Increase in 2013 cap...but Roosters only

[El Diablo]

The keeping some aside in the hope that the Warriors released him for 2012 makes perfect sense. Effectively the Roosters only spent $4.1m ($4.4m - $300k) of their 2012 cap, but wasn't what I was querying.

The article clearly states that the Roosters were able to keep a significant proportion of Maloney's 2013 salary in the previous year's cap.

Now you say that the Roosters haven't paid anything to Maloney for 2012 (and nor should they have been able to given he was contracted to another club). And as far as I know, clubs can't "average out their cap" (so if they underspend one year, they can over spend the following. In fact the Eels floated that in relation to Izzy, and it was rejected), so it matters little that the Roosters had left money under their cap in 2012 because that season is done and dusted.

All of which still has me at a loss as to how any part of Maloney's 2013 salary can be included in Roosters 2012 cap.

Schubert needs to go

He is the problem

 

[Springbokfly]

They must have banged thru an increase in the 2013 salary cap but have only seen fit to notify the Roosters..they are spending like drunken sailors but are still in the market.

Politis has some clout!

How long has it been since cronullas last premiership?:lol:

 

[Valheru]

The keeping some aside in the hope that the Warriors released him for 2012 makes perfect sense. Effectively the Roosters only spent $4.1m ($4.4m - $300k) of their 2012 cap, but wasn't what I was querying.
The article clearly states that the Roosters were able to keep a significant proportion of Maloney's 2013 salary in the previous year's cap.
Now you say that the Roosters haven't paid anything to Maloney for 2012 (and nor should they have been able to given he was contracted to another club). And as far as I know, clubs can't "average out their cap" (so if they underspend one year, they can over spend the following. In fact the Eels floated that in relation to Izzy, and it was rejected), so it matters little that the Roosters had left money under their cap in 2012 because that season is done and dusted.
All of which still has me at a loss as to how any part of Maloney's 2013 salary can be included in Roosters 2012 cap

It wasn?t included in the 2012 cap, it was just budgeted for i.e. the club operated in 2012 as if he was there being paid (effectively operating 300k under the cap). This means that his salary has no real bearing on us juggling the cap this year as it fits under the old cap without cutting any players.

I see the confusion in how the author has written it though.

 

[Lambretta]

I too do not understand this, as it is illegal now, so to the Easts supporter calling us stupid, I am calling you one eyed and unable to see past your 3 new star signings.

If it's taken the way it's written in the article then I have no idea either and would agree with El Diablo that Schubert is playing favourites with Easts.

However I tend to think that Valheru is probably on the mark and the article is deliberately written badly. The Telegraph often write articles that place Easts in the worst possible light - Phil Rothfield ensures this at every opportunity.

I'd rather see an article written by a company that doesn't have a personal axe to grind with Easts before I pass judgement either way.

 

[The Elephant In The room]

If it's taken the way it's written in the article then I have no idea either and would agree with El Diablo that Schubert is playing favourites with Easts.

However I tend to think that Valheru is probably on the mark and the article is deliberately written badly. The Telegraph often write articles that place Easts in the worst possible light - Phil Rothfield ensures this at every opportunity.

I'd rather see an article written by a company that doesn't have a personal axe to grind with Easts before I pass judgement either way.

More like The Telegraphs journalists often get their 8 year old sons/daughters to write articles for them, so who knows how to take them. I don't know if they specifically anti-easts, they just like creating negative hype to sell papers and Easts are the current flavor of the month.

 

[RWB]

It's quite simple really if the Roosters were able to front load some contracts allowing more room to move in 2013.

i.e

Pearce on 400k p/y

2012 - 550k
2013 - 250k

SKD on 400k p/y

2012- 550k
2013- 250k


Front loading has been a technique used by many clubs, however it was my understanding that some time last year it was agreed by the IC & Schubert that heavily front loaded, or back ended contracts would not be allowed so we'll probably never see this happen again.

One of two things;

1) Either the article is wrong, or as Lambretta suggested isn't exactly worded properly or;
2) The Roosters did front load their contracts and it was a smart little piece of business

 

[Hutty1986]

Wait a minute.. the Roosters PAY Pearce to play for them?

 

[Walt Flanigan]

Sounds like Politis has been front-loading Schubert.....

 

[Horrie Is God]

Wait a minute.. the Roosters PAY Pearce to play for them?

You guys want to pay him..

 

[Usain Bolt]

Any team with Pearce at halfback is always destined for failure

 

[SuperiorEasts]

We are following the Sharks model for the salary cap..

How can the Sharks put this image out with that quote. FFS 4 of those players havent even played for the Sharks before, and he's saying what excites them? How would they know what it's like to run out at shark park. False advertising.