hole is a surefire way of creating a house of cards.

Look at the recent results posted by Warrington: £6.77 million turnover on the back of making both finals, returning a pre-tax profit of £344k . Doesn't exactly underpin a radical increase on their part; does it?

You might want to check if the poster that you are incredulous with has ever actually posted on this board before?

How much is the salary cap?

Roughly 25% spent on player contracts and 75% or £4.8m spent on ?



I’m not a financial expert and I appreciate there are other running costs associated to a rugby league club but something doesn’t look quite right here.

Don't worry about it!

The Salary Cap is a complete nonsense - the RFL just puts a notional value on a club's players' contracts. It's nothing to do with how much you actually spend on salaries.

Just scrap the Salary Cap. What purpose does it serve apart from stopping money coming into the game? Clubs have still gone into Administration and gone bust. Just scrap it at the same time as limiting the number of players a club can sign and putting in place clear, up-front points deduction/relegation penalties should any club go into Administration or go bust

It's up the the directors of clubs what sort of salary deals they want to offer players whether stars, journeymen or otherwise.