While the emphasis is on producing more homegrown players (and that number increases year on year 2008 to 2011) to accomodate that you have to either allow an increase in the size of the 1st grade squads or reduce the numbers of overseas trained.

news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 330843.stm
news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 354933.stm



Gene appealed against his classification as 'non fed trained' under the new quota system and won.



Then you would be comparing results rather than comparing the strength of the relative Leeds squads. Those results, as you accept, are also effected by several measures beyond Leeds' control.



The 1st grade squad is basically 1 to 25. It is IMO stronger this season (on paper) than the squad available to coach McClennan last season. If you disagree you should get off the fence and say so.



Where did I deem last season as a failure? I said it was satisfactory.



Reliance was perhaps a poor choice but it's difficult to view a shift from five to seven (in actual numbers) as a reduction. Several years ago I can recall Gary Hetherington saying 'our target is to have a squad comprising 80% of players who have come through our system.' Given that clubs have to declare a 1st grade squad of 25 players to the RFL that equates to a 20 to 5 split homegrown to overseas trained. A goal he achieved in the years 2005 to 2009 inclusive but has now failed in 2010.



I note that Leeds are considering playing a full-time plumber, part-time RL player tonight when they will be facing a full-time Leeds RL player. Having a better squad to call on still needs a deft touch.

While the emphasis is on producing more homegrown players (and that number increases year on year 2008 to 2011) to accomodate that you have to either allow an increase in the size of the 1st grade squads or reduce the numbers of overseas trained.

news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 330843.stm
news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 354933.stm



Gene appealed against his classification as 'non fed trained' under the new quota system and won.



Then you would be comparing results rather than comparing the strength of the relative Leeds squads. Those results, as you accept, are also effected by several measures beyond Leeds' control.



The 1st grade squad is basically 1 to 25. It is IMO stronger this season (on paper) than the squad available to coach McClennan last season. If you disagree you should get off the fence and say so.



Where did I deem last season as a failure? I said it was satisfactory.



Reliance was perhaps a poor choice but it's difficult to view a shift from five to seven (in actual numbers) as a reduction. Several years ago I can recall Gary Hetherington saying 'our target is to have a squad comprising 80% of players who have come through our system.' Given that clubs have to declare a 1st grade squad of 25 players to the RFL that equates to a 20 to 5 split homegrown to overseas trained. A goal he achieved in the years 2005 to 2009 inclusive but has now failed in 2010.



I note that Leeds are considering playing a full-time plumber, part-time RL player tonight when they will be facing a full-time Leeds RL player. Having a better squad to call on still needs a deft touch.

You should read the first report you've linked to. The reporter provides opinion but the direct quote from Nigel Wood emphasizes what the RFLs intention was - "There's been a long-standing objective to encourage the production of more British-qualified players".

He doesn't say it was there intention to reduce overseas players. A club could field a team with no players that it has produced itself and very few foreigners. This was all about getting clubs clubs to produce their own players. That was always the intention. Nigel Wood himself says it in the article you have linked to.

Thanks. I'll ask, yet again, was this through the courts? Was this the court case that took the RFL by surprise that you mentioned but now seem reluctant to expand upon?

Seven what? What do we have seven of? We don't have seven players who count on the quota. BTW, what if Scott DOnald or Ali Lauititi get England citizenship and declare themselves available to play for ENgland, like Maurie at Saints? What would your view be then. Are Saints exploiting this imaginary loophole with Naurie are you happy he doesn't count on a quota?

Our clubs benevolence to the game as a whole is probably to blame. Look at this round of fixtures. Retaining DOnald has allowed Quins to field BJB and Salford to field Gibson and Broughton. Add to that the game Young Bush got and three teams will have fielded 5 young English threequarters thanks to our club. Not to mention the other Leeds produced players knocking about the league. Yet you think we should be criticised. If Leeds had released Donald and kept the players I mentioned how many of those 5 young English lads would have got a game last night?

icon_smile.gif

Yes that decision really bit us on the backside.

Hetherington really doesn't know what he's doing. Maybe if we'd had BJB on our left wing we've got 70 eh?

Aside from the point I make above about the number of English lads playing because of us I would also suggest that BJB will have gained greater experience from his game at full back last night than he would being a passenger on our left wing as Bush was.

You should read the first report you've linked to. The reporter provides opinion but the direct quote from Nigel Wood emphasizes what the RFLs intention was - "There's been a long-standing objective to encourage the production of more British-qualified players".

He doesn't say it was there intention to reduce overseas players. A club could field a team with no players that it has produced itself and very few foreigners. This was all about getting clubs clubs to produce their own players. That was always the intention. Nigel Wood himself says it in the article you have linked to.

Thanks. I'll ask, yet again, was this through the courts? Was this the court case that took the RFL by surprise that you mentioned but now seem reluctant to expand upon?

Seven what? What do we have seven of? We don't have seven players who count on the quota. BTW, what if Scott DOnald or Ali Lauititi get England citizenship and declare themselves available to play for ENgland, like Maurie at Saints? What would your view be then. Are Saints exploiting this imaginary loophole with Naurie are you happy he doesn't count on a quota?

Our clubs benevolence to the game as a whole is probably to blame. Look at this round of fixtures. Retaining DOnald has allowed Quins to field BJB and Salford to field Gibson and Broughton. Add to that the game Young Bush got and three teams will have fielded 5 young English threequarters thanks to our club. Not to mention the other Leeds produced players knocking about the league. Yet you think we should be criticised. If Leeds had released Donald and kept the players I mentioned how many of those 5 young English lads would have got a game last night?

icon_smile.gif

Yes that decision really bit us on the backside.

Hetherington really doesn't know what he's doing. Maybe if we'd had BJB on our left wing we've got 70 eh?

Aside from the point I make above about the number of English lads playing because of us I would also suggest that BJB will have gained greater experience from his game at full back last night than he would being a passenger on our left wing as Bush was.

I agree that the RFL wished to see an increase in homegrown players. Given that there was no accompanying increase in squad sizes permissable under the salary cap regulations, that could only be achieved with a reduction in the numbers of overseas trained. The two measures go hand in hand and are clearly linked, as one increases the other decreases in years 2008 to 2011.

www.superleague.co.uk/page.php?id=346

In season 2009 and 2010 the decrease in the overseas trained quota is double the increase in the homegrown quota.

I look forward to the day when all the overseas trained that were present in SL in 2007 (and awarded exemptions after Gene challenge his classification as non fed trained) have retired/returned down under and Hetherington returns to hitting rather than missing his target.

Hetherington has a long history of promoting young British players and calling for reductions in the number of overseas trained throughout the game. That message doesn't need weakening by his own actions.

I agree that the RFL wished to see an increase in homegrown players. Given that there was no accompanying increase in squad sizes permissable under the salary cap regulations, that could only be achieved with a reduction in the numbers of overseas trained. The two measures go hand in hand and are clearly linked, as one increases the other decreases in years 2008 to 2011.

www.superleague.co.uk/page.php?id=346

In season 2009 and 2010 the decrease in the overseas trained quota is double the increase in the homegrown quota.

I look forward to the day when all the overseas trained that were present in SL in 2007 (and awarded exemptions after Gene challenge his classification as non fed trained) have retired/returned down under and Hetherington returns to hitting rather than missing his target.

Hetherington has a long history of promoting young British players and calling for reductions in the number of overseas trained throughout the game. That message doesn't need weakening by his own actions.

How on earth do you expect me to respond to that?

There isn't q single quote in your post.

Appalling.

Here's a thought for you TVOC. How healthy did it make our game the last time we went the whole hog and banned overseas players?

How on earth do you expect me to respond to that?

There isn't q single quote in your post.

Appalling.

Here's a thought for you TVOC. How healthy did it make our game the last time we went the whole hog and banned overseas players?

Just to muddy who is and isn't exempt read John Kear's comment here news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 368351.stm



Wakefield are getting to grips with the year on year RFL reductions (they are up to 16 players in their 25 man squad (as far as I can see) using the BBC's English born and bred yardstick.

Just to muddy who is and isn't exempt read John Kear's comment here news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 368351.stm



Wakefield are getting to grips with the year on year RFL reductions (they are up to 16 players in their 25 man squad (as far as I can see) using the BBC's English born and bred yardstick.