Nah, lapels are to small, hair was much longer and i was far better looking.

oh and you forgot the little van dyke.

One important point you neglect is that the assurances were not [ijust[/i from Rovers. Tonga has not found the transition towards democracy straight-forward, apparently.

Now we put ourselves at the mercy of an overseas government, so I'm not expecting any sympathy or indeed patience. I don't expect the rules to be interpreted generously (again) - but I do expect them to be interpeted fairly. The passport's no-show was beyond the club's control and despite assurances it would arrive. The fact it was needed at all is, with hindsight, a problem of our creation, but the RFL does not strike me as a vindictive organisation.

It is an administrative issue - Rovers need to find out what the positions of the RFL, WM and, as best they can, Tongan government are and act accordingly. There are whole spectrum of possibilities - fair enough I'm lining up some of the positive scenarios, but they seem no less realistic than the negative HDM orthodoxy (which seems to have changed, despite remaining resolutely gloomy, from 'he's gone', to 'he's staying, but can't be re-registered'... 'possibly...', 'we understand...').

The statement issued by the RFL upon Dobson re-registering specifically states that Mason would require the full support of the RFL board to be re-registered even [iwith[/i a Tongan passport. Granted their record of sticking to what they put out in their statements isn't exactly stellar...

Fair? You talk of fair? How fair to the rest of SL was this unashamed attempt to get an extra quota player on the books and hang the consequences?

The passport's no-show was beyond the club's control but the cynical decision to proceed anyway without it was purely within Hudge's control.

The RFL probably aren't vindictive but they are afraid of ridicule and embarrassment. They are the epitome of inconsistency as well. All I am saying is that it's my bet that Rovers' stock with them at the moment is about as valuable as that of a chicken carcass boiled for half a day to make potato soup.

True enough - and tbf, the situation has grown so complex any set of rules would struggle to cope. My [iguess[/i is that the RFL would re-register him if the passport arrives.



The situation and the quality of those third party assurances were misjudged. But two wrongs and all that. We're now at the stage were the rules are going to have to be improvised. Punishing or embarrassing Hull KR doesn't serve the RFL's interests IMO.
Willie Mason is eligible for a Tongan passport - but he can't get one because the Tongan political system is having a bit of a seizure, one that could hardly be legislated for. Assuming that is resolved, it'd take a perverse attitude to leave Mason in RL limbo. IMO - but I'm biassed of course. In any case, the passport has to arrive first and when it does the deal with Toulon might become reality. Whatever, I hope for both Mason's and Rovers' sake that the RFL have made their position clear so appropriate steps can be taken. Rovers seem to think the passport process is worth finalising, the HDM understands that it is not, so we'll have to wait and see. At least the negativity has set the bar so low that any sort of silver lining is going to feel like a win now!

I don`t think Rovers should be punished over this,but it does beg the question has it set a precedent?

Tbh, how often is this particular set of circumstances likely to arise?

I suspect that the RFL will (and indeed have) revert to requiring a passport rather than government assurances.

There aren't many very up to date stories on the situation in Tonga, but it is a moderately interesting set of circumstances that have arisen. One assumes that the cabinet/privy council has some important roles to perform (aside from ratifying passports), so you have to feel for the Tongan people, whose first taste of democracy this is. OTOH, Belgium got by just fine without a government for several months recently, iirc.

I read somewhere this week (I can't find a link so it must have been a paper-based article, anyone else seen it?) that Hudge was hoping to field both Mason and Dobson at the derby, and had actually asked for dispensation to do so. He received a hearty "no" in response to that request.

Still think it depends on how the RFL view the whole fiasco, if they apportion any blame to Rovers and how embarrassed they feel. The mighty silence from them from start to finish would indicate they feel a tad compromised, at least. They may also take into consideration how audacious they feel Rovers have been with the continued dispensation requests and if they feel they have been granted more than their fair share of favours.

I also think it will depend on how much of a protest other clubs make and how public these are likely to be. I certainly [idon't[/i think they intend to "punish" Rovers, more that they will feel it necessary to be seen to be addressing any imbalances.

infrequently because no other team is seeking to shoehorn 10 overseas players into their squad. Although Widnes might give it a go in 2016 if they claim that 5 years is not long enough to deliver homegrown players.

We deliver plenty of homegrown players, so much so we are fielding more than you

Sorry Phil, I meant decent ones like Yeaman that have got us into a play-off berth (for now

), plus back-up British players like Dowes with more tackle busts per game than highest paid forward at Brisbane Joel Clinton. Again.