23 replies to this topic

[oldrover]

i know we have an under 23s next season, but are we gonna have anyone to play. the whole thing seems a shambles. .i'm sorry but if championship clubs can run u23 squads, then s/l clubs have no excuse.

[Griff]

There's no U23's next year.

It's a scandal.

[marklaspalmas]

There's no U23's next year.

That's been confirmed, has it?

[Griff]

That's been confirmed, has it?

As far as I'm aware. However, there is a dissident movement.

[oldrover]

There's no U23's next year.

It's a scandal.

too right griff

[jamescolin]

Wasn't there some talk of our under 23's being in Championship 2 league? I seem to remember that certain regs stopped us doing it, but is that still the case>

[oldrover]

Wasn't there some talk of our under 23's being in Championship 2 league? I seem to remember that certain regs stopped us doing it, but is that still the case>

rfl "omerta"

[Griff]

Wasn't there some talk of our under 23's being in Championship 1 league? I seem to remember that certain regs stopped us doing it, but is that still the case>

The issue I'd have with that is it would indeed be a fast route to the feeder club.

Edited by Griff, 14 November 2012 - 06:23 PM.

[oldrover]

The issue I'd have with that is it would indeed be a fast route to the feeder club.

The issue I'd have with that is it would indeed be a fast route to the feeder club.

i would see it as more of an "A" team, as they would be your own players

[Matt J]

The issue I'd have with that is it would indeed be a fast route to the feeder club.

The problem with the feeder club is that you're effectively taking over another club. Putting your U23 side in a league would be putting YOUR second side into a competition.

Not the same as a feeder club, but it would devalue the competition though... assuming you'd be putting them into C1 and not a new C2 league.

[jamescolin]

So the question remains. Who do they play. Probably amateur clubs would be the answer. Match time is all important.

[Griff]

i would see it as more of an "A" team, as they would be your own players

Yes - but it's a step along the way to, say, Leeds taking over Hunslet.

And they'd need to be separately registered squads - dual registration would apply. So would it really be your A team, in the sense of A teams 20 or 30 years ago ? No.

And then there's the question of control - would it be right to have the same people controlling more than one club ? What happens if the A team win the comp ? Do they get promoted ? If not, who does ?

No thanks - more worms in there than I'd care to deal with.

[Griff]

So the question remains. Who do they play. Probably amateur clubs would be the answer. Match time is all important.

You'll end up playing a few friendlies. If you're lucky.

[oldrover]

You'll end up playing a few friendlies. If you're lucky.

and thats the problem isn't it. the rfl have allowed clubs to assemble or retain these teams, with nowhere to play them. it's true ,if they played in championship 1, it wouldnt be an exact copy of the "A" team, but preferable i think, to losing these players altogether or the s/l partnerships. and if they did win the league ,they would have to decline promotion, allowing the bottom club in the championship to stay up. so, not ideal but what's the alternative.

[Griff]

The other side of the coin is do you need all those players ? How many are ever going to play for Rovers' first team ?

Would it not be better career development for them to be playing first team elsewhere ?

Yes we need player production, but each team can only play 17 at any one game.

[Griff]

...... and if they did win the league ,they would have to decline promotion, allowing the bottom club in the championship to stay up. so, not ideal but what's the alternative.

Alternative ? Not allowing it in the first place.

I still say it's the thin end of a wedge you don't want. If Fev are allowed to do it, Leeds, Wigan, Saints, Huddersfield, Warrington, Hull, Bradford etc etc won't be far behind.

Fev have nothing to gain and everything to lose.

[gazza77]

Alternative ? Not allowing it in the first place.

I still say it's the thin end of a wedge you don't want. If Fev are allowed to do it, Leeds, Wigan, Saints, Huddersfield, Warrington, Hull, Bradford etc etc won't be far behind.

Fev have nothing to gain and everything to lose.

The other alternative would be for Fev to set up a "partnership" arrangement with a CC1 club to allow players out on DR, much the same as many of the SL clubs have already done with CC level teams. Would the RFL allow this? I genuinely don't know. I don't like the idea, but it would fit in with where the game appears to be heading.

[Griff]

The other alternative would be for Fev to set up a "partnership" arrangement with a CC1 club to allow players out on DR, much the same as many of the SL clubs have already done with CC level teams. Would the RFL allow this? I genuinely don't know. I don't like the idea, but it would fit in with where the game appears to be heading.

Not sure, but I believe so - as long as it's not in the same division.

[oldrover]

The other alternative would be for Fev to set up a "partnership" arrangement with a CC1 club to allow players out on DR, much the same as many of the SL clubs have already done with CC level teams. Would the RFL allow this? I genuinely don't know. I don't like the idea, but it would fit in with where the game appears to be heading.

but then fev would not be in control, the host coach would decide if, and which players played.. it's a shambles

[Griff]

but then fev would not be in control, the host coach would decide if, and which players played.. it's a shambles

Well, the junior club says they're in control but the fact is that if they don't do as they're told too often, the agreement ends.