except had you done so you would be further along now. You chose not to, you chose other priorities, you can't expect to avoid criticism for not doing something on the basis you simply chose not to do it. It hasnt yet, if it had done so you wouldnt need 11 overseas players. You cant expect credit for something that hasnt happened. Its like you expect credit now because at sometime in the future some players may come through HKR's youth system into the first team. You want credit for giving a shot to Mariano despite not giving him a shot, you want credit for bringing through a 23 year old forward with only 2 appearances, you want credit for having brought through 2 players who have less than 10 appearances between them. Kallum Watkins has 36 appearances at Leeds at the age of 19, Beaumont(23), Taylor(20), Cox(19) and Sherriff(19) dont have that between them. These players havent been brought through, if they had they would have more appearances and you wouldnt need so many overseas players.
Its a part of the short-term thinking that has left us so far behind. A big part of it.

No they are being berated for creating a self-fulfilling logic to try and justify their failure at youth level. The incentives are there and they are obvious, they are simply longer term.
But these fringe players will still be a higher quality than 23 year old props with 2 games of first grade experience. And we will still be able to pay them more as an average SL player than they will get as a reserve grade NRL player. Im sure if you look back to the beginning of this season, and the season before that, and the season before that then when these criticisms were made of HKR, the same arguments in their defence were made just using different players who were 'being brought through' and were going 'to be given a shot this year' and how when the likes of Vella and Newton left they would be replaced by young british players, and we were going to see Spaven, I'anson, Mariano, and Esders come through and it just didnt happen.

Convenient when Rovers have been beneficiaries of the dispensation culture that has ridden roughshod over the stated and agreed intentions of all SL clubs to close loopholes. If we learn nothing from the successful actions to avoid compliance with the agreement, it makes the chances of ever achieving those stated common goals a reality nil. You've been adopting this laissez faire attitude for years, telling us "this too will pass" and it will all come right in the end if we just wait. The reality is that we'll still be having this conversation in another 5 years time as you well know, as long as clubs are actively pursuing 11 overseas players in their squad. As said, I'd be happy for our overseas contingent to be Manu, O'Meley, Moa, Seymour and Heremaia.
I do find your passive acceptance of Rovers dispensation seeking at every turn a bit odd. Like the statement that Rovers only have Jordan Tansey and Karl Pryce available to them so McDonnell is the sensible option. Your CEO stated a year ago that recruitment for 2012 was underway, so you've had a year to do what you've been talking about, ie seeking British replacements for the likes of Fisher and Vella. It's a bit silly to be saying now, at the point when 95% of recruitment is done, that Rovers have no alternative but to go overseas. Unfortunately I can't see any end to having overseas player numbers in double digit quantities unless there is a gentleman's agreement observed by all. This just won't happen.

How many youngsters have Hull FC given debuts to this year. You can stand here and talk about Rovers and loopholes till your blue in the face but lets not forget which professional club in this city is currently making bigger strides with youth development.

With the exception of Mariano (whom I would have preferred to keep) I don't think any of those are regular SL players anywhere. So why should Rovers retain players that no other SL club deem good enough to play? If they were good enough they would have been snapped up elsewhere. Even regular cannon fodder like Leeds haven't signed them.

Maybe they would have been had they been given a shot at SL. It seems odd for you to think the responsibility for giving a shot to Rovers youth players lies with other clubs.

Who is to say Beaumont, Cox, Taylor or Sheriff will become SL regulars? Nobody knows until they are given the chance.

Smokey, as usual, your arguments have no element of quality control in them. A year ago you were telling us that replacing I'Anson with Blake Green was a "like for like swap". Green was POTY, whilst I'anson is looking forward to a career with Swinton. ATEOTD, Rovers have to give their customers what they want as a priority. That means putting a competitive team out on the park. Player development will be done for Rovers benefit, the national team is not our responsibility. If it were we wouldn't have that clown as coach.

What a poor effort. I've said many times, and started critical threads on this very fact. FC's youth development and failure to give a player a debut in 2011 is a disgrace, pure and simple, and mainly due to Agar's short term preservationist strategy. Unacceptable. Despite this, we've 7 or 8 overseas players on our books, not 11, and I think we should really limit this to 5. Martin is a poor signing (again which I've commented on critically) and I'd very much hope he doesn't keep a player like Turner or Whiting out of the team. Rovers are improving their academy, for sure, but will still probably have a starting 17 with a majority of non-British players in 2012, that's going into your 6th season. The difference between us, as ever, is that I feel comfortable criticising FC in areas of weakness and what are, IMO, policies and practices that are not to be glossed over. Rovers fans by and large feel unable to critique the fact that 6 years on 11 overseas players is probably a few too many, given that Hudgell signed up for 5 in 2007.

I never said they will. But your logic is sound, players will not become regular SL players without playing SL regularly although I would imagine that that's patently obvious to most people. Thanks for that anyway

Defo agree with u stan on that last comment

Surely your time would be better served over on the Hull FC board then.

I count only 10 overseas players for Rovers. No doubt when if it becomes official about Mcdonnell and Mika and the departure of Misi it will be 11. Still we have 10 overseas players after 6 years of SL and Hull have 8 overseas players after 15 years.

Kind of sucks being you doesn't it?

2007 was a long time ago in SL development terms. Lets look at the changing landscape; a move from 12 to 14 teams. This has diluted the player pool significantly and put simply, their isn't enough British talent to go around. Then there is the Crusaders experiment implosion to deal with. Withers & O'Hara was a situation nobody saw coming, but we would have been foolish to ignore this. Not many teams have failed to take someone on this exemption.

Providing Rovers continue to give the likes of Taylor, Cox & Sheriff a fair crack at the 1st team, I'm comfortable with the club's policy.

Dont worry she booked in at spec savers with me

(1)Kris Welham
(2) Jordan Cox
(3) Liam Watts
(4) Louis Sheriffe
(5) Scott Taylor
(6) Aaron Ollett
(7) Rhys Lovegrove
(icon_cool.gif Scott Murrell
(9) Liam Salter
(10) Nick Johnson
(11) Sam Latus
(12) Rich Beaumont
(13) Chris Heil
(14) James Green
This is our full homegrown list. Discounting Lovegrove and Murrell If we can see six of that list regularly getting game time that would be an awesome effort for 2012.

It was a like for like swap, one untried mid-twenties reserve player for another untried mid-twenties reserve player. Maybe if I'anson had been given a proper shot at first team before he was 23 he would have been able to forge a career at SL level.