Widnes Give Up

[Gooleboy]

3 hours ago, DoubleD said:

Sadly most the players have had to return to part time status this year, although Ellis Robson secured a FT deal with Warrington (and rightly so, he’s a talent)

Who have the others signed for?

[JonM]

6 minutes ago, yipyee said:

Percivil and the lad who plays at cas..are 2 its true that not every clib shoyld have an academy in a close area

OK - see your point. Mark Percival and Danny Richardson - both from Widnes, but joined Saints Academy and now playing SL.

Nevertheless, the fact that Leeds had 3 Widnes Academy products on the field for a game this season says to me that Saints & Warrington were not signing all of the best teenage players from Merseyside/ Cheshire, so I do think this reduces the pool of future professional players and longer term will slightly increase the gap between us and the NRL. Hopefully those Widnes players in the 2019 and 2020 England Academy squads will also get picked up by SL clubs at some point.

[yipyee]

45 minutes ago, JonM said:

OK - see your point. Mark Percival and Danny Richardson - both from Widnes, but joined Saints Academy and now playing SL.

Nevertheless, the fact that Leeds had 3 Widnes Academy products on the field for a game this season says to me that Saints & Warrington were not signing all of the best teenage players from Merseyside/ Cheshire, so I do think this reduces the pool of future professional players and longer term will slightly increase the gap between us and the NRL. Hopefully those Widnes players in the 2019 and 2020 England Academy squads will also get picked up by SL clubs at some point.

True, Walmsley and Hardaker were from the championship not sure of their academy clubs

[Spidey]

13 minutes ago, yipyee said:

True, Walmsley and Hardaker were from the championship not sure of their academy clubs

Walmsley was signed direct from Dewsbury Celtic I think. Hardaker came through the ranks at Featherstone

[Wanderer]

thought Saints signed Walmsley from Batley, could be a figment of my imagination though

[Damien]

4 minutes ago, Wanderer said:

thought Saints signed Walmsley from Batley, could be a figment of my imagination though

They did.

[Spidey]

18 minutes ago, Damien said:

They did.

Batley signed him from Dewsbury Celtic when John Kear was there. Don’t think he went through any academy structure 

[Damien]

4 minutes ago, Spidey said:

Batley signed him from Dewsbury Celtic when John Kear was there. Don’t think he went through any academy structure 

No one said he did. The point was that Saints signed him from Batley and the Championship. Walmsley is a good example of one of those late developers that slipped through the cracks who really came to the fore at Leeds Met.

[DoubleD]

9 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

Tommy I gave alternatives of demarcation/zone/system, how very prudent of you just to pick on one and assuming if to be in a locallity of the club!

Wherever these areas or zones could be or even a different system altogether I haven't a clue what could be done, I understand one thing though that fans of those clubs who yeild the biggest vacuum cleaners are in no way willing to upset the present 'open course' they already hunt on.

They already take on more lads than they will ever need, is it to prevent the competition signing them? and they do so full well knowing that they will be ejecting the majority of them, there we go this discussion has led me to an alternative perhaps a different system could be a ceiling on how many a club are allowed to be signed or a squad capacity number or would that be taking the edge away from the top clubs?

Is demarcation of areas even legal? Is it not a restraint of movement/trade?

[GUBRATS]

There is only so many academies needed in UK RL , if you have too many you start to decimate the community game , finding the balance is the hard part , something that nobody on here has posted a solution to 

[Spidey]

4 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

There is only so many academies needed in UK RL , if you have too many you start to decimate the community game , finding the balance is the hard part , something that nobody on here has posted a solution to 

Agreed. Community game should run up to u18 then academy should be u19/u20 to make a distinction

[iffleyox]

9 hours ago, DoubleD said:

Is demarcation of areas even legal? Is it not a restraint of movement/trade?

I think you can do it if it’s done at sport governing body level. There’s an obvious example in the other code - RFU sets a certain number of tier 1 licences which it then allocates to specific areas.

the upshot is that of course it’s then a closed shop because newcoming/promoted teams can’t have a tier 1 academy but are still levied for the central funds - memorably described by London Welsh as “paying other teams to develop players to beat us”  

so it can be done but firstly not sure why you’d want to, and secondly not sure how you graft it onto the existing system - the old ‘I wouldn’t start from here’ line springs to mind.

[DoubleD]

40 minutes ago, iffleyox said:

I think you can do it if it’s done at sport governing body level. There’s an obvious example in the other code - RFU sets a certain number of tier 1 licences which it then allocates to specific areas.

the upshot is that of course it’s then a closed shop because newcoming/promoted teams can’t have a tier 1 academy but are still levied for the central funds - memorably described by London Welsh as “paying other teams to develop players to beat us”  

so it can be done but firstly not sure why you’d want to, and secondly not sure how you graft it onto the existing system - the old ‘I wouldn’t start from here’ line springs to mind.

But surely if a player wishes to sign for a different club, he can do? Regardless of area

[yipyee]

35 minutes ago, DoubleD said:

But surely if a player wishes to sign for a different club, he can do? Regardless of area

Nope the local premiership club gets first refusal.

This is also how any draft system works btw

[Harry Stottle]

4 hours ago, Spidey said:

Agreed. Community game should run up to u18 then academy should be u19/u20 to make a distinction

What would you suggest happens when they reach the end of the season they have reached 18 Spidey? Have a draft system perhaps?

Considering lads are signed on 'provisionally' from 12 years old onwards, mostly by the bigger clubs for fear that if they wait till the lad develops they will miss him, nothing will change, but agreed it will make the amateur game stronger, but we also have to consider those who are ready for the big time before they are 19. 

[Harry Stottle]

11 hours ago, DoubleD said:

Is demarcation of areas even legal? Is it not a restraint of movement/trade?

I don't know, but it is all down to the system which the game wishes to employ, wether that includes some defined area I haven't got a clue. 

But ask yourself does this model we employ of 90%+ of the best kids we produce ending up at 3 or 4 clubs benefit the game as whole?

Don't get me wrong once the lads end up at these top clubs they are looked after very well and taken to the maximum they can produce, but the point is other clubs are not having the opportunity to develop these kids themselves.

It doesn't take a lot of brainwork to see and realise that a club who takes the best of the available talent will be a club always at the top, the dvidence is plainly there for all to see with only 4 winners of the Championship in 25 years and only 3 in the last 15 years. If the opinion is we want this to continue, then keep the same system but if we want the league to be more competitive then we should devise a system to spread the talent out further, and especially if a condition of SL participation is to run an academy.

Regarding areas outside of the heartlands, supposing say Leeds put a lot of effort into the midlands to develop young talent, should that area be a free for all or should Leeds have first refusal on any one they wish to sign? 

 

[DoubleD]

16 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

I don't know, but it is all down to the system which the game wishes to employ, wether that includes some defined area I haven't got a clue. 

But ask yourself does this model we employ of 90%+ of the best kids we produce ending up at 3 or 4 clubs benefit the game as whole?

Don't get me wrong once the lads end up at these top clubs they are looked after very well and taken to the maximum they can produce, but the point is other clubs are not having the opportunity to develop these kids themselves.

It doesn't take a lot of brainwork to see and realise that a club who takes the best of the available talent will be a club always at the top, the dvidence is plainly there for all to see with only 4 winners of the Championship in 25 years and only 3 in the last 15 years. If the opinion is we want this to continue, then keep the same system but if we want the league to be more competitive then we should devise a system to spread the talent out further, and especially if a condition of SL participation is to run an academy.

Regarding areas outside of the heartlands, supposing say Leeds put a lot of effort into the midlands to develop young talent, should that area be a free for all or should Leeds have first refusal on any one they wish to sign? 

 

So you don’t think a player should have the right to choose what club he wants to play at?

[GUBRATS]

Let's be clear here , we cannot sort out a ' fair and impartial ' system for producing players , our sport doesn't have the money to do it 

So set out clear aims and principles for all clubs , set aside some central funding for the areas outside the heartlands , and then clubs have to pay for the access to players from those areas 

More importantly than more and more academies is all clubs engaging with local schools and community clubs to increase participation levels at the very early years , part of this is the requirement to ' sanitise ' some of the more excessive physical aspects of the game at all levels , as the coach of a junior school team I told my kids they were playing the ' hardest team sport in the world ' , the game is hard enough in its purest form , all aspects of thuggery need to be eradicated , coaches and clubs have to be held accountable for their players , if they won't get it out of the game then remove them from the sport 

[Scotchy1]

Youth development is one of those decisions we can't take in isolation, along with the number of clubs we have, the salary cap and structure re P+R etc.

All of those things interplay with each other and not all options fit within it.

We can have a draft and talent redistribution efforts. However we can't have them with the academy structure we have or with P+R. 

If we are to stand behind the principle that position in the league should be decided by what happens on the field, it is hypocritical and unfair to not give clubs the freedom to put whatever they think is best on the field. 

I would be in favour of stripping academy rugby away from the clubs, I'd be in favour of a draft system. I think it would make more even games and improve quality. But you can't have a draft and relegate clubs and you would need clubs in a second tier to make their contribution to development. So that kind of thing doesn't fit with the structure we have in P+R so the system that we have now whilst there are other positive and negatives is the right system for everything else we do. 

If we want to substantially change youth development we have to be prepared to change everything else as well