Bulliac wrote:
Until the courts get hold of it and come out with a definitive version, it's just like a decision of the the Queen of Hearts in Alice in Wonderland - it means just what Rimmer wants it to mean..
Sums it up. Alice through the looking glass, or Rimmer-Less-glasses?
DB of leigh stated in the article that blew the secret squirrel meeting of the aforementioned clubs, that after he presented his budgie plans (sorry budget- not budgies cos they are the only ones that go cheep) and his case for the increase in the salary cap, the administrator of the salary caps phoned him and announced Leigh's salary cap would be £1.3m for 2016 and subject to a bond being logged in the RFLs coffers (presumably of an undetermined amount). So what do we deduce from this little drama???
I suppose if we apply logic: the salarly cap has gone the way of Osbournes tax credit cuts, and it's now a non salary cap, but an upper limit of spending subject to individual clubs 2016 business plan, and projected turnover (which is the same as revenue or income) nett of VAT presumably! And also an undetermined sum that is logged by himself (Mr DB) or other guarantors to the good old ruling body.
Are we then to deduce that all clubs in the champ. comp. are to be subject to seperate upper limit spending that can be higher or lower than Leighs providing that this figure does not exceed 50% of projected income-revenue-turnover for the 2016 season?
Phew that's a relief...we could call this game the xmas chase! Although I forgot it's already been won and the Chase is over..not much fun is it!
