I have been told that championship teams academies are moving the age group from under 20's to under 23's. IMO this is a great move as it allows players that are late bloomers such as 'chris hill' to sign pro still. He is just one of the many examples of players who are world class and have been found from lower league rugby at a later age. Also alex walmsley, signed very late by batley and then went to saints and became an impressive player. However super league are still operating at 19's and many are released and gone like that. I know a few this year who have been released by bulls who are quality players -some opting to never play again and some to championship where hopefully they will make i as pro. but many it seems - if you are released from 19s then that is it. Championship are doing it right and allowing players to fulfill their potential as well as being able to sign a new young era on with more talented players. I was told by an academy player that a lot of these championship academies will become stronger than a lot of super league ones as a result of this.

Super league need to raise the age limit they have for academies or risk losing quality players. Not just for the clubs themselves but for the international game. We need to keep developing players and not just stop. Also the more youth we can promote the more chance we have of producing world class players.Also the grassroots levels between competing rugby league clubs in england and amateur need to be stronger and they just arent. Not enough scouts there and this is something which australia does well as they do this.

A bit cruel on Salford when you consider that in the lead up to Marwan taking over the club, the entire club from top to bottom had already started to disband, with many 1st team players and younger ones already having either been sold off in previous months or told to find alternative clubs as the future was looking like certain oblivion...

By the time Marwan concluded the deal, Salford had missed the chance to enter academy for SL fixtures, so academy side was up against lesser opposition last term and even though our set up was slated by RFL, walked the competition and subsequent grand final..

As for going out and spending loads on players...what else were we to do from what was inherited by Marwan ffs

ABSOLUTELY SPOT ON.

Problem is with clubs like Leeds.

They are happy to use and abuse Hunslet as, effectively, their 'A' team. Hence Barry Eaton, wearing his Leeds Rhinos shirt, sitting next to Brian McDermott at Leeds' matches.

Use and abuse?
If it weren't for Leeds then Hunslet would've gone out of existence. Barry Eaton is paid by Leeds for his services and Hunslet benefit hugely from their relationship with Leeds including use of training facilities, use of Leeds backroom staff, and of course use of some of Leeds players.

How is improving another club bad for the game? It's better for Hunslet and it's better for Leeds players as they're playing at a much higher standard than an u23's or any other defined age group.

To be honest if I were a fan of a championship club I would hate the dual reg thing. It is beginnings of turning them into a feeder club rather than a club in their own right. There is a loan system if SL clubs want to send youngsters out for a season.

I can understand that view. But no-one forces a Championship club to use dual reg. And it certainly does not amount to using and abusing the Championship club who are there by choice. And certainly not in the case of Leeds & Hunslet.

As for dual reg v loan. The problem is that the loan system isn't flexible enough for SL clubs that have limited squads and high injuries. An SL club usually has a first team squad of 25 players. At times this season clubs have had 9/10/11 players out injured and players playing when they probably shouldn't. So have needed to go beyond that 25 man squad.

So do you put your best young players out on loan for the season? If you recall them from loan that's it done, you'd have to renegotiate another loan with the club or another one when you don't need them in your first team anymore or put them back in your u19's. Or you leave them at the loan club and play an inferior player from your u19's who probably isn't ready for it yet, not having played against adults much.

Neither is a good option. Recalling them, if it's only for a handful of games, hurts their development and hurts the loan club. Leaving them hurts your own club.

Basically I think we need a form of dual reg. We can't afford a full, open age reserves team. It's just too expensive, and I firmly believe the NRL system is their biggest advantage over us. Whether the DR is in exactly the form it's in now is debate able. I'm sure there's a way forward that can provide some certainty for the Championship club but also allows the SL club access to their players when they need them.
Maybe a guarantee where the SL club can only use the dual reg'd player a max number of times in the season or where they're definitely available to the Champ club for a minimum number of games?