I know the article is an opinion piece, but it has some major rhetorical flaws.

If there is such a wide consensus, why do clubs need to be forced into it?

Are there any negatives? No, apart from those i’m going to dismiss as being an argument for another day.

If the benefits are blatantly apparent... but they’re clearly not to all stakeholders, including some of those who’d be paying for it. At least not across both benefit and cost. Anything looks good if you only examine the benefits. Does it offer value? That’s a key question, so...

Various figures and countless examples prove its value apparently. Well cite some of them. Hopefully, they’ll be better than the ‘not a coincidence’ argument of a couple of years ago.

Reserve grade could offer value, but there are definitely counter arguments and to pretend otherwise makes your position look weaker rather than stronger imo.

Spot on.

In my opinion if we have a proper reserve grade it makes the Championship obsolete.

I understand why Championship clubs fans are against feeder clubs but in my opinion that’s what many of them need to become.

I would rather see an u18s and u21s before dual reg. In fact I would encourage loans rather than dual reg so as to reduce the messing around that league one and championship clubs face.

Rimmer's legacy would already surpass that of Nigel Wood if reserves were brought back. Also unacceptable that Salford in the super league don't have an academy. Not sure if they're the only ones in SL without one

Just scrap the u19s and have a reserve grade. Most of the players who'll be playing in it will probably be u19 anyway. I really don't understand why this is being made so complicated.

So without any research you just stick the boot into us ? Our multi millionaire former owner scrapped our academy so maybe you should take it up with him ?

Don’t know what difference that makes?

It was Salford that made that decision so it’s still right to criticise Salford for that.

One of the reasons why someone like Koukash wasn’t right for the sport and an example of the many stupid, rash, short-sighted & short-termist decisions he made at Salford.

He had the cash to make Salford a strong club. He chose not to.

Shows just because someone has money doesn’t mean they know how to run a club.

I do think there is a tendency for advocates of reserves to imagine it’ll combine the best bits of the old A teams and the modern NRL reserve grade without any of the more difficult elements.

The A teams were relatively inexpensive but only had to produce semi-pro players for most of their history. Which is perhaps why they work well for Fax and Keighley. Would Jake Shorrocks benefit massively from competing at that level?

The NRL system is, I assume, much more expensive and has partially developed from mergers, a P&R-free system and formerly independent clubs becoming feeder teams. None of which would garner much support here.

Also, I think your first point about the Championship is exactly right. If there was a shift in perception, so that it were seen as a stepping stone rather than a career graveyard, it’d largely solve the problem more simply.

Unlike 90% of SL teams Toulouse already have reserves..

Koucash has/had plenty of money but, lacked patience, wanting success overnight.
In many ways he was a good match for RL.

Koukash was Salford so it was his decision, and just in case you haven't noticed we are rather light in the pocket department now he's gone, we have had to sell players to keep going so we are hardly likely to be funding an academy he scrapped.

But surely you can see why people would criticise a SL club for not having an academy?

If Salford can’t afford an academy they should spend less on players.

Good point

Salford under Koucash isn’t the best example, given his wealth and stated ambitions. However, I do sometimes think that SL’s poorer relatives are sometimes told that when the wealthier clubs pursue their self interest it’s dog eat dog, while having to simultaneously defend themselves from charges of not doing the right thing by the RL family.

Think this was an opportinity for Ralph to stamp his mark as CEO but he's completely bottled it.

The biggest issue facing the sport at the moment is participation. Reserves are a way of keeping players in the game. Clubs making a decision on whether a player is good enough at 19 is crazy

If you asked the players i reckon at least 95% want a reserve grade. They'll have a better idea than the pencil pushing chairman.

Yes but we can't have everything we are skint, I think we will spend less on players and still not have an academy, it's a vicious circle.

I'm sure also that if we spent money on an academy we would suffer the critisism Widnes are currently getting where they run an academy, but maybe because they spend less on a squad are accused of having an uncompetitive team.

It wasn't the RFL that scrapped the reserves, it was the clubs - done as a cost-cutting exercise.

The RFL is nothing more than a service provider, especially since the power-shift to SL over the last 10 years.

If the clubs want to make it a rule that all SL teams must run reserves, it's entirely down to them...but is it 5 clubs who have actually run reserves this year??

People tend to like ideas they’re not paying for more than those that they are.

Tell them it is going to be funded by a cut in the salary cap and reallocation of resources from the first team’s wages, and see what they say. Or tell fans that season tickets are going up 25% to cover it. Then we might get a more thorough analysis of the pros and cons.

Even if there was the money to fund it, I think there’s a case for that going into the grassroots community clubs instead.

But that’s the whole point really. An academy should be a minimum requirement in the same way as having a club doctor or a stadium with minimum safety requirements is seen as the base standards for a club that can’t be withdrawn regardless of club finances.

Nobody would say it would be acceptable for a club to not have proper medical staff. They would say you have to reduce other costs (eg players wages) first.

An academy is an essential cost of doing business, not a desirable add-on if it can be afforded after a club has maxed out the salary cap for instance.
No-one is suggesting it would be funded and resourced as well as the top academies, but one should exist even if it’s only doing the bare minimum one would expect from an academy.

It’s this kind of prioritisation of players wages that distorts the market and distorts the game. Essentially, Salford can’t afford the amount they are paying out in players wages because they should be paying £100-200k+ a year on a bare minimum academy. So they’ve inflated the wages market by that amount. Making every other club slightly less profitable.

This is what we did 30 odd years ago and it nearly killed the sport. We’re doing the same again as a sport with clubs (not just Salford, I’ve just used them as an example) paying wages that really they can’t afford and shouldn’t be paying. That money should be spent elsewhere.

I agree with you but I don't see it happening in the short term, our priority is staying in Super League because if we don't we won't have an academy or anything else to worry about.

BTW I don't even know which clubs do or don't run one bar Widnes and Hull share.

Is criteria still in place that clubs must have a minimum number of home grown players? Salford will be struggling to meet that in a few years without an academy.

All Super League clubs should be running academy’s. Not been able to afford it is a pathetic short sighted excuse. Salford can afford to bring in Jackson Hastings from the NRL for the Middle 8’s.

The home grown rule got binned off around the same time as franchising iirc. Possibly because it was considered a big ask for a newly promoted team to meet the criterion after a period without the infrastructure in place, and exceptions could soon get messy.

If clubs are responsible for youth development, then fair enough they should do their bit. It might not be hugely worthwhile from a narrow and selfish POV for some clubs, but can maybe be considered a fair exchange for the bigger clubs accepting the salary cap. However, the short-term incentives mean Salford are behaving rationally. My club tried to take a longer term view in 2016, with a now infamous five year plan - that went badly.

Edit - also paying Jackson Hastings for 2 and a half months is unlikely to cost the same as running an academy programme.

Fax are in this season's middle 8's because they have a reserve squad. Accepted that an SL reserve squad will have different dimensions, but iirc the Fax reserve team has been mostly run via a £25k donation by the supporters club. Clearly an SL reserve squad would cost more (with some full-time players), but without our reserves we'd defo not be taking to the field against Leeds, HKR, Salford and Widnes over the coming weeks.

We had very successful academy sides previously, but certainly for us, this didn't provide anything more than a training ground for SL clubs to come calling.

Each to their own is what I say. It works well for Fax, but boy we'd like some more teams to play.

I think this is the key point. One of the failings of Franchising was it just seemed to have a single template that all clubs should adopt. This smacks of the same. Let clubs innovate and try different approaches that suit there own circumstances, and succeed or fail based on their decisions.

If your club isn’t running a reserves team and you think they should, then the RFL are being supportive. Fans who want this need to direct the question to their club. That’s where the power is.