League Express Upfront: Do we really need to get smaller?

[League Express]

The jungle drums suggest that the RFL board is to recommend that the Academy competition, which involved 14 clubs this season, including Championship clubs Sheffield and Featherstone, is to become ten. And because that will mean fewer British players will be emerging, Super League clubs will be allowed to sign more non-Federation trained players to fill their teams.

Click here to view the article

 

[South Wakefield Sharks]

Ok article, but it leaves lots of questions unanswered. However I'm sure the League Express team will be on to it to ensure we get some 'depth' to the story and the rationale behind the proposed move. If it was developed by people with expertise in developing elite rugby league players then I'd be much more relaxed about it, than I would be if it was hatched by the club chairmen!

What we do know though is that many of the current academies are simply not fit for purpose (see latest RFL review). A serious question to ask for example is whether in the Wakefield district, if you pooled the money that goes into the Wakey, Cas & Fev academies, would you be more or less likely to get more top quality players out the other end?

The academies should be about elite player development, not making up the numbers. The community game provides an outlet for players at junior and youth ages, and provides a structure for late developers to mature.

Again in Hull. Is that city likely in the short to medium term to produce twice as many elite players as Leeds? If not, why have two academies in Hull and only one in Leeds?

We have limited resources and we need to be sensible how we use them.

[gingerjon]

We have limited resources and we need to be sensible how we use them.

 

The game has been living in hope for this happening since 1895.

[Viking Warrior]

are wood and rimmer on a hell bent mission to destroy rugby league in britain? academies are the lifeblood of the clubs and have more non fed trained players is once again pacifying the clubs who just don't make the mark............

[PREPOSTEROUS]

It would be a shocking decision to increase the non fed limit, one of the major positives of the RFL’s recent policies has seen an increase in young players getting their opportunity in the top flight. An increase in non-fed spaces combined with the reintroduction of P&R will see clubs in danger revert to type and bulk the squad out with sub standard imports. If this does come to pass then Wood et al need removing from their highly lucrative positions, the little confidence I have left in the RFL leadership would be completely diminished. If it’s the clubs that are pushing for this then the RFL board need to be strong and tell them to do one.

Edited September 23, 2013 by PREPOSTEROUS

[keighley]

We always stress the importance of the international game and how important a strong England is to the overall strenght of the game in the country.  This move will diminish the number of good young English players coming through and the sheer numbers of decent players available for England for this year's World Cup shows the success of the policy they are about to ditch.

 

There have been numerous articles and pronouncements recently about the paucity of English players in soccer's premier league and the resultant failure of the England soccer team to mix it with the big boys. Do we really want to go down this road or can we learn from their mistakes.

 

Not to mention the exhorbitant cost of importing players from Australasia to out already cash strapped game.

[Magic XIII]

 

It would be a shocking decision to increase the non fed limit, one of the major positives of the RFL’s recent policies has seen an increase in young players getting their opportunity in the top flight. An increase in non-fed spaces combined with the reintroduction of P&R will see clubs in danger revert to type and bulk the squad out with sub standard imports. If this does come to pass then Wood et al need removing from their highly lucrative positions, the little confidence I have left in the RFL leadership would be completely diminished. If it’s the clubs that are pushing for this then the RFL board need to be strong and tell them to do one.

 

 

Maybe this is the case in the 'heartlands' but not in somewhere like London where the Broncos can't attract any moderate to high profile northerners and do not have the quality of juniors coming through in sufficient numbers to fill that talent gap. They are snookered.

[South Wakefield Sharks]

Think RL Meltdown is going to be busy with this topic!!

Seems to me we need to consider whether the changes will replace poor home trained players with better quality non federation trained players. For instance is Wakey's 8th home trained player simply in a job because Wakey have to have 8 home trained players?

Could Wakey get a better non-federation trained player for the same money?

If so, that would drive up the standard of the comp as a whole, would have no impact on the national squad, and would send a very clear message to young home trained players about the level they needed to attain to turn pro.

I don't know the answer to the questions, but it might be worth considering them before we all launch into the usual "sack the RFL nonsense"!

[RSN]

Increase the number of non fed players on the back of a super league dream team which was 100% British.

Makes sense.

[mmp]

are wood and rimmer on a hell bent mission to destroy rugby league in britain? academies are the lifeblood of the clubs and have more non fed trained players is once again pacifying the clubs who just don't make the mark............

 

Academies have not been the life-blood of clubs! there are simply too many of them given the total amount of particpation in our sport and the result has been hugely damaging to youth rugby without particular benefits to elite player development (for clubs or country). The RFL need to restructure this space for the good of the sport.

[nathanwood7]

The quota is becoming a bit of a red herring seeing as though it is more and more becoming a case of the only Aussies who want to come to Super League, being no better than the British lads already here. The days of the Jamie Lyons, Matt Kings etc of the world joining seem to have gone for the time being

[Saintslass]

What is going on at Red Hall at all?  Is this about money again?  If so, why are there still 100 plus employees at Red Hall?  If it's not about money, then what is the point of reversing all the good work of recent years by increasing the number of foreign players in the game?  And very average ones too I would imagine given the massive difference in earning potential between us and the NRL.

 

I'm totally baffled by this. 

[The Parksider]

Think RL Meltdown is going to be busy with this topic!!

Seems to me we need to consider whether the changes will replace poor home trained players with better quality non federation trained players. For instance is Wakey's 8th home trained player simply in a job because Wakey have to have 8 home trained players?

Could Wakey get a better non-federation trained player for the same money?

If so, that would drive up the standard of the comp as a whole, would have no impact on the national squad, and would send a very clear message to young home trained players about the level they needed to attain to turn pro.

I don't know the answer to the questions, but it might be worth considering them before we all launch into the usual "sack the RFL nonsense"!

 

Both your posts made great sense to me......

[GeordieSaint]

What is going on at Red Hall at all? Is this about money again? If so, why are there still 100 plus employees at Red Hall? If it's not about money, then what is the point of reversing all the good work of recent years by increasing the number of foreign players in the game? And very average ones too I would imagine given the massive difference in earning potential between us and the NRL.

I'm totally baffled by this.

More to do with the player pool probably. Academy structures and scholarship schemes have dessimated the youth game leaving it in very poor health. There aren't the playing resources available to allow every club to have an academy, especially good ones. Hence the rationalisation which I think is to come if reports are to be believed. Thay said, if you don't actively increase participation levels through development work...

[Saintslass]

More to do with the player pool probably. Academy structures and scholarship schemes have dessimated the youth game leaving it in very poor health. There aren't the playing resources available to allow every club to have an academy, especially good ones. Hence the rationalisation which I think is to come if reports are to be believed. Thay said, if you don't actively increase participation levels through development work...

Not sure I understand this.  Why would academy systems and scholarships decimate the youth game?  Don't they help to develop it?

Edited September 24, 2013 by Saintslass

[GeordieSaint]

Not sure I understand this. Why would academy systems and scholarships dessimate the youth game? Don't they help to develop it?

Amateur youth teams at U16-U18 levels have been folding at a rate of knots according to reports as participation levels are not high in these age groups. The Academies are a huge drain on playing resources... So in a nutshell, we don't have the youth playing numbers to sustain the current Academy structures, nevermind 14+ quality academies.

[Evil Homer]

Amateur youth teams at U16-U18 levels have been folding at a rate of knots according to reports as participation levels are not high in these age groups. The Academies are a huge drain on playing resources... So in a nutshell, we don't have the youth playing numbers to sustain the current Academy structures, nevermind 14+ quality academies.

Amateur U18 teams are completely irrelevant to everything, numbers drop off because 1. The best players leave to join professional set-ups and 2. Kids leave school and want to do other things. I can't believe the stupidity of this post. What you're suggesting is scrapping/reducing academy structures and leaving talented kids in the wilderness for no logical reason.

 

The new RFL administration are going to set the sport back here 20 years unless they are removed immediately.

[TheDuke]

Not always I help at a prominent amateur club and for several years our youth has been decimated by the pro clubs at 16/17 age groups this stems the flow of players to the open age section, in fact two of our players that missed the academy phase initially and played ncl are doing better than the others that left at 16 

 

They should leave players with amateur clubs longer because the majority of the players used in these systems are cannon fodder for the couple they are interested in and these players become lost to the game once discarded

[Evil Homer]

Not always I help at a prominent amateur club and for several years our youth has been decimated by the pro clubs at 16/17 age groups this stems the flow of players to the open age section, in fact two of our players that missed the academy phase initially and played ncl are doing better than the others that left at 16 

 

They should leave players with amateur clubs longer because the majority of the players used in these systems are cannon fodder for the couple they are interested in and these players become lost to the game once discarded

So you'd rather them be slogging it out playing amateur RL with poor coaching and poor facilities than being developed into professional players. About sums up the mentality of RL in this country.

[GeordieSaint]

I can't believe the stupidity of this post. What you're suggesting is scrapping/reducing academy structures and leaving talented kids in the wilderness for no logical reason.

 

The new RFL administration are going to set the sport back here 20 years unless they are removed immediately.

 

No I am not. The whole key to this problem is the number of players actually playing the game at junior/youth levels and therefore I am a very keen advocate of drastically increasing participation numbers and therefore completing agreeing with your last sentence. However, there is very much a current argument that having 3 x Academies in the Wakefield District, 2 in Hull etc etc are too many considering the overall impact it is having on the game as a whole and the amount of quality players coming out of these systems. Rationalising those resources into a 'large' academy in Wakefield, Hull etc where best practice, quality coaching etc are an everyday occurrence might actually produce better players and more of them as per the Academy structures at St Helens, Wigan and Leeds. I am also a keen advocate of a South Wales Academy where the rugby player pool is massive along with areas like London, Midlands etc etc.

[The Parksider]

1. The whole key to this problem is the number of players actually playing the game at junior/youth levels and therefore I am a very keen advocate of drastically increasing participation numbers 

 

2. I am also a keen advocate of a South Wales Academy where the rugby player pool is massive along with areas like London, Midlands etc etc.

 

1. In theory we all are. In practice we are where we are?.

 

2. Are you including all young RU players and casual young RL players?

 

Surely the large majority of our pro players have played the junior game seriously for some years.

 

Isn't it a law of diminishing returns where six regional academies may miss some excellent talent where 60 academies will have have many that don't ever turn out a professional.

 

I like the dukes the majority of the players used in these systems are cannon fodder for the couple they are interested in and these players become lost to the game once discarded. Less academies seems fine if needs must as long as the players they are interested in still find their way to one?

[mmp]

Not sure I understand this.  Why would academy systems and scholarships dessimate the youth game?  Don't they help to develop it?

Simple maths.

Take the North West

Warrington, Wigan, Widnes, Salford, St. Helens all running academies taking players from the junior/youth game... So, that's what, 100 players at each age group?

Consider we have just four divisions of U16 rugby from which to draw juniors and you see the problem. 5 academies competing for the best players - those who might make SL - but to actually field a side they've got to take the next best and then the next best to the point where they've taken players that they know won't ever be good enough at top level but because they all need to field a team, they've got to pull them from the amateur ranks.

The results are:

Some amateur sides fold. They have a squad of say 15, but find they've 4 on scholarship - which means they can't field a side when the scholarship lads are away. The other lads see this and think sod it... We lose players as a sport as a result.

Those selected by scholarship and academy systems who won't make the grade (and were selected to make up the numbers) have their expectations raised...and then dashed when rejected from he elite player system later on. They are less likely to commit as much to their amateur club as a result as 'the game' has let them down.

The theory is fine. But as GeordieSaint says, we'd need to quadruple participation at least for the system to stack up. So the RFL are right to restructure it all

[mmp]

Amateur U18 teams are completely irrelevant to everything, numbers drop off because 1. The best players leave to join professional set-ups and 2. Kids leave school and want to do other things. I can't believe the stupidity of this post. What you're suggesting is scrapping/reducing academy structures and leaving talented kids in the wilderness for no logical reason.

 

The new RFL administration are going to set the sport back here 20 years unless they are removed immediately.

You're right in that U15 to U18 is where participation in all sports drop off sharply. The NW Rugby Union structures have just had to merge geographical areas at U16 level to ensure they've enough teams in place to make a divisional structure viable.

BUT, GeordieSaint is 100% right in his analysis. You have an age group notorious for participation drop off made WORSE by the volume of kids taken out of the amateur structures with no hope of making the grade. We need a smaller number of higher quality academies reducing the impact on junior and youth rugby....

[mmp]

Ps this thread has already started to demonstrate he biggest issue in the game.

People being reactionary and slagging off the RFL for looking to reduce academies....

Yet for over a year (?) there's been plenty from in the amateur game coming on here and slagging off the RFL for having academies...

The RFL have an impossible task - to balance a whole set of competing priorities with a constituency of people determined to slag them off whatever route they take! They can't win...

[sheddings69]

One of the main intentions of licensing was to allow clubs to plan financially over the medium - long term. Another was to slow down the plethora of overpaid antipodeans.......an abject failure on both counts.