Firstly it's not compulsory to join an academy, it's up to the academies themselves to scout for players and it's up to players to sign on with who they want to. Obviously it makes more sense for regional academies to concentrate on players in a catchment area given the age of the players and the availability of resources, but if a lad from Cumbria gets offered a slot in a "Cumbrian Academy" or the Wigan club academy it is up to him to decide where to go. If he goes through the "Cumbrian Academy" and ends up at Whitehaven and then Saints want to sign him then it's up to Saints to make an offer to Whitehaven. If Whitehaven want him to see out his contract then so be it, clubs need to work out for themselves what their best interests are.

What I would do is make it so that when a player signs on with an RFL run academy they agree to go into the draft process at the end, and if they are drafted they will sign a minimum two year contract. If they don't get drafted then they are a free agent, but if they do get drafted there has to be a minimum commitment on the table to make it worthwhile for the clubs. If a player joins an academy and walks away before the draft that's fine, this isn't indentured labour. Ideally the RFL needs an agreement from all clubs they won't sign a player who has walked away from the draft for at least two years afterwards, but if they really must then a fee is due from the club to the academy based on whether they were aligned to the missed draft and what tier they are in e.g. if a player walks away from the "Hull Academy" draft and signs for Castleford then £5k is due, but if they sign for Featherstone then only £2.5k is due, but if they sign for Doncaster it might be £0.5k due (my values purely for example purposes).

In terms of player earnings, the contract for drafted players can stipulate a minimum wage for the two year contract based on what division they go into, if a club ultimately doesn't want to pay that then they don't take the pick. Someone else can take it, or they can hope the player becomes a free agent and they then offer them whatever. I don't think there is a perfect world solution to all this; players might not end up where they ideally want to go, but this is a professional sport and there's not much lower terms. Alternatively, whilst there is a minimum two year commitment there's nothing to stop clubs offering their picks better terms for an extended commitment. point in becoming a professional sportsperson if you want to treat it like a hobby. It's not so different from any other employer who might agree to fund your training or education in return for a commitment to stay with the company for a certain period afterwards.

But that's not what the embedded pathway is about, it's about a clear pathway within the game at any age and at any point in the development of players, not "eliminating" them at 13 years old.
The system is changing and changing for the better IMO, I still has a long way to go, however, whilst we have an RFL running the game at tiers 1&2 and independent leagues and bodies governing the community game, we will have a fragmented system that is not fit for purpose.
There isn't a shortage of talent, there is a shortage of "correct" resource to develop that talent, there has been a big jump in participation numbers From u7-U10's since the introduction of the "sky try" programe with some fantastic success at certain clubs ((SL mainly) who have been targeted to develop these age groups or loose central funding.
It's not all doom and gloom, but it doesn't help when a club decides to scrap its academy and suddenly makes a plan to work with another club which in reality isn't in line with the RFL mandate.

When I did my Level 2 and my Embed the Pathway course they put a reasonable amount of emphasis on the difference between ability and maturity, and also first/fourth quartile babies which maybe helped a bit with counteracting this. There's a lot of support behind leagues being split by weight rather than age in Australia/NZ and I'd be curious to see the same over here. I remember reading a report that found those kids who were bigger at age 14-16 were less likely to make it as Super League players, presumably because they hadn't had to develop their skills as much as they were able to rely on being bigger than everyone.

Why would this temporary measure be necessary? I really can't take the idea that we are so efficient that we have absolutely exhausted the player pool seriously.

Absolutely.

But sadly not every coach does the Embed the Pathway course and fewer actually embrace the ethos of it properly, and even fewer are at clubs where they would be helped to do so, and yet fewer clubs are in league structures that help them to do so.

You're right on the stats about the young players and I know Leeds have been actively searching for quartile 4 players for this reason.

The Embed the Pathway scheme has given me a glimmer of hope because at least I know that the RFL recognise the issues. It just depends on how willing they are to confront the amateur leagues and force them to change. Right now they're sort of preaching to the converted, although that's not necessarily a bad thing to begin with.

The other side of the coin that is almost always missed by those who insist the amateur leagues are fine, is that the amateur setup has 2 purposes, not just 1. Yes they have to develop talent to push up the hierarchy, but their other equally important purpose is as a gateway to the sport for present/future supporters and sponsors. In this regard the amateur setup cannot be described as anything but a failure with only bright spots of mediocrity.

18 months ago, youth was the focus www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/ ... ---9239057

18 months ago, youth was the focus www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/ ... ---9239057