WWW.RLFANS.COM :: View topic - Hull KR and the non-fed quota rules

WWW.RLFANS.COM https://rlfans.com/forums/

Hull KR and the non-fed quota rules - a brief history. https://rlfans.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=59&t=479157	Page 1 of 2

Author:	Mild Rover [ Sat Jan 08, 2011 1:03 pm ]
Post subject:	Hull KR and the non-fed quota rules - a brief history.
As well as brief, also hopefully simple - or as simple as possible. First up it is important to understand that they are rules plural. The quota has been around for a long time, the non-fed rule was brought in as an additional rule to crack down on Kolpaks and EU passports of convenience that 'got around' the the spirit of the quota, as the RFL saw it. The non-fed rule was introduced for the 2008 season. That season you could have 10 non-fed and, as always, 5 quota. Rhys Lovegrove had a dispensation that year and later quailified as club-trained when a new clause was added to that rule (edit - the dispensation probably still applies). The 2008 exemptions came at the end of this year and were effective from 2009 on. I think... 2008 5 Quota: James Webster, Jake Webster, Ben Galea, Garrett Crossman, Daniel Fitzhenry. 5 10 non-fed: The 5 quota players above, Gene & Aizue (Kolpak), Vella, Fisher, Newton (EU passports). 10 James Webster was replaced by Michael Dobson on both registers midway through the season The next year non-fed was reduced to 8, but in a 3 step process players here for 2008 but trained overseas gained dispensations. First, on the back of challenges/requests from Finnegan and the Henderson brothers British born non-fed trained players became exempt. Stanley Gene ensured Kolpaks and EU passport holders were treated the same as British non-feds and ultimately it was even extended to quota players. Garret Crossman left the club and we signed no new overseas players. I think (and timings might be slightly out) ... 2009 5 Quota: Galea, Dobson, Jake Webster, Fitzhenry. 4 8 non-fed: Galea and Webster (? not yet eligible to apply for exemption due to length of contracts ?), Dobson. 3? So Gene and Aizue's departures at the end of the season were not relevant, but Fitzhenry leaving opened another quota spot, giving us 2 spare. We filled one of them with Joel Clinton. The non-fed limit fell to six, but as can be seen above this was cushioned for those who'd recruited from abroad well in 2008 and before. Galea and Webster could definately now come off non-fed but remained quota. I think... 2010 5 Quota: Galea, Dobson, Jake Webster, Clinton. 4 6 non-fed: Dobson, Clinton. 2 For next year (when non-fed drops to 5, where it will stay), all of those players remain, but it was assumed that Galea would come off quota (he's already fed-trained, remember), leaving quota spots for both Green and Mason (who would also use non-fed spots, but those were already open). Galea not coming off quota left us a quota spot short - but we were fine for non-fed space - hence the necessity for Willie Mason's Tongan jaunt. Hope that is useful.

Author:	Mild Rover [ Sat Jan 08, 2011 1:20 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Hull KR and the non-fed quota rules - a brief history.
I can't be bothered to go into the same level of detail, but for Hull FC... I think... 2008 (10 non-fed, 5 quota allowed). quota - Sing, Dykes, Cusack, Berrigan, Byrne. 5. non-fed - the 5 quota players plus Manu and Motu Tony. 7. The fullness of the quota delayed James Webster's signature until he got his passport, even though they had 3 non-fed spots free. 2009 (8 non-fed, 5 quota allowed). quota - Cusack, Berrigan, Byrne. 3. Crocker would have made in 4. non-fed - Berrigan (? long contract ?), Moa, Lauaki. 3? Crocker would have made 4? 2010 (6 non-fed, 5 quota allowed). quota - O'Meley, Fitzgibbon, Berrigan. 3. non-fed - O'Meley, Fitzgibbon, Moa, Lauaki. 4. (Berrigan presumably off, despite still being quota?)

Author:	smudgersmith [ Sat Jan 08, 2011 6:46 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Hull KR and the non-fed quota rules - a brief history.
Ok can you help me out here, maybe a stupid question but............. I understand the idea of the Kolpak ruling and freedom of work across EU and partners however, I do not understand how we can limit this number is this not restricting a members ability to work in the UK?

Author:	Mild Rover [ Sat Jan 08, 2011 7:01 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Hull KR and the non-fed quota rules - a brief history.
smudgersmith wrote:Ok can you help me out here, maybe a stupid question but............. I understand the idea of the Kolpak ruling and freedom of work across EU and partners however, I do not understand how we can limit this number is this not restricting a members ability to work in the UK? 'We' are limiting/restricting based on where a player trained, not their nationality - UEFA have agreed something similar with the EU. The RFL has pushed the principle a bit further in terms of numbers, but it is the same principle. The more ambitious approach led to a phased introduction and a retrospective exemption. Some people regard this as timidity on the RFL's part, but... UEFA competition - maximum of 17 non-association (equivalent of non-fed) in a 25 man squad. RFL - maximum of 5 non-fed in a 25 man squad. Anybody know the RFU regs (I'm not aware if there even are any)? Or County cricket? Football, as a truly global sport isn't the best comparison perhaps - but they have the muscle to be able negotiate principles with the EU.

Author:	phleastyler [ Sat Jan 08, 2011 11:10 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Hull KR and the non-fed quota rules - a brief history.
why dont they just say max of 7 non brits in squad with no stupid loopholes!!!!!!!!!!!!

Author:	Scott_HKR [ Sat Jan 08, 2011 11:15 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Hull KR and the non-fed quota rules - a brief history.
I have to applaud Mild Rover here, for taking the time out to read and understand the rules correctly, and for also putting them in more leymans terms for us simple folk lol. But seriously, good job, for both sides.

Author:

Mild Rover [ Sat Jan 08, 2011 11:24 pm ]

Post subject:

Re: Hull KR and the non-fed quota rules - a brief history.

phleastyler wrote:why dont they just say max of 7 non brits in squad with no stupid loopholes!!!!!!!!!!!!

Article 39 of the EC (as it was then) Treaty says no...

Though this Q and A is about football, the same principles apply...

http://www.inbrief.co.uk/football-law/football-quotas-and-home-grown-player-rule.htm

Regarding a football equivalent of your suggestion it says...

Would this proposal be open to legal challenge?
The key aspect to note regarding this proposal is that it would constitute discrimination on the grounds on nationality whereas the existing system does not discriminate on grounds of nationality. If this system were put in place it is therefore extremely unlikely that it would not fall foul of the fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the EC Treaty through Article 39.

phleastyler wrote:why dont they just say max of 7 non brits in squad with no stupid loopholes!!!!!!!!!!!!

Article 39 of the EC (as it was then) Treaty says no...

Author:	phleastyler [ Sat Jan 08, 2011 11:28 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Hull KR and the non-fed quota rules - a brief history.
so mild rover, the hull fans should stop whinging abot willies potential signing!!!!!! end of, yeah right!!!!

Author:	Mild Rover [ Sat Jan 08, 2011 11:33 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Hull KR and the non-fed quota rules - a brief history.
phleastyler wrote:so mild rover, the hull fans should stop whinging abot willies potential signing!!!!!! end of, yeah right!!!! Actually, I've just noticed that they might have a legitimate gripe, but I'm damned if I'm going to do their dirty work for them. Tbf, the RFL seem to be on top of it.

Author:	Anakin Skywalker [ Sun Jan 09, 2011 12:13 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Hull KR and the non-fed quota rules - a brief history.
Mild Rover wrote:Actually, I've just noticed that they might have a legitimate gripe, but I'm damned if I'm going to do their dirty work for them. Tbf, the RFL seem to be on top of it. Was that the situation I mentioned earlier

Page 1 of 2	All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/