Sorry for chipping in but, I agree with FTF above, Lunt was very good in the game v Salford & I would sign Blair & obvs Sio too any day if funds were no issue & of course they wanted to come to Leigh.

Edit.

Or if our quota wasn't now full .....

Or if I was a director & had any say in the club whatsoever.

stated lunt, blair better than average im talking about us not wigan

I think at some point we have to invest in youth the teams that win things all have great youth set ups

agree with you on the youth but we are not wigan and therefore rely on bringing in players from other clubs youth rugby in hull has slowly eroded and needs a boost if you notice the sharks didn't blood anyone this year partly because of lack of injuries and partly because Radford was frightened to death to lose a game. no good investing money in players who wont make superlegue standard wigan seem to have a production line and supply a lot of players to other teams as well as their own

You obviously don't follow youth rugby in our town, my lads team at east hull won everything in the last 10 years in hull & district league to Yorkshire premier division, Yorkshire & national cup finals, just our team at our age group, kr scouts never watched our games & our home ground is st Richards, FC was there home & away, hence why 11 of our lads was invited down, your club has no youth because it couldn't be bothered to watch youth rugby, now FC have the pick for years to come.

People have always used the excuse that we weren't in SL when you were so took all the best young players but to me that's a poor excuse because if one thing we would have probably been in a better position than you to offer first team rugby and our lack of youth in the 10 years has been poor ( it's got better in recent seasons but much of that was forced upon us) getting relegated may make us look to the academy for more players which can't be a bad thing might unearth a few gems that might have been missed

The teams that win things, mostly have lots of resource generally. Youth development is part of that, but only part - for all the attention it gets, I'm not convinced it is an especially important part. Not to the extent that people assume, anyway. Did you see my post about correlations being weak associations?



Cas have/had a reputation for producing good players - without the money to retain them or surround them with better, it did them little good. Also it reached the point were any player who came through their system was automatically highly regarded, so was kind of self-fulfilling.

We did pretty well relying heavily on imports in our first few years in SL. Then we went for 'Building for the Future', and a focus on youth/potential in 2012. Nice sentiment, and the problem was more that we hadn't had the infrastructure, rather than it being a dreadful concept. That for me though is when we lost momentum. 'Beatings for the Forseeable' was the message it sent out, and recruitment and retention suffered.

As long as we have to focus investment on particular parts of the club, it'll always be tough to regularly compete with the richer teams, who can invest in all aspects. For me the first priority has to be the first team.

its not what they win as kids that counts if they are any good they will come through but it will only be the odd one, wigan get several

I think they've made it clear who they want to keep.

Shame for those who have missed out. Obviously not in the 5 year plan.

I hope there is a clear out in management as well. Otherwise nothing will change.

I understand what your saying and I'm not someone who bangs on about local lads in the team I've stated before I'm not bothered were the players come from take Marsh for example if Campese and Kelly had been fit Marsh wouldn't have played a game and probably have been released I think if we'd of had a u23s last season it may of made a difference we could of hung on to some of the youngsters we released Guzdek for me is a better full back than Cockayne are Mulhern and Clarkson any better than Ollett and Esselmont all I'm saying is if your going to release the kids don't replace them with average players on more money

I hate to say this, but if you take the Dullers as a barometer of youth delevopment,
They have a very good foothold in the local schools and clubs, and have ran an under 23 team this year with some success.
But at the sharp end of the season, CC final and play off semi, only Danny Houghton found a place in the first 17. Next year they have already brought 3 players in from other clubs.
This make an under 23 seem an expensive folly of the rich clubs, with most of the players leaving for other opportunities. Can we really afford this?

Shaul yeamo Bowden green washy. To add also.

I went to a meeting at archbishop sentamu because my daughters going there next year and Pete Grayburn who was head of youth at rovers runs there rugby program and he was saying how he turned them into one of best sides in Yorkshire and he's fixed up players with pro clubs all over Yorkshire now surely as we sponsor them and have a close working relationship with them as he did point out surely the best kids should be coming to us

I heard yesterday that there may be some good news forthcoming regarding Greenwood.
If its to believed then we could hear an announcement by Monday.

sorry for my ignorance, I stand corrected. But Danny Washbrook is a perfect example of the point I was trying to make. Players having to leave due to restricted opportunities.

I don't think Rovers are in a financial position to run a development team, especially if Hull are already established in the local area.
Maybe a greater involvement in a local amateur club is the way to go ?

I think running a u23s this season is pointless and isn't happening for this league we need a core of last seasons squad and hopefully sheens can get a few gems as judging by what people are saying at Salford most of the players came because of him

I don't think we need to run an under 23's anytime soon. Tim Sheens as got to be allowed bring in his own players, be the aussies or other. Then if we get back into the S.L. and established the club in the top 8 regularly, we can look towards a under 23's. Otherwise we will be investing in player development for others to benefit from. Agents will always tempt players with offers of more money/success away from clubs who struggle season on season.

Without an under 23's where are our youngsters going to play though, just say we sign Liam Harris from the under 19's, where is he going to get game time? He's not ready for first team but he'll be to old for the under 19's. It's a catch 22 situation. We'll struggle to get the youngsters through without an under 23's but if we run one we risk losing them to other clubs anyway like we usually do.

If It was my club I would have run one, like you say the likes of Harris to old for 19s but not ready for top flight, but will still be getting paid, may as well run the 23s with young kids, players back from injuries & trialists, nothing to lose.

I agree but all the teams used to run a A team with great results Is it that costly to run the same again it was also a good place for players after a injury to have a run out before they played for the first team

Instead of u19s academy they should just up it to u21s and allow 3 overage players to play this does away with the u23s allows players to play coming back from injury or that are out of the team and makes sure players aren't lost to the game at 19

Is this not what dual registration was intended for? for the few that come through at the moment, playing at Newcastle or simular is perfect for growth and development

Would Newcastle want to give one of our untested youngsters a chance in such an important role?

that would bepend on their ability, if their worth a contract then must have something to offer. If not why are we retaining them?
They may not be physically ready but skill wise should offer something