Reserve league

[Oliver Clothesoff]

One potential idea is to scrap the Scholarship system and have kids playing with their amateur team(s) till they’re 18, at which point they can, if good enough and wanted, sign a deal with a Super League Team, who then compete in a Under-21’s competition. 

That way, players stick with their amateur sides till they’re 18, meaning the player pool isn’t reduced there and that there’s a pathway from that level to open age for those not good enough to make the jump to Super League and that Super League clubs are picking up players between the ages of 18-21, giving them up to three three years to develop into potential Super League quality regulars. 

I’m not au fait with the amateur game and I don’t know if this would work but it’s an idea I’ve seen floated around on social media. 

[Rupert Prince]

2 hours ago, scotchy1 said:

We had more amateur players.

Creating 12 new teams requires more players that much is obvious.

You are talking in circles on this.

Sensible SL teams already have the players for reserves... and academies. You are ignoring all those In lower leagues who are unwilling to develop players of their own and whose first call is on the southern hemisphere for players who have been filtered out of their system.  

Maybe I am being extreme, but if you are intent on running a serious rugby club your ambition ought to be to run more than 1 team.  It's not for the best teams to weaken themselves because the rest are took bored to try.

 

[Clogiron]

3 hours ago, scotchy1 said:

We had more amateur players.

Creating 12 new teams requires more players that much is obvious.

Even allowing for the numerous workshop teams that used to exsist, many including player's who turned out for other teams on other days, I would think that the spread of amature team's now including universities, college's the forces and however piecemeal ouside the heartland's would mean the number of players now would be comparable, nobody used to record such number's in the past as they didn't have to keep producing statistics and reports to justify there existence every other week just like in the rest of our modern society.

[Lowdesert]

24 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

You are arguing that the lower leagues need to be developing more players but refuse to accept that that means taking more players out of the community game.

A reserves team for SL clubs will mean more players taken out of the community game to play in a league nobody watches, nobody cares about and doesnt develop players as well as playing in the championship or league 1.

 

If having a Reserves isn’t the answer, which is the template for DR success for us all to follow?

[Damien]

1 hour ago, scotchy1 said:

You are arguing that the lower leagues need to be developing more players but refuse to accept that that means taking more players out of the community game.

A reserves team for SL clubs will mean more players taken out of the community game to play in a league nobody watches, nobody cares about and doesnt develop players as well as playing in the championship or league 1.

 

That is completely your opinion and has no basis in fact.

[Moove]

Some quotes from Saints on the reserves situation here...

https://www.loverugbyleague.com/post/st-helens-frustrated-by-reserves-stalemate/

Seems only Wigan, Wire and Saints were prepared to commit so they've backed out. Not particularly surprising and it seems the prevailing view across SL is that reserves aren't the way forward.

The way League One is shaping up we could perhaps do with those three entering their reserves into there to make up the numbers instead.

[Damien]

I know that some clubs don't want to send their players on dual registration because many clubs are far from professional and it's not a particularly good environment to send young players into. Think poor training, poor training habits and booze ups on the way back from away games etc.

They would much rather their young players develop in a strong reserve competition and train and develop in a professional environmental and learn from experienced players and coaches. Unfortunately at the moment this is not possible.

[Damien]

7 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

Its not my opinion, its the opinion of some of those who have chosen not to run a reserves.

Many of which conveniently just want to cut costs and say they can't afford to. It is also not the opinion of those that do want to run reserves.

[Damien]

47 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

And one of course being the biggest, most successful side of the Super League era, the one with the largest turnover and the only one to regularly post profits over the past decade.

But whose own players like Adam Cuthbertson say that there should be a reserve competition. He himself makes some good points here:

https://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/leeds-rhinos/adam-cuthbertson-scrap-relegation-sort-the-under-19s-and-super-league-will-flourish-1-9065047/amp

There are ties between Super League and Championship clubs. Mik Oledzki has been playing for Featherstone Rovers the last two weeks and he has done a good job for them and gained some valuable experience and game time. But, in my opinion, the best way to develop young players is through a Super League reserve competition.

The under-19s league isn’t strong enough and it is too big a step-up from that to the first team. Players come into the senior side and they have never played against men before. Physically, it is a massive shock. If the young kids could play against men in a reserve league it would benefit them in that regard and also keep them within the system, which will help with the transition to the first team.

They would be training alongside first-team players and using the same systems, rather than going somewhere else – with different ways of doing things – on loan to gain experience and get time on the field. They will also have come through the ranks with the players they will be alongside in the first team.

Also as Leeds were more successful in the years prior to scrapping their reserves than since, indeed winning Super League 5 of the 6 years prior, instead of almost getting relegated this season then I'm not sure having no reserve team is the best argument. I'm sure the funds needed to redevelop Headingley aren't a factor either in Hetherington not wanting one. Profitably is great but it seems to have got in the way of a lack of youth development at Leeds and leaving too much dependence on the old guard for too long.

[Harry Stottle]

16 hours ago, Rupert Prince said:

I do not think I was talking in riddles.

Football clubs, hockey clubs rugby clubs, all sorts of clubs, scoure all over up hill and down dale to find good players.

An Arsenal coach will come up after hours to our junior school and will coach willing school kids.   They look out to find anything they can get.

They then, in RL terms, put the best they can find into Academy teams and on to higher level.  But a reserve grade will give a mixture off 1st team and others to develop their abilities. And by definition a reserve can step in when needed. 

All this supports the community teams  because not every acadamy player will go on to 1st team.  And equally community teams will also produc better players for bigger clubs.

The efforts of Wigan and other SL teams efforts do not hinder lower level clubs... But it is still their responsibility to produce their players.

 

 

I don't disagree with anything you say Mr Prince, but would you champion an idea that clubs would have specific demarcation zones in which they could only recruit player's from?

It is all well and good stating the likes of Wigan and un-named other SL clubs produce the vast majority of 'elite' player's, but these club's also posses the biggest vacuum cleaner's hoovering up all the avaiable talent from wherever they can entice them, if I was a 'young un' with the opportunity of joining Wigan, Saints, Leeds or Swinton, Leigh or Halifax I would obviously choose the former, but if the choice was not there?

The SL club's that can afford to take those lads and put them on a pathway to professionalism and useually tie up those who exhibit exceptional talent and propects by the age of 14 do so, not for the good of the game, but as a marked buisness plan, they are speculating to accumalate, they will be budeting for a very high percentage of 'rejects' just to capture the good un's, it is good buisness practice, but it also creates an imbalance in spreading the 'production' conveyor.

[pudsey hawk]

In an ideal world league 1 and championship clubs should refuse to do dual reg then super league clubs would be forced into reserve team. No supporter outside of super league seriously want success given to them by dual reg

[Damien]

9 hours ago, scotchy1 said:

Adam Cuthbertson of course, who came through a structure with feeder sides rather than this reserve nonsense, he has never actually seen or had experience with that reserves structure.

And yet even he can see the huge chasm that exits between u19s and first team Super League level and thinks that there should be something bridging that gap. I have never met one player or coach that does not believe that a reserve league should exist or that it is not beneficial to player and club alike. Plenty played under such a system and extol the benefits in comparison to the void that exists now, a void that leaves young players and experienced players, who are not picked or returning from injury, in limbo.

[Rupert Prince]

14 hours ago, scotchy1 said:

The options arent only reserves or DR. There are huge amounts of other options.

We could have proper feeder teams, we could remove the youth development from the SL clubs and do it through SL filtering players through the lower league clubs and allying players to those clubs rather than a club-club relationship, we could have an extended version of DR.

We moved away from reserves for a reason, other sports are moving away from reserves for a reason.

All you are saying is that we need more teams! And more leagues!  Well if successful, we can also have reserves! As I said, all you are doing is talking around in circles.

Elite teams need a pretty big pool of players of all ages and types and evolving abilities.  All your plan is is to get half of them to sit on their backsides.

[Damien]

1 hour ago, scotchy1 said:

And yet when we had it plenty, in fact pretty much all were in favour of scrapping it because it took too many  players out of the community game and the standard was too low to properly prepare players for the step up.

This isn't theory, it isn't a hypothetical, we have had reserves before and dumped them for a reason. 

Money was the reason for the vast majority of clubs and clubs like Huddersfield and Wakefield said as much. The rest is made up fluff to try and justify the decision.

[Rupert Prince]

12 hours ago, scotchy1 said:

Its not my opinion, its the opinion of some of those who have chosen not to run a reserves.

They don't have the money and they also chose to be spineless and  take an easy life. They prefer to pay for supposedly ready made overseas players... And if they are brought in from the pacific,  so much the better because they are cheap.

Just continuing to run a ###### competition means it stays ######.  If your community clubs you go on about were doing their job there would be lots of players for reserves. That's why Wigan can and want to run reserves. 

[Rupert Prince]

3 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

I don't disagree with anything you say Mr Prince, but would you champion an idea that clubs would have specific demarcation zones in which they could only recruit player's from?

It is all well and good stating the likes of Wigan and un-named other SL clubs produce the vast majority of 'elite' player's, but these club's also posses the biggest vacuum cleaner's hoovering up all the avaiable talent from wherever they can entice them, if I was a 'young un' with the opportunity of joining Wigan, Saints, Leeds or Swinton, Leigh or Halifax I would obviously choose the former, but if the choice was not there?

The SL club's that can afford to take those lads and put them on a pathway to professionalism and useually tie up those who exhibit exceptional talent and propects by the age of 14 do so, not for the good of the game, but as a marked buisness plan, they are speculating to accumalate, they will be budeting for a very high percentage of 'rejects' just to capture the good un's, it is good buisness practice, but it also creates an imbalance in spreading the 'production' conveyor.

I would not oppose a demarcation zone.  Not sure how it would be drawn, or where any other "enclaves" would be set up.  

But I should be clear that I do not agree with relegation and promotion and thus leads to the feeder concept.    The SL should grow be investment and via criteria.  And of course if SL clubs fail to meet that they should drop down and if others evolve they step up.    But that's another long running saga isn't it?

[Rupert Prince]

20 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

No, it wasn't. It not working was why it was scrapped. If we were getting value out of it then the big clubs would have kept it going.

We scrapped it for a reasons, sports all around the world are moving away from it for a reason. 

 

October 3: Shrewsbury Town Reserves 3, Bristol Rovers Reserves 0

October 30: Walsall Rovers 0,  Shrewsbury Town 3

The Central League is for reserve teams now, and has 23 teams in 3 divisions in the Midlands.  Its been going since 1911.

How pathetic are Shrewsbury then?

Big clubs as I have repeated to you have massive squads bought in from overseas that they regularly rotate and do so because they either play in other competitions (in Europe) or aspire to.  And again as I repeat, increasingly young English players are refusing that, because they are left out and are going abroad.

So at the top level, your argument falls and at the bottom level the reserve system is still working.

 

[Damien]

1 minute ago, Rupert Prince said:

October 3: Shrewsbury Town Reserves 3, Bristol Rovers Reserves 0

October 30: Walsall Rovers 0,  Shrewsbury Town 3

The Central League is for reserve teams now, and has 23 teams in 3 divisions in the Midlands.  Its been going since 1911.

How pathetic are Shrewsbury then?

Big clubs as I have repeated to you have massive squads bought in from overseas that they regularly rotate and do so because they either play in other competitions (in Europe) or aspire to.  And again as I repeat, increasingly young English players are refusing that, because they are left out and are going abroad.

So at the top level, your argument falls and at the bottom level the reserve system is still working.

 

Premier League clubs still have u23 teams too, pretty similar to our old reserve system in fact. I suppose they haven't a clue too. They also send young players on loan in addition to this, not instead of which is being insinuated on here.

The key difference of course is that if Man Utd do send a player out on loan it is to a full time professional environment where they will play and train at a good level. In contrast people on here want our elite young players shunted off to play and train with part time players, at clubs that can't even field 17 players and develop bad habits and have a booze up on the way back from an away game.

[Damien]

2 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

Wonder why you went to Shrewsbury and not say Man City?

Or Real Madrid

Or Bayern Munich

Man City have a u23s. Real Madrid and Bayern Munich both have reserve teams. They certainly don't just give up on players or wash their hands of development at 19.

[Rupert Prince]

7 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

Wonder why you went to Shrewsbury and not say Man City?

Or Real Madrid

Or Bayern Munich

?

what's your point?  I just already  pointed out that say Man C have effectively 2 teams in one and rotate regularly. 

Damien makes the point well as well.

My point is quite clear and you cannot answer it.   Shrewsbury can run a viable reserves grade competition.  Its not destroying the lower tier in the midlands.

 

[Damien]

Just now, scotchy1 said:

The best man city youngsters are out on loan and even the u23s were invited in to competitions to play lower league competition because of the failings of the u23 development system.

And who do real and bayerns reserves play against? Because they don't play against reserves they play in the lower leagues. 

Every Premier League club has u23s and does so for very good reasons. If there were such failings then they wouldn't exist.

One minute you are saying we don't need reserves then the next you are listing them as evidence like Real Madrid and Bayern Munich. Your argument is completely muddled.

[Oliver Clothesoff]

I’m not sure how this has changed into a debate about lower league football but Shrewsbury Town are not particularly famed for their academy and don’t appear to have any regular first team players in their squad who have come through their system. 

Does that show that it’s working? Is it financially viable for them?

Also, I bet Shrewsbury Town, a third tier football team, are probably in a better financial position than some Super League clubs. Therefore, these comparisons are empty and not relevant. 

[Lowdesert]

15 hours ago, scotchy1 said:

The options arent only reserves or DR. There are huge amounts of other options.

We could have proper feeder teams, we could remove the youth development from the SL clubs and do it through SL filtering players through the lower league clubs and allying players to those clubs rather than a club-club relationship, we could have an extended version of DR.

We moved away from reserves for a reason, other sports are moving away from reserves for a reason.

I don't think you're in touch with RL development on that. 

Don't we have 'feeder teams' now?  Hull have a relationship at Doncaster, others have the same.  The financial implications for controlling a lower league or amateur club wouldn't be within the realm of all Clubs.  Secondly, the Scholarship scheme are, in the scale of things, still in early stages of development.  Education is a massive part of that and some clubs struggle to get that right.  As a result, some kids wont attempt to further a career with a Club whose education partnership doesn't provide the best education for them.

I aren't against the principle of DR, but imo it should have set parameters which improve on what we have now.  We have examples of DR being made a mockery of.  Within the rules, maybe, but from a spectator/fan perspective it doesn't sit well and for some players it must be terrifically confusing.  Clubs, especially those who are wealthier than most, have an opportunity to develop their own, but waste that opportunity and use DR as a failsafe.

RL is one of the few sports where you need physical strength and resilience.  Age impacts on that.  We cant get away from that human factor.  One main reason Reserves or Under 23 or whatever brings is that step up before 1st team standard and enables growth.  Picking off other clubs best, DRing when the opportunity arises is more a strategy of hope.  Hoping a player is spotted and hoping a club will negotiate a player isn't a strong strategy in my opinion.

 

 

[Rupert Prince]

22 minutes ago, Oliver Clothesoff said:

I’m not sure how this has changed into a debate about lower league football but Shrewsbury Town are not particularly famed for their academy and don’t appear to have any regular first team players in their squad who have come through their system. 

Does that show that it’s working? Is it financially viable for them?

Also, I bet Shrewsbury Town, a third tier football team, are probably in a better financial position than some Super League clubs. Therefore, these comparisons are empty and not relevant. 

I know a Shrews supporter so used ad an example.  An example of a common or garden club who plays in a long established reserve league. Its without loadsamoney and can have a reserve team, which Scotchy says are near extinct. 

BTW he is entitled to his view and may make some useful points on this, but on balance I believe it's a poor show and be better and stronger for RL if we had a reserve competition.

And for what it is worth the RU Premiership, the Shield, have reserves... and by way  of standing life on its head they bring in players from other clubs in dual registration!

[Lowdesert]

3 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

No, we don't have feeder sides, we have DR which is barely half way. 

I'm not arguing for DR as is, improvements can be made but reserves is not an improvement. It's a step back.

And there is a place for those not physically ready for SL, youth rugby and lower league rugby. Reserves isn't a step up from that it's a step down. 

We have it in some form, not the full, financial hog.  Wigan, Saints etc will all have good connections with local sides and bring playes in if they want.  That has gone on for years.

Sorry, but its not a step back, its depends on circumstance and it absolutely is a place for 1st team preparation.  Players, going back to amateur clubs, have to be extremely well managed otherwise they will never get where the pro club needs them to be.  A prime example is Albert at Catalans.  Until SMc arrived he barely played a game at lower level, just turned out now and again for the academy.  Now he's been playing for St Esteve, Academy and is developing as a player.  Before that he was running to fat.  Not all clubs can afford to do that an players move away from the game entirely.