Jump to content


Rugby League World Issue 400 - Out Now!

RUGBY LEAGUE WORLD MAGAZINE - ISSUE 401 - OUT NOW!
84 pages, full colour, in-depth coverage from the grassroots through to the international game.
Click here for the digital edition or just download the Rugby League World app from Apple Newsstand or Google Play now.
Click here to order a copy for delivery by post. Annual subscriptions also available worldwide.
Find out what's inside Issue 401
/ View a Gallery of all our previous 400 covers / WH Smith Branches stocking Issue 401
Read Jamie Jones-Buchanan's Top 5 RLW Interviews including Marwan Koukash, Lee Briers, Gareth Thomas, Steve Ganson & Matt King OBE


League Express

Podcast

Photo
- - - - -

Youth structures changing....AGAIN!


  • Please log in to reply
31 replies to this topic

#1 Leyther_Matt

Leyther_Matt
  • Coach
  • 1,004 posts

Posted 10 December 2012 - 03:46 PM

Words fail me (all via Gareth Walker on Twitter).

"Just been told by two Champs coaches that they have this week had an email saying that youth structures for 2013 are changing. Instead of being able to field the planned under-18s and under-23s,there will now just be one under-20s league for Champs clubs. This coming at a stage when some clubs have appointed coaches and signed players for u-18s and u-23s levels."

Absolute farce.

#2 intheshed

intheshed
  • Coach
  • 407 posts

Posted 10 December 2012 - 04:57 PM

We could do with some flesh on the bones of that. Dont think the u23s is going to have come as a massive suprise, how many teams were we down to by the end of last season? You just cant run a league if only 2 or 3 clubs want to enter a team.

The u18s seems odd though and really does need clarifying. Last year Fev & Sheffield ran u18s in the SL competition, clearly as there is no u18s academy next year this would no longer be possible but does it also mean that champs clubs will not be allowed to run u19s in the academy competition or is it an oportunity to run 19s & 20s?

Edited by intheshed, 10 December 2012 - 05:01 PM.


#3 intheshed

intheshed
  • Coach
  • 407 posts

Posted 10 December 2012 - 04:59 PM


.

Edited by intheshed, 10 December 2012 - 05:00 PM.


#4 Griff

Griff
  • Coach
  • 7,618 posts

Posted 10 December 2012 - 05:11 PM

We were down to six, though York didn't complete their fixtures.

We're not bothering, York prob ably won't - don't know about anyone else but the comp wasn't viable last season with six. Any less and people start to look elsewhere.

Edited by Griff, 10 December 2012 - 05:13 PM.

"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

#5 marklaspalmas

marklaspalmas
  • Coach
  • 11,379 posts

Posted 10 December 2012 - 05:15 PM

We could do with some flesh on the bones of that. Dont think the u23s is going to have come as a massive suprise, how many teams were we down to by the end of last season? You just cant run a league if only 2 or 3 clubs want to enter a team.

The u18s seems odd though and really does need clarifying. Last year Fev & Sheffield ran u18s in the SL competition, clearly as there is no u18s academy next year this would no longer be possible but does it also mean that champs clubs will not be allowed to run u19s in the academy competition or is it an oportunity to run 19s & 20s?


Yes I agree we need clarification. I think it's pretty poor all round to be finding out now what's happening in a couple of months when a club like ours has expensive long-term systems in place for player production.

In 2012 SL clubs had U15, U16, U18 and U20.

Championship clubs had (or could have as most didn't) U15, U16, U18 and U23.

So in 2013 if SL clubs have U16 and U19 only, and there is not enough interest to run a championship U23 then the logical thing would be for Championship clubs to go with U16 and U19 too, wouldn't it? 16 to 19 is a huge jump anyway but it's what the RFL (or SL) have decided.

If it's U20, will there be enough Championship teams to make a league? VEry few clubs bothered with U18 and U23 last year, so how many more clubs are interested this year?

How many players aged 20 and over have we signed, assuming there'd be a second team to play for? They may as well be released unless they are realistic first team possibilities right now.

It's just crazy.

 

You Can't Buy Team Spirit

 

 

 

 


#6 intheshed

intheshed
  • Coach
  • 407 posts

Posted 10 December 2012 - 05:59 PM

Yes I agree we need clarification. I think it's pretty poor all round to be finding out now what's happening in a couple of months when a club like ours has expensive long-term systems in place for player production.

In 2012 SL clubs had U15, U16, U18 and U20.

Championship clubs had (or could have as most didn't) U15, U16, U18 and U23.

So in 2013 if SL clubs have U16 and U19 only, and there is not enough interest to run a championship U23 then the logical thing would be for Championship clubs to go with U16 and U19 too, wouldn't it? 16 to 19 is a huge jump anyway but it's what the RFL (or SL) have decided.

If it's U20, will there be enough Championship teams to make a league? VEry few clubs bothered with U18 and U23 last year, so how many more clubs are interested this year?

How many players aged 20 and over have we signed, assuming there'd be a second team to play for? They may as well be released unless they are realistic first team possibilities right now.

It's just crazy.


On the face of it mirroring the sl age groups makes sense. I can see a scenario.in which some champs clubs may see 20s, particularly if it has an overage player allowance, as cost efficient compromise. Those clubs who dont wish to run, or probably more accurately cant fund, a full youth system may see 20s as a vehicle to get younger playets signed on & have somewhere for fringe/returning 1st teamers to play.

All well and good if you continue to allow clubs like fev & sheffield partake in the 19s. Dont see how fev or sheff could continue to run 15s & 16s if the jump is to 20s, as you szy its just too big a jump. It would be a hell of a lot of time, effort and money down the pan..

#7 thundergaz

thundergaz
  • Coach
  • 2,657 posts

Posted 10 December 2012 - 07:42 PM

We will suffer big time from this as we have signed quite a lot of players on and with no reserve team these players won't get any game time at all unless we loan them out but with the link ups that could be quite hard too. If the guys are not up to first team rugby then I'm very worried we will have to release a few. Hope I'm wrong but with this system I can't see them wanting to stay around or us paying them if they are not getting any game time at all.

Edited by thundergaz, 10 December 2012 - 07:46 PM.


#8 Matt J

Matt J
  • Moderator
  • 7,712 posts

Posted 10 December 2012 - 08:19 PM

Posted Image

In this area of the game, the RFL are really REALLY failing the clubs here, I've never known anything as shoddy and unprofessional from a governing body that prides itself on being one of the best in the UK.

I wont say its a joke, because jokes are funny, this is just completely ridiculous.

Cummins Out.


#9 bowes

bowes
  • Coach
  • 10,885 posts

Posted 10 December 2012 - 08:28 PM

We were down to six, though York didn't complete their fixtures.

We're not bothering, York prob ably won't - don't know about anyone else but the comp wasn't viable last season with six. Any less and people start to look elsewhere.

Sheffield have scrapped U23 and run a feeder club in the Conference South next year out of Sheffield Hallam University. Oldham have scrapped theirs as well. So just 3 sides. They're looking at dual registration with the NCL but if that fails who knows?

Hopefully they just run U19 and let Fev and Sheffield in the SL competition

#10 Chris Taylor

Chris Taylor
  • Coach
  • 7,722 posts

Posted 10 December 2012 - 11:18 PM

Reason no.1 why we will never win an International series for many years.

Out of interest, what ever happened to the analysis of the game that they were reviewing? Could be insightful...
2008 RFL Wakefield & District Young Volunteer of the Year

#11 oldrover

oldrover
  • Coach
  • 6,000 posts

Posted 11 December 2012 - 09:24 AM

IF this is true, i'd like to see the reasoning behind it and the timing of it. barmy
joe mullaney is a god
the only good tiger is a stuffed tiger

Posted Image

#12 gazza77

gazza77
  • Coach
  • 2,178 posts

Posted 11 December 2012 - 10:09 AM

IF this is true, i'd like to see the reasoning behind it and the timing of it. barmy


Agreed. Have we any source for the info though?

"Featherstone outside the Super League is like Rooney, Ronaldo, Villa out of Euro 2012."

Please view my photos.

 

http://www.hughesphoto.co.uk/


Little Nook Farm - Caravan Club Certificated Location in the heart of the Pennines overlooking Hebden Bridge and the Calder Valley.

http://www.facebook.com/LittleNookFarm


#13 Griff

Griff
  • Coach
  • 7,618 posts

Posted 11 December 2012 - 10:56 AM

IF this is true, i'd like to see the reasoning behind it and the timing of it. barmy


Reasoning's easy - not enough teams in the comp.

Having a team in Conference South is an interesting idea.

For me thie issue is not so much that players don't get developed. The players who are going to make it will, probably, make it elsewhere. It's more that ambitious clubs in Div 2 need to be able to build a pathway to Div 1 and, as things stand, it's very difficult indeed.
"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

#14 marklaspalmas

marklaspalmas
  • Coach
  • 11,379 posts

Posted 11 December 2012 - 11:55 AM

For me, there are (at least) two related but different questions here.

First is how do we develop young players? Up to say 19/20 years old. The old system of U15 and U16 scholarships, with U18 and U20 academies may have been too expensive for SL clubs (hard to believe their shortsightedness but still), but changing that to just U16 and U19 just won't work. The age gap of three years there is too big at that age.

Second is what do you do with fringe players aafter 19/20? Traditionally that was always done by reserve teams. Last year SL clubs were playing a limited number of over age players at U20, or loaning out or DR. Now they're only doing DR and loans for all fringe squad members. Im pretty sure that won't work out well for them, and will work out even worse for Championship clubs.

I'd prefer SL and any Championship clubs that wanted to be running U16, U18 and U20. Then at 20, well the players are either 1) in your first team squad of 25, 2) loaned out season long to a lower league or 3) let go to play for a lower league club.

DR looks chaotic and I haven't really seen it work for anybody really in the couple of years it's been here.

 

You Can't Buy Team Spirit

 

 

 

 


#15 Griff

Griff
  • Coach
  • 7,618 posts

Posted 11 December 2012 - 12:38 PM

For me, there are (at least) two related but different questions here.

First is how do we develop young players? Up to say 19/20 years old. The old system of U15 and U16 scholarships, with U18 and U20 academies may have been too expensive for SL clubs (hard to believe their shortsightedness but still), but changing that to just U16 and U19 just won't work. The age gap of three years there is too big at that age.

Second is what do you do with fringe players aafter 19/20? Traditionally that was always done by reserve teams. Last year SL clubs were playing a limited number of over age players at U20, or loaning out or DR. Now they're only doing DR and loans for all fringe squad members. Im pretty sure that won't work out well for them, and will work out even worse for Championship clubs.

I'd prefer SL and any Championship clubs that wanted to be running U16, U18 and U20. Then at 20, well the players are either 1) in your first team squad of 25, 2) loaned out season long to a lower league or 3) let go to play for a lower league club.

DR looks chaotic and I haven't really seen it work for anybody really in the couple of years it's been here.


Agree with pretty much all that.

Also, I'd like to know how many players Divs 2 and 3 clubs recruit from their junior sides (in the unlikely event that they have any, obviously) and how many they recruit from other clubs. Because I'm not convinced that you can point to Zac Hardaker and claim that he justifies every Div 2 and 3 club having a junior set-up.
"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

#16 Rach

Rach
  • Coach
  • 235 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 12:21 AM

Yet another nail in the coffin of the Championship sides ... and potentially more disillusioned young players lost to the game ..word fail me .

For clubs in the Championship striving to produce their own talent (Fev , Fax , The Eagles and the Cougars spring to mind) instead of being reliant on dodgy Super League 'loans ',its one massive kick in the teeth.

From the perspective of my own club we've had a strong scholarship / youth sides over the past few years , which resulted in last seasons U23's side being drawn in the main from that setup (in fact for several games ALL 17 players were a product of the clubs youth programme or Cougar Cubs amateur club) and 6 of that squad moved into the first team squad for 2013 . Even those who haven't made the Pro Ranks have stregthned the Amateur game , with more numbers than in previous years carrying on into open age rugby from the junior sides.

I've watched lads that I coached at Under 8 and 9 level move through the ranks and now just as they looked like making a professional career a reality , they are having that last rung of the ladder taken away ..

I'd be the first to agree that last seasons competion with so few teams in it was not the best , but by penalising teams that have got their development and youth structures in place and having an impact ( the very thing that the RFL a few years back was pushing clubs to do ) it makes the current proposals looking a paticularly unfunny joke .

#17 Griff

Griff
  • Coach
  • 7,618 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 10:57 AM

Seems like only two years ago that the RFL was wanting Div 2 clubs to have U23s in place by 2013.

The development policy of the RFL is just one complete shambles.
"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

#18 oldrover

oldrover
  • Coach
  • 6,000 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 12:03 PM

it seems to me that the clubs who have made the effort and gone to the expense of putting the pathway in place have now been cut adrift .
joe mullaney is a god
the only good tiger is a stuffed tiger

Posted Image

#19 bigjohn

bigjohn
  • Coach
  • 975 posts

Posted 13 December 2012 - 01:37 PM

it seems to me that the clubs who have made the effort and gone to the expense of putting the pathway in place have now been cut adrift .



Spot on Oldrover we are like a ship without a rudder at the moment and the sooner the RFL sorts itself out the better before we don't have a game to watch..

#20 jamescolin

jamescolin
  • Coach
  • 3,143 posts

Posted 13 December 2012 - 05:06 PM

It seems that the lack of clubs taking part in whatever scheme is the problem. I reckon that a tie up with amateur clubs is the answer. Players will get games, amateur clubs will be stronger and player development will continue. I don't mean taking over amateur clubs but for Championship teams to enter teams into amateur leagues. Not ideal, but better than no games or development at all.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users