www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/s ... -1-7179028 Some other Championship clubs have complained about the issue where some of our guys have signed 1 year deals and thus don't count as dual reg players. Doubt anything will come of this as I'm sure GH knew he was exploiting a gap in the system and wasn't in danger of getting in trouble for it. If there's no written contract for those players to return to Leeds in 2016 and it's all just been verbally agreed that they'll return then can't see what the RFL could do about this.

www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/s ... -1-7179028 Some other Championship clubs have complained about the issue where some of our guys have signed 1 year deals and thus don't count as dual reg players. Doubt anything will come of this as I'm sure GH knew he was exploiting a gap in the system and wasn't in danger of getting in trouble for it. If there's no written contract for those players to return to Leeds in 2016 and it's all just been verbally agreed that they'll return then can't see what the RFL could do about this.

There's going to be some good stuff posted on the various forums about this

If they are on a season long =#FF0000loan then I don't see any problem.

Absolute guff. They signed a 1 year contract for a club. Leeds have no control over them. They are Hunslet and Featherstone players.
Whether Leeds have an arrangement or even a signed contract with them for after that is irrelevent.
Even a season long loan still leaves the parent club with some control over the player. In this case it doesn't as they aren't Leeds players.

Obviously the RFL have a lot of spare time on their hands.

Warrington had the same kind of arrangement with Swinton with some of their younger players. They were outspoken with regard to their disapproval with the whole duel reg system so exploited a loophole.

Do we even know if Leeds have these players contracted for 2016, or if the players are just on a promise that they will be offered a contract for 2016?

Isn't that irrelevant?

They are on loan or they are dual reg. Not sure what the issue is. Four at Fev are on loan for full year, two at Hunslet are on loan for full year, anyone else is dual reg.

Not sure where it came from about been Fev or Hunslet players. Surely if on loan they are still Leeds players, but as full season can not recall until end of the season?

Certainly Baldwinson and Tonks are contracted for next year, as per the 3 year deal signed last season on return. Briscoe and Duckworth are not on contract for 2016, as confirmed by the club in the announcement of their loan. Unsure on Foster and Minns.

They're not all on loan or dual reg though.

IIRC the lads at Featherstone are there on one-year contracts with Featherstone. They are not Leeds players in any way, shape or form in 2015. Leeds cannot recall them, they can't play for Leeds without moving their registration.

Just wondering whether there may be something buried deep in the Operational Rules that prevents a player having a pre-contract agreed with another club prior to the anti-tampering deadline.

Depends if they do have one. It might just be a verbal agreement/understanding. One that could actually bite the club in the backside if for example another club makes advances towards Baldwinson and offer him a deal for 2016 and he opts to go elsewhere with Leeds left floundering as they have no written contract with said player.

Is this not similar to what "Big" Ben Cross did when he signed for Wigan and Widnes on the same day?

But they are all on loan or dual reg, that's the point.

The lads at Fev are on loan for the year. Therefore they are still Leeds players until their contracts end. Sure, they can't be recalled, but as with any loan, the clubs still owns the player until the contract ends. The same with Briscoe and Duckworth at Hunslet.

The other lads turning out for Hunslet, Mulhern Walters, Keinhorst, Delaney, are on dual reg.

I don't know what the rules are, but the whether they are Leeds players or not is pretty clear.

Quote ="ThePrinter"Depends if they do have one. It might just be a verbal agreement/understanding. One that could actually bite the club in the backside if for example another club makes advances towards Baldwinson and offer him a deal for 2016 and he opts to go elsewhere with Leeds left floundering as they have no written contract with said player.'" But Baldwinson is contracted to Leeds for 2016 www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/s ... -1-6978575

Quote ="ThePrinter"Depends if they do have one. It might just be a verbal agreement/understanding. One that could actually bite the club in the backside if for example another club makes advances towards Baldwinson and offer him a deal for 2016 and he opts to go elsewhere with Leeds left floundering as they have no written contract with said player.'" But Baldwinson is contracted to Leeds for 2016 www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/s ... -1-6978575

Dewsbury have been moaning about it all year. presume they are the likely lead 'snitches'.

So The RFL aren't investigating Widnes as well where Clarkson is on a one year loan?

Well, there is one game taking place tonight in the Championship, Featherstone travel away to face..........Dewsbury. I wonder why they only just complained about the players at Fev this week when they've been there for a few months now.

Briscoe, Duckworth - 2015.
Minns, Foster - 2016
Tonks, Baldwinson - 2017.

If the investigation has some legs, why didn't they do it let season, when London had Foster Minns and Duckworth on one year deals, just like these deals in place.

If that is true then Fev broke the rules when they played Fax by having more than the allowed Dual Reg/Loan players named in their team. If they are on 1 year contracts then they didnt break the rules.

Then you might want to mention that to Andy Hay and Barry Eaton, both of whom are quoted in that article as holding the contrary opinion.

Probably because nobody else in SL complained and thought London might be a threat to their league position.

they are not classed as on loan. Their wages are payable by the club they are at, no recall as they are one year signed contracts with the club rather than loans. They have nothing to do with Leeds until 2016 now.

How did they break the rules? is there a limit to number of loan players you can have? if it is less than four, were all four playing in the game? I thought Minns had been out for a while?

LOANS AND DUAL REGISTRATION: C1:2:10

LIMIT ON NUMBERS
A Club shall not include in any 19 man Match Squad nor play in any Match:

More than five Players who are on loan to it and/or dual registered to it (irrespective of which Club they are registered with); and

More than 4 Players who are dual registered to it


Fev had 4 dual regs for the game and 2 of the Leeds lads named in the 19 man squad. This really boils down to what contracts have been registered with the RFL in regard to these players.

Further to that below are probably a couple of things they are looking at:-

C1:2:1
BOARD ENTITLED TO REFUSE OR CANCEL REGISTRATIONS

b. the Board reasonably believes that to accept the registration or Contract may bring the Game into disrepute or may adversely affect the integrity of any competition;

h. the Board reasonably believes that the Club (or Clubs) concerned is entering into the registration or Contract in order to circumvent the Operational Rules

IIRC Duckworth and Briscoe signed for Hunslet and Tonks, Foster, Minns & Baldwinson signed for Fev. All 1 year contracts. Not loans or DR. If that's true then they have left Leeds and are Hunslet or Fev players for 2015.

Again going off my admittedly hazy memory, I think at least Baldwinson, Tonks and Foster all had agreed a deal with Leeds for 2016 too.

There is an easy way round this, just bring back A team rugby and players won't be loanded as much.