So essentially you are saying the current quota rules arent working, either in SL, or the Championship?

Indeed. Quota rules rarely work, because we have pretty specific laws about them. That’s why we had the club-trained fudge. We don’t have a stick to beat clubs with here, we can offer carrots. Those carrots however big they are, will fade in to insignificance compared to a place in SL. This system, and any system with P+R in, will simply focus clubs on short-term goals so we will see plenty of overseas players at championship and lower SL clubs.

So which Championship clubs ( other than Sheffield ) are abusing the quota?

It isnt impossible for the RFL ( with the support of the clubs ) to police a quota system

You never know by the start of the 2015 season all 24 clubs in the top 2 leagues could be playing of the same rule book regarding overseas quotas. To me that would make more sense than having 2 separate quotas.

Reading the policy review I believe this is the case. Well, not all clubs, there's going to be 10 teams with an academy who play by one set of rules and the rest another, but that's another story, there's not going to be a separation by league.

I got asked this on another thread and can't find any sort of answer, so I'll open it up, does anyone know which set or points rules the middle 8 will play by? Super league scoring (2 points for a win, 1 for a draw) or championship scoring (3 points for a win, bonus points)?

It does say the details will be produced later.

In a way some of the discussion is over the detail that has not been produced yet.

My only hope is that they take more time and do a better job than they did with the draft proposal. Calling the top 8 the playoff 8, confused quite a few people into thinking we were sticking with a top 8 playoff, were as later in the document it states a top 4 playoff.

Whilst I'm not for or anit the RFL. Producing documents that are clear about what they mean should be their basic requirement.

If one is, the potential is for others to aswell. You think if Fev and Leigh keep missing out on a place in SL to teams who have squads packed with Kolpak players they are going to limit themselves to a quota of 1?

It is impossible for the RFL and clubs to police a quota system because it is illegal, thats why it keeps getting challenged and the RFL capitulate.

So it's effectively a top 4 playoff.

1v4 and 2v3.

Sounds good.

Employment Law is about employment. Clubs can EMPLOY who they want, but I suggest the RFL gets QC's opinion on a potential RFL rule that says 13 of the 17 players named for any particular match must have been born in the EU.

If the opinion is that it's at least 50/50 that there would be an argument that this is a reasonable and proportionate way of achieving a legitimate aim (developing more European based players eligible to play for EU national representative RL teams) should there be a legal challenge, then I'd put in it place.

The FA, re socccer in this country, will apparently be going down this sort of route in the next few years, as a means of limiting the number of foreign players playing in the Premiership.

Whose questioned the quota? Also given it's done on qualifications now, which is used in a lot of industries (finance and medicine in particular) it's hard to declare it illegal.

that would be fine if not for the fact that things like the Kolpak ruling necessitate players from Kolpak nations being treated the same as those from the EU.

So we are talking Fiji,Samoa,Tonga, and yes I know that could include a sizeable number of NZ origin players, but it would certainly make it less attractive to chase them than the current situation

Pretty much all the Pac Isles nations, Fiji, Tonga, PNG, Samoa, or anyone who could get a passport for them. Plus the fact that large swathes of Australians and NZ'ers will qualify for a passport of one of these nations or one of the home nations.

We would be banning so very few it would be a mockery.

In that case set the allowable quota at zero, forcing all clubs to chase Kolpaks only, if as you say it wouldnt make much difference, why make it worse than it could be?

To give the weekly rounds more importance, and to reward who finishes top.

the top 8 should play home games againts every team that has finished below them in the league.

Whoever finishes 1st will play all home games, and 8th - none.
I know teams wouldnt agree but would give massive importance of finishing top