So is this the first season where we see the intended effect of the Salary Cap? So many games that can’t be called, a real squeeze at the top which I can’t remember ever seeing this far into a season. Leigh doing fantastically well based on recruitment of some expensive players and some not so expensive (their reserve team perhaps belongs on a different topic).
Wakefield who we all assume are nowhere near Salary Cap limit well adrift.
All makes for an interesting 2nd “stanza” as a certain bald commentator used to say.

Wire are somewhat short of full cap, as are Salford.

I hope so, but it might just be a coincidence. I doubt many would put a lot of money against 2 of St Helens, Wigan and Leeds being in the final and even less on one of those three winning it.

If the same happens next year and the year after, then yes we can then say it is probably down to the salary cap.

In our case not deliberately

But both are top 4 and Wire have been full cap and struggled. So could argue it doesn’t work.

Who would know who has spent what in relation to the cap, with any certainty?

I think the salary cap is having an obvious effect, but I think it's also that the quality of the squads are worsening at the top end of the table and so causing a concertina effect with the mid table sides.

I mean, look at how well Leigh are doing. A squad made up of a lot of journeymen/has beens & a sp sprinkling of decent talent are suddenly looking like a serious contender for Old Trafford - Now that would be great for the game to see a new name there, pushing for honours, but when you compare it to the NRL (sorry, we have to go there), it's a bit embarrassing, as that Leigh side (& most of SL) wouldn't get within 20 pts of one of their sides.

Of course, Saints fans will bring up the WCC, but that's a glorified exhibition. Nearly every SL side playing week in, week out, in the NRL over a 30-35 game season, would finish bottom - Saints would finish maybe bottom 4, the rest would struggle to win a game.

So, overall, we have to ask, is the almost deliberate ploy of bringing down the quality of SL, in order to create a level competition, actually a good thing or something that, in the long term, will terminally wound the sport in the UK?

Yes, when you think that squads as strong as the Eels and the Roosters are struggling to get in the top 8, you know how deep the quality of the comp is.

I think comparisons with the NRL are pointless. It is like comparing Australian football teams v Premiership. Yes it’s the same game but fishing in different pools due to the money available.
I think the rugby being played at present by a number of teams is exciting to watch which hasn’t always been the case. Young British talent is coming through, so what more do we want?
Heaven forbid we go down the RU club route of spending beyond our means and the game goes down the pan.

Their league structure is heavily different to SL and very reliant upon the top 8.

Many clubs play each other only once, so the placings are lob sided and not really talked about as a factor of prominence on Fox.
Hence imo any team in the top half of their league would absolutely thrash the best of us by midseason.

rubber duckie..... Not entirely correct about the NRL but I get what you're trying to say. This is the structure of their league games
Each team plays each other throughout the season, playing 9 teams twice and the remaining 6 teams just once.
As someone else said comparing Super League to NRL is complete waste of time. In fact comparing Rugby league in the 2 counties is pointless as totally different structures

Seeing as "never the twain shall meet" is there any reason to worry about comparisons between SL & NRL? What is more important is to provide watchable, exciting,entertaining rugby even though it probably will never compare with NRL standards.