Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, Eddie said:

John Kear and Dave Rotherham are on this week’s 5 Live podcast talking about the academy decision.
 

Kear is obviously angry about it, pointing out for example that 8 of their 17 last weekend came through their academy, while Rotherham sounded like Rimmer Lite with his bland and non-specific responses to questions. 
 

They also said that one of the questions in the application was ‘would you still be prepared to run an academy with reduced or no funding’ - how very RFL.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p09jlhbc

Such a frustrating listen for all the reasons you've listed. Not really any wiser to the actual reasons behind decisions and lots of contradictory positions. He repeatedly cites impact on the community game and too many academies as main factors but doesn't explain why 2 spots were left open even though designated for heartland clubs. He mentions finances as an issue but then admits to the question about funding on the application(which incidentally stacks up with Carvells comments about no funding which were previously dismissed on here).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


11 minutes ago, Gates1 said:
10 players in 5 years! Embarrassing.
 
Holmes = ave. 4 games per season
Douglas = 2 games 2016-18
Fitzimmons = 2 games in 2017
Trueman not even a Cas product!
Turner 15 games - now at Newcastle
Hall = 1 game
Graham = 1 game in 2020
Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, dboy said:
10 players in 5 years! Embarrassing.
 
Holmes = ave. 4 games per season
Douglas = 2 games 2016-18
Fitzimmons = 2 games in 2017
Trueman not even a Cas product!
Turner 15 games - now at Newcastle
Hall = 1 game
Graham = 1 game in 2020

Trueman played within Cas's academy structure.

O Neil, 1st team regular.

Martin, break through season, taking a regular spot this year.

Peachey, break through season, several appearances already.

Hodgeson signed for an nrl club.

Johnson bought by Wire, Hull KR first team.

Maher, Hulll KR 1st team.

McClelland, bought by RU,  Leeds 1st team.

How does it compare to Wakey? 

(Who have been consistently garbage and have had much lower standard of team to break into over the last 5 years and less established homegrown 1st team players already established within the squad)

Edited by Gates1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 26/05/2021 at 06:09, TrueBull said:

How is that even close to fair? 
Fair is every SL club runs a Cat 1 academy, or no club runs a Cat 1 academy - with the Rfl running regional academies directly. 
 

The easiest way to compare fairness and competition integrity is East Yorkshire. 
In the future, Hull have a couple of first team wingers go down with illness. They then go to their star u19’s winger who has come through the elite academy and has already learned the plays & processes of Hull. This helps them to win the game. 
Also in the future, HKR have the same problem. They can’t go to their elite u19 winger because they don’t have one. They may not have decided to run a Cat3 academy in which case they play a centre out of position or get a loan winger in. If they are running a Cat 3 academy then they need to check if the player (who is completing a plumbers apprenticeship) is available. Unfortunately they lose the game, but the burst pipe is sorted. 
 

 

 

Yes but you are looking at it from a very narrow perspective and not the game as a whole. Also most clubs will play a player out of position rather than promote youth, especially if its a meaningful game.

Just on Hull is Swift from their academy? 

Hull KRs Ryan Hall from KRs academy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 26/05/2021 at 06:18, Eddie said:

Good for the lucky clubs, another way that nobody else can ever catch up. 

True, but this is what RL wants ever since the review (was it lindsays?) In the 90s and TBF if yoy look at Saints, Wigan and Warrington the one club one region is working

Edited by yipyee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, LeytherRob said:

It's not as simple as just switching switching fixtures of their current academy to playing college teams. Clubs have to link up with a college and any players have to be enrolled in that particular college. Clubs can ask youngsters to enroll there but ultimately it puts the college in charge of your youth recruitment.

Not really, if Bradford said to me play for our academy but you have to go to x college to get some qualifications I wouldnt argue. Infact this is how youth sport works in the states.

And didnt an olympic rower go to uni in his 40s so he could row in the boat race?

Oh and thats presuming that the rules for these academys are not tweaked to account for current affairs.

Edited by yipyee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, 40yearsatlondon said:

if London go part time next year...which has been mentioned...then no academy??

They are not heartland. The policy was 2 academys minimum from non heartland to link into the RFL stratergy

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Gates1 said:

Trueman played within Cas's academy structure.

O Neil, 1st team regular.

Martin, break through season, taking a regular spot this year.

Peachey, break through season, several appearances already.

Hodgeson signed for an nrl club.

Johnson bought by Wire, Hull KR first team.

Maher, Hulll KR 1st team.

McClelland, bought by RU,  Leeds 1st team.

How does it compare to Wakey? 

(Who have been consistently garbage and have had much lower standard of team to break into over the last 5 years and less established homegrown 1st team players already established within the squad)

Compare that to Wigan or Saints

And not just at their clubs but scattered throughout the league.

The RFL in effect are paying clubs to produce players, like sports England they pull funding from failing areas

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surely this is going to affect the quality of the player pool. Not all academy players break into their clubs first team but some drop down a division or into a  league 1 team. I know quite a few just disappear from the game and never go back to amateur rl. But surely the top level coaching they get improves the lower divisions if they drop a level. This is what happened with the players from the catalans academy that they ran for a few years. Alot of the players dropped into elite 1 and improved the level. 

Edited by barnyia
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, yipyee said:

Compare that to Wigan or Saints

And not just at their clubs but scattered throughout the league.

The RFL in effect are paying clubs to produce players, like sports England they pull funding from failing areas

Well I didn't see the sense in pulling superleague clubs academies but thought that maybe there is no sense to academies being too close to each other.

Not a lot of lads make it at all from the many who enter the academies, clubs have to fill up with Aussies Kiwi's and pacific Islanders  to get the best quality players they can.

But your exellent post(s) seem to explain it in that it's a lack of money more than anything else. Had SKY agreed to the same money this would not have happened - at least that makes great sense

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Man of Kent said:

It’s got to be about money and the reduced TV deal. Wouldn’t be shocked if all 12 spots are filled, however. 

Agree as above, but sad that individual clubs have to be picked on to "solve" the issue rather than discussing the lack of funding with the stakeholders?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, yipyee said:

Not really, if Bradford said to me play for our academy but you have to go to x college to get some qualifications I wouldnt argue. Infact this is how youth sport works in the states.

But it isn't how youth sport works in this country. Not every college offers the same  courses or to the same standard, so any player who is taking their education seriously would be stupid to make that decision purely because a pro club has slapped their name on the college team. 

1 hour ago, yipyee said:

And didnt an olympic rower go to uni in his 40s so he could row in the boat race?

Oh and thats presuming that the rules for these academys are not tweaked to account for current affairs.

There are different rules rules mature students at colleges than university. University has no age limit because everyone is an adult. They don't just let a 40 year old enroll in college with a bunch of 16/17 year old for obvious reasons.

How could the rules be tweaked for colleges exactly?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Gates1 said:

Trueman played within Cas's academy structure.

O Neil, 1st team regular.

Martin, break through season, taking a regular spot this year.

Peachey, break through season, several appearances already.

Hodgeson signed for an nrl club.

Johnson bought by Wire, Hull KR first team.

Maher, Hulll KR 1st team.

McClelland, bought by RU,  Leeds 1st team.

How does it compare to Wakey? 

(Who have been consistently garbage and have had much lower standard of team to break into over the last 5 years and less established homegrown 1st team players already established within the squad)

Trueman signed in January and played first team in July - in no way can he be considered a Cas product.

Wakefield, seeing as you want to make it about them, have 14 club trained players in their CURRENT first team squad.

This is not about SL finishing positions based on overpaying antipodean imports, it's about producing professional players - and on that metric Cas are bottom of the list.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, LeytherRob said:

But it isn't how youth sport works in this country. Not every college offers the same  courses or to the same standard, so any player who is taking their education seriously would be stupid to make that decision purely because a pro club has slapped their name on the college

Some have suggested that young players don't sign until 17/18 so that the community game isn't decimated and also late developers get the chance to impress.

Maybe the RFL could work with and invest in college RL and players don't sign with a pro club until after college. Colleges would then recruit and run teams with RFL assistance which would help it become a higher standard of RL and also allow young players to study what they want rather than only whats on offer at their academy college. 

Clubs could then sign 18 year olds to play in a u20/21 competition which would replace the current u18 academy as most agree that 20/21 is when most players are physically ready for first team rugby. The u20/21s could even allow a certain number of over age players which could allow it to double up as reserve grade

This would help the community game at u18s as they would still be able to play whilst at college. It would also allow more clubs to run an u20/21 academy rather than u18s as there would be less impact on the community game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, JM2010 said:

Some have suggested that young players don't sign until 17/18 so that the community game isn't decimated and also late developers get the chance to impress.

Maybe the RFL could work with and invest in college RL and players don't sign with a pro club until after college. Colleges would then recruit and run teams with RFL assistance which would help it become a higher standard of RL and also allow young players to study what they want rather than only whats on offer at their academy college. 

Clubs could then sign 18 year olds to play in a u20/21 competition which would replace the current u18 academy as most agree that 20/21 is when most players are physically ready for first team rugby. The u20/21s could even allow a certain number of over age players which could allow it to double up as reserve grade

This would help the community game at u18s as they would still be able to play whilst at college. It would also allow more clubs to run an u20/21 academy rather than u18s as there would be less impact on the community game.

Why would the RFL bother investing in colleges rather than the community game, which is a far better place to develop talent and already has structures in place? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, JM2010 said:

Some have suggested that young players don't sign until 17/18 so that the community game isn't decimated and also late developers get the chance to impress.

Maybe the RFL could work with and invest in college RL and players don't sign with a pro club until after college. Colleges would then recruit and run teams with RFL assistance which would help it become a higher standard of RL and also allow young players to study what they want rather than only whats on offer at their academy college. 

Clubs could then sign 18 year olds to play in a u20/21 competition which would replace the current u18 academy as most agree that 20/21 is when most players are physically ready for first team rugby. The u20/21s could even allow a certain number of over age players which could allow it to double up as reserve grade

This would help the community game at u18s as they would still be able to play whilst at college. It would also allow more clubs to run an u20/21 academy rather than u18s as there would be less impact on the community game.

Best way, the problem though, in the meantime kids will just sign with Rugby Union clubs at 16 and 17 y.o. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, LeytherRob said:

Why would the RFL bother investing in colleges rather than the community game, which is a far better place to develop talent and already has structures in place? 

See the RFU and the network of public schools in the RFSU.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, LeytherRob said:

But it isn't how youth sport works in this country. Not every college offers the same  courses or to the same standard, so any player who is taking their education seriously would be stupid to make that decision purely because a pro club has slapped their name on the college team. 

There are different rules rules mature students at colleges than university. University has no age limit because everyone is an adult. They don't just let a 40 year old enroll in college with a bunch of 16/17 year old for obvious reasons.

How could the rules be tweaked for colleges exactly?

Well depends on the college, st helens college for example allows any age enrolment and 40 year olds do attend college with young uns.

LMS did a plumbing course there a couple of years ago which is a good example.

Not every college is a 6 form college

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

See the RFU and the network of public schools in the RFSU.

Colleges are still the community game. This is also typically one of the drop off age for kids, the other being the high school transition 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, LeytherRob said:

Why would the RFL bother investing in colleges rather than the community game, which is a far better place to develop talent and already has structures in place? 

I didn't say instead of the community game. The college's would be a midweek competition like it is now

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, dboy said:

 

Wakefield, seeing as you want to make it about them, have 14 club trained players in their CURRENT first team squad.

As do Cas, with 10 in there 21 man squad for tommorows game and a hell of lot more appearances between them.

Edited by Gates1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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...