Well as a fan of a SL club you wouldn't see the problem of course.

But as a fan of a Championship club I will tell you that I do not want to watch a SL club's reserve team. Even SL fans don't even want to watch their own reserves, so why would we ? I'd rather my club had a team of lads who were fully signed up and committed to the club, not lads who are simply following orders from their parent club, even if the standard is lower. I couldn't give a toss about the big step up from academy to first team at SL clubs, that's not our problem.

I'm also a fan of a Championship club.

Its not going to be an SL reserves league though, as I said, as long as Championship clubs aren't being forced to take these players on then where's the issue? Its not like every SL Reserve player is suddenly going to be playing in the Championship. There's only a finite amount who are good enough to regularly play at Championship level and it's up to the Championship club how many they want to take on. They have the option of sticking at 4 don't they?

You think?

They do have that option, until the SL club sayes, take 7 or none ?

I'm sure I remember a time when aspiring SL clubs who didn't run teams at all age groups due to a lack of money were told this was evidence that they were 'not ready', providing complete player pathways was vital. I think this was around the same time that making the Championships a competition worth winning in its own right was on the agenda.

Quite correct , the usual suspects were attacking NL club fans angry at the ridiculous application of minimum wage laws to a % of academy squads, citing if you cannot afford to pay for a team, you were not potential SL material, now those fans clubs are doing exactly the same

SL ? Yer having a laugh

The theory is ok but we all know who the dominant partner in these arrangements will be. The new proposed rules are that a Championship club can have 6 Dual Reg players and 4 loaned players at any one time, so potentially 10 SL reserves in their team. Given that the oldest age allowed in the new SL academy setup is 19 (they are dropping the allowance to play 3 over age players) then you don't have to be a genius to work out that SL clubs are going to have a large number of fringe first team squad and overage "junior" players who will need maintain match fitness. The only option open to SL clubs will be to farm them out to the junior partner to keep them playing regularly.

The other problem that I can see is cost. Under the existing rules if a Championship club takes a player on loan or DR from a SL club then for the weeks that you have them you must pay them the same contractual terms as their parent club contract. I simply don't see how most Championship clubs can afford to do that for a significant number of players. Unless they are going to change the rules that is, but nothing has been mentioned so far apart from how it will save some SL clubs £100k per season - no mention of how that £100k cost will transfer to Championship clubs and how they are meant to absorb it.

From what I have been told, the Championship Clubs are going to have the privilige of paying for them.

There may be some conflating of two separate issues going on here.

The two Hull clubs have for some time been talking about combining [iresources[/i for the academies. The recent formation of a joint company would indicate that this is moving forward.

The changes to the academy system that may involve sharing [iplayers[/i is an RFL initiative, and one that Adam Pearson was pretty scathing about in a recent interview.

Personally I don't see how any such system can work, and I haven't yet read or heard anything that justifies even trialling it. The current system may not be working well enough but replacing it with something worse is baffling.

Did you miss the second part of my post?

No I didn't , but what exactly does ' resources ' mean in this situation ?

If you mean players and coaches , say players and coaches , dont use ' RFL ' speak to hide what you actually mean

So are they going to run just 1 Hull ' City ' academy team ?

It was the clubs decision, if they did not want to do it, it wouldn't be happening. The RFL have in no way suggested the idea, they have only given there blessing. As long as both clubs work together on the academy, then they both own an academy and are not breaking rules.

RL fans make me laugh, the Hull clubs have often being criticized for the lack of youth player development and when they are trying new ideas to do something about it they are criticized. Damned if they do, damned if they don't.

The new idea being jettison a full team of ambitious youngsters.......The RFL will always go along with SL initiatives, the same person heads up both organisations..laughable.

I meant facilities/staff. Since when have players ever been referred to as resources?

And if you read the second part of my post you clearly didn't understand it. The joint [iteam[/i came from the RFL's reorganisation of the academies. AFAIK.

I'm not sure that's right. The original idea floated by Pearson and Hudgell was for both clubs to share resources but have separate squads; the move to a single squad was referenced by Pearson in a recent interview and he indicated it was part of the RFL reorganisation and that he wasn't entirely happy about it.

Since its become a Hull thread, do they play youth RL in that part of the country or are we talking about the possiblity of the Hull clubs starting a youth system then blooding youngsters from Hull in the near/distant future?

Where will all the crap Aussies play there rugby if this is a success?

Not if the rules have changed to suit them no , However it would seem then that the RFL have altered the rules with regards criteria of SL membership , as it was a requirement for EACH club to run its OWN academy squad , and to pay a requisite amount to its academy players

Maybe they could stop messing about with rules between licence periods , then clubs might actually know where they stand

Quite correct , the idea of ' sharing ' players threw me , so can these players play for both clubs , or just the academy ? , will they still be paid individually , all very confusing , not like the RFL to bring in confusing rules

From the very little that's been said on the subject I get the impression that these things are still 'under discussion'. Pearson seemed extremely sceptical that any mechanism could be set up that would be acceptable to both clubs and I agree with him. No idea how you could make such a scheme work in practice - some sort of draft system maybe?

Seems barking mad TBH, particularly in an area where divisions run so deep.

Not like the RFL to announce or introduce something without looking into any potential problems thoroughly





See we can agree on something

Quote ="Starbug"Not like the RFL to announce or introduce something without looking into any potential problems thoroughly See we can agree on something '" Looks like it may all be going pear shaped already... www.thisishullandeastriding.co.u ... story.html Hopefully this idea will be permanently shelved now.

Quote ="Starbug"Not like the RFL to announce or introduce something without looking into any potential problems thoroughly See we can agree on something '" Looks like it may all be going pear shaped already... www.thisishullandeastriding.co.u ... story.html Hopefully this idea will be permanently shelved now.

Right then , now back to the Championship clubs paying to keep SL clubs players fit , they have announced the changes , how will they work ?

Anybody ?

One of the Hull clubs will orobably now enter a feeder club agreement with York.