For those who don't know, a lot of the SL clubs are hoping to bring in the "dual registration" of players as a rule very soon. You may have read Brian McClennan talk about it in the trade press this week.
What this means is that they ( SL clubs ) can gobble up any potential talent they spot in the lower leagues and offer them a contract, but because of whatever reason they can "loan" the player back to the club they took him from whenever they feel like it.
They're just in the process of doing it with Kyle Amor from 'Haven, Hudds have done it with McNally and there'll be loads of other intsances up & down.
What are your views on this subject ?

Personally, I wonder where the game is going with this idea, as it smacks of my old favourite the top clubs signing players just so that their rivals can't have the player in question, it's similar to the "loaning" of players like Saints do with Scott Moore and Matt James of Bradford to us.

Yet again, it looks like they'll bring in a rule and the rest of the RL in the tiers below SL will have to fall in line, but who are the main beneficiaries of the "dual registration" ?

Opinions please.

It's to create a "Reservoir" of players under their control. As you say Col, they can lend them back out again but they can control who they play for in the future.

It also creates a bigger pool of players for such as the CC and other tournaments which will stop players from being able to play for a team because they've played for somebody else.

another way to make the NL clubs weaker over all, but do the SL clubs pay their wages and not count towards the NL clubs salary cap.

Personally i think its a way clubs can get promising youngsters for nothing and the NL club gets a good shafting.

sums it up quite well.

Agree totally.

Back-door way to getting feeder clubs.

Are we going the way of Aussie RL?

Sadly that seems to be the plan for us.

Interesting to read Bulls chairman Peter Hoods' comments this week about how the SL clubs last season voted not to fund out of their own pockets the use of the video ref at each SL fixture, preferring to pour their sky monies into player recruitment.

Now he reckon's after a couple of close losing scores against the Bulls brought about by inadequate ref/TJ decisions which "looking back at the dvd" would have been di-allowed had the clubs gone along with the original suggestion, HA HA HA ! Welcome to the real world mister, where the sun doesn't always shine on you.

I had the opportunity to go to watch his team throw away the chance of a rare win yesterday, courtesy of a freebie ticket and I reckon they are in the crap and right, it's a long time since I've heard such negativity from the home fans at a game. Looking at their playing roster in the programme they almost have as many players being paid for sat in the stands as they do on the field, well, at least they had the players in the first place, maybe they shouldn't ( and other clubs ) be so greedy having so much going on players salaries and invested in the good of the game ie: video refs at each game, a luxury I'm sure we'd love to also have given the same income thrown at SL clubs. Which takes me back to my original post on the subject of SL clubs having too many players, tough luck Mr. Hood & Bradford Bulls, it's just a shame there's no relegation at the moment.

The player who gest picked up this way. As it currently stands that player may never get a chance for having a go at the big time. Now he gets that opportunity to impress, whilst still playing at a level that might be right for that period in time. If it does not work out, he continues as he was.

The player is definately the main beneficiary.

Not the SL club ?

On the flip side though, you could say its an advantage for the NL clubs as if the loan player in question has a good spell, then returns to the SL club, doesn't get a game, he may seek a permanant move to the NL club. Especially if the NL club are a favourite for SL status come 2012.

Look at Maloney, can barely get a game for Hull, will play every week for us. He'll go back to Hull where they seem to be on a policy of signing every Aussie cast-off, can't get a game because of this. Where can he get guaranteed game time?

Mixed feelings, yer ok the player gets a chance to step up to SL but when?
Who pays his wages? If the SL team do is that fair on the rest of the clubs in the Championship as it would distort that clubs salary cap? If not what does the Championshop club get from this deal?
If they sign a player why don't SL clubs give the player the experience at that level even if the player may not play many games if any at least they are getting full time training and all that goes with SL, they can get Reserve grade rugby at a SL level too.
Is a player as commited to a club if they are only there on loan plus what do the other players think of the 'big time' Charlie?
Why not just take the player and have done with like it has always been???

Is this similar? www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/ ... er-2292222

Is this similar? www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/ ... er-2292222

How could this become a rule if the SL clubs decide?

Who runs the sport at this level? I know the RFL allegedly advised against dual reg last season, so how could SL force this through if the RFL are in charge?

Maybe we just don't need Big Nigel and his mob and we can just get rid of them and save the game some money.

I will point our he earns more than our prime minister