Mishter Gawwy Hewwington

He was actually one of the few who you could rely on to play well.

Paea, Tronc Myler and Orford, at the expense of Hock, Bailey, Smith and Phelps/Carmont.

Trouble is, even if we wanted to replace Gaz for the rest of this year, we can't.



If/when the B sample comes back positive (it's extremely rare that it disagrees with the A sample), we can sack him from the playing squad with no compensation necessary.



However, we still can't bring anyone in to replace him due to the way the salary cap works.



So say for example that Hock earned £100k and we've paid him for 2/3 of the season, that means that we've spent £67k (ish), and have £33k freed up for this year.



BUT (and just like Feka, it's a big butt) - If we brought someone in for 1/3 of the season and paid him the remaining £33k of Hock's contract, we would have to declare the full £100k AGAIN on the Salary cap, as a full year's worth of wages has to be accounted for.

That means that covering Hock's position would cost us £166k for a £100k player.



So basically, we're screwed for this year for that player - Thanks Gaz.

because he was too injured. Same as what Wire did with Reardon.



He is taken off the cap.

If Hock gets a 2 year ban, and we don't sack him, do his wages still count on the cap?

i think its the wording is wrong, i think us "sacking him" still enables us to hold his registration? Basically i'm not sure which way they do it, but essentially there is a way that hock does not count on the cap and we still hold his registration.

No and the club is employ to employ him in some kind of community education capacity.

Also your understanding of the cap is completely wrong. The rfl don't deal in fractions of a season. Basically, at any one time the current amount of players salaries added up must not exceed the cap.

iS THIS CORRECT OR NOT

Please give me more than that, because that is my understanding of the rules based on this (taken from the RFL rule-book)







So my understanding is that to register a player for 3 months of the season, you still have to declare the equivalent of 12 months salary for SC purposes.



However, because we've already paid Hock for the first 5 months of the season, we still have to declare whatever we've already paid, prior to "ripping up his contract", as it's money that has gone out.



Therefore, we can write-off 5 or 6 months of Hock's money, but still have to declare 12 months for anyone that we brought in to replace him.



Like I said, if I really am "wrong" then please explain why, rather than just a one-word dig.

we don't include hocks if he leaves after 6 months. In the same way that a new players salary counts as if it was there the whole year, a player leavings salary means that there whole wage doesn't count for the whole wage.