Oh, and credit to the Crusaders fans who travelled, but I have to say I think "Cru cru Crusaders..." has taken over "Wigan Wigan" as the most annoying chant ever.

Hmmm....I don't think that had any effect on our payment for finishing runners up.....so it's a pointless point.....if not one fan had turned up, the record books show us as getting spanked by leeds and finishing as runners up.
as for new teams to SL needing overseas players, I agree...it's good to have a balance of overseas players and british talent.....just like we did a couple of years into our existance in SL when we went to wembley....HKA been there recently

Never mind.....maybe this year eh.
...OH, well done for sneaking into the top 8

Of course the more accurate indicator would be the corresponding fixture from the previous season, but if those figures don't match your agenda, well, you just have to be more creative.

Why is it then ok for football teams to field a full side with only ONE Englishman in it (if you're lucky), the national football side isn't any good and hasn't been for around half a centuary so why do the powers that be in that sport not feel the need to only allow 5 overseas stars?

What it should be about is having the best possible product on the pitch and I do not honestly see an Englishman ready to replace any one of our 10.

good point...unfortunately, the people who run the game have made the rules as they are and the clubs, including yours agreed to abide by them......just it's taking some others longer than others to wean themselves off the overseas players.

Surely then you are saying we have BROKEN the rules? If that is so then why are the RFL happy to let it go on?

The RFL have not stopped anyone else doing what we have done because it is within the rules. "the people who run the game have made the rules as they are and the clubs, including yours agreed to abide by them" so by that statement is it your club not using the rules to it's advantage or Rovers fault for being smarter?

Don't get me wrong with 10 overseas players I would have expected us to be a bit more of a complete package and Castleford are really showing you don't need that many overseas players to compete at a mid table standard (yes I know they are top but don't see it lasting, sorry Cas just my opinion). I would like to think when all our players are fit we are capable of troubling the top 5 and being in the mix for the CC and a GF appearance however this is a rough tough sport so cant expect to go a full season injury free.

Never said that? ...........you aren't breaking any rules.....but you are leaving yourselves open to a bit of banter......


I too applaud castleford...and my own club for that matter and Hudds.....all doing pretty well with teams full of british talent.......5 games into the season.....nearly 20% gone.........bet hey, you're in the 8 so it's not all bad

Why are we open to banter if no rules are being broken or even bent for that matter? The club would never have done what they did if the RFL hadn't have already given assurances that we could re-register Dobson as long as we didnt break any rules in doing so. I do not see why HKR should be given a hard time by anyone for any of this, if the rules need changing or making the current ones stricter then so be it but while these are the rules imposed by our governing body why shouldn't any club be allowed to use the full extent of them?

As the RFL have also pointed out, ALL clubs have at some stage been given dispensation so HKR are no different to anyone else it is just because it is in the lime light with who the signing is and who's been deregistered to allow him to come in.

come on you have to admit your club are taking this dispenation a bit further than other clubs.

Did Catalans not do it to bring in Dobson?

Did the Crusaders, Harlequins and Catalans not recieve massive dispensation on overseas players?

Did Hull FC not get off lightly when fielding an ineligable player because the rules were not stringent enough?

It is NOT ROVERS that are giving the dispensation, the RFL only had to say no and it wouldn't have happened but if you do not as you do not get! Why should anyone at Rovers feel bad about a decision made by the powers that run our game?

The fact is with Dobson and Mason playing the sport is a lot more attractive and surely that is what everyone should want? As said it would be great to have a team full of home grown talent but for the clubs view on this watch our chairman on Hull KR TV who openly admits he thinks it is disapointing and would like that area of the club to grow faster than it is and doesn't see us producing a conveyor belt of talent for around another 5 years. This is a shame but Cas, Quins, Hudds, Leeds, Wigan...etc did not start their youth machines overnight, it took time and to be honest it wasn't long ago we didnt even have a youth team.

What dispensation has been given so far to KR? As far as I can see, they've deregistered a player who was on quota, to allow anther quota player in. Any dispensation must surely only occur when they look to re-register the first player?

Think it's more that the RFL have already given Rovers permission to re-register him.

Also some have problems with Lovegrove being given dispensation even though he could just as easily have an English passport and I'd like to see the RFL argue a case at a tribunal refusing an English citizen the right to work!

pathetic isnt it, dispensation after dispensation.

Why not just a give British players a shot

Not strictly correct. Rovers have been told that they [iwill[/i be given permission. Pedantic I know, but with the RFL it always pays to look at exactly what's been said as they generally leave themselves wriggle room in case circumstances change.

Because that won't bring success in the time-scale that their fans crave and their board has promised to deliver.

Poor show if true. Don't Rovers have to apply for the re-registration? How can they approve something that hasn't been applied for (on the basis that they don't know when it will be). And as I've said before, if the RFL board has to approve the re-registration, doesn't the RFL "decision" put the board in a bit of a corner, if they find a reason not to re-register. Rovers could perhaps claim that they'd been given the OK only to have it turned round. Not very fair to them.

Looks more and more like the RFL are sitting round on their elbows....

But the RFL representative on Humberside stated that the board would only not approve the re-registration if Rovers had quota issues, possible money and salary cap issues. We have none of the above and Dobson will be re-registered without an issue.

Then they need to re-word the section of the Operational Rules that covers re-registration of overseas players. That rule clearly indicates that the default position is to NOT allow re-registration, whereas the actual position appears to be to allow it except in exceptional circumstances.

Check out Hull KR TV for that answer. Our chairman clearly states he is not happy that we are not producing players quick enough but it should within the next 5yrs.

We've had ONE dispensation that I can recall, hardly time after time is it?

The whole league has had it at some point and most of the time it is for the good of the domestic game.

One thing is for sure Liam Watts has probably learnt more this week in training with Willie Mason than he ever did at Castleford alongside other juniors.

I am sure you have watched the tries but look at how motivated the Rovers team was, how excited they were when they got the offloads from Mason, even when they showed Mason coming onto the pitch he was so pumped up getting Scotty Murrell going and others. The guy is good for the game no matter what nationality he is.

You have a point I suppose, maybe you should also look at other instances such as Hall been let go and Phelps being brought in, both can play full back, wing and centre,, or is it just 'pathetic' when its Hull KR in your eyes.

If I were to list the clubs in SL that have employed foreign players instead of giving British lads a go it would save keyboard time by saying 'all of them'. Your hatred for everything and anything Hull KR is duly noted.

No they can't, as you'll soon find out if you play Hall anywhere but centre.

Plus Phelps didn't replace Hall. He replaced Tansey, who we sacked for persistent misconduct.

All in all a pretty crap argument.

No it isn't, you have let go a British player and brought in an Aussie who will fill the positions Hall used to play for you, where the hell is the difference, the poster was complaining that Rovers brought in an Aussie rather than a British player, all clubs have done it Hull included.

Dispensation to cover up this fact isnt going to help is it?
Lovegrove and Mason/Dobson is two.


really? do you have any details of this? What dispensation on the quota have Leeds or Saints had? Bradford?
He also learns more actually playing first team games than training with Mason. The same for all juniors.


In isolation certainly. Nobody has complained at Mason being signed but its having Mason, Dobson, Green, Clinton, Newton, Lovegrove, Fisher, Webster, Galea and Vella which is the issue. Its having more overseas players in the first 17 than british players. Its using loopholes and requiring dispensation to squeeze another in which is the problem.

Phelps has come in as a direct replacement for Tansey, as Kosh said. He played yesterday (Phelps, not Kosh), at full back. Tansey, when not suspended or pi$$ed up, was a full back. Unless you have access to Agar's intentions and game plans (

), I think it [uis[/u a pretty crap argument to say Phelps replaced Hall.

the difference is scale. You are bringing in more overseas players and denying more british players a chance.