I couldn't disagree more!

Let em carry on clan. The argument that super league quality players will find their way to super league whether they are near a super league club or not kinda negates all the rhetoric we have to put up with to justify the shenanigans at crusaders and quins somewhat eh?

So by that standard are you saying we don't need Quins or the Crusaders as players will come through anyway?

While I understand the point of the last two posts , I do disagree , the better geographical spread of the game we have , the more chance we have of producing more RL players of a higher standard

But that does not say that the best 20 RL players of the next generation might not all be born within 20 miles of each other , and they could quite concievably all be from Wakefield and be first drawn to the game as Wakefield fans , and also they could be lost to the game as a result of Wakefields loss of SL status

There is no quantifyable way of being sure either way

Obviously not, you seem to have spectacularly missed a point that even Starbug was capable of understanding quite easily. If Quins and Crusaders didn't exist, the young players coming through at those clubs would instead by playing RU or some other sport, they almost certainly would not be playing RL. If Wakefield didn't exist, the likes of Ellis, Westwood and Mason would almost definitely still be playing RL, and would just have been signed by other clubs such as Cas or Leeds. Obviously that's not to say clubs like Wakefield should ignore youth development, but running off a list of players that have come through the ranks at Wakefield and pretending that they would otherwise not be playing is just desperate and stupid, especially when half the players listed by 'The Clan' can equally claim to be products of other clubs. The argument would be different if West Yorkshire wasn't such a crowded market.

Conversely, the desire for grass roots RL in the Wakefield area will wane, once the chance of playing at the highest level, for the club they have supported as a kid is denied.

Whereas, both in London & Wales, Rugby Union is King and all the best players will undoubtedly follow that path, both due to tradition & financial reward.

Therefore the best rugby players in the expansion areas will have been cherry picked by the Union mob & the remainder will drift into R.L.

That’s not the case in Yorkshire, where the only aspiration in Union is to play for the yo-yo Leeds outfit.

Pity you weren't on the widnes site, we could have done with a few decent fans!

The same argument would be equally as valid for any RL club, anywhere. It's nothing special to Wakefield and in fact fits less with a club like Wakefield which already has a very saturated RL market with 2 SL clubs and 3 Championship club in the district, another 3 SL clubs and 3 lower leagues clubs in the county. What is missed by Wakefield is more likely to be picked up and interest kept up by the 10 other pro or semi-pro RL clubs based around them, than Quins or Crusaders, where players/interest missed by these clubs are by and large lost to the game.


You would be surprised at the huge amount of RU professionals who come from RL heartlands, Mike Tindall, Chris Ashton, Toby Flood, Mark Cueto and Ben Foden, Jonny Wilkinson, Danny Care and Charlie Hodgson all from Yorkshire, Lancashire, Cheshire and Cumbria.

Similarly RL players can come from areas outside of the heartlands, but the structure needs to be there. RU needs Sale, Leeds, Newcastle like RL needs Quins and Crusaders.

Hang on a minute , if your going to use part of my post , use all of it , it is quite conceivable that there are and will be many youngsters attracted to RL because of Wakefield who have and will go on to become top players , so yes having a larger geographical spread is desirable , but it in itself doesn't mean that those areas will produce top RL talent , the argument isn't conclusive either way and cannot be proven either way

The argument is self evident, those areas which play RL will produce more RL players than those areas which dont play RL. If we are to increase the amount of players we produce (only one half of the issue, but a larger crop is likely to result in a better cream) then we need to increase the areas which play RL.

The only way to do that is by having a larger geographical spread.


Theres a certain contradiction in your argument that accepts that having a club in an area surrounded by other RL clubs attracts fans and players to the game, but then also states having a club in an area not surrounded by other RL clubs isnt necessarily going to attract fans and players to the game, it just doesnt make sense

that's the biggest load of bo**ocks I've seen outside of a starbug post.

It's not though is it? It's nowhere near. Its not telling the whole truth but it's grounded in reality.

I appreciate the plethora of clubs in the District, however, for young kids who get into the game watching there hero’s, followed by joining junior clubs, and going on to having trials for the club they’ve supported is a real buzz.

Whilst living in an age where money talks, the bond between young players & the R.L club they’ve supported via Parents, Grandparents and peers is a strong bond, many would rather walk away than play for a rival club.






The names of players playing International R.L from outside the heartlands hardly roll off the tongue.

Structures need money, back to the old chestnut, who pays?

No there isn't , you , me , anybody cannot prove that the quality of the top level players will increase by geographical expansion , more players yes , but better quality no , quite often in many sports the close neighbouring of clubs produces the best players , as the standard that those players have to perform at at junior level drives up the quality and the performance level

In the same way that having ' super ' junior clubs associated with pro clubs can be detrimental to improving players at a young age , if you put all the best juniors in one team , they don't have to improve to be the best , split those players between half a dozen local clubs , and those players will have to work harder to be the best

Local rivalry works better than anything else to produce better players

No the principle he suggests is correct , the best way to improve the quality of junior players is local rivalry

And a senior club dropping down a division some how prevents local rivalry?

Thank you for your eloquently thought out reply, I was under the impression that by-passing the swear filter was against Forum rules, oh, I forgot, you’re a higher intelligence, being a moderator and all.

No it doesn't , but it could conceivably reduce the interest in the sport in an area that is more likely to produce better quality players because of local rivalry , it could also lead to more juniors becoming interested in other sports in that area ,

It is what it is , nobody can prove anything either way

Thats very very transient though. If Wakefield go, and dont come back, within 10 years you will have a generation of young players, ready to get signed up to pro clubs, having played for amateur clubs who will have never known Wakefield as a top flight club. Within 5 years you will have a generation of young players at the stage ready to start playing amateur rugby who will have never known Wakefield as a top flight side.

These kids will still have heroes, they will just play for Leeds, Cas or Bradford than for WTW




Griffin, LMS, Clubb, not a massive list ill admit, and for a long time London RL didnt focus on London players but that has changed over the last ten years or so, and we already have two london, born, bread and trained RL players, and we have the likes of Alex Abbott-Tavener, Joe Keyes, Harry Lightfoot Brown, Olsi Krasniqi who are/have represented England at youth level. We have only one club in England outside the heartlands in SL, its no surprise there arent too many players from outside the heartlands, there's very little chance of them coming through, but that one club we do have has been very successful in that respect, and if we can replicate the success of their youth development in 3/4/5 other areas of the country the game will be a very healthy state

But you've just said it does, make your mind up.

And if you are trying to say that there are less players coming through in Leigh because you are not getting battered week in week out in the super league you are a bigger fool than i thought you were.

So your argument is that if we pick players from a wider pool of athletes, they are likely to be worse than the players we pick from a narrower pool of athletes. Its an interesting theory. Self-evidently nonsense, but interesting none the less.


I agree, if we have more, better athletes playing against each other then that will drive up performance. Strange then you would argue the opposite above. Im not sure the distance between them makes any difference.



Or if you have more of these young players they can play together in these 'super' clubs, and play against other 'super' clubs so that they are still having to work harder, but they are also working at a higher level. So these kids arent playing against a club with 3 good players, or 5 good players, they are playing against 17 good players, with 17 good players on their side. So they are playing at a higher level, working harder, with more intensity and being better players for it.
No, having good athletes, good coaches, good facilities, and a well thought out player development pathway is what you need. The distance between clubs on a tiny island like this one makes a barely noticeable difference

Who mentioned Leigh ?

A question

Which areas produce the best players ? , those that have lots of clubs both pro and junior , the more top pro clubs the bigger the interest in playing , therefore the more concentrated is the competition and rivalry between those clubs and the juniors playing for them

So yes eventually you might get players of better quality coming through in expansion areas , but in the short term they will only come from heartland areas

Those with the best junior coaches and facilities where talent can be spotted and nurtured.

What a strange strange strange conclusion. It takes a special type of bias for you to see the reason for heartland sides produce lots of players as because of the distance between clubs rather than the fact there is simply more amateur players, amateur teams and amateur coaches and the positive cycle that creates.

I honestly dont know how somebody thought the reason Wigan produce lots of players isnt because of the popularity of the game in Wigan, the amount of players in Wigan and the fact RL has the best pick of athletes in that area but because its a couple of miles from Leigh. Leeds dont produce a lot of players because of the masses of players who play in leeds, its huge catchment area and the money they put in to scouting and coaching youngsters, but because it is a few miles from Bradford, it is absolute madness

Well that screws SL dosn't it.

It's even more depressing when championship 1 clubs desire to have overseas players

Any more 30 year old past it crocked overseas players to sign for next year anyone?

Your comment is true in Australia only.

Elsewhere it is understood to be the joke it is.

Of course they HAVE been improving the game in this country since 1982 and continue to do so in the minds of those whose understanding of RL in this country is limited to my club, etc.

But GB/England or whatever are STILL no nearer beating the Aussies and Kiwis.

My sympathies are still with the 1000's of volunteers who spend their time and effort in trying to push aside the tide of apathy the pro game has for the amateur game and the lip service it provides even though there are people at Red Hall who try.

But , if I understand right, on Tuesday 26th July 2011 the future of the game is going to be announced as secure by the clubs who the RFL "independent"



panel deem have the shiniest, tidiest bog seats and can pass pretty pieces of paper about.

The excitement for a considerable number of people is underwhelming.