Question about the new quota system coming in

[fourplay]

Where will the new quota system leave a player who was born in Australia, but holds an English passport because both his parents are English...?

Will the new rules nullify that, making him equal to a normal Australian NRL player in the eyes of the new quota system ?

 

[bartman]

My understanding is that it will all come down to where someone has "trained", not where they are from. Therefore the passports and Kolpak rules in theory shouldn't matter.

If such a player hasn't played their rugby league in the UK for three years before the age of 21, then in the new system they will count as one of the ten (and eventually five) overseas players.

Unless they are still under the age of 21 when they come over, where I guess they could count as one of the five younger players that clubs have to include in their squads of 25?

 

[fourplay]

Thanks.

That is ridiculous in my opinion....... so we can have a player playing international RL for England yet he may not be allowed to play in the ESL due to the overseas quota limit. There needs to be a way around that.

 

[deluded pom?]

What's to stop a club signing five good young Aussie players under the age of 21 and still signing five quota players?

 

[fourplay]

Yeah it looks like the whole system is a farce.

 

[bartman]

Thanks.

That is ridiculous in my opinion....... so we can have a player playing international RL for England yet he may not be allowed to play in the ESL due to the overseas quota limit. There needs to be a way around that.

That's where they have to look at international eligibility carefully, not just for England but all nations. It's full of contradictions at the moment anyway.

DP, I do think the rule will see a shift in the type of Aussie/Kiwi players that are interested in or targeted for a Super League spell. It will be the ambitious 18-21 year olds who've come on the NRL scene early and who have player managers who'll start to think about those five dedicated junior spots, if English clubs don't commit to their academies.

Elite players will still be targetted within those five international spots at each club, with the effect that juniors and the fringe members of the squad being paid peanuts. I know personally what one young English Wakefield 25-man squad player earns as a full-time player and it's a lot less than I would have expected, and almost in the struggle category financially?

So I'm not sure there's as much "change" in the mooted changes as people are being led to believe... http://www.leagueunlimited.com/article.php?newsid=14190

 

[nadera78]

To go out and sign five 18 year olds from NZ is a big risk for a club to take. It's cheaper, and ultimately better for a club to instead spend that money on junior development in the local area. Not only will that produce players, but also produce fans too.

As to someone playing for England on ancestral rounds, well it's very unlikely tbh. It really would not go down well over here at all, I certainly would be very pissed off with it. And with the number of talented juniors beginning to emerge I don't see it being necessary anyway. It's the celtic nations and the like that look for ancestral links.

I think (hope!) there is a genuine realisation amongst the clubs that something needs to be done, and this is a way to do it, after all, it takes place slowly and over a period of five years, so clubs really do have the time to develop their own. many clubs already do have good juniors, some are starting to step up their systems, others have work to do.

 

[bowes]

Thanks.

That is ridiculous in my opinion....... so we can have a player playing international RL for England yet he may not be allowed to play in the ESL due to the overseas quota limit. There needs to be a way around that.

Thanks to the Kolpak ruling there isn't. Either they can limit based on where players are trained or they have to allow unlimited Kolpaks. Doubt there are that many players it will affect anyway

 

[deluded pom?]

To go out and sign five 18 year olds from NZ is a big risk for a club to take. It's cheaper, and ultimately better for a club to instead spend that money on junior development in the local area. Not only will that produce players, but also produce fans too.

Agreed nad but I was just being devil's advocate, just like Mr Lindsay. I was referring to a player like Michael Dobson who would get into a SL team's squad based on the U21 rule but be exempt from the "foreigner" quota. A can of worms has just been opened.

 

[nadera78]

What you say is very possible. I guess we'll just have to wait and see what the clubs do. I'm trying to be more optimistic at the momment, just to balance out all the flat-cappers out there that would like to see RL played between Broughton Rangers, Bramley, and no-one else.

 

[deluded pom?]

Pray tell what's wrong with flat caps? I often wear mine when I'm out walking the whippet or down at the WMC downing a pint of bitter before returning to my terraced house to tend my pigeons . Can you hear a brass band playing Dvorak's New World Symphony?

 

[fourplay]

So thanks to the Kolpak genius who created that law the ESL have now pretty much been forced to banned English heritage players aswell. :crazy:

As to someone playing for England on ancestral rounds, well it's very unlikely tbh. It really would not go down well over here at all, I certainly would be very pissed off with it. And with the number of talented juniors beginning to emerge I don't see it being necessary anyway. It's the celtic nations and the like that look for ancestral links.

Why wouldn't it go down well ? So if Feleti Mateo pledged allegiance to England it would not go down well and you'd be very pissed off ?

 

[deluded pom?]

So thanks to the Kolpak genius who created that law the ESL have now pretty much been forced to banned English heritage players aswell. :crazy:



Why wouldn't it go down well ? So if Feleti Mateo pledged allegiance to England it would not go down well and you'd be very pissed off ?

In a word, yes. It's about players who are genuinely English, not some flybynight who wants to play in a major tournament and sees England as an option because he's not good enough for Australia. It's about St George, The Queen (God bless her), William Shakespeare, Horatio Nelson, Winston Churchill, Sir Douglas Bader, Francis Drake, Sir Robert Peel, Bobby Moore, Sir Walter Raleigh (for you Aussies, NO HE DID NOT INVENT THE BICYCLE), Roger Bannister, etc.etc. ad infinitum. It's not about Rolf Harris, Dame Edna Everage and Kylie Minogue. ;-)

 

[bartman]

:lol:

I agree it wouldn't go down well in England at all. Unlike the Australian and New Zealand teams, and the NSW and Qld teams, it hasn't been watered down to declaring an allegiance to get around the fact of where you really came from or started out.

GB is a creation to allow the occasional Welsh and Scot (and Irishman) to play, beyond that tweak there should be anymore adjustments to confuse things further.

To bring another code into it for a moment, I have utmost respect for Ryan Giggs, one of the best soccer players at club level over the years, who never played for England and served the lowly Welsh team for his entire international career. Shame for him, but his pride in his background is enough to make up for the lack of major tournament exposure.

 

[fourplay]

wow.. I'm surprised... I guess the culture in England must be different to Australia... EVEN if it was Feleti Mateo, who knocked back Australia and Tonga, and chose to play for England you'd be angry ? Amazing English people... lol

 

[deluded pom?]

:lol:

I agree it wouldn't go down well in England at all. Unlike the Australian and New Zealand teams, and the NSW and Qld teams, it hasn't been watered down to declaring an allegiance to get around the fact of where you really came from or started out.

GB is a creation to allow the occasional Welsh and Scot (and Irishman) to play, beyond that tweak there should be anymore adjustments to confuse things further.

To bring another code into it for a moment, I have utmost respect for Ryan Giggs, one of the best soccer players at club level over the years, who never played for England and served the lowly Welsh team for his entire international career. Shame for him, but his pride in his background is enough to make up for the lack of major tournament exposure.

Giggs did play for the England schoolboys side but as you said he declared for Wales and played for them all of his career. Pity he didn't follow his dad though. By the way just WHO IS Feleti Mateo?

 

[fourplay]

He plays for Parramatta and is eligible for England, Tonga, and Australia. He is exceptionally talented and a star of the future !!

 

[deluded pom?]

But not a REAL Englishman. We might lose but I'd sooner see seventeen true Englishmen try their best and fail than twelve true Englishmen and five ring ins succeed. The pride just wouldn't be there. And I'm sure you Aussies would point it out to us. It doesn't work in the opposite direction because you're mongrels anyway ;-)

 

[dibviking]

wow.. I'm surprised... I guess the culture in England must be different to Australia... EVEN if it was Feleti Mateo, who knocked back Australia and Tonga, and chose to play for England you'd be angry ? Amazing English people... lol

in English rl we want English people playing for us. i`d be p*ssed off if the whole convicts team said they were English and played for England.
if other countries had this attitude maybe we would have more than a few strong rl playing nations ie. Tonga,Fiji,Samoa and all

 

[teamGB]

i agree totally. this is the problem for international rl. too many young kids who are from the pacific islands play for australia or new zealand. its a joke. GB/ ENgland are the only true international team!!!!!!!!