Reality time

[Jane Robinson]

Until Superleague Europe stop relying on over-the-hill NRL players by self-imposing a limit of maybe one, or at the most two, per club and really put the effort into recruiting and developing the best of the indigenous talent, our national squad will follow our soccer team and latterly our kick and clappers into terminal mediocrity.
Why have we become a pension-plan top-up for Aussie players approaching the end of their careers? OK, the GB public like to see overseas players in our game but they are hardly going to boycott it if they're not there

 

[Fairleigh Good!]

We all know that to be the case. But unfortunately the laws regarding employment and immigration mean it is illegal for clubs to discriminate against players from South Sea Islands and who hold European passports.

The only solution would be for the clubs to sit down as a collective and simply agree to not have anymore than 1 or 2 foreign players. Provided no club goes outside that, it would work. But clubs like Wigan are constantly looking for a way round the salary cap and are far too altruistic to pass this kind of motion.

If Super League sorted this problem out and the NRL started to produce some referees, we might get somewhere.

 

[Jane Robinson]

I did say self-impose. In fact it could become a rule like the Salary Cap and still not be illegal if voted for at the RFL Council

 

[carlnz]

I hope they still let Kiwis in because it would be horiffic for the game here seeing we only have a semi pro competition.

I agree there are too many Aussies over there but let the Kiwis come..

 

[Quidgybo]

I hope they still let Kiwis in because it would be horiffic for the game here seeing we only have a semi pro competition.

True. That could be largely offset though if a second NZ based club is introduced to the NRL. Bringing the best non Warriors players together as a team that plays, promotes and develops the game at home would probably be better for the game in NZ on balance (and the British game to boot)

Leigh.

 

[fourplay]

hmm I have a different view. I don't think its detrimintal to the English game as it raises the skill level of the competition. The top SL players benefit from and improve more by playing with better players of higher skill levels.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

Every year the Poms lose, every year they complain about too many imports and every year nothing is done about it.
14 teams in SL in 2009 should help give more young players a chance but those young players have to be developed first and only a handful of clubs in England are doing that.

 

[WJ]

a) Imports need to be reduced. The Sl competition needs to be all about british players. Young players. British british BRITISH. Look at the current state, we have only 1 competent right centre.........but imagine if up to 14 clubs were nurturing young british right centres at their clubs and they were getting regular first team games?

B) We need to get all clubs up to the cap limit. This will spread talent evenly and mean competition is of higher intensity.

C) We would align our season with the NRL, this will mean international fixtures are organised better.

 

[Cujo]

We have to be realistic about the player pool and why there might not be enough talent to support even the existing 11 English clubs in GB (never mind 14) if we were to reduce the number of imports.

Australia, 250,000 players, 15 NRL clubs
England, 60,000 players, 11 SL clubs
NZ, 30,000 players, 1 NRL club
France 10,000 players, 1 SL club

Anybody notice a problem there? One of the main reasons SL can support so many pro sides (there are also pro sides in the league below) is the amount of money the sport gets. Dilute the cosmoploitan nature of SL and the money might drain away. Interestingly the leagues below SL do enforce a very effective restiction on imports. I watch a team in NL1 and the teams are almost completely British.

 

[Quidgybo]

hmm I have a different view. I don't think its detrimintal to the English game as it raises the skill level of the competition. The top SL players benefit from and improve more by playing with better players of higher skill levels.

Also true. But there is balance between imports raising the standard and imports reducing the opportunities for local players. That's where the argument lies - what is the balance? Too many foreign players in any one position reduces the Lions choice of players for that position. You risk a situation where a player gets a walk up start in the national team regardless of true form simply because there isn't an alternative. That's the extreme obvisously but it demonstrates the point.

IMHO as soon as you get to importing players who would not be able to get a regular first grade start in the NRL you've got too many. Guest stints by players like Sterling and Meninga were good for the competition precisely because they brought real quality. The same is arguably true for a player like Jamie Lyon who comes back to Oz to step straight into the Kangaroos squad. Ten or twelve such Australians/Kiwis at any one time would give a real boost to the competition. And given the money advantage there's no reason to think they british couldn't target 21 and 22 year old Australian stars like Lyon for two year mid-career stints. It still gives the players time to return to the NRL while still in their prime.

But I really think it's difficult to justify twenty to thirty fringe NRL first graders in their late 20s or early 30s. In fact I think I'd start to question the value of even steady first graders if they have no real future representative prospects. I suppose what I'm saying here is quality over quantity. Heavily limit the number imports but be prepared to spend huge to make sure the few players you do import are real stars.

Leigh.

 

[Fairleigh Good!]

Also true. But there is balance between imports raising the standard and imports reducing the opportunities for local players. That's where the argument lies - what is the balance? Too many foreign players in any one position reduces the Lions choice of players for that position. You risk a situation where a player gets a walk up start in the national team regardless of true form simply because there isn't an alternative. That's the extreme obvisously but it demonstrates the point.

IMHO as soon as you get to importing players who would not be able to get a regular first grade start in the NRL you've got too many. Guest stints by players like Sterling and Meninga were good for the competition precisely because they brought real quality. The same is arguably true for a player like Jamie Lyon who comes back to Oz to step straight into the Kangaroos squad. Ten or twelve such Australians/Kiwis at any one time would give a real boost to the competition. And given the money advantage there's no reason to think they british couldn't target 21 and 22 year old Australian stars like Lyon for two year mid-career stints. It still gives the players time to return to the NRL while still in their prime.

But I really think it's difficult to justify twenty to thirty fringe NRL first graders in their late 20s or early 30s. In fact I think I'd start to question the value of even steady first graders if they have no real future representative prospects. I suppose what I'm saying here is quality over quantity. Heavily limit the number imports but be prepared to spend huge to make sure the few players you do import are real stars.

Leigh.

I'm surprised no one has mentioned it, but I think your last point is explained by the short-termism of the British sporting mentality.

In Super League we have relegation. This means for coaches of clubs likely to finish around the bottom that they have a choice. They either think of the long term and blood their own youngsters who will not be immediately up to it, or they go for a guys who have 40-50 NRL appearances under their belt and are often cheap as no NRL clubs are interested.

If the club stays up great, the future is golden. If they go down the entire staff have to take a life changing pay reduction and it bascially shuts down the club for a season or two until they can be promoted again.

Clubs who see themselves as being above the threat of relegation also think in the short term. Teams like Wigan for example demand success. Any coach who fails to live up to that expectation immediately is sacked. Now again you've got a choice. You either back your youth system, which is amongst the best in the world and accept you won't be challenging for trophies for a year or two, or you again import NRL stars perhaps with international caps on their CV. Any major dips in results will result in your sacking, so again the temptation is there to simply import a ready made final product from the NRL. Hence the reason why Wigan have the likes of Richards, Vaeliki, Fletcher, Paaleasina, Bailey and Barrett for next season.