They are good points but it's also the NRL we are losing players to. It's only going to get worse with the new salary cap comes in.

The big problem is the nrl and union are taking our best young players which obviously makes for worse league.

IMO it's the nrl which will take our best players.

I agree Pete and I would rather this happen than go to the dark side,the lesser of two evils so to speak.

In my opinion the best player tag is somewhat silly. Every year the best players change. Taking out the top ten players does not ruduce the quality of the league unless those ten players are the only decent ones and we have no coaches who can coach replacements to be just as good.

No other business or sport in the world panics as much over a loss of a few employees as the british RL fan.

We've lost two very good players this year that are home grown. One to union and one to the nrl. Wigan are looking to be losing Joel tomkins which is another home grown player.

It's not a serious problem at the moment but it's got all the signs of becoming a very big problem.

Something needs to be put in place to prevent thus but I ain't got clue what and how the RFL can stop it.

Like I said, I think the nrl is the biggest threat.

There was also the loss of Ian Thornley an 18 year old 6ft 2", 15 stone centre last year to Sale, and the obvious talent that is Owen Farrell and George Ford.

Farrell and Ford were children when their parents went over to Union. You can't count them as losses. If their parents had gone to play skittles in Afghanistan, they would probably be doing that now too.

Thornley is Wigan's fault. Why didn't he have a contract? Because they have so many e overseas players. Why didn't he play first team rugby for Wigan? Because they have too many e overseas players.

Just continue to grow our sport. It's as simple as that. We can't compete with the NRL or the cash that the RFU has but we can compete on product and certainly on the entertainment front.

Don't be so harsh, they have the best centre in Super League in George Carmont.

Having read all this thread (I did have to pop a valium and a couple prozac) I can say you are all barmy.

I really don't know how to put this so I will try a little experiment. List the players between academy and say 23 in the team. We'll use Saints and exclude Kyle:

Wheeler
Foster
Dixon
Armstrong
Ashe
Makinson
ermm.. and Gaskell

Off the top of my head. How many do you think will be snapped up by union (ever)?

Foster can kick from the tee but that's about it. They are made to play league and no union club is gonna poach any of those. And even if they desperatly needed someone they will take maybe one and you have the cover for that.

Also, as people have said, the number of failures in union is massive compared to success. The chances are that Tomkins and EAstmond will make it union and Tomkins will maybe get into the england team (Kyle is too small and not a good enough kicker) but if the RFU go on a mad scramble, they will come up short... again. We will get them back eventually and, as people have said, they will be maximum 25 whenthey return; still a chance of good players.

What I am saying is that Union may take a player a year (1 so far this year) but this does not spell the end of rugby league.

He had a contract just like Eastmond, but chose not to sign another one , like Eastmond, because he had a far better offer from RU, just like Eastmond.
HTH

OK, but how many club england spots are available?
It would be a rare event indeed if they wanted a league player to play in the forwards.
I would suggest they won't be targeting players to fill the scrum half or [ifly half[/i roles as they'll be considered too specialist for a switch over.
That leaves wingers, centres and full backs available to league players. A maximum of 5 starting players plus squad back up. Call it 10 players max and that's assuminig none of the union players are up to scratch.

Very few players will have the impact that Ashton has has on the international game, but that won't stop that dream and promise of vast riches being used to tempt players like eastmond. I would suggest that of those five positions you suggest, one or two at most will be filled by ex league players. The scramble to be one of them could be between 20 current league players

Who said anything about the "End of RL"? However, it wouldn't take a lot of departures to seriously damage the sport. Aside from the loss of talent League's already shaky position within the media would be jeopardized. Unfortunately perception is often reality and the perception that League is losing its best talent to Union would make sponsors think very seriously about investing in the sport. Unlike the RFU which is awash with money League cannot afford to be losing investors given the current economic malaise.

Which of the above players are likely to move? I've no idea. But you can bet that Union will be sniffing around ANY youngster who looks like he's got the ability to make a name for himself. Obviously the emphasis will be on backs as they are more likely to make the transition. I don't agree that many will likely fail in the sport. If you look at the big names who have joined the exodus the success rate is far higher than people think. Yes, Hape, Vainikolo, Henry Paul and Farrell didn't become Union superstars. But to say they failed is complete nonsense. All of them made the England team at some point and their demise was as much to do with the paucity of talent surrounding them as their own performances.

Union has learned quickly. They made the mistake of recruiting players past their prime and have now switched their attention to younger players. And they will point to the success of Chris Ashton as proof that their plan is working. In any case, Union can easily afford a few failures. Money is no issue.

From another thread.



I think is probably a truer reason for Tomkins depature though.

Just read on another post that Thornley's been fired off from Sale for being rubbish. Gone to Leeds RU second team apparently.

Who's Thornley?

wasn't he the big Wigan loss this year.

Big centre?

No idea!

ask old man Rogues

Say's it all really.

Thornley was on TV a couple of weeks back playing for Leeds Carnegie on loan from Sale. Played pretty well from the highlights I saw. Some great barnstorming runs. Looked a real big lad even when compared against the backrowers on show.

He's gone to learn the game (and Sale sale some money) He was an outstanding prospect 6ft 2" and over 15 stone at the age of seventeen, and very quick.

Sale made him an offer he couldn't refuse (or Wigan match). If you think of Tom Armstrongs predicament at Saints, furthering his education, then think about how Thornleys education has been funded, you will probably realise why he did make the change.

Would he have ever made it as a Superleague player, I don't know but it would have been nice to find out.

Pray tell, what does it say?

It says we don't care about Wigan or there woes but boring old Rogues just can't get that into his head.

That would be my translation of it too.