Jump to content

Academy Licensing (2022 - 27) - (Merged threads)


Recommended Posts


Great news for Wakefield on top of the excellent start of their U19s and U17s last week.

  • Like 5

This world was never meant for one as beautiful as me.
 
 
Wakefield Trinity RLFC
2012 - 2014 "The wasted years"

2013, 2014 & 2015 Official Magic Weekend "Whipping Boys"

2017 - The year the dream disappeared under Grix's left foot.

2018 - The FinniChezz Bromance 

2019 - The Return of the Prodigal Son

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting that they could have awarded 12 licenses, but decided only 10 applicants were of sufficient standard. Doesn't leave a lot of room for the clubs left out to complain about the decision.

Also notable that they've emphasised the desire not to have clubs stripping the community game of youngsters who stand no chance of ever making it to a professional level simply to pad out their academies.

  • Like 4

"Just as we had been Cathars, we were treizistes, men apart."

Jean Roque, Calendrier-revue du Racing-Club Albigeois, 1958-1959

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Spidey said:

So, no Elite Academies for Castleford, Hull KR, Leigh, Salford

If clubs aren’t willing to put the right money and effort into their infrastructure they shouldn’t be allowed to continue in SL more than 1 year.  Development should be a prerequisite, not optional, and newly promoted clubs should be given 1 year only to get their house in order.

The 10 clubs awarded elite Academy Licences for 2022-27 are: Catalans Dragons, Huddersfield Giants, Hull FC, Leeds Rhinos, London Broncos, Newcastle Thunder, St Helens, Wakefield Trinity, Warrington Wolves, Wigan Warriors.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Lowdesert said:

If clubs aren’t willing to put the right money and effort into their infrastructure they shouldn’t be allowed to continue in SL more than 1 year.  Development should be a prerequisite, not optional, and newly promoted clubs should be given 1 year only to get their house in order.

The 10 clubs awarded elite Academy Licences for 2022-27 are: Catalans Dragons, Huddersfield Giants, Hull FC, Leeds Rhinos, London Broncos, Newcastle Thunder, St Helens, Wakefield Trinity, Warrington Wolves, Wigan Warriors.

How can clubs get to that level of infrastructure when the only 2 options are full elite academy, or cat 3 college league academy? 

You say Development should be a prerequisite, not optional but it isn't even optional at the moment, it's ringfenced for only a max of 9 heartland clubs.

Screenshot_20210521-112251_Chrome.jpg

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Lowdesert said:

If clubs aren’t willing to put the right money and effort into their infrastructure they shouldn’t be allowed to continue in SL more than 1 year.  Development should be a prerequisite, not optional, and newly promoted clubs should be given 1 year only to get their house in order.

The 10 clubs awarded elite Academy Licences for 2022-27 are: Catalans Dragons, Huddersfield Giants, Hull FC, Leeds Rhinos, London Broncos, Newcastle Thunder, St Helens, Wakefield Trinity, Warrington Wolves, Wigan Warriors.

So you’d kick Salford. HKR and Cas out next season and go with a 10 team league with London and Newcastle promoted into it? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cas's response to the decision.

Castleford Tigers is devastated to learn that the Club has not been awarded an Elite Academy Licence from the Rugby Football League for 2022-27.

This news comes following a lengthy application process which included a 2,000-page document that was submitted by the Club.

The early feedback given as to the reasons that Castleford Tigers has not been awarded an Elite Academy Licence is due to a large number of clubs in a small geographical location, and that since 2014 the Club has been bottom of the league for producing First Team players. However, the process has not taken into account the appearances of our long-standing home-grown Academy talent such as Michael Shenton, Adam Milner, Nathan Massey, Oliver Holmes, James Clare, Greg Eden and Liam Watts, just to name some of the players currently within the Castleford First Team setup.

The application process also did also not consider that we have 70+ young players on our current Scholarship & Academy programmes, alongside the Tigers Talent Pathway which continues to grow from strength to strength and enables a route for players from Under 12’s onwards.

Throughout the last Academy process, the Club has invested millions of pounds into the Club’s youth systems and structures.

As a result of this, we are determined to develop a hybrid system alongside our current College of Rugby League and Elite Player Pathways, details of this will be announced in due course.

 

 

My thoughts are, why on earth the RFL are choosing to minimise the number of licenses awarded, we hardly have an over supply of players playing the game...

Cas have produced plenty of players who contribute to their own squad and other squads, including the aforementioned established 1st team players at Cas and elsewhere (Clark, Westerman, Louis Johnson, Callum Mclelland, Maher, Arundel, Turner, etc!)

They have brought 3 players through these year to feature for the 1st team in Martin, Peachey and Hall.  Add in O Neil a recent product, Hodgson who went to the NRL!  With several promising players in the current set up Cain Robb, Brad Graham, etc!

Edited by Gates1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Gates1 said:

Cas's response to the decision:

Castleford Tigers is devastated to learn that the Club has not been awarded an Elite Academy Licence from the Rugby Football League for 2022-27.

This news comes following a lengthy application process which included a 2,000-page document that was submitted by the Club.

The early feedback given as to the reasons that Castleford Tigers has not been awarded an Elite Academy Licence is due to a large number of clubs in a small geographical location, and that since 2014 the Club has been bottom of the league for producing First Team players. However, the process has not taken into account the appearances of our long-standing home-grown Academy talent such as Michael Shenton, Adam Milner, Nathan Massey, Oliver Holmes, James Clare, Greg Eden and Liam Watts, just to name some of the players currently within the Castleford First Team setup.

 

I'm not sure listing a bunch of players all but one of whom is over 30 is quite the argument for retaining an academy they think it is.

  • Like 12
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Hela Wigmen said:

Has anyone lost their elite licence then?

In effect Widnes but we seem to have jumped before we were pushed.

  • Like 1

I was born to run a club like this. Number 1, I do not spook easily, and those who think I do, are wasting their time, with their surprise attacks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Gates1 said:

Why on earth the RFL are choosing to minimise the number of licenses awarded, we hardly have an over supply of players playing the game...

Two reasons, quality over quantity, and protecting the community game. These are both interlinked.

The first point should be obvious. There are 4 Super League clubs in West Yorkshire, plus Bradford with an academy. Cas' facilities are pretty poor (no beating around the bush, I know a lot of people work hard there with not a lot but this was for an "elite" academy status) and Cas' production of first teamers from their academy hasn't been great of late. Cas' "investment" is a joke not worth entertaining - they're doorstep academy recruiters and pay even less.

Secondly, the density of academies in the region has left the community game decimated for no good reason. Players are at 15-17 hoovered up, often for the purpose of purely filling shirts with no prospect of actually making the first team. Strong community teams are utterly ransacked with the drop in the number of teams between u15s to the last year before open age being utterly dreadful. Its not good enough return to have this damage.

FWIW my view would be to have all clubs use college based academies if any at all; as it causes so many issues in junior rugby. Leave them till u18s.

I can understand Cas being upset, but perhaps only in contrast with Wakefield's inclusion.

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Toby Chopra said:

I'm not sure listing a bunch of players all but one of whom is over 30 is quite the argument for retaining an academy they think it is.

This is what the Cas media piece has suggested was in the RFL feedback.

‘The early feedback given as to the reasons that Castleford Tigers has not been awarded an Elite Academy Licence is due to a large number of clubs in a small geographical location, and that since 2014 the club has been bottom of the league for producing First Team players.’

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Toby Chopra said:

I'm not sure listing a bunch of players all but one of whom is over 30 is quite the argument for retaining an academy they think it is.

Said players have been taking starting 17 places frequently during the time mentioned which contributes to opportunities for other players. 42%of our current squad are Cas products.  That's a squad that have been competing at the top end of SL for much of the period mention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, LeytherRob said:

How can clubs get to that level of infrastructure when the only 2 options are full elite academy, or cat 3 college league academy? 

You say Development should be a prerequisite, not optional but it isn't even optional at the moment, it's ringfenced for only a max of 9 heartland clubs.

Screenshot_20210521-112251_Chrome.jpg

Just doing the bare minimum isn’t enough to qualify for the full Elite standard.  These clubs have been weakly audited for a number of years and none of it was based on actual players on the pitch until recently.  The evidence is there but it still doesn’t stop clubs from running an academy and proving a point.

If a club is going to be promoted they should have an infrastructure in place to develop players.  If a Club is promoted, let’s say Barrow Raiders, they should receive full central funding and have the a structure in place at the end of Year 1, to fulfil the requirements in year 2 onwards.  That’s not difficult.

Edited by Lowdesert
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Eddie said:

So you’d kick Salford. HKR and Cas out next season and go with a 10 team league with London and Newcastle promoted into it? 

Didn’t say that Eddie.  But, imo, they  should be given a year to put the foundation in place to satisfy the Elite standard in the year after, onwards.  

I think that some Clubs do not fully understand how to satisfy the audit requirements.  Others just keep spending it on players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no issue with the decisions and changes............they're looking to make the Academy an Elite level and unfortunately there are too many players there who won't cut it at top level and there are too many lopsided matches. Also, there are too many clubs who have paid lip service to youth development and not invested significantly in off field aspects, which has led to this decision. 

I'm slightly surprised to see Catalans in there, as that would suggest they will be back joining the Academy league, which they'd been in previously but chose to leave to embed players in the St Esteve team in Elite 1.

The only potential surprise omission was Hull KR, not because of their current setup or track record, which doesn't support them having an Elite Academy status but they have shown intent on rectifying this. I reckon the RFL will be looking for them to put this in place ahead of any potential application in 2024. They've got work to do and hopefully they will see it through.

Pleased to see reserves are back next year

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Glensider changed the title to RL decision on Academies
  • John Drake changed the title to Academy Licensing (2022 - 27) - (Merged threads)

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...