CAN you imagine the drama if the Warriors had won the premiership last year and we then learnt the club had so blatantly and significantly breached the salary cap? Surely this is the wake-up call the NRL has needed about our ridiculous salary cap laws.
I'm sick of hearing that the NRL is vigilantly enforcing the salary cap and that the cap is responsible for the great football we see every week in the NRL.
On the first point, the three most significant examples of salary cap breaches to be exposed in rugby league have come from the Cowboys, the Bulldogs and now the Warriors.
It would appear the normal salary cap auditing processes can detect minor indiscretions or misinterpretations of the laws, but major breaches have been pointed out to the NRL because of someone's conscience when it is far too late to reverse a disaster.
If normal audits failed to detect massive illegalities, who's to say this isn't going on everywhere?
On the second point, the NRL claims the cap is making the game more even, therefore better.
The competition is more evenly contested because more clubs are learning how to manage their salary caps better and because the level of coaching and development is improving all the time.
What the salary cap does is force a lot of players into early retirement. It forces players to go to England or rugby in search of their true monetary value. It also forces clubs to sack popular long-serving players.
The salary cap restricts the earning potential of the game's top entertainers, who deserve a greater slice of rugby league's financial success.
Because all payments made to top players must come out of a limited wage pool, average players and youngsters earn less money.
This other rubbish that clubs should include a monetary figure in the salary cap based on jobs guaranteed to players after retirement really takes the cake. This means the money earned after retirement is still coming out of the current players' wage pool. It's ludicrous.
Now, back to the Warriors. How many people suspected they were over the cap? I haven't heard one person ask how the Warriors kept all those great players under the salary cap. They finished at the back of the pack last year!
The major concern here is how do teams such as the Warriors, Raiders and Storm attract players to their more remote areas without exceeding the salary cap levels? We expect them to be competitive spending the same amount as teams in more traditional rugby league areas. It obviously doesn't work.
Of greater concern is the unbelievable statement from South Sydney president-in-waiting Henry Morris that had Souths been successful in signing prominent players such as Braith Anasta and Matt Orford last year, the club could not have met the payments.
If true, surely this kind of thing is far more serious than clubs with financial capabilities paying a player his true monetary value.
I don't think the Warriors should be penalised competition points for this season. It was different in the case of the Bulldogs as they had gone all season benefiting from their breaches.
The Warriors benefited from their breaches last year. Just as well they didn't win the premiership or the NRL would have a massive problem on its hands.
In the short term, the Warriors should have to pay a significant fine. They should have to unload two highly paid players to lower-placed clubs such as Souths or Newcastle. The Warriors should still have to pay their wages.
It seems unfair to their supporters that their year would be virtually over before it began by docking them points before a ball is kicked.
The salary cap needs to be changed. If it can't be policed equitably - and history shows it isn't - we have to try to find another way.
Making club directors and administrators personally responsible for shortfalls in wages if a club cannot meet its commitments would soon lead to more vigilance in their own financial management.
