You seem to care enough to post a nonsensical sentence which I assume you mean as an insult.

not a sad act Barry, but a Sad Act.

Those darn capital letters really get to me.

Shouting is sooooo rude isn't it

So the "club specific" exemption has been superseded? Doesn't that bring us back to my original point that the "dispensation" as it is now is awarded to the players and not the clubs?

There isnt any 'dispensation' now. There was a 'dispensation' for rovers which meant when the new rules were brought in, then amended, rovers benefited because of their dispensation, and still continue to do so.

Had rovers not received the dispensation they wouldnt be allowed to have the amount of overseas players they have now, this season.

How many less would they have?

at the very least 1, maybe 3.

However my point wasnt that the exemption led us to this point, simply that HKA did receive and are still benefiting from their dispensation

Because we were looking the long-term impact of a particular issue, it only makes sense to discuss it in terms of how the rules are/were and how they changed.

My contention is that the club-specific dispensations ongoing effect is limited the presence of Lovegrove in the squad.
The rest of the fed-qualified Aussies are down to the universal 2008 and EU passport rules that we have benefitted from through 'luck' in the way the comp-wide rules have developed. Vella, Fisher, Newton, Galea - basically it's just we lucked out when we signed them. The outcome is the same, but the story of how we got here that is been spun on here is misleading IMO.



In defence of Smokey - he is always polite. In defence of GML, Smokey spent a lot of time politely trolling on the Hull KR forum until about a year ago. I guess I've kind of missed him.

I do

So you would agree then that the superseding of the "club specific" dispensation with the "player specific" rules as they are now does in fact mean I was right, the "dispensation" or however you want to phrase it applies to the player and not the club.

Nothing gets past you does it
Actually, it's more a roofs thing....he has often said that in principle that FulhamcrusaderbroncoQuins RL should be ejected from Superleague on principle so I was just pointing out, no matter how HKA circumnavigate the rules that they are not applying the quota as it seen on Principle.
Joking aside, your stadium isn't that bad and will gradually get better once you hit the 10,000 fans your CEO/Chair has stated are needed. Your youth set up will start to produce players in time (something we london fans never got but always said was needed BTW) and financially, once you get to 10,000 you will be in a much stronger position than you are now. Even the missile throwing section of your crowd are accepted as a few mindless idiots who do not reflect the true nature of your core supporters.....but none of this changes the fact that the RFL wanted teams to cut back on overseas players and HKA are one of a few teams who are actually ignoring this. Ergo...this 900+ post thread....which if I am honest, should also include posts about the other offending clubs.

Still, if HKA, Salford, Wakey and all the other teams don't sort out their quota, I am sure it will get a mention when they are allocated their next 3 years in the summer.......it realy isn't right that these teams will field more overseas players than English.


BY THE WAY....."roofs"...I like the new 2011 season HKA Jumpers

The story of how you got here, frankly is irrelevant. The fact is we are here, now, and its a pretty p1sspoor position.

No, some players are exempt. Some clubs got a dispensation. If you are still benefiting from the dispensation then you still have the dispensation.