My point is that next year you could possibly have 11 players not born in the UK. Can you name an all British 17 for the players you have for next year?

Well done on naming 3 stand offs and two loose forwards at scrum half.

Can I wait until I know 2011s squad or would you like to send me the list you have already?

I forgot the time stand offs weren't half backs, my bad. And 2 LF?

It should also be pointed out that Rovers intend to hand 5 full time contracts to members of this years under 18s side. We dont just recruit from abroad and are very much doing our bit for developing young British talent.

'English' or 'British born' is irrelevant in terms of the letter of the RFL's law. This isn't really the RFL's fault - they are only trying to stay on the right side of [iThe Law[/i. People and organizations generally respond to incentives (rather than appeals to their better nature) and the RFL have been unable provide sufficient, either in the form of carrot or stick, to achieve their aims in the short term. They've of necessity adopted a gradualist approach and they/we will get there gradually. Unless real incentives accelerate the process (an ever stronger Aus dollar or much bigger NRL salary cap, for example).

Saying that an English player could do the same job as Rhys Lovegrove ignores the crucial fact that he counts as club-trained. You may disapprove of that decision, but we have to deal with what is rather than what others might wish.

Mrs B. Your point about replacing overseas players, as they retire - British players will retire at the same rate and need fed-trained replacements, it doesn't really disadvantage Rovers if this scenario comes to pass. Age is a bigger factor than nationality in this regard.

I've read in the Red Red Robin chairman/coach's columns that JM's recruitment remit is to make the squad more youthful and British. And indeed, over the last two years only Clinton was neither and only Fozzard, among the Brits, was old (for a RL player). Even allowing for there not being much on the market, though, I have to admit that Bailey wouldn't be the most progressive signing.

That is the crucial point - and we have to acknowledge Rovers still have much progress to make.

The background of your fed-trained players is something of a red herring - unless your target is the governing body rather than an individual club. Even then, I'd ask - what else could they do?

which 5 are your best guess??? you'd have to think kristian bell and jordan cox would be 2 of them

Don't want to be pedantic but Ratu is Fijian

Very happy memories of Fiji from when I was a cadet.

Sorry, thread drift.

Fitzhenry didnt want to go anywhere Sweetheart it was well documented and anyone who saw him bawling his eyes out would know that.
Infact didn't we shift a grand total of 3 overseas players that season end and replace them with ............................ Brits and 1 AUSSIE?

Fair enough, but the point is that the overseas reduction framework of gradual reduction to 5 by 2011, communicated several years ago, addressed this. The fact that multiple exemptions could result in some clubs having more overseas players at the end of the first franchise term than at the start, in some cases in double figures, makes a mockery of it. Just my opinion. My interpretation of what you are saying is that the original reduction to 5 framework was illegal. If so then it was a stupid thing for the RFL to communicate to start with.

It would be interesting if the RFL imposed a one point loss on the franchise bid for exceeding 5 non British born players.