RFL move the goalposts again.

[GeoffN]

http://www.sportinglife.com/rugbyleague ... dford.html

Bradford forward Simon Finnigan has won a test case that will remove him from his club's overseas quota.

[FROM A TO B]

I don't see a problem with this, he was born in England, so end of story. You need to ask why was he included as an overseas player if born in the UK? :conf:

[butt monkey]

The problem is, that for the "Overseas quota" to work, all clubs needed to respect the decisions from the governing body regarding who actually was regarded as "overseas" or not.

With the Kolpak, grandparent and EEC rule, this meant virtually half the current overseas (I am guessing here), would not count as such. In an attempt to reduce numbers, wages going overseas etc and also in an attempt to try and improve British playing standards (as most are not much better than their GB counterparts - if even that). The clubs agreed that it was important to decide WHERE the players first played their "senior" rugby - in an effort to adjudicate that THAT was the main deciding factor in who was (or not) an "overseas" player, and remove all other doubts.

Bradford are the first club to break that agreement for their own selfish reasons! Expect more to continue this now - especially as Castleford were "forced" to release Tom Haberacht for the supposed same reason, after signing Mitchell Sargeant.

[MrDave]

Simon's situation highlights the potential of the rules to discriminate unlawfully.

Looks like all Kolpak players are off quota again since the Kolpak ruling says there can be no law to stop players from within the EU or any country within associate trading relationship from playing sport for any club that is in the EU.

Any Kolpak player could go to the RFL and say they want to be off quota under the Kolpak ruling. It is very unlikely the RFL would be able to challenge the Kolpak ruling and win.

[butt monkey]

More details here:

http://www.rleague.com/db/article.php?id=30697

Bradford wished to extend Simon's contract for 2009 but could not do so because the player was classified a non Federation trained player and would thus be on a club's 8-man "quota" next season.

Surely, the club should be careful in who it signs and attempt to sign, knowing full well the repercussion/implications of any quota? This from the club who "couldn't wait" to sign Henry Paul and Tevita Vaikona (amongst others) when they qualified under "residency" rules for exemption from the then overseas quota!

[Mike]

This ruling effectively means that all the loop holes are reopened. Pat is off quota because of his Irish passport, Feka is off quote due to Kolpack...

The bradford board knew what effect this would had on their squad when they agreed to the new rules, now at the slightest problem they threaten to challenge them and bring them down. Any other SL chairman now know what to do if they want to sign an overseas player. What a ridiculous situation.

[butt monkey]

Exactly Mike. I find it hard to believe (although not impossible when dealing with the RFL), that no official, legally binding documentation was signed by all Super League clubs and their respective officials, whereby they agreed to the "binding" nature of the new quota. Without contradiction, falsehood or intent to at a later date (Bulls case - a few weeks), bring the "said agreement" with all 12 clubs into disrepute.

As you say, expect all the Kolpak, Grandparents exemption and EU players to be granted leave from any quota!

[Lil Feka's Dad]

Exactly Mike. I find it hard to believe (although not impossible when dealing with the RFL), that no official, legally binding documentation was signed by all Super League clubs and their respective officials, whereby they agreed to the "binding" nature of the new quota.

I would make absolutely no difference if they did sign a document, as you cannot enforce an illegal contract.

[butt monkey]

Exactly Mike. I find it hard to believe (although not impossible when dealing with the RFL), that no official, legally binding documentation was signed by all Super League clubs and their respective officials, whereby they agreed to the "binding" nature of the new quota.

I would make absolutely no difference if they did sign a document, as you cannot enforce an illegal contract.

But, if the clubs agreed to it. Then they would be bound by it, irrespective of its legal stature. No-one said that it could not be challenged in the Court of Human Rights or other such parliamentary act. Just that the clubs themselves had to act responsibly in an effort to reduce the ridiculous farce of having teams fielding virtually entire sides, made up from players from overseas.

I mean, Bradford are losing Hape in the next few weeks to the lure of Union (would that not create the supposed vacancy the Bulls are pleading for?) - yet they also "cry" that they cannot retain Finnigan because he is classed as "overseas". I expect another "overseas" player signing announcement by the Bulls very soon.

[Lil Feka's Dad]

Great to see racism is alive and well in RL.