I thought everyone was upset about British players not been having opportunities in the game? Why would we want three more overseas?

I'm sure some argument could be made for un-equal opportunities.

Me too. Something or someone (you'd have thought the RFL) must have led the club to believe that Lauaki and Moa are non fed trained, though. Lauaki got a Tongan passport too, there was a delay with the whole speaking English test that it entails. Would be interesting to see a list of all the players at all clubs split into homegrown, British, Quota, Exempt (pre 200icon_cool.gif, etc.

You're right but I think people are making the point that it costs a lot of money and takes a lot of time to invest in youth whereae it is a lot cheaper to import players who play at a higher skill/fitness-level: not world-beaters but better than a 17 year old. So why bother if it doesn't count for anything in the domestic league? Why not just bring 'em all over and don't worry about youth?

Because that's what our CEO agreed to in 2007.

We've done more than many clubs on the homegrown side of things, and also paid fees for Tansey and Westerman thinking it would secure us advantage in the long term tying down young British talent. We probably paid over the odds for Tickle with this as a factor as well. In hindsight we may as well not have bothered to the same extent that we did as it won't give us the expected advantage.

Can any Hull FC fan on here say that they would be up in arms over this if at your club you had 5 quota players, and say 2 who were classed as federation due to their passports and like rovers, everything is within the understanding of the RFL?

Would you be protesting the case then? Serious question, not an enticing one.

Yes.

Next question.

I was embarrassed when we got Berrigan off the quota and I'm glad we don't have to suffer the ignominy of fielding him now he's returned to Oz.

We've got five overseas players and three may not count on the quota.

Tbh that was so berro (and willie) could be a resident here so I have no problem with that.

It's if we replace their spots with other quota players.

7 upward is a complete micky take. We had 6 last season which was borderline IMO. I think 10 is nothing short of farcical and quite frankly embarassing and should rightly taint any victories that go your way.

Can any Hull KR fan on here say that they wouldn't be up in arms over this if at our club we had 5 quota players and say 2 who were classed as federation due to their passports??

Oh and P.S. It's 8 overseas players as i count them with 'special dispensation' and overseas, plus another one to come!!

If it went against the spirit of a previous agreement amongst participating clubs then I would not be happy if we did it. After all it's not really the understanding of the RFL that counts if the other 11 members of the agreement don't understand it.

Such an agreement is entirely reliant on none of the participants welching on the gentlemans' agreement isn't it ? When it also runs roughshod over investment decisions made by other parties, such as spending money on youth development, it is even more disingenuous.

[uIF[/u a previous agreement has been rail roaded then it's not something to be celebrated IMO.

And paying fees to secure young British players.

An amusing aside in the RL Express this week.

Hudgell admits that the uncertainty over Mason's eventual arrival has given the Robins some problems.
"It has impacted on season ticket and merchandise sales" =#0040FFReally, how so? Rovers official website has sales up on last year.


"[uA lot of people were very aware of the non-appearance of Michael Crocker for Hull a couple of years ago. [/uBut when Willie does arrive we expect sales to pick up very quickly"
The underlined bit is entirely irrelevant to the other points, but just a dig. No mention of Eastwood, Carney and Bird who were impacted in the same way. What a tool.

Not just the fans that are obsessed!

Indeed says it all really.

In any case I'm sure we beat our own record sales that year regardless of that setback

You can't do that due to european law unfortunatly.

Yes. This could knock our International game back years but this coming from the RFL , It's not that surprising

This is a great idea my only worry is that it could be classed as still causing a restriction on free trade through the back door.

Not if all the sl clubs agree to the rules.

And every body sticks to it.

Indeed and you wont find me argueing against you over that.
BUT lets be honest here although it is rather embarrasing and cringeworthy (My head was in my hands when i saw Huge and the RFL confirm it) can you honestly say no-one else would have tried it?
With a little luck the exchange rate will save the RFL the headache anyway in the short term.

Didn't Millward try to put this idea to the RFL a couple of years ago while he was at Saints ?.

If it is agreed upon and signed by all clubs then there is no problem.

Therein lies the problem; hasn't one agreement already been flagrantly breached?