Its a strange comparison to draw, the capital debt markets and government debt with a prospective semi-pro RL club?They dont.

They do. Explain Crusaders downfall without refering to them spending more money than they had coming in.

Crusaders broke the salary cap. No use blaming the cap for their problems when everybody knew that the RFL was turning a blind eye to their breeches.



As I understand Wakey had image rights problems that weren't predictable. Don't really understand the ins and outs of Widnes' issues but removing the % of total revenue criteria was a bad mistake.



Sticking an extra 70k allowance onto Northampton doesn't mean that the club will have an extra 70k to spend. You could give them an extra million allowance but it would be meaningless since they wouldn't have the cash to spend.

One word - credit. You can run a business on thin air. You just can't do it for ever because one day the credit will run out.

Only when you explain how the salary cap stopped the Crusaders going bust.

Not in SL they didnt, they didnt even spend close to the SL Salary Cap yet went bust. The salary Cap doesnt stop clubs going bust.

Wakefield had many many problems, all of which were predictable, and Widnes spent more than they had to try and gain promotion, but did it in an SC era.



I dont disagree, if they dont have it, they dont spend it. If they do have it, they can spend it. If Northampton cant afford to spend £366k (the Championship Salary cap plus an allowance) they shouldnt spend it, if they cant afford to spend £300k (the championship Salary Cap) they shouldnt spend it.

No, I'm pretty sure they wore shorts like everyone else

All clubs suffer from those issues. All clubs have varying levels of shortfall that need to be made up by their backer, Crusaders' required a large investment but so do many other clubs such as Huddersfield. The fact that Crusaders lost money isn't unique to them, you seem desperate to want to disagree with me but you fundamentally are.

No, I can't ever remember it being raised on this forum that the biggest flaw in the club would be that Samuel would pull out after one season in SL. If that was claimed, it was a minor point and likely a clutch at straws by people who were bitter about Crusaders' inclusion for other reasons. As I said, something like that is a random variable and there is no possible way that you could accurately claim that you knew it was going to happen. I could quite easily state that Steve O'Connor will pull out of Widnes or something equivalent, that doesn't mean that I deserve any credit if it actually happens. With hindsight, Samuel clearly wasn't a trustworthy character, I've already stated that the RFL failed by not determining this at the time. However, as I said, there's absolutely no way that you, the RFL or anyone else could have known for certain what was going to happen unless are claiming to be psychic.

Yet Crusaders were able to find a backer who rescued the club, so this argument is completely irrelevant. No question that Crusaders would have been a more attractive prospect if they were a stronger club, but they were a new team in only their fourth season, any club at that stage is going to require more investment than a club that has been going for 100+ years. The opinion of Wrexham FC fans is hardly the most valid source. Clearly they were right, but what option did the RFL have? Moss and Roberts were willing to take on the debt, the fact that they were hundreds of miles away is irrelevant, they were still a backer that saved the club which would otherwise have ceased to exist.

I'd imagine that the new NW Crusaders, with a friendly landlord in the uni and a friendly supporter-run football club alongside them, will prove a success.



But as for Northampton- there must be loads of frustrated lads out there who will never make the top-grade in the major local sport (i.e. union) who are hungry for the challenge. Here's hoping.

Have they started to assemble a squad yet?.The last i heard the team was made up of supporters.



IIRC when SWS set up they had open days for RU players to come down and try there luck,i think a few players were signed on on the back of these trials.Hopefully northampton will do the same.



To those who keep banging on about the SC,the hierarchy at northampton have stated that they may put money into it to get it up and running,but after that, it needs to be self sufficient,so lets hope the area backs it.

That is half decent attempt at putting together a level playing field for new clubs , but it is still completely subjective and open to abuse , which club do you use to set the level ?, which year do you do it ?, because the number of ex SL players changes all the time , and all the numbers are arbitray at best



Maybe HKR should have had 5 years extra quota and SC allowance to get them up to SL speed , but you haven't argued their case have you ?



No matter what formula you devise it will favour some clubs and discriminate against others , it isn't possible to balance it out

So saying " If the SC rules were re jigged " isnt suggesting a better way ?



So you are talking broken biscuits then ? , fair enough

Outstanding contribution to the debate from your good self once again , you should be so proud

Quite correct , it was in the NL's they overspent their salary cap , then again it was RFL money they were spending , so maybe that doesn't count

Would it be ok for Northampton to play to the same salary cap as everyone else, then have players travel/living expenses (up to a certain amount) excluded from their overall balance?



This could be for the first 3 seasons to help get them running, then get them on the same cap as everyone else.

In fact, sod that! (why did ever get sucked in?)



Let them start on the same playing field as everyone else. Northampton will be in the same boat as three other teams, so in effect thats 6 competitive games to start off with.



Plus Skolars, Gateshead and the Scorpions don't get players travel/living exemptions.





What has RLFANS done to me? I'm arguing with myself!

You

SWS,Crusaders, Gateshead,Skolers,Northampton plus 3 other new clubs,why is it even entering peoples minds to show favouritism to these clubs.

The C1 expansion clubs will get the same central funding, and be on the same salary cap, as everyone else. All clubs will get the same free travel for away games over a certain distance, but obviously the remote clubs will get travel paid every away match, when the traditional neighbour clubs might only get that for games in London, Northampton, South Wales, maybe Gateshead or Cumbria. Oldham will have to make their own way to Rochdale, but it won't cost to go to, say, Hemel. Employment law regarding overseas players minimum wage is the same for everyone.



The biggest challenge is finding a squad without being able to pay players to relocate. Swinton can always grab a player from St Pats or Miners and know they will be of a standard. The south has lots of talented players capable of playing at C1, but they are, mostly, in semi-pro union. There are local league players, students, servicemen, and juniors cing through, but it will take time and organisation. Hence a division of 4 new clubs, 2 welsh clubs, Skolars, thunder, plus 2 more, will be broadly competitive, as so many teams are in a similar position. The top amateur teams might beat them in the cup, but do we want a second pro club in Leigh, Warrington or Wigan. Give it time, and the expansion clubs will bring new talent and new money into the game.

If it's good enough for Starbore and SmokeyTA, it must be good enough for you; I'm sure at one point in the thread, the former made at least 5 consecutive posts in reply to himself. Bonkers!

Ooooooh no I didn't

It might have done, had it been enforced.

It doesn't stop it but it does make it less likely. Crusaders went bust the first time round because they were already in debt and accumulating CCJs before they joined SL. That's despite the RFL describing them as "financially stable" in their licensing decision. Had they not entered SL with debts, they might not have gone bust.



They had these debts partly because the RFL was turning a blind eye to them breaking the salary cap by importing Queensland league players on full-time contracts whilst in NL2. Had they not been doing this, it is unlikely that they would have been promoted to NL1 and thus been in a position to apply for SL.







Yes, the worst aspect of the salary cap was removing the restriction on %age of turnover thus allowing everybody to spend the full cap. Some clubs can afford the full cap and others can't but will spend it anyway.

It would be fine by me if they actually had the money to do this and not run up debts. My issue is that a blanket "salary cap restrictions should not apply to expansion clubs" is a) unfair (although I do agree about the player availability and travelling costs which perhaps should be taken into account) b) madness if the expansion clubs don't have the money (and they usually don't).

It's a dead-duck argument, as the expansion clubs aren't getting a different salary cap, and all teams will get the same central funding and travel costs over a set distance paid.