The Championship has a lower O/S because the Championship clubs themselves voted for it. Championship 1 clubs are allowed 2 O/S players, by the way. That, again, is because the Championship 1 clubs voted for it. That is the way that [ithey[/i wanted it.

Ah, I see. Well, I did say that I might not be remembering correctly! I just have a memory that the decision had something to do with financial viability.

Financial viability would be an unlikely reason for the O/S quota levels below Super League, given that Championship 1 clubs are allowed more O/S players than the Championship.

Indeed. But I didn't know anything at all about the Championship One quota levels, was only talking about the Championship quota levels, smart a*se.



The financial viability was probably to do with contracts for fulltime players, now that I have reflected upon it further.

I wasn’t trying to be a smart . I was just trying to tell you why the O/S quotas below SL are at the level they are. Whether, or not, you were simply talking about the Championship, makes no odds here. Both the leagues have O/S quotas based on what the clubs in those leagues want it to be, and not necessarily due to financial viability.







There aren’t that many full-time players, if any, in the lower leagues anymore. You just get the odd one or two players being paid for doing community work, rather than have a day job, so I can’t see why that would affect the O/S quotas for the Championship?



Not being a smart here either. The reason why the Salary Cap was lowered from £400k to £300k was probably a financial viability issue though. Perhaps that what you vaguely remember?

I'm not saying it affected the overseas quota, just that the matter of fulltime players might have been what I was thinking of with regard to the financial issue that I remember. In fact I'm becoming convinced that it was. Following on from a couple of Championship teams getting into financial bother in recent times I think the RFL wanted to promote the idea of clubs living within their means, creating stability and good businesses, rather than trying to punch above their financial weight. And yes, that might have been around the time that the salary cap was reduced. It might have been the reason why it was reduced. That I don't know. But I do think I've conflated a few subjects and managed to confuse myself, which is nothing new!

Why do Sheffield Eagles have about five overseas players?

Is there a punchline to this?

We will have to agree to disagree. We just hammerred Featherstone, 70 nil with less than half a team.



I cannot understand how that has "improved the game as a whole." It has developed 6 or 7 elite clubs further and it protects perennial under achievers.



Super League was a great concept. it has just implemented badly. Feels great as a Saints fan mind. But I am equally an RL fan in general.

I think Superleague was probably unavoidable. Without it, I'm not sure we would have had much rugby league at all by now. The consequences of Superleague have to be dealt with as and when they arise. The Challenge Cup is one such consequence. Whether the RFL will ever be a*sed doing anything about it is another matter though.

Ever heard of the Kolpak ruling, Chief?