If that's true, it's no wonder there was no room for Feka in the new era.



That much money is obscene for a 20-minute player.

It was stated by IFL at either a shareholders meeting or at one of the first fans forums, although he did not mention names.

There can't have been a higher paid frontrow in SL at the time. I can understand the reason for Stuart's salary but Feka even before joining us was never a world beater and should have never have justified a salary like that.



To say Maurice's decision making was going off the boil would be understatement. I always felt there was air of desperation around the club to regain our former glory's in Lindsay's final years. The only problem was we were going about in completely the wrong way.

I'm very much in favour of expanding the game far and wide, but to do so successfully we need many more quality players than we currently have so that the expanded product is good, both in the quality on offer at the new teams plus the competitive games between new and old sides.



So if that is taken as a given then we certainly can't afford to let players depart for union, whether they're an Inglis type marquee player or even the lads that went to Sale from us recently. No doubt they could have performed in Super League, even if not with us, so it is very much a loss to the game.

Fielden was signed in desperation as we were heading for Batley / Dewsbury the season after!!



Feka - can't understand why he would ever be on that kind of salary??





Now if you had said Barrett..........

Pat Richards, top try scorer and man of steel, has that got nothing to do with playing outside Carmont then? I am not saying Inglis isnt world class, I am saying that we won the grand final with these 2 centres so no, I wouldnt want a new centre, id rather stick to what we know we can trust.

Don't you think you would be just a little bit better with Inglis?



Thats abit like saying we won back to back Challenge Cups with Mathers I would rather stick with him then have Billy Slater..

If he's comparing abilities, then it's a stupid point.



If it's in respect of their value for money, would inglis really offer 3 or 4 times as much as Carmont?

Greg Inglis can do things on a rugby pitch that Carmont could never dream of doing.



Plus he's only about 23 and Carmont must be atleast 30.



Its a no brainer.

Would you have Billy Slater if you had to get rid of King/Briers/Monaghan & Riley to make room under the cap? Obviously talk of Slater just slotting in replacement of Mathers without it affecting the balance of the team is silly.

But we would have to get rid of 3-4 players in addition to carmont to make room under the cap.

We've been down that route before and got hammered for it.

I'd have him for 2 of the above players.



But 21-12 isn't on about Cap space.