We had 60k to spend to start with.

Radford and Russell will have taken a bit of that though.

I'd snap there hands off if they offer us 150k for Tickle.

I think we might get Chase and for a bit less than that, bit of knob is Chase, but exactley what we need to kick on to the next level, would work great with Seymour IMO.

On the Cas forum (not rlfans) someone on there reckoon the deal is nearly done to join Hull.

Seem to be forgetting that if Tickle does go, we are short of a goal kicker, or at least one with a high conversion rate

I hope we dont......petulant,cheap shot merchant and vastly over-rated and we would be asking for trouble with him,westerman and Watts in the team.

They have a secret hidden form too?

I know its been mentioned before but how would Chase get a Visa?

BALDY BALDY BALDY.

Rumour has it that you hate signing players with hair?

Maybe Hull should make Terry Smirk an offer? He was a bald halfback?

How did you feel when Fitzgibbon left? We're you upset?

So many questions.

What I don't understand is if we've signed players why can we not announce them? Unless we've broken the September 1st rules that some people on here were defending so strongly the other day.

Clubs won't want them announced and potentially unsettling their season.

Other clubs may not want it announcing yet.



This is a concern that I would have. We'd still have Westerman and Whiting but neither are as good as Tickle (although there aren't many who are). Hopefully, if Tickle was to leave, then one of the new signings may be a goal kicker.

I assume now he is English he'd have a British passport to back it up?

I would rather the club agree another deal with Tickle as he is probably one of our most consistent players week in week out and for me is one of the best kickers in SL and he would be a huge loss even if we got £150K.

As for Chase it would be a thanks but no thanks for me as although no denying his talent I just don't see him being a geniune team player, plus his off field antics aint what you want from what would be one of the marquee players within the squad.

I have a feeling the wages for the full season would count on the cap. That certainly used to be the case. However you can get round that by staging payments so that their 'annual wage' for this season is only 40k and goes up to 120k next season.

It's not hidden. Or secret for that matter. I think it pre-dates RLFans.

Think would be big loss losing Tickle

I was under the impression the "live" salary cap meant that this was not the case? Surely if we sign someone mid-season only the wages we actually pay them within the salary cap year would count?

We've got a good back row though. Let him go, give Kent more of a chance and spend his money in other areas.

On the subject of Chase he has real faults in his personality but as a player he would improve us hugely.

All the 'live' cap means is that your cap position is assessed continuously throughout the season rather than a retrospective audit at the end. As far as I know the position remains that as soon as a player plays one cap-relevant match his wages count over the entire season.

EDIT: Here you go...



My emphasis.

I don't know either way, but does that mean that some players (Watts, Pitts etc) are counted on the cap for both clubs? I'd assume that only the money we actually pay them count on the cap for us, and the money Leeds/Rovers have paid them count on the cap for them?

agree, he's a talent, but he's also a tw@

Not quite. Using Watts as an example, his wages while at Rovers count against their total cap liability for the season; now he's with us his wages [ifor the entire season[/i count against our aggregate cap liability. So he kinda overlaps for the period he was at Rovers.

So in theory a players entire seasons wage could count on several clubs salary caps? One of the RFLs more stupid rules and there are several to choose from. It kind of makes sense in the Radford example but any wages already being accounted for on another clubs salary cap should never be duplicated on another clubs salary cap, especially when said player was never paid that money by the new club.

Thats how I understand it as well - but bear in mind we have created space in losing McKinnon who would have been a part year cost in the same vein as O'Carroll and Ellis (if we have released him now), so we would not have had the full year liability for their costs. If Heremaia was being paid under insurance following injury, I am not sure how his salary would be counted on the cap, or whether he is only on the cap as of now.

Could it be his a big fish in a very little pond? get him to a bigger environment and his attitude might change??

Wasnt fussed on him either.......was a privelage to see a modern day legend but he was out of position and have seen better overseas players.

You seem to have a unhealthy obsession with me all of a sudden.I just dont rate Chase...end of.