can you define 'footballing reasons' for me?

I'd make it more simple than that on review. I would say 'without the consent of the coach'. Maybe Lineham & Connor didn't move with the consent of the coach, the rest the coach was happy to let go. Dwyer falls into both sides of this argument, as I assume when he was let go first time, the coach was happy, but I assume this time the coach would like to keep him.
I always find it stupid that a coach is having to make decisions based on finance when his team has no financial issues. Thats whats happening with most of these players. Prime example was Crosby, in which the statement read something along the lines of 'we wanted to keep him, warrington will pay him more, Bretherton and Navarette is a more cost effective solution than paying Crosby what he deserves'.

Isn't the additional £100k funding per club is earmarked for the clubs' Foundations for work in the community, rather than for an academy?

I'm relatively at ease with the Hull situation. Within a relatively smallish area it makes some sense to pool resources. The big issue would obviously come with deciding which team the players go to that make it through the system.

The Salford situation is a crime really. We can all make noises about how football comes first in this area but with that attitude the situation will never be improved.

thats the dilema! atm fc have a group of players ring fenced in the CoH academy, but in a couple of years it will be like a draft pick apparently, so if kr dont come back up straight away it could get interesting!

At the same time what's the point of Wigan and Leeds stockpiling 50 players ??? You have to let them go sooner or later.

It seems they get £100k for both.In the words of our Chairman

Isn't it a good job the same three clubs produce youth year on year so the rest of the sport doesn't have to.

We have finished top 5 the last 3 years and have been to a major final with a squad full of home grown players, difference is sky don't bang on about it every time we are on tv so ignorant doylems like yourself can live in a bubble and dismiss all but 3 clubs. Without youth development we have no club.

Oh dear! Maybe look down from those lofty heights every now and again pal

I do agree with this. Don't get me wrong, Wigan Saints and Leeds are brilliant at developing juniors. But sometimes if you listen to the media in general (not just sky) then you'd think ONLY those clubs bother developing juniors. A quarter of the England squad are from our own academy but we never get a mention in terms of junior development when we're one of the best now IMO

As with Cas we would be utterly screwed without junior development. 11 of our 28 players currently signed up are from our academy. We've some of the most exciting juniors in the game in the 19s which gives me hope for A return to SL one day. We aren't making it without them!

Those three clubs sign up 90 % of the best juniors , not surprising they produce 90% of the players

Now not sure if it's still the case but the RFL used to set limits on the numbers any particular club could sign ( to help spread the talent around and make the junior club competitions more competitive ) , but some clubs flaunted these rules

This might explain Salfords decision