I was at a Community Club event at Odsal the other week and was talking to a man, I think his name was Jamie or Jason, who is the academy director.

Thanks to the budget cuts from the RFL, to run a full Academy set up (and Reserves now), costs us around £200k, which leaves us a massive challenge to then invest and compete with the likes of Leigh and Fev.

So my question to you all… is… in order to be more successful on the pitch would you bin off the Academy and spend that money on better players/ full time even though there’s no guarantee it’ll work?

Keep for me. I understand the temptation in that we probably won't see those developed players at their peak, and we could buy a few more top first team players. But big names don't always mean good performances.

Long term if we scrapped it, we'd lose all those links and relationships we have with the community clubs. Would take years to get those back.


Also our current better players (Doyle, Scurr) and previous better players (Ryan, Pickersgill) were all home grown. Underneath that we've got the likes of Lewis Camden, George Flanagan jr who could make an impact.

200k isn't going to dent our biggest problem so may as well retain...

Until one of us wins big on the EuroMillions a fills the dump in that problem will stay with us.

This, plus the point above about maintaining relationships with our community clubs. We should keep it. One day I hope we have the money to take full advantage.

In a way this question is framed the wrong way around

Why are Featherstone and Leigh NOT required to spend £200K running an Academy rather than being able to buy in players from the NRL, thus creating an uneven playing field?

I think Beaumont at Leigh is not really interested in the bigger picture. He is willing to spend the big bucks but wants almost instant success and a place back in SL.

To be honest I thought Beaumont had applied to run an academy but was refused?

Probably because the RFL told them, and others, that they weren't allowed to run an Academy....

You are totally wrong there , Derek said a couple of years ago he wanted to invest in an Academy side , but was turned down by the RL , folk keep talking as if he’s a fickle fly by night , but he is a very Loyal man and we are lucky to have him in charge , and he’s been in charge nearly 10 years now , and has stated he will be at Leigh for a while yet .

Very true mate , Derek was told Leigh wouldn’t be allowed to run an Academy side , so he puts his heart and soul into having a decent squad .

The RFL don't want academies being run by anyone other than SL clubs if they're in existing RL heartlands. Hence our troubles earlier this season.

I guess the benefits of having an academy depend on how well it's run. Is our still as well run as it was when John Bastian was in charge?

The dilemma is that the better the academy performs, producing quality players the less the club benefits as they move on.

If £200k is the figure then what is that as a proportion of the budget and what does a top end Championship player earn? Would there be a small group of players earning £40k, with an even smaller group at full time clubs earning what Leulia and Asiata are getting? On the basis of these total guesses, do we get 4 or 5 top end championship players benefit? If Leigh/Fev are touching a million we must be nearer 600k so that is a huge chunk. Worth it?

I'd say No. If anything the benefit goes to other clubs who we're competing with for a place in SL. The club never made a song and dance about the academy until McNamara when it became a distraction from what was happening on the field.

Yes, I did not apportion blame for the non-level playing field. I was aware that Leigh had been knocked back in their attempt and I believe that Featherstone also made noises about wanting to run Reserves.

No, the problem is with the structure of the game. And the blame rests with the RFL and SL.

The Bulls are required to run an Academy whether they want to or not, yet Leigh are not allowed to run one even though they want to.

Is that fair? Does it even make sense? All it does is create a playing field that benefits Leigh and Featherstone - it's not necessarily their fault, and as Charlie Caroli says, Beaumont is only playing the hand he has been dealt.

Apparently they've now decided that SL must run Academy's, even though Salford never have. It will interesting to see what happens next year when Leigh or Fev get promoted. Will they be required to run an Academy? If so, they'll hardly have got it up and running before being relegated the next year and - presumably - having to close it down

The game is being run by clowns!

Seeing as the club fought so hard to retain its academy how can it be a requirement? Does academy receive some kind of funding if a player goes on to play super league?Is not much of the cost offset by compensation,Storton/Milne's 100k,Wilson 100k+, Butterworth 35k,Scurr to come? You also get a year or two 1st team seasons out of the good young players for absolute peanuts.

I get the argument about us missing out on signing proven players and us producing players for other clubs but you have to balance that against the players we keep and the money their transfers bring in. I also believe it's better for the game for clubs to run academies. The more opportunities for players the better. Although that's all very well provided you can afford it.