If ratu for example is on 50k and only half applys on the cap due to him coming from union then 25k wouldn't count towards the cap.

But if were at fully salary cap, then that £25k would be us £25k over the cap and so on and so forth with homegrown players etc etc

Exactly, it is obvious to many people but clearly not some

Another one who doesn't understand how it works.

My take on it is that we are not directly using the marquee player rule, but rather taking maximum advantage of all other dispensations to achieve the overspend on the cap. People need to understand the cap is complex and there are different exemptions. In face you could argue there are too many of these, resulting in teams still potentially being allowed to spend too much and getting themselves into trouble, the very thing the cap was introduced to prevent. Or perhaps that's a naive view.

In any ways, in modern day RL a clubs priorities seem to be, a good squad, a good coach and a good accountant

… and it could get even more out of control..

Wigan's Ian Lenagan is suggesting a 3rd marquee player ….

“Next year is important, we have quite a lot of players off-contract and there’s the opportunity for a third maquee player if the rule is changed – I think that would be interesting.”

Spot on. It's obvious to many people but clearly not some/one.

It is in no way obvious.

"We have marquee players that qualify under the marquee rule," sounds a lot like we are using the marquee rule to me. If you are committed to spending over the cap and are taking advantage of all the other little dispensations that are available then it is nonsensical to ignore the marquee player rule if you have a player earning over £150k. Even if it only saves you say 10k, you would still make use of it.

My take on it is that we have at least one marquee player, but Pearson won't say who because he wants to avoid putting unnecessary pressure on anyone. And I think that is a sensible approach.

I think what AP is saying is that the top 25 earners fit under the £2m salary cap.

So he doesn't need to declare any marquee players (if there are any).

When the season starts and any of the bottom 8 earners are needed for selection, the cap limit will get tighter, so things might change.

Personally, I don't think it's any of my business what players are being paid, but the RFL have stated that marquee players have to be declared - I don't understand why.

I was being sarcastic

I'd be surprised if Ma'u and Kelly weren't on a huge wedge, and rightly so. It's good we're pushing the spend on the squad but losing that amount of cash is a big challenge and big risk too given our under resourced front row options IMO.

100% agree, it always amazes me how some on here claim to know the finite details of contracts.