The salary cap issue isn't as hard as you would think. You calculate it on the maximum a player can earn. The fact the players performance is done indevidually along with how hard he works at training...etc means he could still earn a hefty amount.

The injury issue too would be dependant on your past performances in training, games and in general. You wouldn't get your full bonuses but you would still earn more than you would if you were playing and not doing great.

All players would get enough to live and more, the younger players would even earn better money than they would now. The ability for all players to earn more should encourage them to try harder.

It is quite evident at the moment our players are not focussed enough on playing for pride, passion or even for each other so if we took away the one thing that makes them tick maybe they would pull their fingers out.

I take it from this response that your all quite happy to be paying these players with your hard earned cash (that you have to work tirelessly for) to just put out average performances yet still be earning probably 5 times your salary? At least we'd know the players that were here wanted to play well all the time and not just when they could be bothered.

I agree with you nick I think in the 80's when the players played to earn an honest wage by playing with they're hearts we saw much more dedication from a team, what I cant understand is if the player isn't playing well surely they would know how hard it would be to get ie another contract or even another club look at Cooki for example still prob had a lot going for him and no club forth coming for him, I would drop the pay and pay it on bonuses a game and I think it would work.

Huddersfield have the biggest squad in SL. The crowds they get are not the biggest by a long way. Some of thier players will be on big money. So how are they able to keep all thier players happy. Maybe it's the pay structure that needs looking at closely.

I guess the only argument with only having bonuses would be that we'd be supporting Doncaster.

Professional players do need to earn a good wage, they have a short career and need to earn as much as they can as quick as they can but as you say if they are on a good wage they should be worried about not getting another contract. Just seems some clubs are able to motivate players by other means while our coach can't and I don't see another factor that the players care about.

Maybe we should steal their kids before every match and threaten to put them on a well known auction site if they lose!!!! Those without kids we shall sell their XBox or PS3!!!!!

Seriously though we need some way of motivating them I just wish there was a viable way of doing it so we got the best product every week instead of just when it seems they can be bothered.

The idea is great Nick but unfortunately it wont work with players now a days. Before the so called free transfer system came in most players were not full time and played to make there standard of living much better, almost doubling there take home pay especially if they won.now players are full time and especially the overseas player he can earn your £70k in signing on fees and match payments,not many clubs in Oz play winning bonuses they get apeareance money for 1st team games win or lose, the thing in Ox is if you dont play well there you are out on your ear,and someone else takes your place,you then playe in the lower grades for a lower appearance payment.You then have to earn your place back in the team not rely on a coach liking you,or being one of his favourites. Th Ozzie atitued is what difference will money make to you by giving you extra to win, if you are not trying your best and not giving 100% you should not be in the team.

They're subsidised by a bloke called Ken Davy, iirc. Similar to how our board keeps our heads above the water - see also Quins, St. Helens and probably a few more.

Right, I'm about to go on a rant - it isn't going to be pretty and if you're a big admirer of bulldog spirit, I wouldn't waste your time.

Okay, it's a pretty simple concept that, over a reasonable timescale, level of sporting success will reflect effort and ability. Yet there seems to be a view widespread in this country that the latter is almost irrelevant - that any obstacle can be overcome by having a shouty captain 'inspiring' the lads to get stuck in by clapping vigourously and, erm... shouting. John Terry can yell himself hoarse, but the problem for England's 'overpaid primadonna footballers', is not that they aren't trying as hard as their similarly remunerated Spanish (for example) counterparts - it is a difference in technical ability. Improving skill-sets and tactical awareness doesn't make for a great rallying call, but that is the difference between triers and winners.
Rovers' players don't need a boot up the backside - if only it were that simple! Nor do we need a unique pay structure. We need to be cleverer and more competent.

I would agree with much of that. What i would say though is that i think that Justin Morgan attempts to be too clever and too tactically aware. Everything we do is too structured in my opinion and every tackle of every set of 6 seems to be pre-determined. I realise we have to work to a basic structure so that we have something to fall back on if we are under pressure but what i really want to see is Dobson and Green given the freedom to express themselves with the ball.
I think we would see greater results in that than taking money off a players basic wage.

I agree with most of this.
We are VERY structured, Possibly to the point that we are not flexible enough.
We seem to be unable to go away from our gameplan if it doesn't seem to be working, This causes 2 problems for me.
1 If it doesn't work on the day we are snookered (when we drop too much ball we can't use off the cuff to dig us out of the hole and it just snowballs).
2 It makes us rather predictable and if the oppo's work us correctly it makes it very hard for us to win games.
I also wonder if that was the problem with Paul Cooke at Rovers as he is a very off the cuff player, You could say the same about the fact that JM apparently didn't want Danny Brough!

Yeah - I think that playing low-risk has a couple of... well, risks. The first is that if you want to change to start chucking it about, to save a game then it won't come naturally. A risk-taking team that wants to defend a lead can stuff it up the jumper a bit more easily, I imagine. Also, I think that you can get left behind a bit as more teams add more strings to their bows.

I think Mason was meant to give us a new, and needed, dimension - but obviously that hasn't panned out.
Getting Green alongside Dobson hopefully will, in the medium term.

This and the fact that the game plan hasn't evolved from the last two seasons and everybody has worked us out.

We're getting far too many of the basics wrong all of the time. Line speed and defending around the ruck has been terrible all season. This allows the opposition to have the luxury of breaking us up the middle at will or rapidly shifting the ball to the flanks were our slide defence has been horribly exposed. We'll never win any games by conceding five tries a game. We rarely complete more than 60% of our sets it is paramount to success to exceed this. We've failed to add anything other than a good short kicking game in the oppositions twenty metre area, whenever we give the ball some air it's usually just a pretty meaningless shifting of the ball from left to right or vice versa interspersed with the occasional drive towards the posts to mix it up a bit.

On top of this, our once excellent spider sets are now awful.