As you should be well aware not every player that pulls on a jersey for a club has come through an academy system at that club as several clubs don't run an academy. Martin Ridyard came from a Leigh amateur club a couple of years back but he still got the chance to play for Leigh without an academy to play in first. Going back a few years Wigan signed Phil Jones from Lancashire Lynx after he had played for their first team.Did they have an academy? Doubt it.

A community department can be as big or small as you can manage. Hence my saying however modest they start out at. If money is tight then volunteers can be used and that in itself would be a positive link with the community.

What you are reacting to Starbug is a statement given to the media so that fans can read it and get an idea of what is being considered and that they are aware that the process is progressing. It is not the draft proposal that is being given to the 21 clubs and as such will not contain all the fine details of each point (they will be in the draft proposal that the clubs see). We don't get, and won't get all the details as fans as we frankly don't need to see everything of a plan that is still under consultation.

But this is a press release for the fans , not the clubs , so what can be done ? , maybe using plain speakimg English instead of trying to sound cleverer than they really are , by talking bollox

What I am reacting to is the same load of absolute cobblers we see time and time again from Red hall , lots of ' ambiguous ' words meaning Zilch , these statements can mean virtually anything and nothing , yet more ' Emporers new clothes ' with the usual suspects all agreeing how nice they look

if you were expecting details from a statement saying "we are planning to make changes and are in consultation with the clubs and taking feedback from them" then your a ing idiot.

Its a consultation paper, it says its a consultation paper, it is part of the process to get to the details. You would have to be particularly stupid to not understand the obvious reasons the details would be limited in a press release about a consultation paper.

According to the article in League Express the clubs all get one third of the allocated funding unconditionally with the rest of the funding given if they meet RFL standards on community, player development and financial stability.

If that is the case then they would have to be running the club well to get the funding. They might recoup the costs later by obtaining the funding but they have to do the work first to get it. A club already running a community dept (like Leigh) could then use the funds released (effectively spare money) on other areas (such as running an academy) to further improve the club overall.

If on the other hand a club is happy to kick around at the bottom of Champ 1 running on a third of everyone else's funds and not running community departments or academies then that is their choice but they will not get the same cash as clubs that do run those areas.

So why didn't they say that in the Statement , all a lot clearer , see it wasn't hard at all was it

Did it mention a figure ?

Why would those be funded centrally? What have you heard or read that would give you that impression?

No. But that won't be mentioned anyway until it is set in stone. Level of funds being dependant on the new TV deal. The LE article did mention Championship clubs each getting more money than Champ 1 clubs under the new proposed structure.

Thats why I asked for the real meaning of this ?

reward the clubs who make the most positive contribution to Rugby League.

Cant be , it states ' Central ' funding doesn't it , thats not SKY money

and you translated that as "the RFL will centrally fund community departments" ?

That's just what it said in the LE article that the level of funding was dependant on the TV deal.