So it hasn't been superseded? It's just that a couple of hours ago you said it had? Has it or hasn't it? Does the "dispensation" as it is now apply to players or clubs? Nobody is concerned about rules that were applied in the past and are now defunct.

If a player as the rules are now is eligable for exemption does he apply in his own right in his name or does the club claim some random number of exempt players which it can decide to allocate as it sees fit? i.e. does the exemption apply to the player or the club?

Bottom line is , if you were doing something wrong , the RFL would either prevent it or stop it , they aren't so you arent , simple as

Sorry, I thought you and Gutterfax were attempting to apportion blame - in which case the story of how we got here would obviously be relevant.

If we're ignoring context then you think it is weeweepoor, while I think it is tres bon.

Unfortunately the long-established SL clubs failed to match the NRL in producing a surfeit of quality players for us to sign on our return from the wilderness. Happily the rules have fallen in a way that allows us to ameliorate the cost, to us, of your failures. Lucky us.

Yours was a failure relative to the NRL, which is just stronger. Calling the performance of the long-established SL clubs p!s5poor is maybe harsh in absolute terms.

May I anticipate your next question? That is 'how are things ever going to get better?'.
If by 'better' you mean more British kids getting a chance then the player exemptions passing in to history and the economic strength of the NRL will see that happen. If by 'better' you mean an England team that can regularly compete with Australia, this is trying to fight a forest fire with a water pistol. One day we'll contribute more fully to squeezing the trigger - but competing today is the priority.

An individual player can apply for an exemption. That is between him and the RFL.

Hull KA asked for a dispensation, they were given it, they are still deriving benefit from it.

or try, and be threatened with numerous court cases, and cave in.

You think the lack of youth development, the failure to give opportunities to young british players, the poor standard of coaching, the absence of player pathways, and the overall failure in producing players is a good thing?
Its not their job to produce British players for you. Its your job to find them.

No, it isnt, in large parts all clubs have failed, Some have done pretty well, Leeds, Saints, Wigan, Hull, Bradford have all produced a good amount of youngsters, unfortunately they have a couple too many overseas players but you would have to be an idiot to expect them to produce the same amount of players as the entire RL system in Australia.

And clubs will always make the same argument. They always have. Fact is it is damaging the clubs themselves, and the league as a whole, the international side and the game as a whole. This attitude, which is repeated by other clubs, simply proves that HKA and other clubs arent ready for SL. SL is too big, it should be cut by at least 4 heartland clubs who cant seem to cut it.

Importing a shedload of overseas players is a temporary fix for expansion sides while they work to mature the amateur game around them so they can pick from them, When you have one of the strongest amateur games in the country on your doorstep and you can find 18 lads to fill your top 25 then you are simply failing.

You may be happy because your one-club myopia distracts you from the rest of the game, but when you take off your red and white glasses you will see how badly it affects the game, for no benefit at all to the game.

No. Being lucky enough to not have use so many of the products of a failed system that we were not responsible for is clearly a bonus for Hull KR.



Not that easy though is it - due to 'the lack of youth development, the failure to give opportunities to young british players, the poor standard of coaching, the absence of player pathways, and the overall failure in producing players is a good thing' of Super League clubs over many years.



So given that, isn't it natural that we would look to the superior system in Australia to make up the shortfall, until we start producing more players of our own (both as a league and a club)? There's a chicken and egg argument there, but we have to get on our feet before we can concern ourselves with it. You talk about heartlands club not being able to hack it in SL and I assume HKR are one. But, without wanting to turn this into a P and R debate, the chasm that any club has to overcome in coming in to SL is enormous. Despite being a heartlands club, I think Widnes should be given a quota dispensation if they are elevated. And they've had time (if not cash) to prepare.





Maybe. It is something I've thought about too - but it is a much bigger argument, with all sorts of other implications.




18 better or as good as Galea, Vella and Newton? No. Good enough to play SL - probably, but not in 4 years.




That's not very nice. True, but not very nice. Bit hard to swallow from a big-club anti-capper, too.

Personally I blame Roofs TOTALLY