We aren't considering Thorman, I'll believe Macca on this one.

And Deacon.

Deacon/Sykes/Thorman for 2010? The opposition will be quaking already.

Can you quake with laughter?

given our current links with manly they may have put a good word in for us.

Orford would be a huge signing for us, he'd be the little general we have lacked this year. But can't see it unless we're releasing Deacon as well and that would then leave us needing two halfbacks. Unless Macca was being serious about Sykes at 6, but for me to be happy about that I'd want to see a top quality centre and scrum half recruited. Even then it would be a gamble..

would love to see orford in a bulls shirt. perusing other boards ratchford may be available from salford. ratchford/orford starting halves with deacon and sykes as backup would be a major improvement for next year. Also brough's played plenty of standoff in his time so orford/brough could be an option and rumours about brough coming keep floating around.

heres hoping

I think Deacon would be an expensive back up! I have heard rumours that he is off next year but with a year left on his deal I would be surprised unless he is part of a player exchange deal. Perhaps Salford would welcome an experienced scrum half to replace Myler!

...and Robbie.

I must say I was disappointed to see Robbie move to Leigh. I was hopeful he might retire and we would offer him some employment up at Odsal. Probably wouldn't fit in with our cost cutting measures but we can really do with someone like Robbie promoting our club once again.

deacon in swap deal for ratchford - everyones happy

Looks a lot to me like Robbie is happy to do the promotional stuff, providing he gets to still play. I suspect once nobody is offering him a playing contract, he'll work full time in the media, probably for the BBC.

Ratchford looks to be wakefield bound..

according to wakey fans - their the new wire, think they are signing everyone



and wakey fans are going to be disapointed anyway as ratchford to wakey was all a facebook hoax started by the player himself. official statement on salford website about it.

Why do the RFL keep changing the quota eligibilty of overseas players, it's making a mockery of the ruling and doing nothing to decrease the amount of overseas players playing in Super League.

In my books it should be 3 overseas players per team(Kolpack included), nothing more.

Because they have to come up with a mechanism that can't be challenged under the current raft of employment legislation. Any attempt to limit "non-British" players would fail because it is illegal under the laws imposed by our masters in Brussels. And has been. Regularly. How do you think the Kolpac ruling came about in the first place?

The RFL tried to work round the rules with the current quota rules. But unfortunately in their haste they rushed them with out fully thinking them through and this has left the mess we are in know.

It doesn't have to be a official ruling though does it, the RFL and clubs should agree with each other(gentleman's agreement), not to employ more than 3 overseas players. After all, clubs don't have to employ somebody that they do not want to do they?

That presupposes that all the club chairmen and chief executives are "gentlemen". Can you see a struggling club or one with inadequate or shot youth development (or one who has seen its best youngsters poached by a competitor) signing up to that?

Also, if wind of it got out I suspect the "agreement" would be actionable in some way. If all else fails, some player or his agent would drag up the Human Rights act...

If they are serious as they reckon they are about developing British talent then I would like to think they could agree to it.

Why would it be actionable? People dont have to employ somebody that they do not want to, do they?

Exactly.

Rather than an overseas quota, one option might be to insist that all overseas players are paid salary only (bollox to image rights, employee benefits trusts, mega pension contributions and all the rest) AND all through UK PAYE? Or if not, then the grossed-up amount is used in salary cap calculations. And if news leads come over the wire that a club has not been behaving like a complete saint and instead was trying to grab too big a share of the pie, it should be chucked out.

Not if you are struggling club chairman with your club on the rocks and recruiting overseas is the only short-term solution - for example.



Discrimination, that's why. You have to be able to show a non-discriminatory reason why you employed A over B. You can't discriminate against e.g. EU nationals or people from countries with whom the EU has freedom to work agreements and things like that.

Then there are the "Ageism" rules, which the likes of Beaver could use...

Well I dont know all the rules and regulations.

It's not discrimination I dont think, it's simply wanting to improve the claibre of players produced in this country.

In the eyes of the law, it is.

Hey don't shoot the messenger! Most supporters agree with you. Unfortunately, a combination of legislation and lack of money in the game make achieving that objecting far more difficult than it should be.

And Maros Kolpak showed that he was discriminated against - in fact it was restraint of trade. Look where that led.