I completely agree with you on an A team or reserve team..which for me would not only be beneficial for age grade players but those returning from injury or whose form has dipped....I have spoken to GH on this n he will not go down this route..too expensive...Personally I disagree with him, can't imagine senior players like going on dual reg to Fev when returning from injury...whilst Mac has said he thinks DR works for club...in previous interview he also said there are only so many players that can be sent on loan or DR...as a result we are losing players. So since GH is not going to budge on this issue...can't see RFL making it compulsory then the best way for an age grade player to learn is directly off a senior player...Wigan n Saints are able to push youngsters through into senior squad mind they also have reserve squads. Personally would disagree think Harvey Whiteley will be able to step up..but time will tell.

Wouldn't disagree although losing players and losing players we need aren't necessarily the same thing. I too would like to see us run an academy but without knowing the financial ins and outs I couldn't possibly judge its cost effectiveness.

I do actually like dual reg I think there is a place for it, but it is not suitable for every player, but piano no players to other super league clubs is just as good if not better, see Keinhorst, recently, Richie Mathews nick scruton all had good loan spelles in the past.

Interesting that last year some linked our league position to not having a reserve side compared to the league position of those who did. This year ourselves and Cas are top and the likes of Wire and Saints well off the pace.

Saw a couple of weeks ago that Wigan even cancelled one of their reserve fixtures due to lack of players with injuries biting the first team, which is an ever increasing issue for teams nowadays.

I remember Keinhorst making his debut for seniors and scoring...was still playing in U19s racking up an impressive tally in U19s. Yes did well on his loan spell but remember when he came back at short notice, might have been 2015 season due to injury after match he said it was difficult because of the adjustment n switching from different systems of playing...even though not score that match he gave a try assist. Mac said think in interview yesterday that DR was working well , he also was at pains to say the different systems used was /would not effect the players..that he knows the coaches is in touch..etc

Sorry not sure how to double quote..so this links onto Printer The post below.

I must admit I was one not on here as only recently found this forum, that felt a reserve team would have benefited our players. I still believe that is the case.

Yes we are joint top of the table at moment , we have been playing some exciting rugby of late whilst at the same time....though clog up of fixtures was part to blame, dropping of pace n making errors.. I still think best is yet to come.

For me though a reserve squad would benefit in particular for those whose form has dipped beyond what is expected of them.. Having a reserve team you are still keeping them within the rhinos fold...They have then an incentive to win their jersey back. Similarly someone in reserve team can get promoted. More intense competition for the jersey should increase the quality of the squad over all. Then allowing you also to rotate players in senior squad reducing injury. Mac said tonight one of mistakes he made last season was bringing players back to soon from injury as they then picked up another...that happened to Ablett last season..He said he learned but is Handley completely over his injury, Brett or Stevie ?


The other point whilst DR or loan can work.... not all players get game time..have seen a few times where Featherstone has not used a player who was on loan to them n they were not playing for us. They don't always walk straight into that team.

Saints might for the moment be off the pace but Wigan are 3rd....would also say they better than us at using there U19s in the senior squad, not afraid to give them a decent period learning from experienced players.

I think it could benefit if all SL clubs had a reserve team. Last season in the reserve comp there was several weeks between fixtures, this years still gaps between games and some of the opposition are lower level in Keighley, Halifax, Featherstone reserves. At the moment the current setup/lineup of the reserve comp I don't think we're missing out too much.

The standard of the A Team doesn't matter as much as the ability it gives to get and keep players fit and ideally playing in the same style as the first team. For younger players it gives them the chance to play against grown men in a lower pressure environment. The old A Team league used to be full of really ordinary reserve teams from the likes of Batley and Keighley - it was never a high standard. On the cost side I think part of the problem is wanting players to be full time. The old A Team used to have any number of players that played for a few quid but worked as well, and were seemingly quite happy to play at that level for years rather than go elsewhere.

welcome to the forum mate . yes, forgot about Ward but he is another a bit in the mould of Hood whom they didn't seem to see a future in at Leeds or trust with game time but i still believe they were right in that assessment at the time, and it has taken them plenty of time at lower clubs to get up to even standard SL level, time both would never have got at Leeds.

they are two good examples of the benefits of having an A team may produce. We may have been able to keep at least one hanging around for longer to develop here, indeed over the last 18 months there would have been ample opportunities open up in the first team for them to come through properly like they have now elsewhere.

This is how i see it. There are plenty of benefits in having an A team. A good stepping stone between juniors and first team.. there is a good chance you will be playing against some established SL players most weeks and like you say, it is a great way of getting players their fitness back or keep players fit who are not in the 17. Add to that, it gives the opportunity for players (particularly young half backs) to learn team patterns so when they are thrown in for a chance, it is not so alien to them, something they can never get playing in championship or league 1.

I don't think having a reserve team would be that beneficial. It would keep youngsters playing at a lower level for longer, and it would reduce the player pool of professional players available to championship clubs.
Most of the players playing in the competition will be academy players anyway, so assuming they'd be playing in both competition's that would mean you have a lot of players playing a couple of games a week, either that or you have another roster of players entirely, meaning you'd need around 51 players at the club as a whole. It just doesn't seem like value for money to me.
I think the best solution would to lift the age limit on the academy to 20 or 21, and allowing a couple of overage player spots that can be filled with players returning from injury.
The step up from academy is huge, but the best ones will always make it, and the players lack of all round skill will get exposed. The best recent example I can think of is Ryan Hampshire. At 16 to 19 he was being touted as a once in a generation player, even some Aussie clubs were interested in him, but blinding speed can only get you so far, especially in the pivotal positions.

I think your wrong on the reserves, and most in the game think the same way, people with a vested interest in players and game.

That said, I actually agree on your second point, and something I have often said. For me, the best solution is an under 16's and an under 21's. If they are not making it by 21, then to be frank, there not going to in the system they are in and should move on anyway.

Your also to be fair a bit off on Hamshire. His problem is not that he is not the player he was, it's that the modern game coaches, especially English ones, have very weird thinking with regards players and positions, and seem to always want to redesign the wheel. Hampshire may or may not have made it in his best position, but without the chance and time to show it, it is hard to put entirely at his door, and assume other players will be the same.

i partially agree scrap under 16's make academy under 18's and then under 21's and maybe allow 3 overage players, the players that are pushing 21 or just over but aren't quite first team regulars can be dual reg, but realistically that would maybe be around 4-5 players max that would give the players stepping up to under 21's a more gradual step up in class and mainly then playing against full grown men more, the better players can then use dual reg as another stepping stone before they can be tested in super league. it also by having those 4-5 players over 21 who may be late developer's specially forwards another year or two to develope. think that would cover all bases. there will always be those that slip the net, and those that promise much but just cant step up.

I used to like going to see the A team and years ago they would get regular crowds of 3000 or so which provided extra income for the club. Members got in free but spent over the bar etc and non members paid. For senior players returning from injury or out of form it was an acceptable way of proving fitness and a great way for youngsters to play alongside 1st teamers in club colours.

I would favour a compulsory return of A teams which together with an increase in funding would allow SL clubs to run larger squads which are now necessary IMO because of constant injuries in the modern game. It would also allow youngsters longer to develop more at their home club and with team mates.

used to go watch Cas reserves a fair bit(more local )and yes 2k plus crowds against Leeds were common and close to that most weeks again members were free and addition like £5.
the is and Rightly so nostalgia and fell good factor about the old A team league, alas the game has moved on but as most agree under 19 and dual reg is not filling that gap, and a tweek or two are required but i dont think we should wholesale go back to forced A teams.

i know people dig at Phil Clarke but he's take on the A team was spot on, he talked about how some players were good A team players but apart from the odd first team game were 5-6 years A team pro's and how he learned so much from his 2-3 years before being a regular first team player.

i also think the old A team was deceptive, i never would have thought JJb would have stepped up to super league watching him in the A team, on the other side Jason Netherton used to rip it up at that level but looked out of his depth at first team. Chris feather another one (but that's a slightly different story)