A lot of valid point have been made here, however the reason for scholarships/academies merging is to save on cost. The suggestion that if you have less players and only the very best talents are given this opportunity is pure spin. Surely the more players that are within the professional system, given the right coaching at the academies, then the more talented individuals will emerge. The important thing here is the right coaching by the right mentors.

One issue raised is that not enough players make the grade from scholarship to academy, then academy to full time. If a club take on more that half a dozen of its academy players each year it is a surprise. This is not because they are not talented enough as many do find themselves at other semi professional clubs, it is because there is nowhere for most players post 19 to go at their initial club. All clubs are full of overseas players, many of whom given the mere sniff of an NRL contract would be on the first plane back, or they do not run reserve grade teams where players can make the transition from boys to men.

Some clubs maintain that dual registration is the best way forward, this I find very hard to comprehend, the number of post 19's that have gone out on dual registration, then returned to their parent clubs and made the transition into first team rugby is very few and far between. In some instances playing for a community club is a higher standard than their dual registration partners.

In my view all SL clubs should be made to run a reserve team to prevent the talent drain, and the RFL should make this a viable competition with regular fixtures. I remember summer rugby being sold on the concept of the Australian model of watching under 19's, reserve then first team all on the same afternoon.

If you stop clubs going far and wide then you also limit parental choice. There's no easy solution but the way things are set up now means certain clubs have choice and other clubs have less. A draft system would provide a fair platform for all clubs- and better coaching and facilities to all youngsters.

A draft system doesn't provide a remotely fair platform. Why should the clubs who want to prioritise junior development be held back by those who don't? Is it fair to tell a kid from Wigan, who has grown up dreaming of playing for Wigan, that he has to go and play for Salford in front of crowds of 2000 because they had a bad season and they want him?

However, the idea that the only possible reason for the merging of academies is cost-saving is just not true. Looking at Cas and Wakefield for example:

They'll have 50 players combined at u19s level (ish)
The worst 25 players at u19s level definitely aren't going to play Super League
The worst players will take up a disproportionately large amount of coaching time because they have the most deficiencies
The worst players will disproportionately limit the standard of training by providing weak links in drills

By limiting the number of players to 25 between Cas and Wakey, you:
1) Increase the quality of training - less weak links, meaning the best players' skills are challenged more
2) Increase the ratio of coaches to players (unless they fire half of the coaches)
3) Increase the proportion of coaching time/resource spent on players with a viable chance of playing Super League
4) Improve the community game by not taking 25 players out of it solely to provide a team for the best players to play in

Hardly just a cost-cutting measure in reality.

Fax ran a reserve squad last season, and we have 4 of them who are stepping up to the 1st team next season. AFAIK we're running the reserves again next year, but our biggest problem was finding teams to play against. SL teams should be required to run a reserves team. The bizarre thing for us is that our DR club (Salford) are only running a 1st team next year...