Quote DaveO="DaveO"Why would that happen with the home-grown and federation trained rules in place? If needs be these rules could be strengthended.'"
That's a fair and valid point - with such rules in place it should mitigate if not stop those kind of situations from arising. Although there is also the problem that if you start telling clubs that they must pay some sort of penalty for bringing their junior players in from outside of their own service area you could argue that it is anti competetive and you are denying kids from signing on with clubs that they
want to be at, rather than clubs their are geographically assigned to because of where they happen to live and/or play their junior rugby.
Quote DaveO="DaveO"
Wigan have one of the best youth systems going with many players who took part in the WCC game home-grown. Leeds and Saints have good systems and its no coincidence IMO they have been sucessful sides.'"
Agreed. My complaint about Warrington at the moment is that we do not have enough home grown players in our side, that is gradually starting to change but given the terrible starting point we had (When Cullen came to the helm, we had one player from the area, Clarke - and he wasn't a product of our Junior system, but Wigan's), it's going to be at least a few more years before we can see the staffing levels even out to a more acceptable "locally produced" level in comparison to Wigan/Leeds/Saints.
Quote DaveO="DaveO"
If there has been a problem with transfers in recent years in the era of the salary cap its too few clubs doing this and living off other clubs production lines. Hudds are Wigan MkII. Prior to this the obsession with Kolpak players was a fine example of the short term thinking of those running clubs.'"
No arguments from me on that, Dave.
Quote DaveO="DaveO"
Well I am glad someone thinks they are underpaid because they are.
'"
Anybody who thinks they aren't perhaps don't realise the truth of the matter. the "stars" of the game may be on what those of us on national average wages may consider to be a lot of money, but for what they put their bodies through and the entertainment they provide it is still way too low - and the general unrecognised work horses in teams would be lucky to be on anything even approaching £30k a year.
Quote DaveO="DaveO" As to it being a bigger challenge now given the current climate to raise money this is true but at least it should affect the rival sports as well.'"
It will affect them of course but comparatively I think it will affect them slightly less, the more glamorous sports are still a draw, the monies involved may be less but will still be substantially more than RL can ever dream of bringing in. It is the unfortunate truth of things.
Quote DaveO="DaveO" The problem is the sport has failed to raise the income enough to increase the cap well before the financial crisis happened so I don't see the crisis as a legitimate excuse for whay the cap has remained stuck at the current level. It would be too easy to blame the crisis for an inability to increase revenue going forward over the next few years but I am sure the RFL will do so.'"
It's good to see you at least agree with me that the only logical way we can increase the cap is to first concentrate on bringing more money in to the sport. I'm not sure those who simply say "we should be allowed to spend more" really realise the financial state of the game and what would be required to do so in a sustainable way. The argument of "we're being restricted to the same spending level of the small clubs" is hogwash IMO, I reckon at the moment only Wigan, Warrington and Leeds are able to spend up to the full salary cap, Saints may be able to do so once their new ground is built and they can start bringing more money in through corporate hospitality and sponsorship, and of course the decreased revenue drain that was maintaining Knowsley Rd for safety in previous seasons, and this season renting a ground from a third party. If saints are already spending at the full level, it would surprise (and impress) me.