But if the said player is employed by a 3rd party, how coulod that be counted on the Bulls salary cap. I am openly admitting I am paying him and letting him play for the Bulls.

I would hope that if I was paying for the Bulls star player, I would not still have to buy a season ticket...

"And another beer please Mr Thurston..."

Liking your thinking

Could Debaser not just pay said player for certain services?

the regulations:



5.1 The “Salary Cap Value” of a Player is the total sum of the Gross payments and

other benefits that are paid or payable by a Club or Accrue (or are deemed to Accrue,

in accordance with this Clause 5) to the Player in the relevant Salary Cap Year,

whether pursuant to a Playing Contract or other arrangement (verbal or otherwise), in

consideration for or otherwise on account of the Player’s provision of playing (or

related) services to the Club in that Salary Cap Year.



Debaser, note the words "or other arrangement". Its the usual catch-all in such rules, so basically if anybody is paid by for example god to play for the Bulls it still counts towards the cap.



given such a catch-all, how the hell do Warrington pay for the 127 internationals in their squad????!!! By even more devious words such as media rights, etc as Adey has implied.

You might suppose that; I could not [ipossibly[/i comment...

Ok - if we are trying to come up with alternatives... How about it is the player who wins the lottery and is a lifelong Bradford fan. Ie Widdop. He comes to the club and says I don't really need any money so give me a nominal sum (£1) and I'll play for free. Would that work?

there is nothing expressly against that, however 5.1 says it is the value of the players not simply the actual salary benefits etc paid to them, these are of course included as the obvious way to calculate the value of a player. so I suspect that 5.2.2 (h) would be invoked and they would assign a deemed salary benefits bonuses etc cap value to Widdop:



(h) such other transactions as the RSCM determines should be treated

as payments to a Player;

Those regulations make the Warrington situation all the more baffling then. Even if the players do accept a lower wage then most accept they should be earning, their value must exceed this.



It's a mystery.

Exactly - who decides value. Basically that means there should be someone who is excellent at creating fantasy teams at Red Hall who can apply relative value

There may be historical precedent. Despite various wassocks on other forums asserting that we breached the salary cap in 2005 by the temporary signing of Mozza, I was given to understand that his cost for salary cap purposes was sort of...zero. Ways and means, no doubt.

If it came from the T&A forum, with nothing else to even suggest it anywhere else, forget it IMO. I cannot see it being a realistic possibility. Remember we had loads of these phantom signings last year - folk just get excited, then blame the club for "lack of ambition" or whatever when they don't happen! This one was never going to happen either.

Can't they just employ the player for like £50,000 a year, then employ their wife to do bar work for say £100,000???



I'm sure that's what we used to do.#



Or pay the player £90,000 and employ him to do promotional work for the club too paying them £60,000 for a certain amount of hours promo work?

No.



First one was stopped years ago. See "Steve Renouf..."

The Operational Rules state all payments to family members are included in the salary cap value.



Second one comes under "image rights". Club-paid image rights fall within the salary cap value, and are a big issue now anyway because of the HMRC actions against RL. Or, if not, they are still caught because ALL salaries etc paid to a player, for whatever reason, are included. This applies even if the player is also coaching - something that has struck me as unfair where the situation is genuine.

the cap rules evolve, but this is what they are at the moment, if anybody can see a way around them all Bulls fans would be most grateful, but even then the club still has to be able to afford the payments www.therfl.co.uk/~therflc/client ... rt%205.pdf

the cap rules evolve, but this is what they are at the moment, if anybody can see a way around them all Bulls fans would be most grateful, but even then the club still has to be able to afford the payments www.therfl.co.uk/~therflc/client ... rt%205.pdf

I keep thinking they - or the link - should be posted up as a sticky on here.



And that all posters should be required to sit a test on them, like the driving theory test, before they are allowed to post on this fourum...

Was just catching up on this thread and thought the same thing about 4 or 5 posts ago, would save you a whole load of RSI!

Looks like Roger is a person to trust.



Moon next Roger? Herbert, Ah Van and Briggs out?

eddie thank you for informing people about sammut while i was in the sin bin

can we keep Ah Van aswell as get Moon? I'd be all for that.



but this Roger guy seems to know his stuff, I'll listen next time he posts a rumour.

think ive got a couple paid on to be allowed to get a couple wrong

assuming herbert has gone to accomodate sammut then ah van would have to go to bring in any other overseas or non fed player. Only exception would be an overseas player who was in superleague when quota rules changed and hence has a non fed trained exemption (morrison is in this category I think).

Id take Morrison backhad his injuries but still quality, the guy didnt even want to leave Bradford in the first place !!

i do think briggs will be gone, potter does not get on with him,dont know why



think its a shame, as i think with briggs there is definately a super league player there, needed to persevere with him,think thats bad on potter seen as though he signed him and not given him his chance