heard a few of the 18s were on nearly double that on their acadamy contracts. most of the acadamy are on pay as they play or £50 a week plus any win money. KR not one of the better payers for their kids if you believe some of the other clubs.

clubs can spend 50 k on players outside the top 25 players, which means that the lads cant be on that much
ie you have a 30 man squad than 5 players share 50k, you do the maths ,unless some are getting paid 'off cap'

The 50k only counts for players outside of the 25 who actually appear in the first team.
In theory you could actually pay your reserves and academy more than your first team players so long as they dont feature in the first team.

No you couldn't, your 25 man squad is intact your top 25 earners.

Your 25 man squad have to be your top 25 earners but it doesnt change the fact that, in theory, you could spend more on your academy and reserves than your first team players (i.e £1.6m) so long as players with a combined value of above 50k dont feature in the first team.

Sorry I miss read thought you meant you could have a academy player a your top earner.

You are right though you could have over a hundred youngsters on 20k each.

They would still come under the salary cap though

Not if they didn't play - which'd be pretty self-defeating, admittedly. Although it does allow teams, who can afford it, to better compete for youngsters and get them in their system.

The cynic in me wonders how much the new system will be about nurturing and developing young talent, rather than simply competing harder and earlier for the same finite pool.

The 25 man squad has to be the top 25 earners who have been registered with the RFL.

If you have a player who is out injured for a long time you would de-register him. He could be your top earner and he wouldn't count on the salary cap but he couldn't play first team rugby.

they still count in the cap IIRC, just gets them off the 25 man register