Fielden burnt out because he was all-action and Nobby flogged him for 80 minutes every week. This doesn't prove anything.

With not many exceptions - Kopczak, Peacock, Hill (who was a regular for Leigh from a young age but obviously improved), most of the now-mature English props (Graham, Burgess, Morley, Carvell, Lynch, Bailey, Crabtree, Huby) were first-team regulars in SL before they were 21.

Sorry my mistake then. I'm on my phone and its harder to keep track of what I am saying when it takes 10 times longer to type

Young to me doesn't have an age on it. It's a rugby age. A player can be 21, and older than a player who's 23 for instance, because of his development and integration into the team. It just seems that you and Nantwich want kids in the 1st team for the sake of it. The current set of players we are using are better than what's behind them so I see no need to force it. It's not like he never gives youngsters a chance. 1st of all these kids have to hit a great standard at the level below. Then they can progress upwards. Stevie Ward did that and looks better than maybe 75% of the back rows out there at times. It's not an overnight process though. We have a young back line as it is. They are skilful but sometimes stability is needed, especially with a few out injured.

Exactly. I have no idea why people continue to trot out this line that props are not ready until late 20's.

Sure they get better as they develop, but that is different to to not ready.

It's not about how good they are when they were 21 though. Who on that list were world beaters at that age? and Morley was a back rower!! It's about progressive development over the space of a set amount of time, not saying lets play them week in/week out because they have potential. We have 3 stage development plan now. 19's, DR and SL. Let them perform at 19s, then let them make the step up to Championship, and then if they look too good for that level, begin to bring them into the team.

That suggestion is just backwards and where we do entirely differ. If clubs followed that blueprint, the game in this country would quickly fall on it's knees.

The best players, as proven many times over, have started at a young age. Why the hell would anyone hold back a player until he has firstly played under 19's, then dual registered Championship? What we want is as many full time professionals as possible, not part time provers.

Many, Many, players have been way above championship standard at 17, never mind 19.

You underestimate the championship level then. It's a very good stepping stone. You seem to think I'm saying, "hold them back until they are 30"! I'm not. I'm just saying make sure they can handle the levels below before you expose them to the "top" level. I want to see a competitive SL from 1-14 but the quantity and quality of players just aren't there. No one in the u19s or on DR looks ready to be playing every week just yet.

No disrespect mate, and it may well be you are right, but you are not really in a position to form that view with such authority.

Are you in a position to form the view that they are?


As far as I am aware it's up to a few guys with McDermott getting the final call. So far his judgement hasn't hurt the team at all.

I can not say I am, because I don't see them.

I do however still have contacts with a lot of respected scouts in the game, who have given me information on two or three of them. So no I would not make the sweeping statement that none of them are ready.





I will reserve judgement on hurting the team, as I am a big believer in plan for change. I don't believe McDermott has an idea of what that means.

Whilst it may not have hurt the team now, only time will tell on what effect the way he does things pans out.

To be fair to Mac he has brought through or made regulars of Ward,BJB,Watkins,Clarkson and Hardaker in his time in charge and we do have the best young three-quarter line-up in the league, which should serve us well for the years to come so to say he he has no idea of what change means is a bit wide of the mark.

Mcdermott is in his third season at the club now,its highly likely that he will be gone anyway by the time the sweeping changes have to be made in 3-4 seasons time as Sinfield,Burrow,McGuire etc.. hang up their boots.

Watkins and Clarkson were regulars before his time. Hardacker was a big money signing, and Ward could not be ignored.




That's the worry I have, and why I made the comment that you quoted.

They weren't regulars Gotcha. They had been gradually brought into the team over time. Also, Hardaker was a signing, but we loaned him straight back to Fev to help him develop before just throwing him straight in. Even after he came back from Fev, he didn't play every week. It was a gradual process of getting him integrated in.

Going back to your, "I have a mate at the club who's in the know" post, who does he/you think should be playing First Grade who isn't at the moment?

Hang on with that one. Where have I said that sort of childish comment?

You have missread there mate.