I realise they are compulsory that’s why I said to do the bare minimum requirements. I doubt there’s too much of a loop hole salary cap wise to make it worthwhile risking anymore important players then you have to.
Dunno, but it's interesting how more than a few clubs are using "rings ins", there has to be some benefit in using retired, ex players or AFL blow ins. Otherwise give a Development Player a chance to show his wares. Something fishy going on.
I just think it’s clubs wanting to minimise injuries to current players plus using the retired players does drum up a bit of media attention and fan interest. From the NRL’s point of view I think they’d prefer a retired player with a bit of profile playing instead of a development player that only the die hards would know.
No disagreement with that, but my question is what is the Salary Cap trick with the 9's? There has to be one, otherwise non contracted players simply wouldn't be allowed to play. Most definitely club administrators couldn't play without some trickery going on. Imagine, in comparison, if we tried to play Ryan in an NRL game? If StHelens would release him (not going to happen) could we play Thompson instead of Ryan?
I don’t think there is a cap trick. The NRL must have some sort of requirements for squads and I’d say they allow one spot for a retired player or the AFL player in the Roosters case.
I'm just curious as to what the rules are regarding players, player payments and their effect on the Cap. I haven't seen any rules published, has anyone?
I haven’t seen any either. We should get a good idea of it next week when teams are announced.
