Sky Sports.com

I hope that both the Catalan Dragons and the French rugby league are able to capitalise on the interest that their team will receive in the build up to the final, and it helps the profile of rugby league in France.

Quotes of the week

Also see

• Rugby League on Sky

After a week in which the major talk centred around the Salary Cap, it was pleasing to see that the action on the field demanded some attention last weekend.

Congratulations to St Helens and Les Catalans for reaching the Carnegie Challenge Cup Final at Wembley, it will be a day that the players, coaches and supporters will never forget.

I clearly remember the first time that I played at the old Wembley Stadium, and burst into tears when my try was disallowed - I played as a schoolboy in the curtain raiser before the 1982 Final!

Rugby league provides many highs and lows for its players, their families and everybody else connected to or interested in the game.

A trip to Wembley, with the anticipation and excitement that goes with it, is one of the dreams that has come true for the men at Knowsley Road and the people in South of France.

I hope that both the Catalan Dragons and the French rugby league are able to capitalise on the interest that their team will receive in the build up to the final, and it helps the profile of rugby league in France.

Now to this week's questions

WIN WHEN THEY'RE SINNING

Hello Phil, just a suggestion... in ice hockey if someone is sin binned they are off for the full duration of the penalty or until such time as the opposition scores. Therefore if the opposition scores within a minute then the penalised team is immediately returned to full strength. How about trying this in rugby league ? A team is rightfully penalised but the potential impact of the penalty is reduced to a maximum of four or six points. If a team scores two or three tries while the opposition is reduced to 12 men it could possibly kill the game as a spectacle. Best regards, John McWilliam

PHIL SAYS: I really like your suggestion John, but I don't agree with it. You may have heard me saying during the games that we've covered this season that I feel a need to see the sin bin used more often, and in a slightly different way to the current system. I propose the introduction of a five-minute ban for technical offences e.g., lying on in the tackle, ball stealing etc and a 10-minute ban for foul/aggressive play e.g. fighting, high tackle etc.

Even if a team scored three times whilst the man was in the sin bin, then I would see that as a fair punishment for his offence. I also like the drama that we get when the clock is ticking down. It was great to watch Stacey Jones looking on nervously in the semi-final last Sunday and trying to imagine how he was feeling and what he was thinking. Your suggestion might be better than mine John. Either way, I hope that the RFL, coaches and people responsible for rule changes discuss this at the end of the season.

TRENT BARRACK

Dear Phil, Following this weekend's Challenge Cup results, discussion between my RL supporting peers and I have found their way back to one man - Trent Barrett. Sunday's abject performance wasn't his first of the season; in all three of Barrett's performances against St Helens (surely the league's yardstick) he has been virtually anonymous (except for his kicking game, which is admittedly excellent by anyone's standard). Upon leaving the NRL, the Aussies were quick to point out that he wasn't a big game player, but we all assumed it was just the winging Aussies being bitter as usual. My point? A lot of fans not from Wigan are concerned by the large amount of hype and furore created around Barrett by the media,and are extremely concerned that this guy could walk away with the coveted Man Of Steel award in front of players who, in our opinion, are much more deserving. The bookies seem to have been taken in by such talk, listing Barrett as favourite for the award. As an expert, what is your opinion as Barrett as a player, and indeed as a candidate for Man Of Steel? Mark Hutchings

PHIL SAYS: I think that Trent Barrett is a great player, and that Wigan would be lost without him. One of the problems that Wigan have this season is that they don't have enough other players threatening the opposition when they come to attack. If teams successfully close him down, there's not a lot more to worry about. Admittedly, he hasn't played well in every single game, but he's done enough in the 24 games he's played for Wigan to make the shortlist for the Man of Steel award. (Wigan have struggled to find enough scorers this year, Barrett has scored 16 times). I'm not sure that the current system of choosing the Man of Steel is the best, but can't think of one any better. It's affected massively by performances over the last 8 weeks of the season. Very few people can remember who was playing well in April. It's very hard to tell which players look so good because they're playing in the best teams. It's hard to win the Man of Steel if your team is near the bottom of the table. I wonder if a non-player might win it this year? It doesn't have to be a player who wins the award. It's supposed to go to the person to have had the biggest impact on the game this year, Steve Ganson or Ashley Klein might win it after the Cardiff mistake! (I'm only joking). Could a coach be given it for his impact at a club? I don't think that Trent Barrett will win it, it usually goes to a player from a club that wins something that season, and I can't see Wigan winning the Grand Final this year.

CAS FOR COMPENSATION?

Hi Phil, a couple of weeks ago you made an interesting statement on 'Boots n All' about Wigan, Castleford and the salary cap. As an ex Wigan man yourself I thought that you were very fair and honest when stating that Wigan should be punished in a manner befitting the crime (if found guilty) and that Castleford must be compensated in some way. Now Wigan have been found guilty, but only docked a paultry four points for an overspend of almost £225,000, what would you recommend that the punishment should have been? In addition what compensation would you award to Castleford who have, as a consequence, had to release most of last years playing squad and start again, whilst Wigan have recieved Sky money, remained in Super League, been allowed to sign top international players and bought their way into a Challenge Cup semi-final? Should Castleford be offered an automatic franchise for 2009 as compensation? Graham Cox

PHIL SAYS: Whatever I think that the punishment should have been is slightly irrelevant. All the clubs have agreed on the punishments, they are the ones that set the rules. In my opinion I would have both a financial penalty and the loss of competition points. I think that both might deter a club from breaking the rules. You might think that it's justice now that Wigan have lost in the Challenge Cup Semi-Final.

I have tried to think of a way to compensate the Castleford players and staff affected by their relegation but can't find a practical solution. Neither can I find a way of making their fans feel any better. The rules don't currently permit it, but would seem appropriate for the Wigan club to have to pay Castleford some compensation, which they could use to help prepare their franchise application. I don't think that it's right to reward them with an automatic place in the elite division post 2009 just because of what has happened at Wigan. I think that all applications should be assessed the same. I hope that Castleford are granted a place because I feel that they are an important member of the rugby league family and I'd like to see that at the party.