Tim Smith is not exempt according to the rules.

The only thing I can think if is that Rangi Chase must be. After all, surely if you represent a country you should be allowed to play in it without restriction of its own governing body?!

Tbh, I doubt Koucash has any interest in things like quotas. He's pretty much made it clear that he's going to circumvent the salary cap.

And IMO I think that challenging the quota rules is a good thing. There's very little real quality players in SL and the introduction of additional teams at the same time the number of available players was reduced was a ridiculous idea on the RFLs part

Another idiot I see.

Koukash quite clearly stated on Thursday during our announcement that Salford have and will continue to respect the salary cap.

Some fans just can't bear to see anothe club enjoy some good times

Good luck Salford, I hope you can put the Red Devils on the sporting map

Quote ="nottinghamtiger"According to the RFL teams may only register 5 non-federation trained players (www.therfl.co.uk/news/article/20745): [i"A ‘Non Federation Trained’ player is one who was not playing for a club within the Rugby League European Federation between age 16-21. Clubs are limited to five ‘Non Federation Trained’ players only."[/i McGoldrick and Meli are exempt as they were playing in Super League before these rules came into force. McPherson is exempt next year as an ex-Crusaders player (although he never played for them he did sign a contract to!) However, Salford have signed. 1. Tim Smith 2. Junior Sau 3. Tony Pulatua 4. Steve Rapira 5. Jake Mullaney 6. Rangi Chase Surely they cannot register all these players? Or am I missing something?'" McPherson isn't exempt as a ex crusaders player. That exemption only applied for duration of first contract signed after crusaders, not for rest of their careers.

Quote ="nottinghamtiger"According to the RFL teams may only register 5 non-federation trained players (www.therfl.co.uk/news/article/20745): [i"A ‘Non Federation Trained’ player is one who was not playing for a club within the Rugby League European Federation between age 16-21. Clubs are limited to five ‘Non Federation Trained’ players only."[/i McGoldrick and Meli are exempt as they were playing in Super League before these rules came into force. McPherson is exempt next year as an ex-Crusaders player (although he never played for them he did sign a contract to!) However, Salford have signed. 1. Tim Smith 2. Junior Sau 3. Tony Pulatua 4. Steve Rapira 5. Jake Mullaney 6. Rangi Chase Surely they cannot register all these players? Or am I missing something?'" McPherson isn't exempt as a ex crusaders player. That exemption only applied for duration of first contract signed after crusaders, not for rest of their careers.

This.

Nobby has the ability to whip them all into a decent shape, too, and while a whole new squad may struggle in the first half of next season, while they all get used to each others' game, I reckon at the business end of 2014 Salford may be a thorn in people's sides, and the next 2 or 3 seasons could get quite interesting.

Also it's refreshing to keep reading positive stories about RL, instead of the negatives of which we've had no shortage and will no doubt get more.

Not sure that any exemptions and representing a country are connected to be honest. If he gets a British Passport and takes nationality, then as an EU citizen he would be exempt from the overseas quota, but he still wouldn't be fed trained, so it makes little practical difference. Surely this would all be sorted by the RFL when the registration is made anyway or am I in dreamland here?

Love how everyone seems to be grasping at straws in the hope that Salford will not succeed.

Keep it going people... it's fantastically entertaining.

What's the point if having an overseas's quota then? Because even if a player becomes exempt the non fed rule still restricts them?

Although there will be some with that view, I personally don't want Salford to fail.
The more financially stable clubs in SL there are in SL, the stronger the competition will be in my opinion. My issue is not the money they are spending, nor the players they are signing.
I was critical of Hull KR's "manipulation" of the quota and non-fed rules in the past, and would be saying the same if ANY club had signed more non-fed players than they are allowed to register. On this occasion it's Salford, but my opinion would be the same whoever it was.
This is not the place to go into detail (again) on the Visa issues. The issues can be read on other threads and we will just have to wait for the UKBA to make their decision (it has not been confirmed yet that Chase has been granted a Visa).

It's about the rules of the game. Will Salford mind if Saints field 24 players next year against their 13??

If you moan we'll just say you don't want us to succeed.

It's about every team playing by the same rules. If every team can have 6 non-fed players then you may have faced more competition for those you signed.

If they have them fair and square then i'm happy with that, but it does sound like no-body is 100% on which of the 6 are exempt from the 5 player limit.

Surely the no-fed rule was brought in due to clubs finding a way round the quote via dual-passports etc?

Ok then why can't we just have the non fed rule why quote the over sea's quota rules aswel?

I've no idea mate I was just pointing out why I think the non-fed rule was brought in.

They kept the quota rules as at the time there was a huge number of clubs with a large number of overseas players.If they had restricted to 5 players, or tried to reduce it over time some clubs simply could not have coped. So they took all overseas players currently playing and said you are exempt.

The idea was to make it a manageable transition to each club only having 5. It's actually a rule that has been successful.

It's allowed more of a transition from Championship clubs to SL and from SL to the NRL.

At Saints we are down to 6 overseas players as Manu is pre-2008.

The question is simply, which of the Salford 6 fits into this rule. I still reckon it's smith and that the rules allow for a player to leave and rejoin the competition.

Although someone more in tune with the in's and out's will know better than me.

Even if the rule allows for a player to leave and rejoin the competition, Smith signed for Wigan after the rules came into force. He wasn't exempt at Wigan, he wasn't exempt at Wakefield. He therefore shouldn't be exempt at Salford.

The rule does apply to players leaving and coming back to this country. At Fc Aaron Heremaia is exempt having played in the lower leagues over here before returning to NZ.

Next season is the 3rd of a 3 year contract for McPherson so for the next twelve months he is still in his first contact.

The RFL register each player so theyd of noticed if there was a problem, I still think Smith would be Exempt as he played over half the 2008 season, Salford would of checked in the First place before signing Smith.

Could someone please explain the reason McPhearson is exempt? Just trying to figure something out.

I' m sure Salford have checked with the RFL that they can register the six players in question.
It would be better for everyone on this thread, and RL fans in general, if the RFL specified which players are classed as 'Non-Fed' and who has been classified as exempt.
Without wishing to pre-empt Notts Tiger's next thread, we have signed 11 players who are not club trained ( Walton is) and we are only allowed 17 out of the top 25 earners.
Don't know if Jordan Davies might get some sort of 'club trained' equivalence as a Union convert. But it would help everyone if the RFL made it clear which players are exempt from the published rules.

But the RFL don't know who Salford are going to sign and the players won't have been registered yet!
Nothing would surprise me - Remember Hull KR having to de-register Dobson when he was injured so Willie Mason could play?

I hadn't even thought about that! So how many players contracted for next year are not club trained? If it's more than 17 the club has a problem.

I'd guess McPherson, Gleeson, Griffin, Dixon, Ashurst, Emitt. That's six in itself.
Add Davies to that, possibly on some sort of exemption.
Don't know about Wiliams, Wilde, McGoldrick.

There is still talk of further signings, which would compllicate things even further. Although there are some Salford 'club trained' players knocking around at other clubs.

Salford Red Devils are a new club though arnt they? I mean a completely different company? So wouldn't the slate be whiped clean? I mean how does it work for London fulbronquins?