Re: 2011 SL Transfers : Mon Nov 08, 2010 8:06 pm  

SmokeyTA wrote:

Have i said anything different? There is however a limit to the amount of 'experienced' players this country produces because we are so averse to giving our young players experience. Which means that to rely on 'experienced' players means to rely largely on overseas 'experienced' players.

You've immediately answered your own question

SmokeyTA wrote:

Or they arent introduced and clubs rely on overseas players.

Which is a risk a club can take but if that club then struggles because of fielding inexperienced players when needed they only have themselves to blame.

SmokeyTA wrote:

it is very rare that a player with 0 experience proves themselves the better than a player with lots of experience. Why do young players, not at 17/18 but at 19/20/21 need to wait for injuries before getting an opportunity to learn and get the experience they need to improve to be better than a 24+ year old overseas player.

It is even rarer that a coach will have absolutely no idea of the ability of a player in their first team squad without seeing him in a SL game, so to answer your Billy Slater problem, it will be abundantly obvious that the player has such talent and given the remit of a SL coach being to win games (which I think we agree on) why would a coach not select his best players in order to win more games?

SmokeyTA wrote:

because it has become secondary. Where a coach is praised for spotting 'talent' at 22/23/24 from the nrl or lower leagues in Aus, rather than criticised for not being able to prepare any british player

Where does this praise for "spotting 'talent' at 22/23/24 from the nrl or lower leagues in Aus" emanate from? Or did you just make that bit up? Don't tell me, I already know.

Re: 2011 SL Transfers : Mon Nov 08, 2010 8:31 pm  

Barnacle Bill wrote:

You've immediately answered your own question

No I haven't. You have confused yourself again.

Which is a risk a club can take but if that club then struggles because of fielding inexperienced players when needed they only have themselves to blame.

or they could just keep upping the amount of overseas players they have, then sign some players from other SL clubs and argue that only introducing 1 academy player as a regular first team player in 5 years isnt a pathetic total and go on to make lots of silly arguments about how it isnt a bad thing they have to rely on 10 overseas players.

It is even rarer that a coach will have absolutely no idea of the ability of a player in their first team squad without seeing him in a SL game, so to answer your Billy Slater problem, it will be abundantly obvious that the player has such talent and given the remit of a SL coach being to win games (which I think we agree on) why would a coach not select his best players in order to win more games?

No, you are confusing talent and potential. You are confusing a players ability right now, with a players ability 3/4 years down the line after 3/4 years of SL experience. You are as usual confused.

Where does this praise for "spotting 'talent' at 22/23/24 from the nrl or lower leagues in Aus" emanate from? Or did you just make that bit up? Don't tell me, I already know.

i know you know, you said it.

Re: 2011 SL Transfers : Mon Nov 08, 2010 8:39 pm  

inside_man wrote:

I don't see many ways around it though, the problem at the minute is the exemptions for players who were already under contract.

If a player hasn't trained in the federation for 3 years under the age of 21, he counts on the quota. Nothing to do with nationality, no-ones grandparents are involved, just where they trained.

It'll just take a couple of years for players to retire for things to be the way they are supposed to be.

I applaud your optimism, but you seem to think that a) the goalposts are fixed, and b) clubs are enacting the spirit of the principles they all signed up to when the actual evidence is that some will have twice as many overseas players next year than they agreed to in 2007.

Some clubs will put their energy into both lobbying the RFL for exemptions and rule changes and seeking legal get-outs rather than getting on and enacting what they agreed to, and that's just the way it is, unfortunately. If you really believe that in a "a couple of years" all clubs will have 5 overseas players, you're mad. This is what was agreed 3 and a half years ago and we're no nearer to it now than we were then, in fact some clubs are further away.

Re: 2011 SL Transfers : Mon Nov 08, 2010 9:44 pm  

SmokeyTA wrote:

No I haven't. You have confused yourself again.

No. First you say you didn't specifically mean experienced Aussies and then you immediately say it's the experienced Aussies that are the problem.

SmokeyTA wrote:

or they could just keep upping the amount of overseas players they have, then sign some players from other SL clubs and argue that only introducing 1 academy player as a regular first team player in 5 years isnt a pathetic total and go on to make lots of silly arguments about how it isnt a bad thing they have to rely on 10 overseas players.

Now, you see, that's not true is it? No club can arbitrarily decide to up the amount of overseas players they have without regard to the rules laid down by the RFL can they? Hull KR due to circumstances will have more "overseas" players next year than this. It is still less than they had 3/4 years ago, a fact you might not like but still, there it is. And you've been arguing incessantly about signing English players from other clubs, but when Hull KR do it, this is in some way less than satisfactory.

SmokeyTA wrote:

No, you are confusing talent and potential. You are confusing a players ability right now, with a players ability 3/4 years down the line after 3/4 years of SL experience. You are as usual confused.

No I'm not, you are suggesting a player of Billy Slater's ability would be overlooked, not because there are better players in the squad, but because there are more experienced players in the squad. You even went so far as to suggest that the next Billy Slater would be overlooked in favour of Shad Royston. Well if a coach does that they deserve everything coming to them which likely would be more losses (not in a SL coaches remit, do you agree?) and probably lose the player. Why would any coach, who wants to keep his job, do that?

SmokeyTA wrote:

i know you know, you said it.

I know. You made it up.

Re: 2011 SL Transfers : Mon Nov 08, 2010 9:54 pm  

Barnacle Bill wrote:

Hull KR due to circumstances will have more "overseas" players next year than this.

Please.....what circumstances are these? The regulations that were agreed and have since been pretty much ignored by all are there to assist with the development of English talent. HKA seem more preoccupied with trying to get back their glory years and win something now...rather than building slowly. I understand that a SL win or a CC win would probably boost attendances at Craven Park......but as a business model, it's very short termist...........and if you go another season without a trophy, will you continue to go down this route?
I know HKA are not the only team doing this, even little old skint Quins RL have 6 overseas players signed so far for 2011......but the blind defence of 10 overseas players by some on here does attract more criticism......

I know it's easy for a Quins fan to say as we have had a lot of our "Englishness" thrust upon us, but I would rather spend another 5 years slowly building a local squad that can compete rather than going to Wembley with a team full of overseas players....we've done that...It didn't work.

Re: 2011 SL Transfers : Mon Nov 08, 2010 9:56 pm  

gutterfax wrote:

Please.....what circumstances are these? The regulations that were agreed and have since been pretty much ignored by all are there to assist with the development of English talent. HKA seem more preoccupied with trying to get back their glory years and win something now...rather than building slowly. I understand that a SL win or a CC win would probably boost attendances at Craven Park......but as a business model, it's very short termist...........and if you go another season without a trophy, will you continue to go down this route?
I know HKA are not the only team doing this, even little old skint Quins RL have 6 overseas players signed so far for 2011......but the blind defence of 10 overseas players by some on here does attract more criticism......

I know it's easy for a Quins fan to say as we have had a lot of our "Englishness" thrust upon us, but I would rather spend another 5 years slowly building a local squad that can compete rather than going to Wembley with a team full of overseas players....we've done that...It didn't work.

Re: 2011 SL Transfers : Mon Nov 08, 2010 10:21 pm  

Barnacle Bill wrote:

No. First you say you didn't specifically mean experienced Aussies and then you immediately say it's the experienced Aussies that are the problem.

you should try and read it again.

Now, you see, that's not true is it? No club can arbitrarily decide to up the amount of overseas players they have without regard to the rules laid down by the RFL can they?

well it is what we are seeing happening, Hence Hull KA agreeing 3 and a half years ago to have a maximum of 5 overseas players by now, and going into neext season with 10

Hull KR due to circumstances will have more "overseas" players next year than this. It is still less than they had 3/4 years ago, a fact you might not like but still, there it is.

yes, Hull KA will have 10 overseas players, it is a pathetic total from a supposed heartland club.

And you've been arguing incessantly about signing English players from other clubs, but when Hull KR do it, this is in some way less than satisfactory.

i could just repeat that it is preferable to signing overseas players and less preferable to bringing through your own juniors but you would only ignore it.

No I'm not, you are suggesting a player of Billy Slater's ability would be overlooked,not because there are better players in the squad, but because there are more experienced players in the squad. You even went so far as to suggest that the next Billy Slater would be overlooked in favour of Shad Royston

No, im suggesting the Billy Slater who made his debut isnt as good as the Billy Slater who now plays for Australia. Im suggesting that the Billy Slater who made his debut wasnt the best fullback in the world when he made his debut. Im suggesting the Billy Slater who made his debut wasnt the best we will see of Billy Slater and that he still had lots of development to go when he made his debut. Im even going as far as suggesting that the Billy Slater who made his debut wasnt as good as Robbie Ross or Steve Turner. Im saying it took a concious decision to work with the raw materials Slater had to make the Billy Slater of today, even if it meant more experienced players, who were a bit better at the time (due to their experience) needed to take a step back.

That is where you have got confused. Im not suggesting that the Billy Slater of 2010 is being ignored, im suggesting the Billy Slater of 2003 wouldnt have been given the opportunity in this country and as such would never have become the Billy Slater of 2010. You see the difference now between talent and potential?

Well if a coach does that they deserve everything coming to them which likely would be more losses (not in a SL coaches remit, do you agree?) and probably lose the player. Why would any coach, who wants to keep his job, do that?

Because youth development and there introduction doesnt pay off immediately. In this country, 2003 Billy Slater goes out and makes a few mistakes (as you would expect from a rookie) then the manager is binned off for not playing Robbie Ross and he isnt around in 2008 to see Billy Slater win the golden boot, so in this country he doesnt get the chance, or if he does he is canned after making a few errors and an overseas player is brought in. Thats because of the short-termist self-interest in SL that see's fans trying to justify binning a 23 year old british stand off with 30+ appearances for a 24 year old Aussie stand off with 40+ appearances.

Re: 2011 SL Transfers : Mon Nov 08, 2010 10:22 pm  

gutterfax wrote:

Please.....what circumstances are these? The regulations that were agreed and have since been pretty much ignored by all are there to assist with the development of English talent. HKA seem more preoccupied with trying to get back their glory years and win something now...rather than building slowly. I understand that a SL win or a CC win would probably boost attendances at Craven Park......but as a business model, it's very short termist...........and if you go another season without a trophy, will you continue to go down this route?

I imagine that at the end of next season Vella and Galea will leave the club, regardless of this fixation you have with Rovers winning everything now.

gutterfax wrote:

I know HKA are not the only team doing this, even little old skint Quins RL have 6 overseas players signed so far for 2011......but the blind defence of 10 overseas players by some on here does attract more criticism......

The "blind defence" of Hull KR is solely down to the criticism being levelled at the club with no regard, none at all, for the circumstances which brought Hull KR to this position and the total disregard for the things the club have delivered on in such a short space of time. Things which clubs with access to SL money for three times as long have abjectly failed to deliver on.

There has been only so much money available, what Hull KR have done is deliver real improvements to the stadium, fielded a competitive side and actually brought quite a lot to the competition. The youth system while in the national leagues was relatively poor (for reasons that all but the most myopic anti Rovers supporter can understand) and these things do not change overnight. Now we have parity with our neighbours in attractiveness of the club to young players things are improving. This year our under 18's played in the top tier of their competition. Things are improving. But you can't just open a box of SL ready young English players, as some would like us to do, even if their own clubs don't.

There are clubs which receive a fraction of the criticism that Hull KR do that have no excuse, no good reason at all for fielding more than 5 overseas players next season. I have been told ad infinitum by our kipper loving friend that Leeds youth system is wonderful. It should be, they've had years to build it and no need to rob Peter to Pay Paul to finance it. They will have more overseas players next year than this. Not only that, one player coming in will be 33 at the start of the season, and the same hypocrit will then lecture about young English players not getting a game at Hull KR.

Incidentally I notice that young Luke Ambler will be making way for Cross to fit in at Leeds next season. I wonder what spin the kipper meister will put on that one.

gutterfax wrote:

I know it's easy for a Quins fan to say as we have had a lot of our "Englishness" thrust upon us, but I would rather spend another 5 years slowly building a local squad that can compete rather than going to Wembley with a team full of overseas players....we've done that...It didn't work.

No you wouldn't. If somebody offered you a team capable of a Wembly or Grand final apearance you'd snap their hand off. The role of a SL club is to win games, it is not a factory for English (or even local, as you put it) players, what is the point in that?

Re: 2011 SL Transfers : Mon Nov 08, 2010 10:23 pm  

gutterfax wrote:

Please.....what circumstances are these? The regulations that were agreed and have since been pretty much ignored by all are there to assist with the development of English talent.

Did make me laugh that. I think "circumstances" that poor Rovers find themselves victims of are signing up 3 and a half years ago to having 5 overseas players in 2011 then through a combination of applying for exemptions and deliberately building a team around the likes of Ben Fisher, suddenly finding themselves into double digits on overseas players and with only 7 spots in their first choice 17 available to British players. Talk about hard done-to

Re: 2011 SL Transfers : Mon Nov 08, 2010 10:31 pm  

SmokeyTA wrote:

you should try and read it again.

You should write what you mean instead of writing what you don't mean.

SmokeyTA wrote:

well it is what we are seeing happening, Hence Hull KA agreeing 3 and a half years ago to have a maximum of 5 overseas players by now, and going into neext season with 10
yes, Hull KA will have 10 overseas players, it is a pathetic total from a supposed heartland club.
i could just repeat that it is preferable to signing overseas players and less preferable to bringing through your own juniors but you would only ignore it.

In what way is giving a young English player, released by another club, a job less preferable than bringing through your own juniors? What exactly is lost to the game by signing a player from another club for example Hull KR signing Liam Watts from Castleford. I would happily sign 25 players like that.

SmokeyTA wrote:

No, im suggesting the Billy Slater who made his debut isnt as good as the Billy Slater who now plays for Australia. Im suggesting that the Billy Slater who made his debut wasnt the best fullback in the world when he made his debut. Im suggesting the Billy Slater who made his debut wasnt the best we will see of Billy Slater and that he still had lots of development to go when he made his debut. Im even going as far as suggesting that the Billy Slater who made his debut wasnt as good as Robbie Ross or Steve Turner. Im saying it took a concious decision to work with the raw materials Slater had to make the Billy Slater of today, even if it meant more experienced players, who were a bit better at the time (due to their experience) needed to take a step back.

Well done you. Clever boy!

SmokeyTA wrote:

That is where you have got confused. Im not suggesting that the Billy Slater of 2010 is being ignored, im suggesting the Billy Slater of 2003 wouldnt have been given the opportunity in this country and as such would never have become the Billy Slater of 2010. You see the difference now between talent and potential?

You can argue such hypothtical scenarios with yourself all night for me kipper man.

SmokeyTA wrote:

Because youth development and there introduction doesnt pay off immediately. In this country, 2003 Billy Slater goes out and makes a few mistakes (as you would expect from a rookie) then the manager is binned off for not playing Robbie Ross and he isnt around in 2008 to see Billy Slater win the golden boot. Thats because of the short-termist self-interest in SL that see's fans trying to justify binning a 23 year old british stand off with 30+ appearances for a 24 year old Aussie stand off with 40+ appearances.

Or indeed the binning off of Luke Ambler to make way for a 33 year old Aussie journeyman.

Yes, we'll all take a lecture from Leeds. They're really giving youth a chance aren't they?