No he isn't.

He was out injured when Wigan played Barrow.

Yes hes is. He doesn't need to play for the team to be cup tied, he was signed after the deadline, he can play after this round

if true thats a stupid rule.

should be like soccer, only cup tied if you have already played in the competition with another club. nice and simple.

It is true, that's the ruling.

behind the stick has a point. After the Jamie Thackery fiasco, it was revealed players are registered for the challenge cup originally for rounds 4-5, then the clubs need to re-register players from the quarter finals onwards.

Now if Mathers is registered in the CC for Wigan, then he can't play on Sunday unless he was de-registered and then re-registered again under us.

I suppose Martin Gleeson will have the same problem, except he didn't play against York which suggests he wasn't registered to play. If Wigan had any sense then they would have done the same with Mathers, so in theory (and after a lot of waffle from my behalf) I suppose I must be eligible to play on Sunday, selection pending.

Both Mathers and Gleeson are available for their clubs AFAIK.

I don't know for certain, but pretty sure it will be similar in football that you have to register players.

The challenge cup rules are as follows:



Now, given Gleeson joined Wigan after our match against York and therefore surely wasn't registered to Wigan the Monday before, he must also be cup-tied this coming weekend.

And actually, I've just re-read it and our match against York was the 4th round - the rules state you can only use players up to the 5th round that you had registered on the Monday before the 3rd round. So Mathers and Gleeson are both cup-tied.

And for Mr Potatoe Head's info, rules in football are basically as follows:

-Any player playing any match in the FA cup is unable to play for any other club in the cup that season (same as RL)
-Any player playing the cup must be registered to the club no later than 12:00 noon Friday before the game (again similar to RL, although RL a bit more strict in saying it must be one of two particular Mondays)
-To play in the Final, player must have been eligible for same club in semi final (same as RL, although RL more strict in saying qtr final)

not disputing anything anyone has declared to be true but why on earth do the RFL make things so confusing.

If a player has not played in the CC for another team in earlier rounds then he should be eligible to play for his current club in the next round and possible future rounds.

Easy isnt it?

I think it's to prevent daft short term signings to boost a clubs cup squad.

i see where you are coming from but i think that is more likely to happen in football than rl.

Once the rl season starts transfers of players are few and far between.

Quote ="SEB"I don't know for certain, but pretty sure it will be similar in football that you have to register players. The challenge cup rules are as follows: Now, given Gleeson joined Wigan after our match against York and therefore surely wasn't registered to Wigan the Monday before, he must also be cup-tied this coming weekend. And actually, I've just re-read it and our match against York was the 4th round - the rules state you can only use players up to the 5th round that you had registered on the Monday before the 3rd round. So Mathers and Gleeson are both cup-tied.'" www.wiganwarriors.com/news_full.asp?newsid=4751

Quote ="SEB"I don't know for certain, but pretty sure it will be similar in football that you have to register players. The challenge cup rules are as follows: Now, given Gleeson joined Wigan after our match against York and therefore surely wasn't registered to Wigan the Monday before, he must also be cup-tied this coming weekend. And actually, I've just re-read it and our match against York was the 4th round - the rules state you can only use players up to the 5th round that you had registered on the Monday before the 3rd round. So Mathers and Gleeson are both cup-tied.'" www.wiganwarriors.com/news_full.asp?newsid=4751

hmmm, did the RFL change their rules after the Thackery affair? I'm not sure, and can't find anything. The rule I quoted is from a document on the RFL website dated February 2008 - so it's possible they've changed them and not put them on the website yet.

Going from memory, the CC had two signing deadlines, was it February and April? Regardless, I can't remember, but know it only has one deadline now. I Think!

Could be wrong (usually am), but I didn't think they'd changed the rules as the rules were quite clear. It was the punishments (or lack of) that were the problem and were subsequently addressed.

At last, found something, the RFL website is not up to date: www.skysports.com/story/0,19528, ... 73,00.html Quote The RFL have now opted to remove their complicated deadline system, to try and avoid any such confusion in the future. Now, prior to round five, any player properly registered for their club will be eligible to play cup fixtures, and for the quarter-finals onwards, players must have been registered before a set date, which this year is May 25.'" So, Gleeson IS eligible. And so should Mathers. Over to you Behind the stick?

At last, found something, the RFL website is not up to date: www.skysports.com/story/0,19528, ... 73,00.html Quote The RFL have now opted to remove their complicated deadline system, to try and avoid any such confusion in the future. Now, prior to round five, any player properly registered for their club will be eligible to play cup fixtures, and for the quarter-finals onwards, players must have been registered before a set date, which this year is May 25.'" So, Gleeson IS eligible. And so should Mathers. Over to you Behind the stick?

Quote ="SEB"At last, found something, the RFL website is not up to date: www.skysports.com/story/0,19528, ... 73,00.html So, Gleeson IS eligible. And so should Mathers. Over to you Behind the stick?'" SEB i applaud your diligence in finding and reporting the facts - which keeps us lesser mortals "in the know"eusa_clap.gif

Quote ="SEB"At last, found something, the RFL website is not up to date: www.skysports.com/story/0,19528, ... 73,00.html So, Gleeson IS eligible. And so should Mathers. Over to you Behind the stick?'" SEB i applaud your diligence in finding and reporting the facts - which keeps us lesser mortals "in the know"eusa_clap.gif

I second that, good work SEB.

I concur and also welcome the way the that SEB communicated his concerns and findings.

So Mathers in the 17 this week do we think? he played in the reserves last time out V Huddersfield so he has had some game time.

Read this thread again.

Quote ="Latchford Wolvesfan"Read this thread again.'" Why when SEB has found information confirming that Gleeson is eligible for Wigan so Mathers should be for us Quote ="SEB"At last, found something, the RFL website is not up to date: www.skysports.com/story/0,19528, ... 73,00.html The RFL have now opted to remove their complicated deadline system, to try and avoid any such confusion in the future. Now, prior to round five, any player properly registered for their club will be eligible to play cup fixtures, and for the quarter-finals onwards, players must have been registered before a set date, which this year is May 25. So, Gleeson IS eligible. And so should Mathers. Over to you Behind the stick?'"

Quote ="Latchford Wolvesfan"Read this thread again.'" Why when SEB has found information confirming that Gleeson is eligible for Wigan so Mathers should be for us Quote ="SEB"At last, found something, the RFL website is not up to date: www.skysports.com/story/0,19528, ... 73,00.html The RFL have now opted to remove their complicated deadline system, to try and avoid any such confusion in the future. Now, prior to round five, any player properly registered for their club will be eligible to play cup fixtures, and for the quarter-finals onwards, players must have been registered before a set date, which this year is May 25. So, Gleeson IS eligible. And so should Mathers. Over to you Behind the stick?'"

Thanks all, makes a nice change from getting criticised!

it may have already been done without our knowledge all cloak and dagger like

Just play him, it never bothered Hull with Thackray