Yep, we're back to pre-2008 rules if the rule is applied consistently.

See Wakefield sending Cas down with 15 overseas players in their 17. Rovers must have had some high numbers during the 2007 fight against relegation too - I shall check...

Don't know whether to laugh or cry. Just keep smiling, eh?

Seem to remember a certain side fielding a team full of Aussies after merging......kettle ,pot ,black ???

When you put it like that it's scary.

Indeed.
Not that I mind too much - but for people who believed in this (in the same way I believe in the flat salary cap, while accepting a few dodges as a fact of life), this must be a major shock. It's just gone, overnight. And the RFL seem cool with it.

Most overseas players HKR put out in a 17 in 2007 was 12, in consecutive games against Hull and Wigan, at the back end of the season.

As someone who's spent fortunes following GB/England around the world, this makes me exceedingly angry.

If you believed that the non-fed quota was going to contribute significantly to a more competitive England team, you're right to angry. I always doubted it - looks like we'll never know now. Can't believe that such high profile policy, whatever its merits, has been binned so casually.

What restriction?

The right to seek work does not imply the right to be employed.

But if every club is up to quota on "overseas players" then another "overseas player" would not be allowed to be employed whereas a "non-overseas player" could still be employed.



I agree with Bullseye on this, the clubs (all of them) have to take more responsibility and stick to the spirit of the rules with overseas players. The RFL are never going to be able to put together a rule that comprehensively restricts overseas players without it being potentially subject to legal action, so the clubs have to be a lot more responsible than they currently are being.

Do you remember our play-off game in 2007 v Wigan? 16 out of 17 British, and 11 homegrown. Will you be in a position to do the same in a couple of years?

Could we somehow link Sky payments to non-GB eligible players - every time a non-GB eligible player is fielded, a small amount is deducted from the "maximum" payment?

Would soon add up for some teams.

Absolutely. I was hoping he'd bring Hansen into it. He even represented England at academy level in the past, was born and raised here, and has spent his entire rugby career with Wigan.

So there's only 6 players who Wigan have got who are really quota, still 1 too many but not as bad some. I think it also helps that the standard of those 6 is pretty good, the only one i'm not sure of is Finch but that's because i haven't seen a huge amount of him.

Just before Hudgell signed up to this in summer 2007, reported in The Independent:
"Super League clubs have agreed to wean themselves off their dependence on overseas signings. Several sides regularly field up to 12 overseas players, taking advantage of the Kolpak ruling, grandparentage and European passports but now the Rugby Football League are to act to close the loopholes.

From next year, at least five members of a first-team squad of 25 must contain players who have either graduated from a club's academy system or are aged under 21. This will increase by one player each year until 2011, when a squad must have at least eight homegrown players. During the same period, the number of overseas players must be reduced from 10 to five.

Nigel Wood, the RFL's chief operating officer, said: "This new rule fulfils a long-standing objective to encourage clubs to develop young talented players. By giving them greater opportunity at the top level, it is likely to improve standards not only on a national level but also internationally. Over time, the number of home-born players in a squad will increase whilst the number of players who are not academy, Super League or National League club-trained will be reduced."

The 12 club chief executives passed the proposal at their two-day summit in Perpignan."

What a load of bollox.

I wouldn't expect an answer to that one, Mrs B.

Me then. How many of the 17 against us in south wales in feb will be home grown .........................after answer I will say does this mean you have gone backwards

At least 7. You only need to name 8. Last season you had Spaven, I'Anson, Mariano, one of the Latus brothers and Ratu (as an under 21 I think) in yours. That went well.

Yep I think there has to be some immediate, short term penalty to clubs for fielding overseas players since they obviously don't care about the long term damage to the sport. Maybe make overseas players count 20% more on the salary cap? So an overseas player paid £100k would actually take up £120k of space? Only an idea.

Interesting that the RFL's position is diametrically opposed to yours. Short term relaxation of the rules as part of a long term strategy to improve the game.

What, like this articulation of the long-term strategy agreed by all chairmen in 2007?
Nigel Wood, the RFL's chief operating officer, said: "This new rule fulfils a long-standing objective to encourage clubs to develop young talented players. By giving them greater opportunity at the top level, it is likely to improve standards not only on a national level but also internationally. [uOver time, the number of home-born players in a squad will increase whilst the number of players who are not academy, Super League or National League club-trained will be reduced[/u."

How sincerely do you think clubs are embracing this commitment, nearly 4 years on and with "relaxation" of the rules now so extreme that you can have 17 non British players in a squad?

Yep, I think people could accept the players from 2008 being exempt, since we would eventually see a steady decrease down to the "proper" quota levels. However if you can now import "non-overseas" players then it makes a bit of a mockery of the quota rules. In the end the clubs have to decide if they want a strong sport in 20 years time or not.

Its similar to something i proposed previously. With a reformatting of SC we could allow teams to employ a boat load of overseas players to cover up for their failure in youth development and talent scouting in this country as Hull KR would be, but we make sure those players are a bit rubbish and you financially lose out. Making it pretty unappealing.

Cut the sky payment in half to £600k, pay back £25k for every British trained player who plays 20 games for you in the next season, and a further £20k for every player who you give a debut to and makes 10 appearances in that season. If you play 20 british trained players with 20 games, you earn £500k, have 3 who make their debuts and play 10 games and you earn another £60k

You then get paid another £20k for every player who plays for England in that season who you gave an SL debut to regardless of who they are now playing for.

Then it would be in a chairmans best interest to scout, train and play british players, and we would hopefully see fewer selfish, short-termist actions like we are from Hull KR.

Who if they wanted to field 10 overseas players to cover up for their crap scouting and that they ignored youth development for a long time, they can, a rejigged SC would mean they were crap players brought over, and then it would be immediately costing them at least £125k (likely more) to do so.

Sounds like a good idea. Have you suggested it to the RFL?

I still think Wigan have too many, and hope that will change soon. And even with this Wigan still provide 5 players to England, how many do Hull KR provide??? However how a Rovers fan can even begin to compare overseas players is quite funny.

7 tut tut,another VR thread crawling with FC fans whinging because we are improving our squad.Never mind