Off the ball: How do we stop player trickle to NRL turning into a stream?

The likes of British test players Mal Reilly, Brian Lockwood, John Gray, Mike Stephenson and Phil Lowe had been lured Down Under and the game here feared a haemorrhaging of all its talent.

The ban lasted until 1984 – and when it was lifted it saw a flood in the opposite direction with Wally Lewis’ short stint at Wakefield being the prelude to the arrival of Mal Meninga, Peter Sterling, Brett Kenny Eric Grothe and Les Boyd, all members of that Invincible Kangaroos tour squad and all in the peak of their powers.

At that time quality imports, complementing the cream of homegrown talent, fired the British game forward after a challenging late 70s period and that spurt lasted well up to the halfway point of Super League.

But now we have to recognise there is a problem and the British competition once again faces a threat – this time on two fronts.

Financially the finances available to NRL clubs and those in the English Premiership absolutely dwarfs Super League’s spending power.

It means that the big clubs in those competitions can quite easily sit back and let Super League clubs spot and nurture young talent and then, if they wish, cherry pick the best by waving figures in front of them that are hard for professional sportsmen to turn down.

So far, on the whole, it is still only a trickle, but that could soon become a stream if a tipping point is reached.

Joe Greenwood is the latest player linked with a move to Australia.

If it gets to the situation where the NRL clubs and reserve grades that support them become the leading destination for any gifted early 20s British player we are going to be left with a rump of a competition, here to simply feed the ‘Big League’.

Nor are we getting the same numbers of quality imports like Jamie Lyon, Matt Gidley, Trent Barrett and Steve Renouf coming here any more. It is largely a one-way street.

What tools does Super League have at its disposal to retain players? It clearly cannot keep players prisoner over here by stopping them from plying their trade in Australia. So another import ban is off the table.

Money wise we can increase the Super League salary cap but the absolute financial disparity between it and the NRL and rugby union’s Premiership, means that British clubs cannot get into an arms race which could ultimately lead to more Bradford’s in the 13-man code.

The big idea currently on the table is central contracts, but in the sports where they have been used like cricket and rugby union, the players play a good chunk of their games at international level.

Cricketers are constantly playing internationals.

In rugby union Wales and Cardiff Blues flanker Sam Warburton was tied to a central contract to stop the drain of players to cash-rich France and the English Premiership.

But how would that work in league? Do the clubs target the players who indicate they want to move to Oz? No doubt the players agents will be doing cartwheels at that prospect.

Or does the game be pro-active and target all the players in the Elite Performance Squad and then tie them to contracts?

That would take a lot of money? Whose money would that be?

And then how fair would that be to the balance of the whole comp if say central funds pay for the six Saints, Warrington and Wigan players.

It is even more unfair if money went to a big club to keep a player grown and nurtured by a smaller club.

There is a danger with central contracts and if the game was to go down that way, it would blow apart some of the reasons for a salary cap.

If that is the case it would be more honest if the cap was raised and Super League were allowed to use their own money as long as they were genuinely generating it and it was not all on tick.

The game does have to do something, it is not simply about retention, we have started to tread water and no amount of positive hype will make the fans, and maybe more significantly talented young players, see otherwise.