No because it would undermine the whole process of the salary cap and attempts to even up the competition. Would you want Melbourne to go out and buy Folau and Karmichael Hunt and a couple of other ''RL'' converts or a couple of RU players so that they can dominate again.

I think it would be an option in the future but would need to be limited to one per club etc.

I would much rather see a position whereby hometown players are exempt but again that would have to be a bit further down the road certainly in the UK.

maybe for 1 year

If the RU/AFL player is going to be paid a salary, then No.

I see where you are coming from Dally. I like what Spud said that maybe for one year they don't count. This gets them back to the superior code. This should come with a contract that says the player must get into the 'public eye' for free for marketing purposes whenever the club or NRL/SLE want them to.

yeah one per club, it would need to be limited

if it means hunt or folau are back in league id be happy.

it would have to be their first rugby league contract, one year wouldnt be enough to swing it

which player is gonna be happy to take a wage cut after his first year though?

I would love Quins to convert the clubs union supporters.

i think one per club would be a good move 9even though my own club wouldnt benefit) as we can start signing more top union talent rather than the other way round.

One per club is fair enough. Teams like Quins, Cats and Crusaders would benefit greatly from this. If somehow this were brought in I reckon Wigan would be straight in for fat face Ashton too. By the way, why does that happen when you play union, you suddenly put on 2 stone and get rosey chubby cheeks?

Its all the port, grouse and caviar.............served to you by your northern butler.

I'd say 100% yes.

Jonathon Davies, Tuigamla, Botica, Gibbs, Quinell. The situation at present as regards a national presence, is worse than it's ever been. RL in general need the exposure that top name signings would bring.

I understand the reasons behind the salary cap, spreading talent, keeping the books clean but the fact remains that as in the pre cap era, most trophys are won by one of 4 teams. The best the rest can expect, is a place in the play offs.

We should probably try and if we succeed it can only give the game(in UK) the publicity that we need to expose our product to the wider public so basically yes let's go for it.

no...the first year of said union player's contract would'nt be included in the salary cap..but years 2,3 etc would meaning the team would have to balance their salary budget to accommodate him...

Quick question. This benefits youth development how exactly...?