Good, you shouldn't want / need the extra quota space.

Will they be allowed to all go to Championship teams?

Who should?

looking forward to your post full of moral outrage when widnes use same loopholes everyone else uses to get more than the allowed 5 quota players.

No-one should.

Whilst it is probably right, and probably fair for the players to get this dispensation, it is still disappointing and still a failure for Clubs to need it.

I would like HKR to appraoch Elliot Kear, Ben Flowers and Gil Dudson (think thats his name). I hope we steer clear of the overseas players, I don't want them.

Dont be so silly, there's not enough letter L in a standard scrabble bag.

As above no-one ESPECIALLY under a franchised system.




I hope we don't and tbf the club have always maintained they'd prefer British! I do hate the way some SL sides / fans are obsessed with filling / making more quota space!

What a complete joke Superleague has become!

It certainly has and i always thought that the RFL were not serious about import quota's, it is out of hand.

Livelihoods more important in this case, I think. There were a lot of angry and frustrated players who could have been out of a job otherwise.

They can always go back home. After all if it were British industry they would have to look for some other form of employment. What makes the RFL think they are any differant??

makes you wonder if the RFL were somehow tied up in their contracts? If so they would have been looking at a breech of contract/redundancy/court action to recover lost earnings.

an employer can't breach a contract anymore than an employee. Unless Crusaders are declared insolvent then they simply can't sack the players who are on fixed term contracts. Players would have a right to claim lost earnings/redundancy packages. This smells like a sweetner to save the Crusaders company name from being wound up.

The 2012 quotas which seemed to be going in the right direction are "subject to change afer a review of the system" - I hope it isn't going to get any worse icon_sad.gif

Why are Hull KR singled out? Last night we had 7 Hull born players in our 17, Admittedly we lost the game but Rovers are moving forward on this front.

Well that's ok then, we'll just ignore the rest of the season up until this point then.

Where we have regularly included 5 hull born players?

But still more overseas players than anyone else.

Hmm, overseas players who have made 10 or more appearances. (I think 10 gives an accurate picture of players used regularly throughout the season)
Green, Dobson, Vella, Fisher, Lovegrove, Newton, Galea (7 players)

Hull Fc:
Phelps, Obst, O'Meley, Fitzgibbon, Moa, Lauaki, Manu (7 players)

Salford:
Patten, Henry, Nero, Holdsworth, Cashmere, Anderson, Paleaasina (sp) (7 players)

Two other heartland clubs with an equal number of foreign players regularly featuring in the teams.

I think a more accurate picture would be how many different overseas players you have used this season not how many appearances certain ones have made.

Funny how you discounted the number of Hull lads playing on Saturday because they hadn't featured much yet you focus on overseas players who have played a handful of games between them. It seems your logic contradicts itself.

The original point was why highlight HKR when it comes to overseas players and i'm pointing out it's because you have more than anyone else and have played more than anyone else, just because they're injured or crap and you have decided at this late stage to blood some youngsters doesn't alter this fact.

But why do you believe that youngsters don't count unless they are regular fixtures yet overseas players do?

Oh look, another HKA overseas debate....