London Broncos cheating again

[ian.birchall]

I see on tonights teletext review of the next three clubs that London Broncos having had a terrible season last year are showing 11 new aussie signings for this season.
How long does their exemption from the overseas signings rule last???
I only ask because I want to know :exc:

[GeoffN]

As far as I can remember, they originally were allowed 15, reduced to 11 in about 2002, and then to 9 last year and this. Not sure about their makeup now, regarding who counts in the 9.

[*!Wigan Babe-Luke Robo Is Class!!*]

would that not effect their salary cap im probarbly wrong becuase i dont get salary caps but still lol x

[DaveO]

ian.birchall posted:
I see on tonights teletext review of the next three clubs that London Broncos having had a terrible season last year are showing 11 new aussie signings for this season.
How long does their exemption from the overseas signings rule last???
I only ask because I want to know :exc:

The number of Aussies they can sign has gone down but I think they are "doing a Bradford" and signing overseas players who don't count on the quota for various reasons.

In fact I am pretty sure I read somewhere a senior official from the Broncos said this was exactly what they were doing and that they were merely taking advantage of the rules and so were not bothered about the number of "Aussies" that gave them in their team.

Dave

[ian.birchall]

GepffN and Dave, I'm afraid you are both missing the point of my moan. I know about their exemptions from the rules that the rest of us have to abide by, I just want someone to tell me why they have this exemption after so long in Superleague.
Interestingly enough it would appear that Wigans efforts to get around the same rules by signing an Italian passport carrying Assie prop did not go down with the Fates.
At least they are matched by Wakefield who in their 2005 squad have 11 Antipodeans plus 2 Frenchmen, hopefully they will suffer for that as well, although of course they benefited from that last year. :exc:

[GeoffN]

It comes down to opinions on expansion, really. They wouldn't have survived in SL without the exemption, and the same reasoning will apply to UTC next year. I admit to being disappointed at the number of 'home-grown' players in the London side, but it does take a long time to set up a similar infrastructure to what we have in the North, where kids take up the game at age 6, and are playing competitive games at that age.

[ian.birchall]

GeoffN, you are too kind, they had more home produced players last season than this, that is going back not forward in my book.

[trotski_tgwu]

I agree Ian as i heard on boots n all near end of last season that London now has more Rugby League Teams in there Area than there is in Castleford. so work it out there must be homegrown talen down on London. I just wishes that they Taught rugby league up here in Scotland as kids would flock to it as opposed to union or footie.

[Fraggle]

trotski_tgwu posted:
I agree Ian as i heard on boots n all near end of last season that London now has more Rugby League Teams in there Area than there is in Castleford

I didn't see this, but did they mention the ages of these teams? It's no good for the Broncos if there are 100 local teams if they're all under-12's.

[DaveO]

ian.birchall posted:
GepffN and Dave, I'm afraid you are both missing the point of my moan. I know about their exemptions from the rules that the rest of us have to abide by, I just want someone to tell me why they have this exemption after so long in Superleague.

It's my understanding thatit was agreed when they were put in SL and that it is only recent seasons that it has tarted to reduce. They are now compensating for the reduction by signing Aussies who don't count on the quota.

Dave