This constant “they’re lost to the game” line is the real b*llocks. I’d love to know how many players people think stop playing altogether if they don’t make it at their original SL club, don’t think it’s anywhere near the number people like to think.

You say they’re shipped out to a Featherstone or Bradford dismissively but what’s wrong with players going to these clubs with an increased chance of first team rugby and every opportunity to work their way to a SL club someday.....Hill, Gale, Walmsley have all starred lower down and ended up in SL and the national team.

Leeds have this off season seen a couple of lads move to Featherstone, if they’ve got the potential to be stars with a few more years under them then what’s the problem, surely helps the Championship to have talented youngsters playing in it? Or is it all about SL and some clubs wanting to stockpile their youngsters for themselves for fear of letting one slip through their fingers. Like mentioned previously Leeds have seen the likes of Gale, Mulhern and Foster leave and go onto to do well ELSEWHERE, that’s something Leeds aren’t afraid to do, the other clubs self interests stops them prepared to do the same. One of those young lads who have made the move to Featherstone may well end up starting for one of our rivals in years to come but that’s only because we’re prepared to let them go and develop elsewhere without fear of potential backlash later down the line.

I'm sorry, but what part of it is ? Leeds' record on youth development stands up against any else in the league.

"Spouting " is going to the press and shouting "[url=http://www.totalrl.com/hull-and-wakefield-criticise-super-league-clubs-approach-to-reserves/you shouldn't be allowed to do things unless you agree with me[/url"

Its only the same as Printer saying its utter B****cks to say players are lost to the game. Ateotd if no one can produce any sort of evidence to back up either claim then its all just speculation based on anecdotal evidence at best.

Agree, but this "players are lost to the game" line gets trotted out as it if were gospel, and the only evidence that people can offer to support it is a comment from Jamie Peacock that was made in the context of the structures that he grew up in at the time.

Do people honestly believe that there are people working in call centres or factories across the north who can say "I would have been an England international if only Leeds had a reserve team"?

For a club chairman to start dictating that clubs "shouldn't be able to do something" based on nothing more than them not agreeing with him on how to address a very nuanced issue is, in my view "spouting rubbish".

Wouldn't the players benefit more staying in a FT environment with better coaches and better facilities, than moving to Featherstone? Presuming the reserve league provided them with a stern enough challenge game wise?

For some, they may prefer to leave the protection of the nest and move to a Championship club - move out of their comfort zone, that options remains open to them.

I believe Warrington are pushing for Academy to be changed from U19 to U18, with 19y/o's moving in to the reserve's.

i live in the Wakefield met, and they have decimated the surrounding towns and asset striped all local facilities, so i no al about Wakefield council, but if Wakefield 20 years ago had self financed there new ground or stadium development, like Leeds, it would be done now, but instead wakefield fans cry about Leeds not running a reserve team, like thats the biggest woes of the game.

like luke Briscoe, not good enough for super league to old for academy, went to fev for 2 years layered well learned is trade now back in super league with a 3 year deal, if it was not for dual reg, he would have been languishing in reserves then drifted out of the game.
for the record i have always been a fan of reserve grade specially the under 23 model, but if a player cannot get a start in league one or championship at 20-23 years old and is only playing reserves, then he will probably never going to make it as a pro player and certainly not a super league player.

And a shiny new ground is? Yes, it'd be nice but as someone has previously commented; Wakefield receive financial penalties for playing out of Belle Vue.

Weirdly I didn't see our ground have any impact on where we finished in the league last year.

8th - Catalans
9th - Leeds
10th - Hull KR
11th - Salford
12th - Widnes

(Include Huddersfield and Hull FC if you count the qualifiers)

All listed IMO have better grounds than us yet all finished lower in the league table, I'd say our academy and reserve teams have had much more to do with that than our ground did.

maybe because its the Wakefield chairman spouting about clubs signing marque players and not running an A team, just because Wakefield cannot afford to spend marque money, then using it as a politic tool to bang there own drum. Wakefield criticizing a Club like Leeds is like Saudi Arabia criticizing Britains number of food banks.
and maybe your posts get removed as you often resort to name calling, abuse, attempts at bullying all masked as "banter" and "a bit of fun", rather than coming back with sensible debate or constructive counter points.
for the record i am in favor of reserves but can see the counter argument and understand why some clubs prefer to blood there fringe players in championship.

I'm not getting into the middle of the whole issue, but on the 'players lost' issue, i was at a meeting earlier this year at warrington with karl fitzpatrick, iirc he did say in terms of reserves/academy players being too old, we had found a lot of these players didn't cascade down the leagues, but packed in playing altogether, not even going back to their community clubs to play open age. Therefore the circle of life wasn't being replenished.

I do wonder if thats the same around SL? in the majority?

whoppey doo, so you finished above Leeds one season The then reigning champs and you have one what, as for your academy and reserves, most of your side is made up of players come through the ranks at other bigger clubs, but there is no need for this to be p***ing contest, as my club is considerately bigger better more successful has a better ground more fans more money better player development pathways than yours. but hey its a club and as it does not run an A team.
the A team debate may be a wider issue than needs relooking at but for wakefield chairman to go public and slate clubs for trying to and succeeding in signing world class talent is poor form, and stinks of teddy out the pram stuff, its may be disappointing, but maybe talk to the chairman opposed to it and look at there reasons and look at what can be done to make them reconsider. maybe Leeds would consider sending 3-4 players to play for wakefields reserves that cannot get game time at Fev or super league but too good for academy.