Hopefully Championship teams can still take players on loan. But when they do, the players are THEIR players, who train fully with their loan club, and are there on a long term basis.

"[Part quoteGFB,

I get where you are coming from, but I don't believe this will be true, especially for the SL sides that already have Reserve sides. Even the ones that don't have reserves all ready will automatically have 2 years worth of academy players available to them next year, because of the change in age group, going from under 19s to under 18s for academies means that players in their last two years of the academy set up will automatically fill the majority of the player roster in the reserves. On top of this most SL first team squads are in the region of 26-28 players so leaves a significant number of players, about 4-5 (assuming that most clubs are running with 4-6 injuries at any one time) that are not getting game time with the first team. Then given that the reserves, to begin with will mainly be 19/20 year old youngsters, SL clubs will probably look to still utilise DR and loans for these players to get game time in the Championship which will generally be a higher grade of rugby than the reserves. This becomes even more true for sides that already have reserve sides."

So if I am reading it correctly FG, for the SL clubs second choice, fringe, coming back from injury etc players it will still be DR as the best option.

For their so called "reserve sides" they will be third choice largely younger players who in the near future as they get older will become first team, first choice players, second choice, fringe, coming back from injury etc DR or move on for a more permanent deal at their level players.

If that's the case then rather than reducing the number of DR players, having a full reserve grade set up among other things will increase the number of DR players coming available.

If I ran a SL club I would want to keep my reserve team costs as low as possible. To do that I would need to play players who are cheap (the youngsters) or I see as needing to get fit (Not likely to go on DR as can be monitored better). For other players, not in contention that week for a SL game, I would want to get some money back to help cover costs - so I would send them on DR to pay part of their salary.

We have also not had clarity on the number of reserve games each season (ie is it one league, conferences, or even divisions. One, two or even three game against each team) this will also be important

Based on this I see little change in the availability of players for DR

For me it wouldn't be a bad idea if next season some sort of rule was brought in to try and prevent certain types of very experienced SL players playing on DR. For instance, although Brad Singleton was made available to Fev because he wasn't selected by Leeds, I agree with those who say that's not the type of player who should be playing on DR, there are plenty of similar examples (Adrian Morley is one who comes to mind). Maybe a rule that says you have to have played fewer than 50 SL/NRL games, or not played at that level for at least a year, to be eligible for DR.

Or just dump it altogether?

Fine by me if they do, but that ship might have sailed. The Championship has become so much stronger that I can't see it being contested exclusively by third-tier players. By that I mean - the top 200 players roughly make up the starting 17 in the 12 SL teams, the next 200 are the remaining SL squad members, and Championship clubs would be left to select from that third tier, players outside the top 400. The smarter Championship chairmen have realised that there's not much point in paying, say, a 20k salary to attract the 400th best player in the country when you can use the 250th-best or 300th best player on loan or on DR.