Imports

I agree with you ballersvoice (nice modest handle you have there :-))

As I mentioned before there have been some fantastic imports over the years who have actually done a lot for the sport. Quite a few of them even settled in the UK longer term. However that does not mean it is the only way. If players from the US were not allowed I still think the league could be competitive and entertaining for the fans. It almost certainly would be taking a step backwards with an aspiration to take 2 steps forward though. I can see why clubs would be reluctant and fans skeptical.

I think we've sold a few tickets to people believing they're watching the USA national team over the years

And I've been sold at 6'7" before!

Yes - but they also have protectionism rules too (and enough money to attract local talent, from broadcast deals and the like!)

I find that rule interesting.  Was it brought in to avoid explicitly stating a limit on EU players?  Limiting work permits (3) has no legal implications.  By stating at least 5 Brits, that equally allows 5 EU players.

I'd prefer it was aimed at 5 British trained players, but I suspect that still creates a minefield with regard to players gaining British Nationality.  Although the second tier of British Ice Hockey seemed to be able to work around it where even players who'd represented GB (but were born and trained in North America) were limited to how many on a team and even who they could be on the ice with.

The Newcastle team from two years ago is a good example; and I'm not picking on the Eagles in anyway.  How many of the first 9 players on that rotation were British trained?  Darius (and even he had some discussions on his eligibility I believe) certainly.  After that I'm not sure.  Potentially as many as all 8 of the remainder played their first matches in the UK as adult professionals.  I think there was still space to bring in an additional EU player.

Going forward EU restrictions will likely drop.  It would be good to find a way to open up opportunities for British trained players (especially youngsters) whilst ensuring loyal nationalised players are not pushed out of the BBL by restrictive eligibility rules.  In fact a route for any player trained in the British system regardless of nationality (unless restricted by UK rules) would be great.

Would it be legally possible to state a roster must include x U-23 players trained in the British youth system?  I would advise caution though.  However good intentioned such rules may be; they are counter productive unless the source of players at a suitable skill level exists.

1. The eligibility rule is over a decade old. I don’t imagine anyone can recall the specific drivers of it.
2. There are basically no naturalised players left as for the last 15 years a tier 5 visa has not counted as time in the country for purpose of naturalisation. Only viable route now is marriage to a Brit and even that is time consuming and not straightforward.
3. You can’t discriminate against players with British passports through parental connections. (For instance rodney glasgow last year). You are either British or you are not. Half of England’s cricket team would be ineligible.

The answer is to mandate a rule where 2 squad players must be GB qualified and U23/25 AND the club must spend a percentage of its total budget on them (suggest between 10-20). That would create a market for these players as clubs sought a competitive advantage.

Simon Lokan played 2 games lol, let's not include him

Vigor was born in Aberdeen

Dusha born and raised in England, played gb u20 then got found out how bad he was so joined another national team