question re. imports

[ledzep]

why do superleague clubs always insist on signing hacks like scott donald and clinton toopi, rather than promoting british youngsters?

 

[East Coast Tiger]

We've been over this a thousand times before and we'll do it a thousand times more. Basically the English clubs find it easier to sign an import than find, coach and develop a young local player to SL standard. There's plenty of good young British players coming through but not enough.

 

[douglasallen91]

guess the same reason why the roosters signed anasta and harrison!

 

[JasonE]

why do superleague clubs always insist on signing hacks like scott donald and clinton toopi, rather than promoting british youngsters?

They are obsessed with Aussies/Kiwis, no one more so than Dave Hadfield.

 

[Ryan]

The smart thing would be to "tell" their superstars (Fielden / Morley / Sculthorpe etc) that they have to play in the Australian competition, and the ESL will subsidise it. You watch the improvement in their game (UK's). I'd say we could handle an additional 3-4 english players per year.

You have to play against standard week in week out to lift your own standard.

 

[deluded pom?]

I remember Gary Schofield going to Balmain in the early eighties . He spent a couple of the then English closed seasons there and came back to Hull a far better player for it . It always disappoints me that very few British players are prepared to back their talent and have a go in the NRL . The exchange rate of the $ to the £ is often quoted as a reason for not going but the way I see it is if someone like Fielden had gone then I'm sure his earnings from off field endorsements would be far far more in Australia then he could ever get in Britain .

 

[Evil Homer]

why do superleague clubs always insist on signing hacks like scott donald and clinton toopi, rather than promoting british youngsters?

IMO,because clubs want instant success rather than building for the future.

A lot of this could be put down to Promotion & Relegation - teams near the bottom of the table tend to sign Aussies rather than develop their own talent so that they can avoid relegation for another year,then release the Aussies and sign a new bunch,a la Wakefield.This is one of the reasons why I think P&R should be scrapped.

 

[Manu Vatuvei]

IMO,because clubs want instant success rather than building for the future.

Yeah, but what does signing players who are completely sh*t have to do with success? :crazy:

 

[Fairleigh Good!]

You bag these players off, and I agree they are awful, but they have all been successful in the NRL.

Look at the two players signed from the NRL premiers, West Tigers. Elasta-girl Pat Richards and Fragile Mark O'Neil. Both were top players in the NRL and have been nothing short of appalling in the Super League. Both are players I would fancy myself against at Amateur level yet they would both get contracts with NRL sides if they wanted to, Richards especially who is being tracked by Wests.

Clinton Toopi has played first grade all his career and has plenty of caps for New Zealand. Only last season I saw him carve up the Aussies on his way to a hat trick, did I not?

A few years ago signing an NRL player was a cheaper option that signing an English player and was a guaranteed success. Now the standards have risen in this country, that is no longer the case. NRL players are iffy signings on the whole and are often turning out to be expensive failures.

The only choice is to ban them I say. Super League clubs should only be permitted to sign NRL players under 25 years of age or players who are current internationals, and even then only 3 per side.

 

[douglasallen91]

You bag these players off, and I agree they are awful, but they have all been successful in the NRL.

Look at the two players signed from the NRL premiers, West Tigers. Elasta-girl Pat Richards and Fragile Mark O'Neil. Both were top players in the NRL and have been nothing short of appalling in the Super League. Both are players I would fancy myself against at Amateur level yet they would both get contracts with NRL sides if they wanted to, Richards especially who is being tracked by Wests.

Clinton Toopi has played first grade all his career and has plenty of caps for New Zealand. Only last season I saw him carve up the Aussies on his way to a hat trick, did I not?

A few years ago signing an NRL player was a cheaper option that signing an English player and was a guaranteed success. Now the standards have risen in this country, that is no longer the case. NRL players are iffy signings on the whole and are often turning out to be expensive failures.

The only choice is to ban them I say. Super League clubs should only be permitted to sign NRL players under 25 years of age or players who are current internationals, and even then only 3 per side.

pat richards was good, but he played over his talent.

mark o'neill is sh*t

toopi's only good game last year was in the test match he only got into the test on name and cause soliala got injured

 

[terracesider]

The only choice is to ban them I say. Super League clubs should only be permitted to sign NRL players under 25 years of age or players who are current internationals, and even then only 3 per side.

Agreed, but actually banning could raise problems with employment law because many, if not a majority, have a legal right to enter the European Union labour market.

I thought the current quota was 3 per side yet I've just read that in the Cas v Wakey the other week there were about 20 Aussies and Kiwis in the two squads.

 

[Manu Vatuvei]

You bag these players off, and I agree they are awful, but they have all been successful in the NRL.

Look at the two players signed from the NRL premiers, West Tigers. Elasta-girl Pat Richards and Fragile Mark O'Neil. Both were top players in the NRL and have been nothing short of appalling in the Super League. Both are players I would fancy myself against at Amateur level yet they would both get contracts with NRL sides if they wanted to, Richards especially who is being tracked by Wests.

Clinton Toopi has played first grade all his career and has plenty of caps for New Zealand. Only last season I saw him carve up the Aussies on his way to a hat trick, did I not?

A few years ago signing an NRL player was a cheaper option that signing an English player and was a guaranteed success. Now the standards have risen in this country, that is no longer the case. NRL players are iffy signings on the whole and are often turning out to be expensive failures.

The only choice is to ban them I say. Super League clubs should only be permitted to sign NRL players under 25 years of age or players who are current internationals, and even then only 3 per side.

Clinton Toopi has been a joke his entire career. The problem is when you scout on reputation and don't actually watch the games.

 

[Evil Homer]

Agreed, but actually banning could raise problems with employment law because many, if not a majority, have a legal right to enter the European Union labour market.

I thought the current quota was 3 per side yet I've just read that in the Cas v Wakey the other week there were about 20 Aussies and Kiwis in the two squads.

Wakey have more overseas players than Catalans and Harlequins.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

Wakey have more overseas players than Catalans and Harlequins.

In the recent Wakey v Cas game I counted four British players in the Wakey 17. That's just ridiculous. Cas had a few too but not that many and they were only just promoted. Wakey has been in SL for about seven years (?) and still rely on an entire squad of imports. The only Brits in the Wakey side for that game were Rooney, Atkins, March and Saxton.

 

[whatsdoing1982]

Once the Super League goes to 14 teams in 2009, I think every club should be notified now that only a maximum of 5 overseas players can be at each club and then 3 by 2011.
This gives them time to slowly get rid of them and prepare their juniors and bring them through. Yet allowing 3 overseas players this will allow for some starts from aus or nz to improve the game over their.
I am in Aus and I would love to see more players from other countries in our comp. I love Brian Carney, he is my favourite player.
3 max players from overseas will improve the game at junior level and help bring players through to ESL. Plus it saves the clubs overpaying old players from the NRL.
I thing the ESL is on the rise and will only get better in 2009 and onwards.
My vision for the next 5 years would be.
11 English Sides
2 French Sides
1 Welsh Side

My vision for 10 years would be

13 English Sides
2 French Sides
1 Welsh Side
1 Irish Side
1 Scotish Side

France, Wales, Ireland and Scotland would all have a major comp still but they would draw on this comp for their players.

 

[Evil Homer]

Super League already has an import quota of 3 - this legally can't include European passport holders or Pacific Islanders though,so teams like Wakefield tend to find ways round it.

 

[whatsdoing1982]

Not 3 per year but 3 in total.

 

[Evil Homer]

Not 3 per year but 3 in total.

This is already the case - you are only allowed 3 quota players in your squad at any one time.