Mikey has nailed it - of the players going overseas, the only ones who I think are a significant loss to England post RWC are LCD and Marchant, and even those aren't massive losses. Whereas if the league loses Itoje, Genge, Smith, Steward, Curry, Dombrandt, etc in quick succession, it's done for as a viable entity. How would it develop internationals with the quality so drastically lowered, why would fans tune in to watch a second division competition that's basically a development league for the Top 14, who would sponsor such a thing?SDHoneymonster wrote: ↑Mon Jan 30, 2023 12:17 pm Would an English club be able to afford Willis and remain under the cap currently? I'm unclear, although I suspect the Wasps/Wuss lot will all be given special dispensation. I'm not so sure that relaxing the rules isn't such a bad idea for the short-term, given English rugby is now losing players with the stature of Vunipola, Simmonds, Cowan-Dickie, Nowell etc. Yes, we want England's stars playing in the Prem and the lure of an England cap is a strong one, but economically at the moment English rugby just isn't in a place to compete with the bigger URC and French clubs and on the field England isn't New Zealand, which can absorb multiple players heading overseas as there's usually three or four quality options bubbling under the surface just waiting for a chance. I'm a supporter of the policy to only pick players who play here, but at the moment it's possibly unrealistic to enforce. South Africa and Argentina show that it's still possible to compete without an iron grip on your entire playing base, for example.
Your point about England not being NZ in terms of player production are valid, but I'd say they argue my point not yours - we can't afford to have all our best players disappearing off to Japan or France, because there's not three or four quality options there to replace them.
Puja