Simple - but illegal. Fed/non-fed is the only way in which the RFL can put a de facto quota on antipodeans with EU passports or 'Kolpaks'. They need that legal fig-leaf.

The market is going to change when the NRL gets its new TV deal most people seem to believe. Incentives are often more powerful than rules. More players who are now in the Championship, or would be released into it from SL academies, will then get a shot at SL. More British SL players will be attracted to the NRL. SL will be a bit weaker, England might be a bit better if enough go down under.

Still think it should be where you first played as a professional, the 'outside' the UK criteria could stop players playing here because their parents were abroad serving in the forces or working for a company abroad. It would be a bit unfair to prevent a lad being classed as a British player at 18 because his dad was working in Abu Dhabi at the time of his birth, he may have been living in the UK for 17 of those years and never been to another RL playing country.

I presumed he was referring to Ben Galea.

Is it? In what way? How can having a strong national team be bad for rugby league?


Of course. But across the country not just across the M62. Why should people in the south choose to play RL instead of cricket, football, union, tennis etc especially when they're never exposed to it in it's elite form except for occasionally seeing a bit about the Cup Final and when England lose to Australia again.



Why?


Except it doesn't have popularity. It's popular in Hull, Leeds and Wigan and a few small towns. It exists, thats about all you can say for League.


In what way? I assume you know of untapped sources of funding for this marketing that you yearn for? The RFL do regular emails, mail shots, billboards and have even advertised on TV, something which, IIRC, no other major sporting governing body has done before.

if a flat earther had wrote that i would expect him to ripped to pieces by at least a dozen people who post on the board,you included.

While it is off topic, I cannot agree with the endorsement on the health of the Premier League

As with all markets, Association Football goes through periods of boom and recession – they have been in the former for the past decade or two. The problem they have is that some clubs (Man City, Chelsea etc) are immune to commercial pressures due to their financial backers and others are striving to keep up and racking up mountains of debt in the process (I am sure that nearly all of them would vote for a salary cap!)

The assumption that the Premier League is a commodity that will always be over consumed was put seriously in doubt over the last 7 days with thousands of seats empty at Anfield and many empty at Stamford Bridge (I won’t even start on the DW)

I believe that the next few years will see the commercial house of cards that is professional football in the UK come crashing down and several clubs (including Premiership ones) going to the wall

Why? Have I suggested it should stay that way? Is rugby league popular outside of those areas?

You may well be right, or will more wealthy backers simply come in and prop up those clubs. The Man City's & Chelsea's are only the same as Hull KR, Quins etc who rely on wealthy benefactors to prop up that club whilst running large losses. If they had to break even then the likes of KR, Quins etc would have to drastically reduce spending.

Either way, to compare Super League to the Premier League in the context of needing a strong national team was still a bit stupid.

it becomes an m62 game again.

Only if you misunderstand what they are saying, Nobody has said there wouldn't be a tv contract without a presence down south, they've said the contract would be smaller. I think that's pretty well established that without Quins the Sky TV contract would be smaller that it currently is. However, that doesn't mean the sport is popular down south. It quite obviously is dwarfed by football and union.

How is it a contradiction to say that the game is "popular" in Leeds, Wigan and Hull plus a few small towns but the sport is growing down south? Still small, but growing.

it mght be dwarfed by those two sports and it might still be a growing sport,but it must still be popular.
theres a 30 year old club with a SLE licence,theres a semi pro club, RL is in all the schools,1000s play at amateur level, the sky tv deal is dependent on it.
how can it not be popular?.

You may be correct.

According to [url=http://www.thisishullandeastriding.co.uk/sport/HULL-KR-RFL-happy-Mason-quota/article-3060965-detail/article.html[uthis[/u[/url Mason is Federation trained. So when Ben Galea finally comes off quota with his Maltese passport Rovers, amazingly, will still have an overseas place available, so 11 foreign players is deffo still on the cards.

So have we gone full circle with the Kolpak (type) loopholes that the Non-fed rules were supposed to close if we're saying people who clearly are non-fed trained now can be classed as Fed trained?

If this is true the the floodgate may open for more South Sea islanders to come acroos and anybody with an EU passport will also become fed trained.

Correct. Hull FC now have only 2 quota players Fitzgibbon and O'Meley having foolishly adopted the spirit of the agreement in 2007 to close loopholes and counted Moa and Lauaki as quota players. Clubs that embraced the spirit of the agreement and who have taken the longer term view of academy development and increasing proportions of British players are being actively disadvantaged now. Let's hope the retention of Ben Galea on a one year extension is worth the further damage to the game's reputation and the undermining of good work by some clubs to actually try and achieve the stated quota ambitions all clubs agreed on (including Hull KR) nearly 4 years ago.

What a joke another victory for Hull KR against the qutoa system. Honestly, everyone knew their owner was slimey due to the business he is in but the fact is he doesn't give a stuff about the external Rugby League environment.

Question, now the non-fed, fed issue is blown out of the water how are we ever going to reduce the amount of overseas players in the game?

I think you'll find he actually gives more of a stuff about his club than he does the backwards setup that is the RFL. Who can blame him for exploiting any possible rules he can to bring the best players possible to his club? James Rule and Hetherington are only interested in ££$$££ and therefore wouldn't ever dream of having a) a full salary cap and b) more than 1 big money signing.

Are you for real?

Can you answer me a) What % of the cap Hull operate at each year?
b) Whether Long, Fitzgibbon and O'Meley are 'big money signings'?
c) Whether you think it's right that Hull KR could potentially field 11 non-english players next year?

The RFL's efforts to lower the numbers of overseas players have obviously failed in the face of so many loopholes in the law.

Clubs will continue to exploit those loopholes as bringing in a full developed player from overseas is cheaper in the long run than developing home grown players.

As a result the England side will continue to founder internationally and and the game as a whole struggle to attract attention outside its heartlands. That will lead to it attracting less money in sponsorship and so be able to invest less in development, leading the game to struggle in comparison with its competitors.

The issue of overseas players is only one of a number of things that holds RL back. In the end it all comes down to money and clubs not having enough of it.

The only way out of this downward spiral is to spread the game and get more people involved from non RL areas. Unfortunately not all clubs have the money or the inclination to do this.

a) i) Can you? and b) ii) Considering berrigan is now off the cap, and radford and dowes both took pay cuts I doubt that westerman and sharp (



) will take up all that space.

b) I would only shout about O'Meley been a big money signing if I was you, Long and Fitzgibbon (more so Long) have seen better days haven't they.

c) I think its wrong that the RFL want to in one breath push to build the English game, yet then allow tongan players to count as federation trained. Hull KR are doing what any club can do, if it was your club you wouldn't mind, Wigan have 8 players who aren't english too don't forget. And the day the RFL gave up caring about English rugby was the day they allowed Catalans into the comp who for the record have far more non english players than us

a) So you're basing the comment 'Rule would never dream of operating at full cap' on a season of recruitment that probably isn't finished yet?



b) And O'Meley hasn't? In fact Fitzgibbon played more minutes than O'Meley last year and was probably more effective. Are you suggesting only players who haven't seen better days are big money signings?

c)

. When the RFL brought in Catalans they showed they cared about expanded the game as a whole, it's not just about English Rugby League it's about trying to knock off the tag of an M62 corridor sport.

Who's the 8th? I only count 7 (and that includes Leuluai who is fed trained without any loopholes)

Lima
Hoffman
Carmont
Roberts
Richards
Finch

Not getting into a tit for tat argument with you.

But I feel you have shown you are clearly hypocrite when you on one hand say Rovers are not doing the English game any good by having 10 aussies, yet then you say regarding Catalans it is not just about Engllish Rugby?

End of the day, Mason is on his way, deal with it.

It's because you know you are wrong. Rugby League in France needs expanding, It does the Aussies no good for their has been (Vella, Fitzgibbon) or have never been (Fisher, Lovegrove) players to come ply their trade over here.

Nobody has a problem with Mason coming over. People are questioning the apparent new loophole that is being used to classify him as Federation Trained when he clearly isn't, and the wider implications for the sport.

Stop being so chippy FFS.