Sorry link posted off phone didn't work, try now. A- for humour E- for application.

I think its fair. Its a very good opportunity for a club to pick up a couple of youngsters and after a season or two will be declared their own homegrown players.

Not yet but let me know where yours is and I'll see what I can do.

Hand me the scrabble bag and I'll get the village name for you.

Surely though, one of the points of licenses is to decrease the amount of quota players. We'd all like to see the sum amount of quota players in SL decreased by a quarter, but by doing this you're potentially increasing it by nearly a quarter.

I should say overseas players rather than quota.

I think its a fairness thing. Blokes only as recently as last month have tied their families, agreed contracts only to have them stripped from them. On the one hand it means we're not completely dumping on blokes like Hanbury (who is a decent and still pretty young player), on the other hand it's allowing a pathway for some of the talented youngsters not to be lost to the game by relaxing their club trained rules

This and KRs passport dodging are worlds apart. Looking after our blokes' welfare is a priority and i think its the correct call, personally

True. It is the fair and decent thing to do. But, I suppose in a way its a mess and a mess we could have done without.

I suppose the RFL could have maintained a hard line with the overseas players to stick with the purpose of Franchises, but would still have needed to provide exemption to the homegrown players. If they did this it would be highly unfair.

I think the RLPA needs to applauded, sounds like they've gottn in there quick and done what they need to do.

Bradford have got Sammut

two days ago these players "didnt know" if the club would be in super league or not for the next three years, by signing contracts they knew they were taking a risk as is any player signing for a "C" grade club
i dont see how the situation has changed so that these players, who are of little quality judging by their club's position in the table, have justified an exemption to the rules which were just about starting to make a difference for the good of our game and national team
the rfl are obviously partly to blame for their situation by allowing crusaders exemptions (and probably guaranteeing them a franchise in order to attract players) but this is an over reaction for me

I agree! Their are enough quota spots out their to cover those players who had contracts at Cru, why create more? And how ling does it last?

Just seems daft to me as if players are good enough sides will find a spit for them!

bradford had announced sammut before this dispensation was announced and had a quota spot to accomodate him. still unclear whether sammut will qualify for the exemption as he'd left crusader before it was announced albeit only by by a few hours. logically it should apply to all crusaders players under contract for next year at time they decided to withdraw their application which would include sammut.

Logic and the RFL don't exactly go hand in hand.

Sorry but I find this absolutley barmy , or is it the only thing that would have stopped them all walking out today , and the Crusaders fielding the Skorpions team till the end of the season

The RFL are running out of feet to shoot themselves in