Now this I disagree with.
I am one of the strongest supporters of having a strong academy, but the rules as they are currently written do not mandate that you have an academy.

Any and every club has the right to choose how they run their own club. As previously mentioned, why would Salford bother when they can pick up Wigan, St Helens and Warrington youths or fringe players because those clubs cannot afford to keep them.

It might not be a strategy you like, just like I don't, but it is their right to do what they wish within the rules.

You can hardly blame Salford for starting all this, all clubs were complicit in the destruction of the youth grades. Thats when the ball started rolling, this is merely a symptom of the leadership of the sport not supporting youth, and restricting the top clubs ability to hang onto what they produce.

But that's not what the embedded pathway is about, it's about a clear pathway within the game at any age and at any point in the development of players, not "eliminating" them at 13 years old.
The system is changing and changing for the better IMO, I still has a long way to go, however, whilst we have an RFL running the game at tiers 1&2 and independent leagues and bodies governing the community game, we will have a fragmented system that is not fit for purpose.
There isn't a shortage of talent, there is a shortage of "correct" resource to develop that talent, there has been a big jump in participation numbers From u7-U10's since the introduction of the "sky try" programe with some fantastic success at certain clubs ((SL mainly) who have been targeted to develop these age groups or loose central funding.
It's not all doom and gloom, but it doesn't help when a club decides to scrap its academy and suddenly makes a plan to work with another club which in reality isn't in line with the RFL mandate.

When I did my Level 2 and my Embed the Pathway course they put a reasonable amount of emphasis on the difference between ability and maturity, and also first/fourth quartile babies which maybe helped a bit with counteracting this. There's a lot of support behind leagues being split by weight rather than age in Australia/NZ and I'd be curious to see the same over here. I remember reading a report that found those kids who were bigger at age 14-16 were less likely to make it as Super League players, presumably because they hadn't had to develop their skills as much as they were able to rely on being bigger than everyone.

Why would this temporary measure be necessary? I really can't take the idea that we are so efficient that we have absolutely exhausted the player pool seriously.

Absolutely.

But sadly not every coach does the Embed the Pathway course and fewer actually embrace the ethos of it properly, and even fewer are at clubs where they would be helped to do so, and yet fewer clubs are in league structures that help them to do so.

You're right on the stats about the young players and I know Leeds have been actively searching for quartile 4 players for this reason.

The Embed the Pathway scheme has given me a glimmer of hope because at least I know that the RFL recognise the issues. It just depends on how willing they are to confront the amateur leagues and force them to change. Right now they're sort of preaching to the converted, although that's not necessarily a bad thing to begin with.

The other side of the coin that is almost always missed by those who insist the amateur leagues are fine, is that the amateur setup has 2 purposes, not just 1. Yes they have to develop talent to push up the hierarchy, but their other equally important purpose is as a gateway to the sport for present/future supporters and sponsors. In this regard the amateur setup cannot be described as anything but a failure with only bright spots of mediocrity.

18 months ago, youth was the focus www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/ ... ---9239057

18 months ago, youth was the focus www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/ ... ---9239057