Re: Reserve grade under 23s : Wed Sep 02, 2015 4:18 pm  

Mr Churchill wrote:

The above two posters are talking rubbish on this in my opinion and seem to have no clue as to what is good for the game in this country.

Every club has a first team. There should be Under 23 and under 19 leagues for all clubs. It should be compulsory for Super League and Championship clubs to run under 23 sides in the respective leagues.

Under 23 teams will be allowed to play up to x number of over age players say 5 eg for first team players coming back from injury.

Salary cap rules can be amended to fit the structure but it only covers the top 25 highest paid players anyway.

There should be a suitable limit on the number of age over 19 players that a club can sign as there always used to be.

Good players below super league standard will start to sign for teams below SL now there is an open route to SL via the new structure.

Any young players that progress can be signed by SL clubs by paying a transfer fee to the lower league side thus helping the finances of the game as a whole.

Reserves isn't a spectator sport; the Championship / Super 8s is. If fans of teams outside SL are treated like feeder club fodder the game in this country will die.

Dual Reg was a stupid idea and is being killed off just in time.

I never said reserves was a spectator sport nor that teams outside SL be treated like feeder clubs. Nor are they now. Nobody is forcing ANY Championship club to use the DR system. Leigh and Bradford seem to manage fine without it. That's their choice. As it would be under the system I proposed.

What you don't seem to get is that an U23's weakens the Championship. Many youngsters, if not signed up to SL first teams go to Championship clubs. Now they won't do for another 3 or 4 years. If the U23's is of a lower quality than the Championship then that hasn't helped the development of players.

If it's really the good of the game we're looking at then Championship clubs will be more than happy to help player development won't they?

As I said, Dual Reg wasn't a stupid idea, it just wasn't implement well and if both Championship and SL clubs hadn't had such self-serving attitudes it could very easily work.

Re: Reserve grade under 23s : Wed Sep 02, 2015 4:25 pm  

LeagueFan - What in gods name are you on about?

I'm willing to accept different views but that's just complete and utter rubbish.

Any fringe player accepts he's only going to get a game when a regular is injured. That's a fact of sport. Always has been. To suggest that's because of Dual Reg is just utter batsh|ttery.

The "crazy scenario" of Championship game 1 week but SL game next? Isn't crazy. It's what fringe players do. Or they don't play. In the same way academy players play a much lower intensity academy game 1 week then an SL game the next.

Re: Reserve grade under 23s : Wed Sep 02, 2015 5:17 pm  

Dual Reg is no good for anybody but selfish super league coaches.

Super League clubs have a first team squad of say 27 or 28 players. So, barring an injury crisis, the SL coach will always have first team squad players he'd like to 'get a game' at a dual reg club. Won't be decided until a day or two before the game mind, so Championship club recipients are disrupted but some of them will go for it in the hope of a star player winning the game for them.

Take Kevin Penny. Gets a game with Warrington only if either Monaghan or Ormsby or Evans are not fit.

Gets farmed out to North Wales or Swinton or whatever. Scores a couple of tries. Gets hell's abuse from opposition fans- "p off back to your own club Penny" even though everybody knows it's not his fault. Stops development of the host club's wings, creates unfairness in a division where promotion is on the line. Generally cheeses everybody off.

Penny would be much better playing in a Warrington team in the reserves/under 23 league, playing to Warrington's systems, watched by Warrington's coaches (and maybe Warrington fans if games played as curtain raisers as in NRL) and busting a gut in that situation to win a first team place.

Re: Reserve grade under 23s : Thu Sep 03, 2015 6:39 pm  

Which other clubs are likely to field u23s next year?

Re: Reserve grade under 23s : Sat Oct 10, 2015 8:59 am  

Sir Kevin Sinfield wrote: Which other clubs are likely to field u23s next year? Don't know but there'll be 15 rounds according to this: http://m.hulldailymail.co.uk/Hull-FC-co ... story.html

Sir Kevin Sinfield wrote: Which other clubs are likely to field u23s next year? Don't know but there'll be 15 rounds according to this: http://m.hulldailymail.co.uk/Hull-FC-co ... story.html

Re: Reserve grade under 23s : Sat Oct 10, 2015 9:26 am  

Sir Kevin Sinfield wrote:

Which other clubs are likely to field u23s next year?

Our chairman said we were currently weighing up the benefits of having a reserve grade. But I don't think we will with a championship budget. Wasn't it quoted as £100k to run a reserve grade?

Re: Reserve grade under 23s : Sat Oct 10, 2015 9:31 am  

"The likes of Warrington, Wigan and St Helens" http://mobile.hullfc.com/News/Article/4 ... u23s-coach

"The likes of Warrington, Wigan and St Helens" http://mobile.hullfc.com/News/Article/4 ... u23s-coach

Re: Reserve grade under 23s : Sat Oct 10, 2015 11:59 am  

Is this league just going to be SL teams or a mixture of both SL and Champ.

Fev, Sheffield and Leigh and s few more tried to run reserve teams last season but there just wasn't enough games and the system was a bit of a joke.

I agree that it should be compulsory for all SL and championship teams to enable players to develope at their own clubs.

Re: Reserve grade under 23s : Sun Oct 11, 2015 3:53 pm  

Mr Churchill wrote:

The above two posters are talking rubbish on this in my opinion and seem to have no clue as to what is good for the game in this country.

Every club has a first team. There should be Under 23 and under 19 leagues for all clubs. It should be compulsory for Super League and Championship clubs to run under 23 sides in the respective leagues.

Under 23 teams will be allowed to play up to x number of over age players say 5 eg for first team players coming back from injury.

Salary cap rules can be amended to fit the structure but it only covers the top 25 highest paid players anyway.

There should be a suitable limit on the number of age over 19 players that a club can sign as there always used to be.

Good players below super league standard will start to sign for teams below SL now there is an open route to SL via the new structure.

Any young players that progress can be signed by SL clubs by paying a transfer fee to the lower league side thus helping the finances of the game as a whole.

Reserves isn't a spectator sport; the Championship / Super 8s is. If fans of teams outside SL are treated like feeder club fodder the game in this country will die.

Dual Reg was a stupid idea and is being killed off just in time.

Where are these players going to come from? 15 additional players to cover this reserves league for 24 sides is 360 players?

We have just lost 2 clubs from SL because the game couldnt produce the players to support it, we have just seen Jimmy Lowes' hissy fit and 2 months of Leigh crying in to their lobby because they cannot build a side to compete with SL clubs making the structure unworkable, and introducing a league between them so that SL clubs can hold on to any player with a hint of potential for longer is going to help this? Why are Cas going to be releasing a Ryan Brierley if they need a reserves half? Why are leeds going to allow a Baldwinson to play at Fev when they are needing another 4 props to put out a reserves side?


Prepare to see large numbers of 19 year olds offered terrible 4 year contracts, stagnating in a league of awful quality, and championship clubs still moaning about how it just isnt fair on them

Re: Reserve grade under 23s : Mon Oct 12, 2015 1:46 am  

DemonUK wrote:

A limited number of 'overage' players would be allowed unlike the current U19s

Which i for one would be in favour of