We weren't discussing Australia?! We were discussing the NRL (which happens to be based in Australia). The NRL methods, the NRL coaching techniques, the NRL youth system. Which has also produced the overall majority of the NZ players.

We were discussing Graham & Roby playing in the NRL, not playing for Australia. Why should we be looking at the Kiwis? As you've just pointed out, they've only managed to produce one full time pro club.

It's what they do with the players before they get to that level that matters.

....and I told you why sending a couple of players over was of little benefit, if any. Which is why we moved on.

Now, is it the NRL coaching methods that have produced NZ players, or the NZ junior coaching methods that have produced players capable of playing to such a level that they can beat australians to positions in NRL clubs and Brits to spots in SL clubs, and are able to beat a team selected from the best Australians in the NRL?

We should be looking at the Kiwis, because despite having only one full time club, they are able to consistently produce a great number of players capable of playing in SL and the NRL, and also beat the best that England and their 12 elite clubs and Australia and their 15 elite clubs can put together.

I can see why you came to that conclusion.

Just look where Chris Thorman is now, with everything he must have learned during his spell in the NRL.

It's not the Kiwi's that are producing the players capable of playing in the NRL is it?! The Kiwi's don't have a youth system?!

It's the NRL teams youth systems that's producing players capable of playing in the NRL. The fact that were born in New Zealand isn't relevant to the point at all.

If we're talking about the best way to develop English Youngsters, we need to be looking at what the NRL are doing because the NRL are consistently producing players of a world beating standard (Some of whom go on to play of Australia, some of whom go on to play for New Zealand).

You said we need to look at what the Kiwi's are doing, and I am (quite rightly) saying, the fact the New Zealand international team could be considered by some better than the Australia international team, is completely irrelevant when discussing how to produce good players, as the majority of both teams players have been brought up in an NRL youth system. Thus reiterating the fact that we need to be looking at what the NRL is doing, and not what the Kiwi's are doing because the Kiwi's don't have a youth system.

If you don't understand that, then I'm not arguing any more as you clearly don't get it and it can't possibly be explained any clearer.

Do these Kiwi players magically appear at 16-17 years of age in the youth systems of NRL teams?

Why are NRL teams looking to pick up young players from NZ when they have such a large talent pool on their doorsteps?

Somewhere, during their formative years in NZ, they are being exposed to coaching that makes them the equal of their Australian counterparts and considered ready to enter the junior system of NRL teams.

That's the question, and why your answers are more reflective of someone who "doesn't get it" than Richie's.

It's only a hand full of players that at 16-17 are as good as their Australian counterparts. Like maybe 1 in 16?!

Funny that seen as 1/16th of NRL teams, who use NRL training techniques, and NRL youth policiy and who are watched week in, week out by NRL selectors and scouts, just happens to be based in New Zealand.

Look, all I'm saying, is 5 of 23 play for NZ Warriors. The other 80% have been developed by the NRL. My point, which is 100% valid, is that it's the NRL that is producing top quality players, and that is who we should be learning from.

Why on earth, with all those Australian youth players, are NRL clubs signing young Kiwis?

These kids from New Zealand are top quality players (for their age) before they even get to the NRL, that's my point. What the NRL clubs then do is take these players and polish them into the players that put on Kiwi jerseys.

So how is New Zealand able to generate such numbers of these outstanding young players for the NRL clubs when their English equivalents can't do the same for SL? It's that pathway into the pro clubs and its relative success in NZ that needs to be examined as much as what the NRL/SL clubs do with their junior players.

IMV it's because Rugby is the national sport in NZ.
Initially Union but increasingly League.
At junior level I suspect that which code you play is immaterial.
Without being racist I think that Maoris & all other South Sea island races (like black sprinters) are genetically better suited to Rugby of both codes particularly since RU in the southern hemisphere at least is now much closer to RL than ever before.

There does seem to be, from the guys I've spoken to here, a fair bit of crossover with players playing both. More than they do here anyway, where many players seem to be either one or the other. Although until just a few years ago, players in 80% of the country didn't even have the opportunity to play league.

I think its due to the fact that modern RU is much more of a handling game than it ever used to be plus the influence of so many exRL coaches now plying their trade in RU all over the globe.
How often did Fran Cotton for instance ever handle the ball compared to Tony Woodcock (the All Black front rower not the ex-Engalnd footballer by the way)?

Which players have been improved to the extent that would warrant such unqualified support for a further exodus?

One of the casualties of the move to summer rugby has been the international scene and the lack of an opportunity for players to have a short stint with an Aussie club.

Without doubt most of the players who guested for ARL clubs came back better for the experience. We also had regular tours which were real learning experiences for players and there was a genuine desire for players to play for their country. This is in contrast to the trips now where players get fraction of the game time.

From my own personal experience living in NZ I can vouch my ten year old at the time step-son was enthused by rugby ( union and league ) because every single one of his class mates was too. It is the game they all aspire to. We found he had the natural attributes in pace and classic wing play within a well disciplined team even at that age ( all the dads and teachers want to to succeed as coaches too, increasing the choice of quality here also ) to succeed.

The attitude in him, however, changed considerably once back in the UK. Football here of course dominates amongst his mates. He no longer has any interest in any code of rugby.
Do not underestimate peer pressure.
My lad is another potential loss to the game and unless RL becomes the dominant sport in this country - it never will - things won't really change.

all very true however sadly in this country there is absolutley no chance of rugby league being as popular as football, regardless of exspansion of the game etc...

In the short term it would help the England team if most/all of the team/squad played in the NRL but it's not a long term solution. All it would mean is that the next generation of England players would be playing in a weakened, less intense competition in England. We need to make our own competition stronger and more intense which means more good players/fewer weak links which is why increasing the league size was a bad idea and a massive cull in overseas players would not help either. More incentives to recruit, train and support quality juniors better than we do now are what we need. However, this solution is long term and won't pay dividends for some years.

I think we need to get our best 16-18 year-olds to Australia to train with NRL sides for a year. We have a classic case in point in young Hardacre. With the best will in the world, how much is he going to learn playing NL? More than Academy, but I'd suggest far less than reserve grade in Australia. Widdop sums it up - he's not a regular first-teamer in the NRL and yet he's got the basics down well enough to not look out of place alongside SL 'stars'.

I'd like more senior players to give the NRL a go, but do agree that we can't have all our star players leave at once. Having said that, we aren't going to face a mass exodus anytime soon for the simple reason that NRL clubs aren't going to be interested in many of our players - Graham, Roby, Tomkins maybe. But even then they aren't going to pay them anything like what they're on in SL. Just like Ellis, they're going to have to take a pay cut and prove themselves first. I would hazard a guess that very few of our star players would be willing to do that - and TBH I can't blame them individually.

While I agree completely with much of this and your previous posts, I do not agree with copying the way things are in NZ. We have a model far more akin to the Aussies who have mutiple sports competing for talent. We need to look at the way we work with kids in sport from the ground up. It's the Aussies who are masters of getting the most out of limited talent and population over lots of sports. In NZ they play rugby and that's pretty much it.

I'd like us to remember we had a playing style that was good enough to beat anyone and we could have again. I like the way we move the ball and the style we play. What we need to have are intelligent players who have been coached in basics like playing the ball and controling posession so it's built in. Ellis was the player he is before he went to the NRL, the fact he's shown up as outstanding there isn't because of magic NRL dust that's been sprinkled on him, it's because he is a great player.
Widdop doesn't sum anything up, he's a lad who is good enough to get in a Melbourne team a couple of times and apparantly immediately qualifies for an international shirt. Briscoe did not much wrong while playing full back for England, and I've sen him play far better than I've ever seen Widdop play (and I think I've seen all his first grade appearances so far).

Widdop vs Briscoe sums up everything. How many first grade games has Briscoe played? More than 3 I suspect. At the equivalent stage in his career as Widdop he would have been laughably bad in an international. That entirely sums up the difference in coaching and experience a kid in Australia gets compared to one in the UK.

The 'style of play' we had when successful was 40 years ago. The game is not the same at all as it was then. Sadly Australia has carried on moving forward whilst we lag way behind. Our style of play may be entertaining, but its patently not as good as the NRL.

The whole point about the coaching you suggest our kids need is that they aren't getting it in England. Otherwise we wouldn't have halfbacks with no kicking game and centres who are clueless. That's the point - if we sent our kids to Australia its those basics they would be looking to pick up. If they don't have the raw materials then nothing will help, but one of the most frustrating things to me is how so many of our players do have raw ability but have no taught skills to go with it. I'd argue its not just coaching but also playing - hence why sending kids to the NRL would probably work better than sending an army of Aussie coaches to teach Academies.

I'd also add that until we have a whole lot more players in SL of the required quality, the coaching will go to waste anyway. If you don't get punished for dropping the ball or giving away dumb penalties, then you'll keep on doing it. Its human nature.

A lot of rubbish has been talked about League in NZ. The Warriors produce a lot of juniors - in fact they just one the juniors comp? With many been signed by for the first team and a few for other clubs. TBF most of the current problems have been caused by ineffective administration - sound familiar - but that has now been sorted.

Many areas produce juniors that actively recruited by other NRL teams.

Granted Union is bigger, but kids often play both one on Sat and one Sunday, but league in NZ has one thing union does not. We have Sir Peter Leitch - the one and only Mad Butcher!

Briscoe was a very talented and much talked about young full back when he broke into the Wigan team. But that's not enough to get you in a GB team past two greats like Radlinski and Wellens. You have no idea how he would have played had he been selected. I suspect he would have shown up as well as anyone.

It's of limited value sending young players to the NRL because it's already too late. We have to adjust our attitudes from ground up - that's junior level - 8/9 and beyond.

Regarding Widdop, for his age and experience, he isn't ahead of where Chris Ashton and Lee Smith were, in fact he's probably behind them.

In my opinion, whilst there are significant issues about size of player pool, the intensity of SL and I think there is a definite need for a mid season domestic rep series of some description, the biggest problem is that of junior and youth coaching. Still, despite some effort from the RFL, there are far too many junior and youth coaches who focus on winning instead of player development. There are far too many junior games where the team tactic is pass it to the big kid. The big kid who doesn't have good skills either but just happens to be 2 foot taller than the rest of his age group.
We get several kids every year who come to us whilst still playing for amateur teams who's basic skills are frankly appalling, especially their passing and handling. They can throw a ball but they can't pass it. Same goes for virtually every other skill, tackling is "brave" but technique is non-existant and there are too many who can't kick a ball to save their lives. I don't care if a lad is obviously going to be a prop I still want him to learn the basic skills which include accurate kicking of different types. As for attacking or positional "nous" well there's none whatsoever. We are literally having to explain to 12/13/14 year old kids the difference between a prop and a stand off. The play the ball is also appalling, it makes the play the ball in that cup final that was shown recently look tidy.
I've managed to see the training of scholarships at a few SL clubs and to say I was underwhelmed by the basic skills on show is an understatement. I also happen to know a couple of the scholarship coaches who are incredibly frustrated that they are having to coach/re-coach basic skills that should have been learnt at a much younger age.

Until there is a much firmer grip got on junior and youth coaching and the backward, aggressive, arrogant, idiotic, selfish and you scratch my back & I'll scratch yours elements are got rid of from junior coaching we won't move very far forward.