I think it's clear as day that the U20's are vastly understrength given that they are about 9 eligible players down. However, they really shouldn't be 11 games in and 11 games lost.

The age group classifications are been changed again next year to U19's and U23's replacing the disastrous age groups we have now.

Will the overage player limits change for the u23's?

It is easy to make this criticism based on the numbers. Adey mentioned that Stuart Barrow/Paul Medley have come in for criticism, I suppose its because people are looking at it in the same way as you.

As I said, it is not only the effect of the number of injured core 20s squad players, but the lack of the first team squad players playing in the 20s that have resulted in this year's league position.

This has meant that the places have been filled in with 17/18 year olds. In the last but one 20s game v Leeds there were 7 of them, and no first team squad members - Callum Windley being promoted after that.

The other teams ALWAYS have first team squad / first team experienced players in.

It makes a massive difference at this age. In this era of forward domination, the everlasting adage that a prop hasnt matured until he is 27 is still the case. His body generally hasnt developed adequately to meet the stresses on it until he is past 22. You cant expect boys to win against men.

Someone may still comment that it is the same for everybody, but Bulls have lost every game. I guess this then can then only be down to how many players are carried in each squad at every level, such that injuries are not affecting the teams with bigger squads as much in the results. It is obvious that Bulls dont have the luxury to have big squads at every level.

So, whilst the first teams results are positive, and the 18s are on a roll, and RL is all about confidence and momentum, that is why I said dont dilute the 18s by bringing them into 20s unless it is for their individual personal development. In the current circumstances, let the 20s result be what it will be, and watch for the improvement in the near future when the 18s come through.

And importantly, give the current 20s the positive support of true fans.

It's actually played 9 lost 9 with the points difference standing at -255.

Salford away next up on Friday who are joint Third having only lost 2 out of 11.

From what I've seen of the Bradford Bulls Valvoline Cup exploits - RL FAN 6500 gives the best summation on the situation.

Basically the reason for the 0/9 record realistically comes down to the horrendous crippling injuries sustained by both the Valvoline Cup Super League squads.

Yeah I understand that and agree.

they won 5 last year all season, I would be happy with that again this season based on writing off these first 11 but with the first team squad getting players back over the next weeks and months, O'briens just back etc, so add some experienced players to some good young talent and I can only see things getting better, as with the 1st team.

I'm grateful for the wise insights of RL500 regarding the current state of the U20s

I'm especially interested to hear the argument that the U18s shouldn't be promoted into the U20s just to make up numbers, presumably because it would have an adverse effect on longer term development. That sounds like an eminently sensible idea to me.

Let's face it, this seasons Valvoline Cup is a write off already. We aren't going to qualify for anything, and the squad will do well to avoid the wooden spoon. A couple of morale boosting wins is the best that can be hoped for at this point in time.

If that means that our best Academy prospects are knocking on the first team door in two years time, well, that is perfectly acceptable.

I've spoken to Stuart Duffy, a couple of academy DVD are in the post to me today, I'll edit and upload when they arrive, but I don't know which games they are. If anyone has the team lists from the last few academy games and wants to post them here/PM me I would be grateful as I could then add the team list to the highlights so we know which future stars we're watching.

thanks in advance Duckman, looking forward no pun intended to these highlights.

V LONDON (H) W 44-30
1 Marcus Elliott
2 Kyle Moore
3 Sam Wood
4 Josh Casey
5 Jarrod Ward
6 Liam Darville
7 Adam Brook
8 Jordan Hargreaves
9 Nathan Conroy
10 George Marchant
11 Oliver Roberts
12 Alex Mellor
13 Emmerson Whittle
14 Brad Adams
15 Connor Nolan
16 Kyle Carter
17 Josh Haliday

V WARRINGTON (A) W 42-12
1 Curtis Naughton
2 Kyle Moore
3 Josh Casey
4 Sam Wood
5 Jarrod Ward
6 Liam Darville
7 Marcus Elliott
8 Liam McAvoy
9 Nathan Conroy
10 George Marchant
11 Alex Mellor
12 Oliver Roberts
13 Emmerson Whittle
14 James Slater
15 Jack Cockerham
16 Jordan Hargreaves
17 Ross Walker

I may have second rowers numbers wrong way round, but when watching on bullbuilder Roberts has dark hair, Mellor has light hair

Excellent, thanks for that.

Is that the strongest U18's team we've got?

Not available that day was hooker Connor Spencer, England U18 and regular in 20s, would make great combination with Nathan Conroy who played full game (I think)

Other than this - Yes (obviously IMO)

And John Bateman might play if they were in a cup final

There are some other good new U18s (who can play next year as well ie school year 12), who come in when the older ones are called into the 20s and they dont let the team down, it is only the further year of age/size and development (which is quite significant at their age) which makes the team slightly less strong, particularly in defence (with the wisdom of hindsight fully evidenced by the two recent results!).

This looks likely to happen this week when 20s play Salford Friday and 18s play Huddersfield Saturday - shame but probably inevitable unless the approach I have put forward earlier was taken up, which is not likely.

Any idea where those juniors were signed from?

Joe bell is a good stand off/second row as well.

both Hood and Potter stated that they only wanted to play the younger players when it was right for them and their development, but they are still (well Potter now) hostage to the misfortune of injuries and fixtures.

This is only relevant for the first team and young players going into the first team

It does not really have relevance to what I am saying about the U18s in the current circumstances

The reason for having a U20s / U23s / (second team in my day) is as follows:-
1) so that any first team squad over 20 (up to 5) can play whilst on the fringe or coming back from injury,
2) any other signed on players Under 20 (this age restriction is STUPID and will hopefully be increased to 23) can play and develop hopefully into getting into the first team squad - with the aim of building up 1st team squads with home grown players to replace overseas players

The 20s play in a competition, so that games are meaningful, but as is the case now with Bulls U20s results to date, their meaningful involvement in that competion is OVER for this season.

So it is my opinion that it is now wrong to dilute the U18s so that the 20s have a team, which does not contain any (or many) first team squad members and has no chance of achieving anything in its competition.

Only put 18s in the 20s when it will help their development, which under the current circumstances, is not likely when they will go into a team with few or no first team experienced players in it, those 20s who are playing have not achieved a win this year, and with other U18s with little experience.

Keep the U 18s together as a strong team to grow with the confidence of having a chance to win and the rewards will come in the next two years with a strong 20s which will be a positive environment for the development of these players and should lead to more of them coming through into first team contention.

I know Jarrod ward is from Oldham st annes

Curtis Naughton (Shaw Cross Sharks)
Josh Casey (Siddal)
Ross Walker (West Bowling)
Kyle Moore (West Bowling)
Nathan Conroy (West Bowling)
Oliver Roberts (Siddal)
Alex Mellor (Shaw Cross)
Emmerson Whittle (Siddal?)
Brad Adams (Shaw Cross)

i think Potter you and I all agree, but its just the practicalities of having to put out a full squad on the day that get in the way when theres injuries galore at all levels. And the number of 1st team players coming back over the next few weeks mean that it is realistic to try to keep the U18's together. and a level up we are getting a good core of our own players together in the 1st team pack, Koppy Burgess Obrien Whitehead etc etc

The number of overage players for this season has just been increased from 3 to 5 with immediate effect. The main problem with the U18's is its deemed non competitive thats why i'am in favor of the better lads playing 20's rugby.

I see George Marchant is playing prop, didn't he join the club last year as a centre ?

New to this forum business. Alex mellor came from Kings Cross not shaw cross. With reference to the above I concur why not just keep this group of 18s together and have a great shot at being undefeated? With regards to u18 footie being non competitive the problem obviously lies with the RFL, Does a competitive envioronment hinder develoment? or instill a winning mentality among the next generation? these kids have been playing competitive footy since they were 13/14 so why take a backwards step now?

Sounds like half a dozen of them were moved up to the u20s and we still beat Huddersfield, good job guys!