Yes but just because we have a few injuries doesnt mean Maloney is suddenly 'ready' for super league. I do not know much about Cordoba but you have to give the club some credit for bringing a guy across mid season to help the coach put out as strong a squad as possible.

If Agar doesnt think Maloney is ready then this signing makes sense in a results driven business ( ). Agar thinks a guy with 60 odd NRL appearance will improve the team more then the guy who is still cutting his teeth at this level but progressing none the less.

The only logical explanation i can see for this is due to the 25 player first team squad rule and he has had to make way on this so Tansey can be registered on it.

Which 25 player first team squad rule is that?

rlThis one.rl

SUPER LEAGUE SQUADS

• Each engage Super League club must nominate a first team squad of up to 25 players.
• Clubs may then make amendments to that first team squad during the season with the prior approval of the RFL.
• If a club wishes to play a player who is not in the first team squad, it may only do so with the prior approval of the RFL.

So I suppose it depends how the 25 is defined (I presume it's to do with full time vs part time). If Tansey's arrival has made it impossible for Maloney to play in the first team, perhaps he's asked for a move.

You will see teams have a 30 man squad, although only 25 of them will be classed as first team, some will be academy who do not count.

Another clear as glass RFl ruling.

Cheers, didn't realise such a rule existed.

But he wouldnt have had to leave Hull to come off the 25 players will he? (unless thats the only way the RFL would allow Tansey to join)

Wasnt aware of this rule, thought it had gone when the 20/25/25 ruling went but obviously hasnt.

Couldnt we justify the signing of Tansey with the season ending injury to Motu? Thats assuming Motus injury is that bad of course.

Seems harsh that you cannot replace an injured player due to a 25 man squad ruling.

The Salary Cap can be deemed to be restriction of trade but if it is agreed by the majority of the clubs and becomes an RFL Bye Law it overrides Employment and Contract laws.

I think you'll find that a bye law of an organisation doesn't, and never could, override statute.

The RFL are also introducing the rule next year that allows clubs to loan players to lower league clubs at short notice, due to the reserves becoming the U21's (if i have got that right).

Maybe Agar plans to re-sign big Mal and loan him out for a year?

Still find it odd that we opt to play underperforming players this year whithout giving younger guys the opportunity to step up and show what they can do, particulaly when the season is more or less over. Agar baffles me at times.

No, but he couldn't then play, so (from his point of view) what would be the point in him hanging around? That's what I meant in my last sentence.

Maybe. But the point is the clubs have agreed it. It is therefore an RFL Bye Law and all clubs will abide by it. You brought up the Employment Laws.

Simples.