I believe we voted against. Doesn't stop us spending full cap and could probably spend more.

The only reason I can see us going against it is we are investing a lot of money in our academy system, something koukash isn't prepared to wait for. In the long run we will benefit mostly bringing kids through playing alongside better paid players

It wasn't just Koucash. It was voted in 8-4.

Yes because he is so short sighted he wants instant success

Only wire saints leeds and wigan will benefit from this rule imo as they have strong junior set ups allowing them to spend extra on quality

If part of the marquee's wage isn't counted on the salary cap does that mean the amount doesn't ahve to be declared to the RFL

If it doesn't matter, whats to stop Koucash allocating an extra million through the marquee wage and have it shared out to other members of the squad?

Plus four others who voted for it. Why should other clubs be holding these clubs back?

Where is the proof we are holding these clubs back? Just because we voted against doesn't mean we are unambitious

Look around you will find numerous coaches and players saying that the rule is already wanting to be used by owners for their wishes not their coaches

Have you gone mad? Where did I say Hull FC were unambitious or that "we" were holding clubs back? The clubs that are holding others back are the ones who can't even spend up to (or close to) the cap as it is.

Hull FC, whether they voted for it or not, are in a position financially where they'd be able to use it if they wanted to.

Can you link to where these players & coaches have said that about the rule?

Twitter
radio humberside

Danny lock wood has said it's just raising the cap, sexing it up

Yeah, but what he said was bollox. The way he put it was that you'd already have the marquee player on the cap and this would 'free it up'. Which is not the case for any club, really.

rovers troll, back to your bridge Easty