I agree with everything you are saying. The 15 clubs who took an interest had 3 years to prepare the academy for application and simply haven't met the agreed, specified criteria.

Lets see what an independent third party thinks when some club go through the appeal process.

The extent to which the club produces Super League players (since 2016) = we was in the joint academy from 2015-19 so whatever FC produced, we produced the same, from 2019 we went solo and Covid hit 2020.

The ability to finance an Academy = We are putting a lot of money into our Academy since going solo in 2019, even at the expense of not spending a full cap on the first team.

past performance on deliver = As point one, given a solo licence in 2019 and only had the 2020 Covid hit season to be judged on.

Any other criteria that the RFL determines is relevant at it's discretion = yeh real specific that isn't it



I've got my head around it

you've every right to feel hard done as every club should be allowed to have their own academy but rather you rant on here why don't you vent your spleen at that dimwit Rimmer, hes the one to blame

If the independent third party justifies the refusal to allow an academy, and points out the shortcomings can the club(s) put these right and re-apply?

Realistically, no.

The decision is based on past performance, which is fine but the past is gone.

If you mean ‘could they do better and re-apply in a few years based on that better performance’, then the issue is that they won’t have an elite academy during that period and so will be unlikely to improve.

It is a bit like under the SL licensing system, when non-SL clubs could apply but it was very difficult for them to compete with the incumbents with their inherent advantages.

Karl Turner, the MP for East Hull has tweeted that he expects a statement from the RFL and Hull KR today, following what he believes to have been constructive discussions.

Thank you, very informative.........

Even though HKR could end up with no academy, one issue here is when a young player does well enough to be signed as a professional I take it he does not have to sign for his academy club? Once at the end of going through the FC academy, is say a keen Rovers fan who has really done well in the said Hull FC academy able to just go and sign professional with Rovers????

Coincidentally, this came up in another discussion I saw earlier today.

Hull FC have a promising young fullback called Connor Wynne who is 20 years old and, as far as public knowledge goes, ooc at the end of the season. It isn’t even a rumour that Rovers might be interested, afaik, just fans looking at the ooc list and wondering. The point was made that because he is under 21, Hull would be entitled to fee if they also offer a contract that meets certain criteria. I’m not clear on who sets that fee and how, but it isn’t an open market once lads are above academy-eligible age.

Another issue might be if a kid is a massive Rovers fan and isn’t too smart about hiding it (I remember hearing Kenny Dalglish tell a story about hiding his Rangers posters when the Celtic scout visited his family

), might Hull be disinclined to invest in his development?

I've already posted that HKR seem disadvantaged by this process, due to having a joint academy for the previous period.

I've also posted that I could see an interim licence being given to HKR, perhaps reassessed in 2 years, instead of 5.

Quote ="dboy"I've already posted that HKR seem disadvantaged by this process, due to having a joint academy for the previous period. I've also posted that I could see an interim licence being given to HKR, perhaps reassessed in 2 years, instead of 5.'" https://www.totalrl.com/rfl-modifies-it ... -licences/ "Probationary Elite licences have now been awarded to Bradford Bulls, Castleford Tigers and Hull Kingston Rovers... These are initially for a two-year period (2022-23), “and the clubs’ progress during that period will be kept under regular review”, according to the RFL." Dave Rotheram, the RFL’s Chief On-Field Officer, said: “We are pleased that it has been possible to reach this agreement for the benefit of all, while respecting the process that led to the initial decision. “The RFL will work with all five clubs to address their specific circumstances. All have responded to these challenges with impressive energy, which has earned these opportunities. “There is a recognition by all now that Elite should mean Elite".

Quote ="dboy"I've already posted that HKR seem disadvantaged by this process, due to having a joint academy for the previous period. I've also posted that I could see an interim licence being given to HKR, perhaps reassessed in 2 years, instead of 5.'" https://www.totalrl.com/rfl-modifies-it ... -licences/ "Probationary Elite licences have now been awarded to Bradford Bulls, Castleford Tigers and Hull Kingston Rovers... These are initially for a two-year period (2022-23), “and the clubs’ progress during that period will be kept under regular review”, according to the RFL." Dave Rotheram, the RFL’s Chief On-Field Officer, said: “We are pleased that it has been possible to reach this agreement for the benefit of all, while respecting the process that led to the initial decision. “The RFL will work with all five clubs to address their specific circumstances. All have responded to these challenges with impressive energy, which has earned these opportunities. “There is a recognition by all now that Elite should mean Elite".

Glad to see common sense has prevailed and Cas, KR & Bradford have been awarded elite licences for 2022 and 2023. GIving them an extended period to apply for the full licences. i.e. they'll be issued once everyone has forgotten about all this.

Ralph saves face and the player pool isn't knackered by what was an incredulously bad decision.

Reported elsewhere ... https://www.examinerlive.co.uk/sport/ru ... n-20745431 "the RFL has now granted probationary licences to the three clubs for a two-year period, in which time the clubs will be regularly reviewed to ensure they are meeting the standards required. All clubs have received feedback as to where their applications fell short and will be required to fix those issues to retain their licences."

Reported elsewhere ... https://www.examinerlive.co.uk/sport/ru ... n-20745431 "the RFL has now granted probationary licences to the three clubs for a two-year period, in which time the clubs will be regularly reviewed to ensure they are meeting the standards required. All clubs have received feedback as to where their applications fell short and will be required to fix those issues to retain their licences."

Typically classy response from a Bulls fan - it's ALWAYS someone else's fault!

Hopefully the 3 clubs will take the chance they have been given and make the required improvements.

If they aren't up to standard in 2 year's time, will that be Ralph's fault as well?

Which in Bradford's case was that there aren't enough U16's playing in the district despite the number of community clubs. Removing the academy wouldn't improve that either as a couple of the community clubs have already received approaches from a super league club.

Rubbish that for 2 weeks parents and kids have had this uncertainty with the club only receiving - what is pretty subjective - feedback yesterday!

Forgive me for being cynical but Bradford didn't get one in the first place because the superleague chairmen didn't want Championship clubs to have academies. The likes of Lenagan said as much two years ago. London and Newcastle are development areas but certainly Newcastle fail on 2 of the 4 criteria as set out.

Typical supercilious response from you.

Whilst Nigel Wood is acknowledging that improvements need to be made, he is also getting his excuses lines up for the next failure...

"we now see the position as a great opportunity to improve even further.

We will work even harder...

We should also mark a note of caution. The revised financial support provided by the RFL is likely to be either removed completely or drastically cut. This will undoubtedly place a considerable strain on the Club..."

That's right championship clubs will get reduced central funding next season as the superleague isn't the draw it used to be for TV audiences. For a different thread that though.

In what way is my post "behaving or looking as though one thinks one is superior"??

You've heard a big word on the bus and have been dying to use it!

It's fantastic that the 3 club's have a chance to make strides forward - let's hope they take it.

Just had to google it then?

Your first point is bunkum - that was not the reason for Bulls failing to meet the criteria.

On your second point; the process was RFL not SL led.

I'm very glad the 3 club's have been given a reprieve. I hope they make the most of it.

Elite academies are now funded CENTRALLY and that funding is RING FENCED for that purpose.

The cut in mainstream funding should not affect the operation of the academy.

That's the point of the application and assessment process!

Too much development money has been disappearing down the drain. Too many clubs paying lip service to youth development.

You now have to evidence the success of your academy £s.

Oh, the irony!

Your choice of emoji is the very definition of supercilious.

Dave Rotherham = “That is now the challenge for the whole game – and one in which all clubs recognise they must play their part, with the increase in standards of Academies a key part of that.

“The standards will not be diluted, and every Academy Licence holder will be held to account under the terms of the Licence agreement.”

What was it then?

I mean you've been pontificating on here for over a week now and both Bradford and Hull KR only got their feedback at yesterday's meeting.

You are right though it is bunkum - that's why when faced with being taken to the court of arbitration for sport the RFL have had to back down.

You are so one-eyed, it's almost unbelievable.

The 3 club's, for varying reasons, and in varying degrees, messed up their academies/applications. Big style.

They have, quite rightly and exactly how I said they would, been given a reprieve. (Clearly one of us knows more than the other).

If the club's only received their feedback yesterday, on what basis were they already going to arbitration? You have to cite a specific reason; to do that, they must have had feedback.

Bulls being denied was down to underinvestment in the set-up, simply relying on a decent grass roots to prop it up.

HKR - very unfortunate to be deemed a junior partner in the CoH academy.

Cas - woeful production line, woeful back-room set-up and woeful, back of a fag-packet application - they thought it was a foregone conclusion.

Glad all 3 have a chance to make progress, but if you (or they), don't get the licence extended in 2 year's time - whose fault will it be then?

Im not gonna kid myself, we’ve dodged a bullet here. I’m quite pleased with how all of this has played out - a lot of us Cas fans have been very disappointed in the way our youth has been treated over the last few years so, hopefully, this is the kick up the backside that the club needed. There is no shortage of talent in the area, the schools teams and youth teams do well. They just don’t seem to either a) improve or b) be given the chance, when they have entered the academy set up over the last 7/8 years. We have a coach coming in that does seem to want to promote youth so, hopefully, this is the start of us getting back to where we should be.