I don't think it would directly raise the quality of the national team all that much (I think it probably would a bit if that team was composed of better players), but I'd like to have a situation where we had produced 30 or 40 players who were good enough that the NRL clubs were clamouring for their signatures.

G1 with his legal head on will probably be able to confirm, but my understanding in that case was that the judge ruled it a restraint of trade, but not an illegal one as Harris had received consideration for agreeing to it (the right to early termination of his Leeds contract).

Spot on.

You've hit the nail on the head. A restrain of trade clause can be enforceable if there's some extra inducment to agree to it. Leeds agreeing to release Kallum early would fit the bill, IM(not so)HO

It didn't seem to have that effect on aussie standards when their player came to England in the past. Hopefully fewer run of the mill aussies will come over thus increasing the player pool of england qualified players.We shall see.

remember wembley 95 and the anti merger protests


mainly from the old pit villages , was never going to trouble us though was it............................

Back in the days of yore, we had the dominant league, we poached the top talent from Australia and they had to adapt, bring through more players, get clubs making money so they could hold onto their star players and drastically improved the coaching and playing standards. Admittedly, not over night but they did it.

Boots on the other foot now.............

I remember seeing a hand painted banner pinned to the gates at Post Office Road that read "Fev is Fev, Cas is Cas, you can stick your merger up your a*s"

and 10,000 Fev fans marched through the town to protest against any merger with Cas. Only 2000 of them turned up to the next match.

Wow that really impressive, according to the 2001 census Featherstone had a total population of 10,382. I wonder what the other 382 were doing that day.

Except that's not really how it worked.

Very few of Australia's top players ever actually relocated to the UK, and those that did tended to go back again after a few years to continue their careers down under.

When the UK still had a winter season, it was more common for Australian and Kiwi players to come over here on short term contracts during their off-season as a way to supplement their income.

I'm struggling to think of too many current internationals who upped sticks and came to play solely in the UK over the period I have been watching the game.

By the time we had Aussies and Kiwis coming over for short term deals our comp had already fallen behind the ARL.

Before then when the likes of Brian Bevan, Lionel Cooper, Pat Devery, Arthur Clues, Eric Harris, Jack Mclean were playing over here 40s, 50s, 60s we genuinely did have the best comp and the best players. These blokes were here long term.

The change that put the Aussies in front of us seemed to occur in the late 60s and early 70s.

The day's of yore that Swarcliffe was referring to was pre war and 40s and 50s.It was in the50s that the Aussie's brought in the ban on English clubs signing their player's.There were quite a few did make this country their home Arthur Clues for one

More RU that concept

Funnily enough the current situation where overseas players become too expensive and the remaining cheap foreign players being not good enough could be the catalyst that all clubs need to stop with the quick fixes and put proper resources into the junior systems.

There's never been a better opportunity to play first team rugby for a young British SL players.

I don't know why everyone's that bothered as he's only a poor man's Darrell Goulding according to my pal who's a Wigan fan.

Absolutely and no club is better placed to prosper under such circumstances than Leeds at present.

JP has written an article in which he names Watkins as a player who may be off to the NRL.

[urlhttp://loverugbyleague.com/blogpost_602-jamie-peacock-column:-time-for-super-league-to-take-action.html[/url

Some posters may be happy that Leeds will be well-placed to be the best side in an U-23s NRL feeder league, but the situation is very problematic for British RL as a whole.

Ignoring the Feeder league rhetorick why is "the suituation" problematic and what is the situation?

The (potential) situation is losing players like Tomkins and Watkins, and being told that it's not a big problem because we can invest in youth (which we should be doing anyway) and these players can take the spots with no difference in product.

If those players turn out to be as good as the players they're replacing, then they would also leave.

Without your best players, or with players you've invested in training (clubs) and supporting (fans) leaving, you have a competition less attractive to TV and sponsors, less able to compete financially, less able to offer salaries to ward off the NRL or RU, and vulnerable to a downward spiral.

I shouldn't have said that it's exactly "the situation" as of now, but it does have the potential to get that way.

But players will always leave and they always have. Calderwood left and Ryan Hall emerged. Harris left and Danny McGuire emerged. Chev Walker left and Kallum Watkins emerged.

The talent drain to union was massively overblown and didn't kill us. I think the drain to the NRL will be the same but, obviously, with the added benefit that these players will still be avaiable to our international game and, maybe even benefit it.

I don't see it as problematic yet. What would be problematic IMO is if the game over-reacted and, in the present climate, increased the salary cap to a level that irresponsible clubs can't afford. Another Bulls scenario like last year would be problematic.

Yup.

There's a tipping point where it stops being knee jerky and becomes pro-active response to a real problem. But I don't think we're anywhere near it yet.

Nobody has actually gone yet.

People seem to assume that everyone would automatically accept a move to Australia for more money. Speaking as somebody who has twice declined the chance to do the same in my career, I think that's a flawed assumption.

Just as with the 'drain' to Union, there really aren't that many SL players likely to be targeted by NRL sides. Forwards will be the first preference in the short-term, as English players have a track record of success (make no mistake, most NRL clubs will be scouting SL to see if there's another Sam Burgess coming through the ranks). Tomkins and Watkins may well be targeted because they are clearly special players with a lot of potential (as well as flaws which will need to get fixed).

Hall would be a possible target, and a few others (Briscoe maybe?), but I suspect that NRL clubs won't take big financial gambles on many backs at all, and that the pots of gold just don't exist as they have for players moving to RU.

What's caused SL more problems is the opposite issue - lack of players from the NRL to SL. The drying up of the Welsh RU/junior English RU pipeline had an immediate impact on GB's back division. Similarly we're now seeing some clubs for the first time in 30 years not being able to pad out their squad with NRL hacks. This is actually something that needed to happen IMO, but it was always going to have a short-term impact.

It's clear is that some clubs were well-placed to react and to focus on junior development, and others were left hopelessly flat-footed. What's needed is all clubs to get their act together, but it will take a few years before we consistently see quality young players coming through at all clubs. As a result I'd argue that it will be several years before we really know how many clubs are sustainable in a SL basically dependent on developing its own players.

Gareth would you say SL is better or a worse competition without the likes of Sam Burgess and James Graham? add to that a sprinkling of real top Aussies e.g. Jamie Lyon, Buderus, Hoffman etc and you have a devalued competition.

If you are saying it doesn't matter if the likes of Watkins - the only top notch centre to come through the Leeds Academy system in the last 15 years - go to Aus along with many of the 'marquee' players because it gives opportunities to young players I cannot agree.

Leeds is an interesting club - they encourage youth development but they also have the - Wigan apart - the largest catchment area of the northern clubs and have an advantage of scale. You can hardly say the likes of Castleford/Wakefield/Widnes etc are competing for junior talent on an even playing field. Longer term this will lead to a league dominated by Leeds and Wigan, clubs that have access to the best young talent.

I'm not sure if I can agree with the whole catchment area thing as both of our most exciting and coveted backs, in Watkins and Hardaker were brought in from outside the Leeds catchment area.
I think it's more to do with talent scouts and their persuasive abilities.