RFL move the goalposts again.

[butt monkey]

Great to see racism is alive and well in RL.

Is it?

If you could prove such a statement - then we should see the ultimate "explosion" of legal cases and court proceedings to recompense the "exploited".

Seeing as regulating overseas signings cannot be deemed "racist". How can you justify the statement?

[Lil Feka's Dad]

Sincere apologies.

I obviously misunderstood. I thought you were suggesting that it would be better to limit the number of foreign players, regardless of their ability, in favour of British players, regardless of their ability. That scenario would be racist, but if that is not what you were suggesting then I unreservedly apologise.

[butt monkey]

You forget.

I have no input on RFL procedure or resolutions!

Besides which - the wholesale stopping of "Overseas" players was not an option - just the reduction.

[Lil Feka's Dad]

No, I understand (or assume) that you have no control over RL policy. I just thought from your earlier posts that you supported the view that it is perfectly acceptable to exclude a player based purely on their nationality / race.

I never understand the hypocrisy of the Rugby League; before each game we are reminded that (paraphrasing) “Rugby League is a family sport…racist or abusive behaviour will not be tolerated”. What they should do is finish the sentence and add “unless you are foreign and you want to play the game, in which case racism is wholeheartedly endorsed by the governing body”.

Personally I enjoy watching skillful players, regardless of where they come from.

[butt monkey]

My thoughts are that it perfectly acceptable to exclude someone (no matter what colour/creed or religion) as set out by rules (from the governing body) that prevent clubs avoiding junior development/future development at the expense of signing "overseas" players of whatever quality and standing (I have never heard of any players not being signed simply because of colour etc - well not in RL anyway). If this is "racist", then apologies from me! It is not simply about stopping all "overseas" players, but making the clubs sign "quality" rather than quantity. That would remove any "racist" arguement!

However, with our very own Government struggling to control the mass migration of economic migrants from Eastern European countries. Other EU countries (France) applying a "protectionalist" policy regarding the protecting of jobs for home nationals etc, this "racist" stance could be construed into all works of life.

[Lil Feka's Dad]

Personally I don’t get the obsession with the International game.

I watch approximately 70 – 80 games a year. On average 3 of those are Internationals. Personal opinion, but I’d prefer to watch top class league & cup games rather than an artificial dumbed down version in the misguided belief that it will increase the number of British players available for selection.

I believe the Rugby League has too many mutually exclusive goals, and the pursuit of one is to the detriment of the other. I believe that many of the “rules” introduced to protect the game are now restricting it.

If the goal is to have a “competitive league” then the restrictions to arrive at that situation hinder the International game. If the goal is to develop the International game, then changes are required to the current structure to encourage more young players into the game and give them the opportunity to develop. I don’t see how the restriction on squad size (via salary cap) is beneficial to that.

I think I am correct in stating that in an era with a free market with no restrictions (pre salary cap etc.) that the whole GB pack was provided by one club and the Australians were beaten. (I’m open to correction on that one by the more knowledgeable historians)

There are many incentive based schemes which would encourage youth development, however under the current rules, where players are prevented from playing purely because of their nationality, I stand by my original comment that within the hallowed halls of Red Hall, (and among a selection of supporters who concur) racism is alive and well in rugby league.

[MrDave]

The overseas quota could only be an agreement between the clubs because it could never be enforced as a rule, the Kolpak rule deals with player from EU and countries with trade relationships but if someone wanted to challenge the overseas player rule for being racist they could have a case.

"racial discrimination" shall mean any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based on race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other field of public life

racial group "any group of people who are defined by reference to their race, colour, nationality (including citizenship) or ethnic or national origin"

Quoted the definition for racial discrimination and a racial group and underlined the obvious point which could case the overseas quota to be classed as racist. A lawyer could probably find 100 more reasons.

Just to note I am not implying the RFL are racist of that anyone who supports the overseas quota is racist I am just pointing out how legally it could be challenged.

[cpwigan]

Why is it always Bradford though. I seem to recall something involving the Pauls, the Harris saga and now this. Let's be honest this is no different than how we tried to circumvent the salary cap. Therefore, under the fabulous spirit of the game it should not be allowed. Finnigan came here for a pay day when he realised he was not good enough for the NRL. In that way he is no different to most imports. For Bradford to pretend otherwise is a sham.

[cpwigan]

The International Game

- International competition = far greater revenue from sponsorship, far greater TV audiences for all forms of RL, greater TV revenue from enhanced contracts, greater sponsorship etc etc. MONEY, MONEY, MONEY

Rugby Union is a great example.

[Lil Feka's Dad]

This thread could go off on two tangents. 1) The merits of the development of the International game. 2) The systematic racial discrimination as implemented by the RFL. It seems one is being used to justify the other.

"racial discrimination" shall mean any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based on race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other field of public life

racial group "any group of people who are defined by reference to their race, colour, nationality (including citizenship) or ethnic or national origin"

According to the definition as posted it’s pretty clear that regime the RFL have in place is in fact racial discrimination. It’s also pretty clear that many fans of the game support this policy. For some reason the same people get a little uncomfortable when the policy is called by its actual name. That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet. The exclusion of a player based purely on their nationality by any other name is still racism.