Jump to content


League Express

Podcast

Photo
- - - - -

First effects of the new development system

Wakefield Adam Slater

  • Please log in to reply
163 replies to this topic

#1 flyingking

flyingking
  • Coach
  • 708 posts

Posted 05 January 2013 - 12:50 PM

http://www.therfl.co...eads-down-under
www.twitter.com/flyingking2

#2 Padge

Padge
  • Coach
  • 18,033 posts

Posted 05 January 2013 - 12:53 PM

Young players have left for Australia in the past, there's nothing new here.

Visit my photography site www.padge.smugmug.com
Radio 5 Live: Saturday 14 April 2007
Dave Whelan "In Wigan rugby will always be king"

 

This country's wealth was created by men in overalls, it was destroyed by men in suits.


#3 roughyedspud

roughyedspud
  • Coach
  • 3,610 posts

Posted 05 January 2013 - 12:54 PM

it'll do them good too....

OLDHAM RLFC
the 8TH most successful team in british RL


#4 Griff

Griff
  • Coach
  • 7,648 posts

Posted 05 January 2013 - 01:03 PM

Young players have left for Australia in the past, there's nothing new here.


Having a development system is new ........
"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

#5 keighley

keighley
  • Coach
  • 5,223 posts

Posted 05 January 2013 - 01:12 PM

But for every player who goes off to Australia, how many others are lost to the game because of this cost cutting exercise by the SL clubs, just as we were starting to produce young British players of quality in numbers, we turn off the tap from the well. It probably had to be done from a cost standpoint but I think the overall numbers of quality players being nurtured into top class professionals will diminish greatly.

#6 Ant

Ant
  • Coach
  • 3,083 posts

Posted 05 January 2013 - 01:43 PM

People said that when the "A" Team system was scrapped

#7 keighley

keighley
  • Coach
  • 5,223 posts

Posted 05 January 2013 - 01:54 PM

People said that when the "A" Team system was scrapped


The' A' teams I remember were always half full of older first teamers returning from injury and some older never quite made it players who were there to provide cover for the 1st team and to make up the numbers for the A team, as well as a few younger players.

The scrapped teams now were all younger players and will, I think, reduce the opportunity for many to kick on and make the grade due to lack of numbers and playing time, so I don't think it's quite the same as when the' A' teams were scrapped.

#8 mmp

mmp
  • Coach
  • 380 posts

Posted 05 January 2013 - 02:08 PM

But for every player who goes off to Australia, how many others are lost to the game because of this cost cutting exercise by the SL clubs, just as we were starting to produce young British players of quality in numbers, we turn off the tap from the well. It probably had to be done from a cost standpoint but I think the overall numbers of quality players being nurtured into top class professionals will diminish greatly.


how many youngsters went into the system and then left after having their expectations over-optimistically raised? We havent the volume of kids in the sport as a whole, or the ultimate demand in the pro-game, to justify so many flowing into the systems that we're in place...for the good of the game, the reforms were required.
In Bury or North Manchester? Interested in Rugby League? Check out the Rugby League in Bury web-site: http://www.pitchero....bs/burybroncos/

#9 Ant

Ant
  • Coach
  • 3,083 posts

Posted 05 January 2013 - 02:42 PM

Maybe the net effect will be that kids that werent good enough for super league will get games in championship teams instead of never playing or only playing other kids and so not getting better?

And the kids that are good enough get into the first team in their late teens and not early 20s and over all championship teams rely less on journeymen antipodeans and instead more kids stay in the game

#10 a.n Other

a.n Other
  • Coach
  • 1,548 posts

Posted 05 January 2013 - 02:54 PM

how many youngsters went into the system and then left after having their expectations over-optimistically raised? We havent the volume of kids in the sport as a whole, or the ultimate demand in the pro-game, to justify so many flowing into the systems that we're in place...for the good of the game, the reforms were required.

So you are saying less kids playing rugby will be better for the good of the game?

#11 mmp

mmp
  • Coach
  • 380 posts

Posted 05 January 2013 - 03:09 PM

So you are saying less kids playing rugby will be better for the good of the game?


the opposite. we need to put more effort on increasing the total number of kids playing the sport to a level that makes running pro-Academy structures sustainable.

Take the NW - Widnes, Warrington, Salford, Wigan, St. Helens all taking 20 - 30 lads of each age group away from the amateur game per annum. There is no way on earth that all of them would flow into the pro game and many were being recruited into the structures to make up the numbers. Their expactations were over-optimistically raised and then many felt used by the sport so quit the sport.

Worse, was that many junior sides might only have 15 - 20 players and if they lose 5/6 to a scholarship system (and with so many pro-sides and so few jenuio sides this was happening!) the junior side might struggle each week to put a side out; so then even more players are pushed out of the game as individual junior sides struggle to be viable.

the system was not working - the result was less young players playing the game!

have 20+ more sides at each age group and it might have been sustainable to run so many Academy and Scholarship structures. Until we have that volume of kids in the game it's not vaible to keep dragging lads into 'talent pathways'. That is as much a reason for the reforms as it was cost-cutting by the pro-ranks.


so my point is, we can only run those type of structures as a sport IF we concentrate more time, effort and resource of increasing junior participation. we just need Sport England to recognise it now!
In Bury or North Manchester? Interested in Rugby League? Check out the Rugby League in Bury web-site: http://www.pitchero....bs/burybroncos/

#12 Padge

Padge
  • Coach
  • 18,033 posts

Posted 05 January 2013 - 04:11 PM

But for every player who goes off to Australia, how many others are lost to the game because of this cost cutting exercise by the SL clubs, just as we were starting to produce young British players of quality in numbers, we turn off the tap from the well. It probably had to be done from a cost standpoint but I think the overall numbers of quality players being nurtured into top class professionals will diminish greatly.

So ;lets employ more rugby players than the game can afford and then...

You have posted post after post after post saying Bradford, Salford blah blah got in a mess because they didn't cut costs..

Edited by Padge, 05 January 2013 - 04:11 PM.


Visit my photography site www.padge.smugmug.com
Radio 5 Live: Saturday 14 April 2007
Dave Whelan "In Wigan rugby will always be king"

 

This country's wealth was created by men in overalls, it was destroyed by men in suits.


#13 a.n Other

a.n Other
  • Coach
  • 1,548 posts

Posted 05 January 2013 - 04:17 PM

the opposite. we need to put more effort on increasing the total number of kids playing the sport to a level that makes running pro-Academy structures sustainable.

Take the NW - Widnes, Warrington, Salford, Wigan, St. Helens all taking 20 - 30 lads of each age group away from the amateur game per annum. There is no way on earth that all of them would flow into the pro game and many were being recruited into the structures to make up the numbers. Their expactations were over-optimistically raised and then many felt used by the sport so quit the sport.

Worse, was that many junior sides might only have 15 - 20 players and if they lose 5/6 to a scholarship system (and with so many pro-sides and so few jenuio sides this was happening!) the junior side might struggle each week to put a side out; so then even more players are pushed out of the game as individual junior sides struggle to be viable.

the system was not working - the result was less young players playing the game!

have 20+ more sides at each age group and it might have been sustainable to run so many Academy and Scholarship structures. Until we have that volume of kids in the game it's not vaible to keep dragging lads into 'talent pathways'. That is as much a reason for the reforms as it was cost-cutting by the pro-ranks.


so my point is, we can only run those type of structures as a sport IF we concentrate more time, effort and resource of increasing junior participation. we just need Sport England to recognise it now!

My mistake then. Good post.

#14 keighley

keighley
  • Coach
  • 5,223 posts

Posted 05 January 2013 - 04:52 PM

So ;lets employ more rugby players than the game can afford and then...

You have posted post after post after post saying Bradford, Salford blah blah got in a mess because they didn't cut costs..


What part of my last sentence didn't you understand?

#15 Blind side johnny

Blind side johnny
  • Coach
  • 9,291 posts

Posted 05 January 2013 - 05:12 PM

The' A' teams I remember were always half full of older first teamers returning from injury and some older never quite made it players who were there to provide cover for the 1st team and to make up the numbers for the A team, as well as a few younger players.


Ahh, happy days!

I really used to enjoy A team games when they were open-age.
Believe what you see, don't see what you believe.


John Ray (1627 - 1705)

#16 Blind side johnny

Blind side johnny
  • Coach
  • 9,291 posts

Posted 05 January 2013 - 05:13 PM

What part of my last sentence didn't you understand?


Probably the bit that says someone else has to pay for it because the game can't afford to itself. That's not really such a great admission to make is it?
Believe what you see, don't see what you believe.


John Ray (1627 - 1705)

#17 Griff

Griff
  • Coach
  • 7,648 posts

Posted 05 January 2013 - 05:21 PM

There's inevitably going to be wastage. You only actually need about a third of your development players to come good to feed your first team - and that's assuming that you don't recruit from any other sources.
"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

#18 jt

jt
  • Coach
  • 1,678 posts

Posted 05 January 2013 - 06:24 PM

It's all ok we won't give as many youngster the opertunity to try and be the best they can and get involved with pro clubs to work harder to test themselves we will waste the money on other things

#19 southstand loiner

southstand loiner
  • Coach
  • 2,657 posts

Posted 05 January 2013 - 09:27 PM

talk of wastage is very over the top as most of those who do not make it with a professional team tend to join local community clubs as we are now supposed to call them.
as someone who watches a lot of local rugby league in the leeds area nearly every week i see young players who have not made the grade at pro clubs playing for there local teams such as east leeds or hunslet warriors ect
ah a sunday night in front of the telly watching old rugby league games.
does life get any better .

#20 Padge

Padge
  • Coach
  • 18,033 posts

Posted 05 January 2013 - 09:34 PM

talk of wastage is very over the top


Its just another attempt to try and beat the big clubs with a little stick.

It really is tiresome.

Visit my photography site www.padge.smugmug.com
Radio 5 Live: Saturday 14 April 2007
Dave Whelan "In Wigan rugby will always be king"

 

This country's wealth was created by men in overalls, it was destroyed by men in suits.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users