Deep down I don’t think you really believe that.

I think it's safe to say that any game time is valuable to the player, whether it's in Super League, League 1, or the Reserves.

I also think that it's very much dependant on the player in regards to where they are sent and if they will benefit, for example - Cory Aston linking up with the club where he's played 3 years of rugby previously and his Dad coaches. That's a perfect fit for him IMO.

It seems to me that a lot of clubs are saying “we’re in favour of a reserves comp but there aren’t enough clubs in it to make it worthwhile”. This is a very convenient argument as nobody then takes responsibility and they can all carry on as they are. Meanwhile the RFL and SL provide no leadership. The RFL say they’re disappointed. SL say nothing at all.

It’d be interesting to know why the figures quoted for running a reserves team differ so widely. From £130k quoted by Leeds to £60k quoted by Wigan and £30k quoted by Wakefield. Something’s amiss there and it appears as if the main opponents of it are inflating costs as a way of arguing against it.

Game time is massively important and many players aged around 18/19 don’t get enough of it. I agree that it very much does depend on where the player gets the game time. For some a long term loan can be a good thing.

Where I have objections is where players can be sent off to their DR club for a few weeks, have to learn new patterns of play and gel with their new teammates only to be recalled given a games or been part of a 19 man squad and then sent back out again. In some cases a player can appear for 2 or 3 different teams in a season. Some players never actually train with their DR club and just do a “captain’s run”. This way of developing players is never going ensure consistent, continuous development. Players end up feeling like they’re not valued and lose their love of the game. This happened very recently with a young player at my club. The talent pool is already small so why risk making it smaller?

I think its more of a reaction to wakefield fans over reaction and out right paranoia regarding their club and they often try to undermine every post, and then use something like this to point score and be all self righteous, see the tom Johnson debate, think people just use the stadium issue as a default reaction to Wakefield fans over reaction to everything. this thread and their chairman's outburst being one example.

I am sure most fans would love Wakefield to get the stadium they deserve, i know i would be. would like all teams to finally move there facilities out from the Victorian era.and into the 21st century.

Meanwhile back on topic....

No it's nothing to do with the topic end of, it's just the knee jerk reaction of someone who can't argue his case.

Its a response to the question, and it was not me who brought up the stadium issues in the first place.

So back on topic you have still not answered my question put to you on your suggestion for the future academy reserve team formats. can you answer that one before claiming somebody else cannot argue their case.

Nice try.

I've clearly stated what I want a full reserve competition - what part of this don't you get?

explain why you do, what do you believe the merits are. i also have stated i would prefer a reserves comp, so why are you arguing with me and making out its a Leeds v wakey thing, when its not.

Preparing to get shot down here,.. But... Is it really. Who's come through Leeds academy in the last 4 years to cement their place in the team. This is Leeds who would have their pick of World class juniors. Again I saw a post from a cas fan regarding all the players on DR. Cas have hardly brought any one through in the last few years. We've massively benefitted from Cas's generosity so certainly nothing against them.

I agree with Printer. Its not one size fits all which is exactly the reason clubs should be forced to run reserves. Loaning out to a championship club will benefit the more advanced junior players as it's a higher level. The reserves allow those not quite ready to continue playing rugby league and not been cut off the sport at 19! The argument isn't about what's better, it's about creating as many pathways as possible for junior players

Four years seems an oddly arbitrary time limit to put on things, but of the squad numbers that have been announced today, nine of the players with 1-20 (so players who are likely to get a decent level of first-team game time) are from the club's academy (and outside of that first 20, I'd expect Ashton Goulding and Cam Smith to get a good amount of game time).

For the record, I've neither the time nor inclination to compare that with other clubs, but I'd say that it's a healthy number.

Yes, the cohort of players that all came through circa 2003 hasn't been replicated, but those are very rare events that aren't unique to Leeds or RL - Manchester United are still looking for the next "Class of 1996". There's no such thing as a "conveyor belt" or "production line". However, one way that you do make those sorts of cohorts more frequent is to do one of the very things that Hetherington says in the article in which he's apparently "spouting rubbish"- take the money that you're spending on reserve teams and put it into encouraging grass-roots participation.

I'd like to see a full reserve competition again. I don't feel that DR is the answer as putting a player into a club often means that a player from the DR club has to step aside to accommodate the DR player. What does that do for his development or his confidence/esteem. Play a week miss a week play a week miss two weeks.
I agree with Michael Carter on this one and would hardly label it, as some have, as an 'outburst'. It's his opinion that's all.

this happens at Donny with the Hull players taking preference

WRT other clubs I think the idea some have that Wigan promote youth so much better than others doesn’t hold up. How many forwards do they have that came through the academy in the last several years that play regularly? Only Sutton really and he’s off and in that time they’ve signed the likes of Tautai, Isa, Hamlin, Naveratte, Clubb, Flower, Bateman whose leaving and replaced by Greenwood.

When Tomkins left first time they got Bowen them when Tomkins returned they still brought in Escare and now have Hardaker, where’s the youngster getting a shot a FB? Leeds have two young academy FB’s.

The one area they’ve been really strong in is wingers with 4 over the years but even that’s only because of Manfredi’s injuries and Burgess trying NRL opening the chance for Davies and Marshall. Those two are the only players to debut during the these last few years of them running reserves who are now in Wigan’s top 20 and Marshall is probably 4th choice and will have limited games if injuries don’t hit.

Realistically, what sort of standard would a reserves league be playing to?

Taking Hull and Wakey as examples - these are, after all, the 2 SL sides who've geared up for this - what teams, out of their current rosters, would these sides put out as reserves?

a) with, say, 2 injuries to their first choice 17s
b) with 6 injuries to their 1st choice 17s
c) with 10 injuries " " " " "

Each scenario is realistic at various points of the season. I won't over-complicate by asking you to factor in injues to reserves too.

Cmon you Hull & Wakey fans, indulge us; it is the close season after all.

I will, limited though it is would be the standard being offered by DR IMHO is no better possibly worse as it has an element of just doing it to keep fit. Well you can do that just as easily playing Halifax reserves.

So although I would wish it to be stronger I still prefer it. I certainly prefer it to Heathering's ludicrous theory that Lees Academy is their reserve! Yes Gary that's worked once in 25 years and perhaps twice for Wigan who don't expouse that theory.

Fair enough, I'm neutral tbh. My main concern is a lack of players to make it work. I'm no fan of DR but for Leeds, if it ever became a choice between academy & DR and reserves, then Id want us to keep the academy every time.

One of the big issues with Reserves for me would be clubs ability to fulfill fixtures due to injury lists. Constantly see large injury lists for several teams throughout the season nowadays and they’d just get larger if reserves were playing weekly.

That reserve games have been cancelled every year since its reintroduction a few years ago because some clubs haven’t had enough fit bodies even though they’re only playing a limited amount of reserve fixtures should ring alarm bells for people, how are they going to cope with 20+ reserve games?

Fax have a reserve team that costs around £25k to run each season. The bulk of the team are effectively academy players, but without age restrictions it means that slightly older players can still be a part of the team. The majority, if not all, of the funds needed to run the team are generated by Fax supporters.

We have a healthy squad that doesn't cost much to run, and we wouldn't have any issues raising a team. The added bonus is that a plethora of injuries to the first team squad means that there are still able and willing players to draft in should the need arise.

It's not a quick fix by any means, but Fax are benefiting with players developing through the reserves into the 1st team. More games for those players can only help their development.

How many overage players are selected each game? If it's not more than 2 or 3 then I don't see the point. Especially if the quality isn't much different from the current u19s league. Just introduce a rule that allows teams to field a certain amount of overage players in their u19s.

The Fax reserve team is being reassembled for next season (a few gone and a few elevated to the 1st team), but we have 15 players on the books at the moment. 2 I don't know their age, 1 @ 17, 2 @ 18, 4 @ 19, 4 @ 20, 1 @ 23 and 1 @ 24. It's not an academy team, but still full of enthusiastic young men who want to play the game.

You might have a healthy squad and only playing a limited amount of reserve games helps reduced the length of the injury list.

A mandatory league with all 12 SL teams playing 20+ reserve fixtures, it would be naive to think at least 3-5 teams wouldn’t struggle at times to have enough fit bodies at times giving how often we see teams down to the bare bones barely able to name a 19 man squad at 1st team level.

Albeit in transition (so not up-to-date for 2019), that 15-man reserve squad is on the back of a 33-man 1st team squad for Fax (accepted a couple of long term loan players in that). We have more problems finding game-time for our players than struggling to raise a squad. All on a part-time budget.

If clubs really put the effort in in their own local area, we could have a thriving 2nd string competition that would truly underpin the 1st line professional game.

I can see how a reserve team in the current structure would benefit clubs that don't have an u19s team, but as most SL teams do, it's pretty pointless unless the number of players of the required standard significantly increases.