The changes are aimed in part to help counter the financial appeal of France to top players © Getty Images

Enlarge

Related Links

News: Mixed response to extra marquee player allowance

News: Premiership opens door to more top-level imports

Today's announcement was hardly a shock, predicted as it has been for some time. Amid the salary cap details, the news that two top 'excluded' players will be allowed instead of one is perhaps the most significant.

The criteria for the second player - that they must not have played in the Premiership for 12 months preceding the contract - is clearly aimed at two areas. One is the English player lured abroad; clearly this is aimed at those playing in the Top 14. The second is the big-name foreign players who have tended of late to head to France.

By loosening the shackles Premiership Rugby have opened the door to the seemingly significant numbers of players from the Southern Hemisphere, especially Australia, who can realise their earning potential away from their home.

The 2015 Rugby World Cup and the refusal of several unions to pick players not playing at home has had the effect of keeping many manacled to their country of origin. It is not accidental the new regulations come into place when they do.

Australia tried to pre-empt this with a relaxing of its own rules and by introducing sabbaticals for leading players to enable them to cash in overseas. But the ARU's hands are tied by a lack of money and it seems to be tilting at windmills.

Premiership Rugby has realised that if it is to compete with the ravenous Top 14 and its cash-rich clubs it has to bow to market forces. If the best talent keeps heading over the Channel then the value of its own product to the media and advertisers diminishes.

For all the talk about home-grown players - although the measures to boost those should not be brushed aside and the production line of England talent is not doing too badly - when all is said and done this is all about keeping the value of the core product. To his credit, Premiership Rugby boss Mark McCafferty said as much when he said the second excluded player "will add to our TV and commercial values".

There will be gripes from some of the less well-off clubs. That inevitable and the same arguments about financial inequality can be heard in almost every sport these days. Like it or hate it, sport these days is not a level playing field (has it ever been?) and there will always be big and small clubs. There is nothing to be gained by reducing everyone to a base level, even were it possible.

This is not a revolutionary moment. But it does give the Premiership clubs - at least those who can afford it - a foot up in their battle to be the major force, on and off the field, in European rugby.