That’s always been the answer.

The main obstacle has always been the clubs, including Bradford in their pomp.

You go on about Bradford’s products but what have they or any other club done to make these things happen. Nothing and they never really have. Not when it comes to spending money, that goes on past it Aussies for short term gain.

It takes time, effort and above all money to create a true infrastructure, Union knows it, the FA know it but SL wasted it’s golden egg when the TV money arrived.

Only Leeds and Wigan have ever really made the youth system work and even then only by plundering and stockpiling all the talent.

Where are the schools and junior clubs affiliated to them, where are the leagues run and supported by them?

Truth is nobody is interested until they reach 16 then it’s too late. By then the talent pool is too small and the late developers have nowhere to go.

You look at the Aussie system, they are miles ahead. The NRL teams run junior teams but they are basically finishing schools, all the hard works been done. Our Academies are like re-education camps, because there is no connection between the pro game and junior RL despite what the clubs say.

We can tinker with the Academies all we like and to be fair they all try their best but until the raw material is improved they will remain fairly ineffective. Truth is that imho there is no other sport who’s elite level is so disconnected from its grass roots that they are barely the same sport,

Quote ="vastman"That’s always been the answer. The main obstacle has always been the clubs, including Bradford in their pomp. You go on about Bradford’s products but what have they or any other club done to make these things happen. Nothing and they never really have. Not when it comes to spending money, that goes on past it Aussies for short term gain. It takes time, effort and above all money to create a true infrastructure, Union knows it, the FA know it but SL wasted it’s golden egg when the TV money arrived. We can tinker with the Academies all we like and to be fair they all try their best but until the raw material is improved they will remain fairly ineffective. Truth is that imho there is no other sport who’s elite level is so disconnected from its grass roots that they are barely the same sport,'" Thanks to Maccbull atomic and your good self........ I think you make the same general point, but we must remember that the last SKY deal was big enough to not only help fund "academies" but also "foundations"..... Very little ever appears on message boards about the "charitable" foundations at the SL clubs. Charitable they are to a point but a large part of their time is promoting RL to local schools. As I understand it JJB has worked for the Leeds Foundation and put rugby balls in kids hands, and encouraged kids teams to be formed. I don't think it fair to say clubs do nothing, SL clubs have the funding to do this, something Bradford don't get hence they can't do the foundation.......... https://www.leedsrhinosfoundation.org/ I think Salford who have no academy still have a foundation https://twitter.com/SRDFoundation?ref_s ... r%5Eauthor We've got to be fair here, SL clubs deliver a lot of hard work to try to encourage kids to play and have done for most of the current 5 year TV contract.....

Quote ="vastman"That’s always been the answer. The main obstacle has always been the clubs, including Bradford in their pomp. You go on about Bradford’s products but what have they or any other club done to make these things happen. Nothing and they never really have. Not when it comes to spending money, that goes on past it Aussies for short term gain. It takes time, effort and above all money to create a true infrastructure, Union knows it, the FA know it but SL wasted it’s golden egg when the TV money arrived. We can tinker with the Academies all we like and to be fair they all try their best but until the raw material is improved they will remain fairly ineffective. Truth is that imho there is no other sport who’s elite level is so disconnected from its grass roots that they are barely the same sport,'" Thanks to Maccbull atomic and your good self........ I think you make the same general point, but we must remember that the last SKY deal was big enough to not only help fund "academies" but also "foundations"..... Very little ever appears on message boards about the "charitable" foundations at the SL clubs. Charitable they are to a point but a large part of their time is promoting RL to local schools. As I understand it JJB has worked for the Leeds Foundation and put rugby balls in kids hands, and encouraged kids teams to be formed. I don't think it fair to say clubs do nothing, SL clubs have the funding to do this, something Bradford don't get hence they can't do the foundation.......... https://www.leedsrhinosfoundation.org/ I think Salford who have no academy still have a foundation https://twitter.com/SRDFoundation?ref_s ... r%5Eauthor We've got to be fair here, SL clubs deliver a lot of hard work to try to encourage kids to play and have done for most of the current 5 year TV contract.....

Quote ="Maccbull_BigBullyBooaza"Ok I see what you mean. The problem IMO is the relatively small talent pool we are working worth. Surely the answer is schools rugby league?'" https://bullsfoundation.org/ I am wrong to think Bulls do not have a foundation, it's here

Quote ="Maccbull_BigBullyBooaza"Ok I see what you mean. The problem IMO is the relatively small talent pool we are working worth. Surely the answer is schools rugby league?'" https://bullsfoundation.org/ I am wrong to think Bulls do not have a foundation, it's here

Quote ="atomic"So you agree that an academy isn’t an answer.i It’s not a pathway or a gateway to future rewards. What needs to be explained is how an academy works as opposed to the community game and what happens to those players.Should they make the grade of an academy then not make the grade of SL what happens to them?'" https://leighrl.co.uk/wp/v2/leigh-community-trust/ Your club appear to run a "community trust" that promotes the game in positive ways....... AFAIK the issue with academies taking kids away from community clubs is it depletes these clubs youth teams and they disband. But it is the case as kids get to 16 they tend to find other things to do that they may see as more grown up. It may be that handing out academy places when kids are 15 keeps them playing because there's a chance of making the grade. My own evidence is our local junior soccer league which several leagues at each age range but by the time kids hit 16 there was only one league as so many kids decide to stop playing around that age. The professional clubs were moving in when kids were 13 and 14.......

Quote ="atomic"So you agree that an academy isn’t an answer.i It’s not a pathway or a gateway to future rewards. What needs to be explained is how an academy works as opposed to the community game and what happens to those players.Should they make the grade of an academy then not make the grade of SL what happens to them?'" https://leighrl.co.uk/wp/v2/leigh-community-trust/ Your club appear to run a "community trust" that promotes the game in positive ways....... AFAIK the issue with academies taking kids away from community clubs is it depletes these clubs youth teams and they disband. But it is the case as kids get to 16 they tend to find other things to do that they may see as more grown up. It may be that handing out academy places when kids are 15 keeps them playing because there's a chance of making the grade. My own evidence is our local junior soccer league which several leagues at each age range but by the time kids hit 16 there was only one league as so many kids decide to stop playing around that age. The professional clubs were moving in when kids were 13 and 14.......

I see lots of names being mentioned here - most don't count.

The RFL are only counting first team products from the last period of the academy licence.

The next set of applications will only consider products from THIS academy licence period.

I have no doubt that in 5 years time, some clubs will be still finding someone else to blame.

Best name one or two them we can get the wind up out of the way.

Highly publicised head injuries, schools which won't play RL but insist on union, more non team sports activities for kids to choose instead, less SKY money etc will all contribute to decreasing numbers of youngsters wanting to play RL and RU.

But club x are just feckless, lazy and can't be bothered?

Your comment about there being very few kids teams at 16, is because they are then playing "adult" football.
Not necessarily have they given up the game, the same also applies to cricket, where, due to physicality not being such an advantage, if you're good enough, your old enough and loads of 13/14 year olds can and do play in 2nd /3rd team senior cricket.
Mind you, they still have recruitment issues and some sided and clubs have folded in recent years.

I played a bit of 3rd 4th team Union at 16-17 1989-1991 open age. would not dare have played open age Rl at that time. even under 18's was very very tough std as there where not really enough under 18s team round my way at the time, so just getting a game was not easy. Hardly any junior football in my far flung outpost of west yorkshire. now there are loads of junior Football teams and hardly any Rl teams not like they used to be.
Participation is very very low.

The physicality in Union and League makes it a tough ask for 17,18,19 year old's to "step up", something that isnt the same in Football and certainly not the same in cricket.
RL is more than ever a power based game and although some can cope, plenty need more time to develop.

We still come back to numbers and it's more important than ever to find ways to attract more juniors into the game.

When I was 14 I was a star FB and I have the trophies to prove it.

At 16 I was struggling with the physicality of the game and I was not a small lad. I still enjoyed it but I was no longer the star.

By 18 I had a go at open age. I played the full 80, scored twice and I’ve never played since.

I was black and blue by the end, I’d been threatened and punched by huge men who were more my dads age.

I’ll admit it, l was scared and played on instinct. That was 1983, perhaps it’s different now, I hope so.

I tried Union, I got bored and I didn’t really get it, so golf and a bit of tennis it was. Think I made the right choice

My lad went through Junior Football, which was renowned for being used as a creche for parents and interest built from the under 7's peaked around the 11's and 12's and fell after that with most kids not returning for U15's and U16's.....by that time scouts had taken who they wanted.......Kids had other choices and didn't need mum and dad to follow them.

I refereed games through this period, when adult sunday football was also declining fast, so much so there is no adult sunday league (which I ran a works team in) anymore round here, so please don't give me the made up nonsense that they are all playing adult football.

Once again the problem we have is participation numbers have declined massively via a social trend we cannot hope to reverse, and the head injuries alarm bells have only made it worse. SL clubs through their foundations give kids the chance to play and through their academies give the best a chance to make a career of it.

No point people constantly moaning SL clubs don't do enough to develop players, they actually do all they possibly can through foundations an academies.

If you want a row about it contact Jamie Jones Buchanan and out him straight.....

In 1986 I had just about finished with my works soccer team in the Sunday league - something like 12 leagues of 12 clubs.

There is no sunday league anymore......... It's been a massive social change. Grass roots Soccer and Rugby has been decimated.

Well, I'm totally confused.
I must have mis read your earlier post on here, which I thought was suggesting that it was SL clubs and their academies that were killing the community game ??
My point was that it's nothing to do with SL clubs, which give better training and development of young lads and that it is lack of numbers which is THE problem for the community game.
"We" have to make RL more appealing and find ways of keeping youngsters in the game.

Reducing the numbers of elite academies wont achieve this.
Thankfully, one or two decisions have been reversed now and I re state the fact that SL clubs that are deficient, should be helped to get their academies up to scratch and not just binned off.

Yes I agree a lack of numbers.......

However the more academies you have the worse the general standard becomes.

Surely we want a competitive academy at a high level

A 10 club academy league will raise the standard a 14 club league will reduce it and will carry 100 players who are never going to make it.

Correct!

It’s getting the schools playing the game again IMO. Not reducing the number of academies.

I dont have the stats to back this up but I would hazard a guess that most grass root sports are diminishing in not just the UK but most developed nations. Its not the 80s anymore where there was nothing to do other than play sports or sniff glue. Kids these days would rather see how many likes on tik tok they can get or play fifa online with their mates, rather than partake in team sports.

The schools can't be made to start playing Rugby league, and where the schools use Union orientated heads of games you have no chance.

The kids who make it are the kids who go down to Milford, Dudley Hill, Oulton, Lock Lane etc....

As for the academies you don't explain your point. 10 academies will pretty much mop up the small numbers of talented kids who will make the grade.

20 academies would be ridiculous as the general standard would be poor and not stretch the talented kids.

If a couple of kids were tearing it up at school and on the local junior circuit then come 16 they need to be playing in a higher more intensive league.

Danny McGuire runs rings round kids at East Leeds, then goes to Leeds academy and is suddenly facing much better opposition and has to up and develop his game.

Players only develop if they move on to higher standards of Rugby,



.

Fundamentally, EVERY SL club should and need to be running their own academy.
It's quite ridiculous to preclude certain clubs because their academies aren't up to scratch.
They should be helped/forced to get them up to the required level - no excuses and it should be a pre requisite of being in SL.
A grace period for newly promoted clubs would be ok.

The previous licence period WAS the grace period.

Clubs knew this was coming and it should not a single club should have been caught out by the process.

In fact, it was scheduled to happen in 2020 and was delayed for 12 months because of Covid - there are no excuses for shoddy academy set-ups..

By the way, what the Wakefield poster forgot to mention was that another pre req of getting a SL licence was a stadium that was up to standard.

Bet you can’t get guess one of the 2 clubs that “promised” a SL standard stadium 10 years ago that still hasn’t delivered one?

Why stop there







If more academies is the answer then demand academies are set up at championship clubs before they gain promotion to Superleague.

Then when they go up they will go up oven ready for playing in Superleague.

No point just forming an academy once promoted, you can't set up a professional academy in just a few months after winning promotion can you? And then shut it if you go down?? You just can't do that.....

make it a pre-requirement of being in the Championship that you have an academy because according to you the more the merrier??

Lets go to 24 academies and have another 300 plus kids dragged out of community clubs none of whom will ever make a professional player.

Tell me this, how many out of every 100 players who currently join academies go on to make a professional career for themselves??

At a guess I'd say Castleford Tigers maybe.

No matter how many times you and people like you say this, neither Cas nor Wakefield, promised to have a new stadium in any given time frame.

It's a myth.

To be fair to him/her he/she's not the first, there have been others like leBron James, ruanne rebellion, AS108, and steph curry to name but a few have also said that.

Who let Steph back in?