Here's another challange.

Could somebody show the best route, say a 7 year old, would take to become the professional England Rugby League team captain.

There has to be a way but how easy/difficult can it be?

Once again you betray your ignorance of what actualy goes on during the 3 years that players spend in pre scholarship and scholarship. Your dismissive attitude toward the amount of work that gets done and the vital importance of it is disgraceful and quite insulting to those who carry it out.

The thrust of this discussion only goes to show how important it is to give the Toulouse youth the opportunity to play Super League.

No it goes to show how damaging the current amateur setup and, unfortunately, a lot of people within the amateur setup are to the game.

I obviously don't include everyone in this and my experiences and knowledge is based mostly upon the amateur game in Yorkshire and a bit of Lancashire. But there are too many clubs that accept (and some sadly encourage) violence and needless aggression at their club, be it from players/officials/coaches/fans/parents etc which just drives people away from the sport at all ages including open age.
There are too many league officials who accept this kind of aggression from their member clubs (games abandoned for fighting or excessive abuse of referees at u12's and sometimes younger FFS) and don't punish the clubs, coaches or club officials responsible.

Then there's the similarly major issue of God-awful coaching. Kids coached from age 8 to fight, 10 year olds coached wrestle technique before they can pass a ball or tackle properly. Kids coached, quite literally, to pass to the biggest or fastest kid in the team.

Again, this doesn't apply to all but sadly does apply to too many in the north. Fortunately my experience of amateur RL further south is a much better one, but the heartlands is currently letting the sport down.

Good, any coach who would be insulted by it isn't needed in our game. It isn't about them. Far too many think it is. It seems you are one.

Don't be ridiculous, what an idiotic thing to say!

The coaches who deliver pre-scholarship and scholarship are almost 100% volunteers who give up their time, 10 hours+ every week, in order to help young budding professionals reach their goals. Most of the coaches have funded their own learning through the RFL and UKCC and continue to finance their own learning in order to better their knowledge and delivery to the players. They are conscientious individuals and are dedicated to the groups of lads they coach. In almost every case the coaches are virtually anonymous and seek no recognition but derive their satisfaction from knowing they played a part in moving the youngsters forward.

Your moronic, ignorant comments are so wide of the mark it renders anything you have to say on the subject irrelevant as you clearly don't have a single clue about youth development or what motivates the coaches who deliver it!

Word of advice, stop digging, go back to pontificating about some other subject rather than winging it about this one!

a little tip. Bluster is not a good replacement for content.

Coaches who coach for the right reasons understand that at 13, 14, 15, their influence is minimal in deciding if a player goes on to be a pro deserve and have earned our respect and applause.

But those claiming that a player who they coached twice a week as mid-teen went on to be a pro because of them? meh.

Ill ask again, how many of Wakefield 2009 academy GF side have come through to being full pros? Youth development is so much bigger than scholarship coaching, the difficult part isn't picking up naturally talented children and giving them some coaching, its not even about offering the best of those kids academy contracts, its not even about getting those best academy kids to win. By far the most important part, and by far the defining factor of whether a player becomes a pro or not is the time between a player being an academy player and actually being an SL player because as we have seen with the litany of examples throughout our game, players can be miles ahead of their peers at 14, they can look world beaters at 16, but if the academy doesn't prioritise their development, and they aren't blooded properly, it doesn't matter if their scholarship was one on one with Craig Bellamy, they wont be a pro.

Like I said, anything you now say on the subject is irrelevant. You don't understand and never will, your ignorant about the subject, speak in ridulously superficial terms, make ludicrous sweeping statements and ignore what others are telling you.

To be fair to Smokey, if all he's being told is opinionated bollox then he's perfectly entitled to ignore it.

If it were opinionated bollox, I'd expect anyone to ignore it, but it's not!

You of all people should be wary of making such a statement.

Be careful what you wish for!

I asked you a question a while back.......ill try again. How many of the 400 or so NRL under 20s make the grade? These are the kids that excel at age grade.....the kids tutored by the local coaches from an early age.....how many if them make it?

Junior coaches teach basic skills and that's great, but it is NORMALLY not these basics that turn them into pri players......no matter how lyrically you wax

I'm sure the answer to your question is out there somewhere, why do you expect me to do your research for you?

This discussion has centred on UK clubs so I don't see the relevance of your question as I alluded to in my first response to it!

It's been clearly stated by a number of posters on this thread that there are clear differences between what is happening in Australia and here.

Junior coaches at Scholarship level teach far far far more than just basic skills, there's no waxing lyrically because there's no need, just factual information.

Good luck to those naturally talented kids making it into a decent academy with the skills required without decent coaching. After all, these coaches are not needed in our game because they're insulted by ignorant claims such as yours.

It's no coincidence that since the introduction on an elite academy (U15's) and SG Ball side (U18's) in WA the talent production has gone through the roof and we are feeding many players to NRL clubs. Giving the talented U15's the right coaching, nutrition, suppliments etc etc is critical if they are to progress.

Wow, a whole field of strawmen in there.

Junior coaches at Scholarship level can teach everything under the sun. They could literally be the only RL coaching, and the only contact with RL a kid has up until that point. It doesn't create pro's.

The fact is that players who are picked up at 16/17/18 into academies and junior academies are picked up because of their talent, not because their coaching at scholarship level in Wakefield is better than elsewhere, and frankly its pretty pathetic to claim those kids, the vast majority of whom won't go on to even make a single SL appearance, as evidence that youth development at your club is working. Because all I hear is the excuse although Wakefields youth development is brilliant, there just aren't the results

and for all your attempts to play on emotion and pretend im bad mouthing volunteers, it wont work. Its also pretty apparent that you are devaluing not only the players input, but his amateur coaches input, his academy coaches input, and the actual commitment it takes to blood a young player in to the first team at pro level by vastly overstating the effect of scholarship coaching at certain clubs.

I noticed you have still failed to answer my question as well, ill ask it again, how many of the Wakefield 2009 Academy GF squad have made it to an SL career?

No individual part creates a pro, including when they get into an academy. Together they do. To dismiss everything before it is pretty ignorant of athlete development.


And where does this talent come from? It's not just genetically inherited. It's an important piece of the puzzle. A very important piece. In fact, it's a very important piece that is ignored way too much in this country.


Or he's saying that there is huge importance to every piece of the puzzle?

Absolutely correct on all counts.

As we have gone WAY off the original topic that will do now thanks.