|
|
Post by JJR on Oct 25, 2018 8:39:03 GMT
So is the Rule
5 Overseas and 7 Non Fed'n Trained? Or just 7 Non Fed Trained? Assume Non Fed Trained is at it says, not developed in the RL U.K. system
Also does Kolpak still exist and is Tonga seen as Kolpak still?
Sau probably been here 6? years so not overseas
Lussick has heritage status so not overseas
So are
Sau Lussick 2 Non Fed
Lui, Hastings, Ben Nak'i + Sio?? Overseas and also Non fed players
So with Littlejohn, Vatuvei, Hauraki gone and off the books there is room for 1 overseas/ non fed player, assuming Sio is not a figment of everyone's imagination.
At least I see why it was important to get Vatuvei, and Hauraki off the books last year and Littlejohn and Tasi for next year.
Life's never dull in the mysterious world of RL Rules.
Hope this makes some form of sense.
|
|
|
|
Post by bonitared on Oct 25, 2018 8:54:48 GMT
Depends what you mean by ‘sense’.
I’ve no idea whether you’re 100% correct,or not, but surely this would be a good time to start with a blank piece of paper.................and produce rules from scratch.
|
|
|
|
Post by lemmy on Oct 25, 2018 11:37:52 GMT
7 non fed trained according to the RFL operating rules - www.rugby-league.com/operational-rules-2018/#p=44I'm guessing the Kolpak rule still applies because the Pacific island states still come under the European "federation" in terms of being able to work in the EU? |
|
|
|
Post by redunderthebed on Oct 25, 2018 12:15:34 GMT
No such thing as overseas or kolpak or heritage or residency anymore
Just non-fed trained. Can’t remember exactly how it works but it’s to do with being at a SL/English club before a certain age (21?)
I’m pretty sure all 6 mentioned above are non-fed so l guess leaves us one space?
|
|
|
|
Post by JJR on Oct 25, 2018 15:59:02 GMT
Well done guys, the mist is clearing a little.
My confusion arises from the fact that when Lussick signed there was a bit of enthusiasm because he had a heritage links.
Was Ben N over 21 when he signed; if not he's not a Non Fed player, I think.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2018 16:03:43 GMT
Well done guys, the mist is clearing a little. My confusion arises from the fact that when Lussick signed there was a bit of enthusiasm because he had a heritage links. Was Ben N over 21 when he signed; if not he's not a Non Fed player, I think. Ben would have been the wrong side of 21 and thought that it was Hastings who had English ties as there was a brief clamour for him to be picked by Bennet. |
|
|
|
Post by JJR on Oct 25, 2018 17:20:55 GMT
Heard Lussick had as well
|
|
|
|
Post by Carnster on Oct 25, 2018 19:27:01 GMT
Well done guys, the mist is clearing a little. My confusion arises from the fact that when Lussick signed there was a bit of enthusiasm because he had a heritage links. Was Ben N over 21 when he signed; if not he's not a Non Fed player, I think. Age has nothing to do with it in this context. The rule, roughly, translates to a player being registered as a youngster playing in a specific hemisphere's junior competitions. So it basically boils down to where each player was registered to play. You register a player down under as an amateur within the official federation of that hemisphere he becomes non-fed trained for the purposes of SL. So Ben N would still count as a non-fed spot. |
|
|
|
Post by Carnster on Oct 25, 2018 19:30:26 GMT
I have no idea why a fuss is made about heritage links to overseas players. It only really matters when pinning their colours to whichever Nation they want to represent. Seeing as most of the green and gold crims will have heritage in the UK I never understand why it's mentioned at all, except in the context that I said above.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2018 20:13:50 GMT
I have no idea why a fuss is made about heritage links to overseas players. It only really matters when pinning their colours to whichever Nation they want to represent. Seeing as most of the green and gold crims will have heritage in the UK I never understand why it's mentioned at all, except in the context that I said above. Would be fun to see if the NRL had the same quota rules, some teams seem to be more than 50% South Sea islanders. |
|
|
|
Post by vin on Oct 25, 2018 21:12:38 GMT
I have no idea why a fuss is made about heritage links to overseas players. It only really matters when pinning their colours to whichever Nation they want to represent. Seeing as most of the green and gold crims will have heritage in the UK I never understand why it's mentioned at all, except in the context that I said above. Would be fun to see if the NRL had the same quota rules, some teams seem to be more than 50% South Sea islanders.
Yes, only around a third of their current national squad are actual shackle-draggers. Most of them are indigenous Australians, Maori, and Islanders with one or two Germans and Serbs.
|
|
|
|
Post by JJR on Oct 25, 2018 21:26:51 GMT
I have no idea why a fuss is made about heritage links to overseas players. It only really matters when pinning their colours to whichever Nation they want to represent. Seeing as most of the green and gold crims will have heritage in the UK I never understand why it's mentioned at all, except in the context that I said above. I don't think asking a question is ' making a fuss' but there may even be a different interpretation to that. |
|
|
|
Post by redunderthebed on Oct 25, 2018 21:28:48 GMT
Would be fun to see if the NRL had the same quota rules, some teams seem to be more than 50% South Sea islanders.
Yes, only around a third of their current national squad are actual shackle-draggers. Most of them are indigenous Australians, Maori, and Islanders with one or two Germans and Serbs.
They’d all be fed trained in Oz though as long as they played their first rugby there or NZ or one of the Islands |
|
|
|
Post by hillbillyred on Oct 26, 2018 7:01:53 GMT
typical Aussies: "one of the islands": UK, Japan, Greenland, Australia, Jamaica : we get it all :-)
|
|
|
|
Post by Carnster on Oct 26, 2018 7:39:37 GMT
I have no idea why a fuss is made about heritage links to overseas players. It only really matters when pinning their colours to whichever Nation they want to represent. Seeing as most of the green and gold crims will have heritage in the UK I never understand why it's mentioned at all, except in the context that I said above. I don't think asking a question is ' making a fuss' but there may even be a different interpretation to that. It wasn't a pop at anyone here. Just a general observation among fans and even media. Shows how grey the subject is i suppose. |
|
