Quote ="blackpoolwigan"Certainly makes things interesting, and it means returning players from NRL/RU would almost always be better off at their original club.'"
It'll be interesting to see if we see a SnapBack as it were with a few players "returning home" - fortunately the 100k minimum should stop mass exodus'
For saints, eastmond was rumoured after his falling out with bath, and looked like the first "win" for the rule, but he's since re-signed. For us at least, all eyes are on James Graham. Only time will tell if this rule actually makes us competitive for signatures (which could pave the way for a more general marquee ruling imo)
Personally, I think club trained needs better definition. I think the likes of Scott Taylor and Alex walmsley, who don't qualify as club trained, have had significant input from their respective clubs, but won't be able to benefit, should they continue on to become the superstars they're currently showing the potential for. I also think that with international appearances, the salary cap value should drop (75k limit for a player whose played for England knights, 50k for a full England appearance for example)
I have tried speaking the rfl to get clarification (I can almost smell the anorak!) so I'll see what kind of response I get about the new rule. It was quietly announced, and I think the structure debates, followed by the marquee rule debate (which was in the document that this rule was taken from, before koukash mentioned it interestingly) have taken distraction from any deeper analysis of the other rules being introduced.
