It's not worked and it will never work. The club owners are too short sighted to see the damage they are doing.

While rules exists clubs like Wigan and Hull KR will always look to go beyond those as they feel rules are beneath them.

superleague.co.uk/article/growth ... lubs/23604

superleague.co.uk/article/growth ... lubs/23604

The number of overseas players is reducing year on year while the number of homegrown players is increasing year on year. The old quota system was seriously flawed, the new fed trained rules in conjunction with the quota are far better and will have a serious impact on the number of overseas players in SL. Especially in the next 4 or 5 years as those currently exempt either retire or move back to the NRL.

No it wasn't the "whole point" of the licensing system, it was part of it but the licensing was also to try and create stability and long term planning instead of the short term-ism that was evident at far too many clubs.

I think the fed trained quota is brilliant.

Once all the exemptions drop away we'll have the situation we all want - 3/4 overseas players in a squad.

What and have no limits on the number of overseas players? Madness.

The rfl need to be more strict on the rules of the quota system. At the moment it seems like there's more loopholes then there are rules.

I don't believe it will miraculously make the England team world champions like some people think.

What will make them world champions is clubs investing more on youth development and to promote the game.

So you think the answer to the number of overseas players in our competition is to scrap the quota rule?

Do you not see a contradiction in this?

And if you think someone being Tongan gets them off the system then you clearly don't understand the system.

My point was why have something in place and then not police it.

The RFL keeps changing the rules of the oversea players regulations what is it that a player who had one year left of his contract with Crusaders suddenly signs a 3 year contract with Hull KR how is that justified. The RFL should of said that any player who had a contract with crusaders could be taken over by another club and be exempt but any extended contract would not be exempt.

How don't they police it? Give me one example.

Crusaders isn't an example of them not policing it before you say anything. An example of them not policing it would be someone getting away with breaking the rules.

The problem is you don't understand the rules and don't understand why there are exemptions.

In fairness they have been more young players coming through than ever before. We got rid of promotion and relegation (which does take a way a lot of excitement for the bottom end clubs and championship clubs) to promote our young players, then our national coach goes and picks a load of Aussie and Kiwis.

There are over 100 overseas players in SL, thats about 50 too many.

Your right but, is this not the case for every popular sport, i.e- football, rugby union and the like? Not saying it's right but thats the way sport is and i can't see it changing anytime soon.

As a supporter of a club that seems to find all sorts of ways to have more overseas players than necessary I would agree that the quota rules need to be tougher not abandoned. Personally I would link the SL grant to the number of European developed players (I think it would be good to see more Welsh, French etc players in SL for the good of the Int game) on a direct % basis ie:

1-4 non European trained = 100% of grant
5-7 = 75% of grant
8-10 = 50% of grant
10+ = 25% of grant

That way clubs can decide what they want to do but know that there would be financial consequences. The money not taken up by clubs who decided they would rather have more overseas players could be pumped back into jnr development by the RFL.

Having said that the ridiculous decision by the RFL to exempt Crusaders players from the quota shows they aren't really that serious about it so if the governing body don;t care why should the clubs?