Instead of 2 or 3 word answers all the time any chance you could explain your understanding of it please

I'm not sure what they did, but presumably it must have involved renegotiaion of contracts mid run.

Why? An existing contract by employment law becomes null and void if a newer contract is agreed. If the player and club agree the contract there is no severance pay needed.

I'm still not getting your point here. He was asked if we had a quota spot available to sign Sam Moa for next season. He got a reply of "no quota not full for 2010 yet". Whats the problem?

Which was allowed. They just werent allowed to say to player x that they would give them 50k per season in year 1, 100k in year 2 and 200k in year 3. The RFL rules that it had to be 117k per year i believe. (i may be wrong though)

It would be illegal for the RFL to stop contracts being renegotiated.

I'm thinking it's the inaccurate use of the word quota for all overseas players. Maybe a little pedantic, but using quota all the time does increase the confusion. It's kind of like calling all British people English, whether they be Scottish, Welsh, or Northern Irish.

The problem ive got is that he gave us a fact in isolation with no detail. This is dangerous in that detail is then speculated and made up.

The correct approach here would be to give no fact or to give fact and detail.

Sorry



He was close, this year it is a maximum on 8 non federation, of which a maximum of 5 of these can be 'quota'.

Next year it will be a maximum of 6 non federation, of which a maximum of 5 can be'quota'.

Kolpaks, Islanders, RU players count as Non federation as do dual /european passports I believe.

Ah ok, i use the word quota for a total number. Guess i should have used quota for the oz/nz players we are allowed and then total overseas for the total numbers?

Now see you wrong already it's maximum of 7 this year.

EDIT: I stand corrected it is 8.







FFS This is fecking complicated.

So what should he have said? "sorry I cant answer that question?"

Dont think anyone really knows. (including James Rule evidently)

Thanks for that (still don't understand the bl**dy thing though

) does that mean then , if we wanted to, there is still a quota place left for Moa

So with

Berrigan
Lauaki
O'Meley
Fitzgibbon
Manu
Cusack

The 6 non fed places are full? Or are they? What is happening that we don't know about?

Or maybe 'were currently invetigating our quota situation for next year, we may be full or we may have space we just dont know yet so cant give any further info currently. We'll tell the fans as soon as we have clarity'

No it isn't. It's 8.

Thats exactly where the confusion has come from. Either someone is leaving that is here or someone isnt classed as one of the 6 non fed spaces that we think they are.

It's a good job that everything's going so well at the club that all we have to moan about is the wording of an email and whether or not Rule should announce every website article before it gets published.

FC Mute was correct!

But if he thinks we have a quota spot thats a lie.

That sort of response would have had everyone on here saying he is clueless and should have found this out by now etc etc.

I've realised, and stated that I was wrong!

The RFL can always refuse to register him under those circumstances as it will in all likely hood fall outside their own Bye Laws. Although it may be possible i'm pretty sure it would not happen.

Well it depends on the NZ, doesn't it?



It's all just a riddle of terminology. Quota players are within the non-federation/overseas allowance, but the 'quota' is often referred when actually meaning the letter.

But if we thinks he has a quota spot he can tell us the situation making it available cant he? (otherwise he is not been totally truthful but without lieing isnt he?