Quote St pete="St pete"It's funny all the Salford fans wasn't calling for this marquee rule last year.'"
Guess again. [url=http://www.rlfans.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=553727It was discussed last year[/url.
My thoughts haven’t changed since then: up to three salary cap exempt players allowed where proof of finances allow it.
There are a few angles we all need to bear in mind here:
[list1. What is good for Koukash and Salford
2. What is good for rugby league
3. Political motives[/list:u
Koukash would do without the salary cap tomorrow. We all know that. The marquee rule for him is chipping away at something that has been a staple in rugby league for over a decade now. The so-called golden ticket suggestion, and that cash rich clubs could scoop them up from others, was proof of that. And it was funny too. The Doctor, brazen as always.
Is scrapping the salary cap good for rugby league? Today, I don’t think so. Just as with 1995, the main beneficiaries will be the average rugby league player. Average salaries will probably rise quite quickly, and that doesn’t solve the problem the game is facing in keeping talent. For example, Wigan allegedly spent [url=http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/article-62747/Lindsay-calls-end-salary-capping.html£3.2m on player salaries in 2001[/url before being reigned in. I reckon we would all like to see the average wage of RL players rise, but only if the game could afford it. That said, can the sport be seen as progressing if in ten years the value of the salary cap has barely budged? There has to be concessions somewhere down the line.
While McManus makes some salient points, I’m not convinced that this isn’t primarily a case of not letting Koukash stomp into rugby league and get his own way. You only have to go through newspaper and minute archives to see that such squabbles can tend to be exercises in one-upmanship between individual club chairmen or factions.