Re: Salford and the quota (?) : Tue Sep 24, 2013 6:59 pm  

Good job non fed quotas increasing to seven then. Assume sammut doesn't count overseas quota due to malteses heritage.

Re: Salford and the quota (?) : Tue Sep 24, 2013 7:03 pm  

I was just about to ask if his Maltese passport mattered. Is it EU related?

Oh I dunno. If he scores loads then someone else will have to go...

Re: Salford and the quota (?) : Tue Sep 24, 2013 7:08 pm  

hindle xiii wrote:

I was just about to ask if his Maltese passport mattered. Is it EU related?

Oh I dunno. If he scores loads then someone else will have to go...

Two different quotas that run in parallel. Overseas quota is one which players can get round with EU passports. Non fed trained quota was brought in to stop this and is one sammut currently has a exemption for. It's the non fed trained quota which is increasing, I think to 7.

Re: Salford and the quota (?) : Tue Sep 24, 2013 7:22 pm  

mat wrote:

Two different quotas that run in parallel. Overseas quota is one which players can get round with EU passports. Non fed trained quota was brought in to stop this and is one sammut currently has a exemption for. It's the non fed trained quota which is increasing, I think to 7.

Ta.

I knew the changes, but not where Sammut sat on it.

Without wanting to be arsey to silsdenbull, but if correct that could be worth adding to the squad list thread!

Re: Salford and the quota (?) : Tue Sep 24, 2013 8:24 pm  

So can we sign another kolpak (forward) and overseas player (gob smacking kiwi centre from the Warriors) and still have enough quota for Sammut next year?

Re: Salford and the quota (?) : Tue Sep 24, 2013 9:08 pm  

I'd be more interested in how they fit them all under the "Salary Cap"!!!

Re: Salford and the quota (?) : Tue Sep 24, 2013 10:05 pm  

Well, one of our yet to be announced signings is definitely non-fed trained.

Re: Salford and the quota (?) : Wed Sep 25, 2013 8:13 am  

Well, as far as I can tell the rules haven't changed yet. There has been no RFL official press release, unless I've missed it, and the operational rules that I've just read this morning from the RFL website don't currently show any change in the Club trained or Quota rules; Sorry for the long copy and paste but I thought it might help for clarity;

"CLUB TRAINED
B1:12 The purpose behind the “Home Grown Player” Rule is:
a. to encourage Clubs to develop and better develop their own players so that there are more players coming into the game and so that the standard improves; and
b. to afford an opportunity to junior players to play in top level competitive matches in order to aid their development and ensure the development of the sport.
Definitions. “Federation” means the RLEF;
B1:12A
At the time of notification in any season of the Provisional First Team Squad and First Team Squad and following any amendments during the season, a Club’s First Team Squad, where that Club is in Super League, must consist of:
a. a maximum of 5 players who satisfy none of the definitions of Club Trained, Federation Trained or are working towards either classification.
b. a minimum of 8 Club Trained Players or Academy Juniors working towards that classification.
c. the remainder being made up of Club Trained, Federation Trained Players or Academy Juniors working towards either classification."


Thats as of this morning from the RFL website, I take it these rules are changing and clubs (?), press (?) and other individuals (?) have been briefed prior to the changes. And I'm sure it used to say the aim was for the 5 quota to reduce to 4 but I cant find copy of that as its been removed I think. But this is why it is valid to question and discuss Salford, or indeed ourselves with the sammut/new non fed player issue in terms of recruitments which appear to be in conflict with the current operational rules and quota limits. If all clubs have been briefed these rules are changing and plan their recruitment accordingly then fine (even though I think its a massive step backwards as these quota/club trained rules were one of the things the RFL has got right IMO). If the rules are not changing or only certain clubs have been told then its not fine. Hopefully all will be revealed in an RFL statement when they change the operational rules or with other annoucements after the EGM on the 9th October.

And for the avoidance of doubt, I think its great that Salford have got new investment and are looking to move up the table, its good for the game, but they have made pronouncments about the quota and cap, and now they've signed a lot of quota and marque players and the rules are changing (apparently) so a discussion about the situation is to be expected, it would be the same whichever club it was. Im sure the RFL will clarify things around the EGM.

[Bullseye]

Re: Salford and the quota (?) : Wed Sep 25, 2013 11:13 am  

The thing I don't understand is the reason for the changes.

The RFL brought in the Non Fed and Quota rules and the minimum of 8 club trained players to promote chances for home grown players. Within a couple of years of these rules being enforced they're watering them down. Are there too many club trained players? No. So what's the reason?

Re: Salford and the quota (?) : Wed Sep 25, 2013 11:25 am  

Bullseye wrote:

The thing I don't understand is the reason for the changes.

The RFL brought in the Non Fed and Quota rules and the minimum of 8 club trained players to promote chances for home grown players. Within a couple of years of these rules being enforced they're watering them down. Are there too many club trained players? No. So what's the reason?

These changes are definitely happening, but FC and the club have been aware of the alterations for a while so nobody is at a disadvantage.
The reason they are changing is because of the regionalised academies that are going to be set up within the next couple of years. I think this stems from the academy review that the RFL carried out earlier this year, when quite a few of the academy set ups were found to be of a poor standard. So much so that the RFL decided to set up regionalised academies in certain areas, rather than each team having to run their own.
As a result, the home grown player pool reduces and also becomes uneven for some teams. This is why the number has gone down from 8 to 7.
As for the non-fed rule, this is either a knock-on effect of the academy changes, or something loosely related to the world cup. I suspect the former, but I wouldn't be surprised if the WC uncovers a few hidden gems, and the increased non-fed spots may allow some clubs to add to their roster after the comp is over - quite late in the day for squad additions. Adam Pearson has specifically stated he is leaving some non-fed/quota spots free for the WC.