Did make me laugh that. I think "circumstances" that poor Rovers find themselves victims of are signing up 3 and a half years ago to having 5 overseas players in 2011 then through a combination of applying for exemptions and deliberately building a team around the likes of Ben Fisher, suddenly finding themselves into double digits on overseas players and with only 7 spots in their first choice 17 available to British players. Talk about hard done-to

You should write what you mean instead of writing what you don't mean.



In what way is giving a young English player, released by another club, a job less preferable than bringing through your own juniors? What exactly is lost to the game by signing a player from another club for example Hull KR signing Liam Watts from Castleford. I would happily sign 25 players like that.



Well done you. Clever boy!





You can argue such hypothtical scenarios with yourself all night for me kipper man.



Or indeed the binning off of Luke Ambler to make way for a 33 year old Aussie journeyman.



Yes, we'll all take a lecture from Leeds. They're really giving youth a chance aren't they?

You going to do a graph about that or would you like me to explain Grubbs to you again?

Because Hull Kingston Australia are fielding 10. thats because Leeds are a well run club, the fact is they make a profit, have invested millions more into their stadium than Hull KA. Why does that mean they have to achieve more again? you are simply holding leeds to a higher standard, because they are run better, then complaining that whilst they are doing better than Hull KA in pretty much every facet, they should be doing even more than everyone else and because they arent it is comparable to Hull KA's failures, which is quite obviously the myopic one-club nonsense you are famous for.

no we wont, we currently have one less than we did last season. We would need to sign two more overseas players for us to have more than we did last year. For a change Bill, you are simply factually incorrect.

There is no spin, No need to be, you are factually incorrect, Cross is replacing Eastwood.

only the short-termist and idiotic (thats you btw) would sacrifice the long term growth and stability of the club for a short-term shot at glory.to create a stable, self-sufficient club, in a growing, stable, self-sufficient, improving league.

Or you could just read what it says and not try desperately to make it mean something else.

ooh selective quoting, this is fun. If we can get a factual inaccuracy, a contradiction. and a straw-man from you in one post it will be another grand slam

Oh, and it is preferable because you should rely on your own club, you should have your own Liam Watts, by all means add them when you can, but you should have a fair few of your own to start with

well it seemed someone needed to explain it for you, I thought it was obvious to anyone but it seems i gave you too much credit!

oooh, theres the contradiction, as opposed to being obvious enough to deserve a patronising retort, it is now only hypothetical that Billy Slater improved because of his introduction to first grade.
oooh, a factual inaccuracy, Luke Ambler signed a two year contract extension last year. He is being loaned out to get more experience as Leeds also have Amor and Pitts at prop. He isnt being binned off.

Oh and Cross (32 not 33) is a replacement for Eastwood, not for Ambler

aaaww, you see this is an informal fallacy but im not sure its a straw-man. Its clearly nonsense, but you know what, we missed out on the Bill Grandslam of nonsense this time. im sure we will get one soon.

Since promotion, what actual ground improvements have been delivered with this additional Sky money? A small extension to one end of the East Stand in 2008?

Rovers sign up to a unanimous agreement to close loopholes and get to 5 overseas players for the 2011 season in 2007. Rovers seek further loopholes and actually go into 2011 with 10 overseas players. Rovers fan claims they are the victim of "circumstances".

I am a fan of the Game...........and a supporter of my club. The Game is bigger than any club.......

After yet another dismal showing by supposedly the best 24 English players on offer.....I would much rather that all SL clubs developed another 5 or 6 players each who are able to step up rather than go to Wembley...win the CC Final and be told they were a team full of aussies......I don't short term solutions....short term solutions only work in the short term. For the game to grow......the rules that all the clubs agreed to need to be adhered to.......


Interesting. I though the role of a SL Club was to have crowds of 10,000 and a travelling support of 6 million.......that's what most HKA fans have been saying about London RL for years.
The reason that there were rules agreed to on overseas players was to ensure that all licenced clubs in SL were developing UK talent.....if you'd rather go back to the days when Wigan won everything and the rest of the UK laughed at the 'northern" game then fine......but don't drag the rest of us with you........Huddersfield are a good example of what the RFL blueprint was looking for......East Hull is not. Neither is Leeds, Wakey or even Wigan....just to ease your persecution complex

I for one don't support Leeds signing Cross, nor did I support them signing Brett Delaney. IMO if Leeds didn't have those two next year, we'd have the balance about right in terms of overseas players in the squad. Unfortunately unless all clubs play by the spirit of the aim to reduce overseas players, then they will all continue to go on as they have been.

OK. Now you see him, now you don't.



Ah, I just read your note at the bottom.

As a Hull fan I don't support the prospect of bringing in Rovelli from the NRL either. The concept of being able to take a reasonable stance and to critique one's own club in it's recruitment policy in this regard is lost on the one-eyed Rovers defence brigade on here. Clearly 10 overseas players is not the way to go, but for now we'll get the line about not breaking the rules, then they'll actively seek further exemptions and loopholes. No evidence to suggest otherwise at all.

As Super League is a competition including Enlgish, Welsh and French teams it should be a maximum of five players in your squad who aren't English, Welsh or French. Whether players from other European nations should be exempt from the quota list is something that should be looked into.

The RFL fought the law and... well tbh they got a draw. But they need to know their limits and not raise expectations that turn out to be unrealistic. Or perhaps they were right to be ambitious - by aiming high they may achieve their goal sooner, if not as soon as they'd have liked. Any player that was going to get an exemption has got it already, so if they hold fast they'll get what they want in the not too distant.

They're trying to change things and that always leads to unintended consequences. Reducing reliance on overseas players doesn't just mean young players will be given a shot. Older players careers are being extended. See the two year deals for Meli, Fielden and Radford.

It is a truism that people and organisations respond to incentives not appeals to their conscience. Is it within the rules? Yes. Is it within the spirit of the rules? That is open to interpretation and that interpretation will reflect our biases. Do I feel like somebody justifying minimising their tax bill or asking for a small paycut to keep their child benefit? Yes - but no worse than that.

The five player rule I suggested would need to be brought in over say three or four years. Implementing it right now would throw up all kinds of problems eg exisiting 'non-quota' player contracts.
I know something in a similar vein has already been put forward and to a certain extent applied by the powers that be, but it fathers a lump of Swiss cheese. If clubs were told that by the start of the 2015 season they could have the said five 'non quota' players they would be able to plan ahead with regard to development, recruitment and contracts.

Fair enough - but to be legal we need the fig-leaf of fed-trained, rather than anything about nationality. As far as the EU and certainly the UK is concerned anyway.

If a club found a 16-year old EU player and brought him through the system, he couldn't ever be put on any sort of quota.

Crusaders RL www.crusadersrfl.com/article.php?id=3105

Crusaders RL www.crusadersrfl.com/article.php?id=3105

Thats a strange one

Not if he's over his injury and isn't played out of position.

If Reardon's played at Full back he'll do okay.

[url=http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/sport/sportbulls/8624125.Bradford_Bulls_not_putting_away_the_welcome_mat_just_yet/Pryce to Bradford still a possibility[/url

The trouble with the fed-trained thing is that a player like Ian Henderson, who was born and raised in England until his family moved to Australia is counted as a quota player, yet Robbie Paul isn't. So what you have is an English man who needs a quota to play SL and a former international kiwi who can play without the need of a quota spot.

I think the Henderson's got exemptions from the new reg's so do not count as Quota\overseas players. I imagine if Widdop ever plays in SL he would get a similar exemption.

You'd hope so, otherwise it makes a bit of a mockery of the whole thing as an idea to help produce more english players

[urlhttp://www.superleaguefans.com/rugby-league/rumour-mill-goes-into-overdrive.html[/url
Dunemann to be Leeds assistant?

St Helens Out J Bradbury [Oldham RLFC www.superleague.co.uk/article.php?id=20527

St Helens Out J Bradbury [Oldham RLFC www.superleague.co.uk/article.php?id=20527

Cas should announce Aspinwall tomorrow