Who in there right mind would pay £20 a week to watch their super league team, and another £15 to watch their academy play in the championship?

It simply would not happen. Sure the championship sides would still have the fans attending, as that is their only league games. But the under 20 sides will not be well supported thus make a mockery of the crowds anyway.

To add to this, the RFL are trying to raise crowds in super league, not reduce them. What if fan "A" did decide to attend this championship game if it's at home and the first team are away from home. All that does is reduce the super league crowds.

It's a great idea in an ideal world without financial commitments and travelling. But in reality it is just another fantasy idea.

Surely how much they charge to watch their home Under 20 games would be for the SL club to set?

There's no split of income between home and away teams like there is for cup games, so there would be nothing to stop SL sides playing their Under 20 games with free admission of they wanted to.

So what about championship sides home games?

If crowds are not deemed good enough now, surely you don't seriously believe that more fans would attend a Halifax versus Bradford academy team, than what would attend a Halifax versus Dewsbury game for example?

That same Bradford academy team is not going to have fans going over there to pay £15 when they are forking out another £20 for their teams super league game that weekend.

What you bringing the Championship into it for? I was talking about Championship 1 where the crowds can't really get much worse anyway. The average attendance yesterday was 423! The travelling aspect may well be an argument, it would all be in the pricing, but I'm pretty confident that having Wigan, St Helens, Warrington, Leeds (even with Under 20s sides) would significantly boost that average of 423 because the standard of rugby would improve!

I see your points regarding attendances and a better standard of rugby, but I just don't think it could work.

I think a better option would be to put the u20 sides/uni teams into the Northern Rail competition, I think to put them into Championship 1 would be a mistake.

Also, I think that maybe the Challenge Cup could be reformed. Possibly putting the u20s sides in the opening rounds, then in the second round add the lower leagues, then add the Championship teams then the SL teams. However, even though it is highly unlikely, it could potentially lead to say Saints v Saints u20s or Wigan v Wigan u20s.

It's just a thought though.

I quite like the Northern Rail Cup idea though, it's another idea I've suggested before. It would give the Super League kids a real goal to test themselves against not only Championship 1 but Championship sides as well and I reckon it would be very well supported.

Somebody correct me if I am wrong, but I think at one point in the 80's Rovers and FC had suggested putting their youth/reserve teams into the lower league. But I think the suggestion was to form a completely new team in a developmental area (Goole, I think).

Could doing something like this possibly help the RFL get the extra teams it needs for it's restructuring aims? Could Harlequins under 20's link up with Hemel should they wish to join the league and help them with coaching, players etc? I am not saying this is the answer, but it could possibly work. If something like this did happen, I would think that the u20 league would need to be abolished, but I would hope that it would be a requirement for the Super League team to give funding to the venture rather than looking at it as a cost cutting exercise.

I agree, that would be a better idea. Paying to watch in a competitive cup match, would be far more likely to happen than paying to watch them in a run of the mill league match and your own super league team also.

Why do fans seem to have this compulsion to fix what they perceive as being wrong with parts of the game , nothing to do with themselves , like constantly suggesting the Cumbrian clubs merge , when they are 40 odd miles apart , and having kids playing against team 2 divisions below them

Nut jobs the lot of you

Lets think outside the box, why not get rid of the under 20,s? Let super league clubs have only 25/30 man squads. That would leave the production of young players to the amatures (where I belive most is done anyway) the progression to the top should go through the semi pro clubs. The semi pro clubs make money from transfers into super League clubs & also provide a worth while competition for us fans. The long term aim is to add more teams to superleague on the American NFL model. The only problem I envisage is getting the right type of coaching to the youg kids but that is where the RFL should play its part.

As your idea is similar to the much ( on here ) praised richest sport in the world , your post will be ignored , in theory a brilliant idea , but totally unworkable

Will you lot just bloody leave the Championships and Northern Rail alone please!!

The only idea I could see working on here would be for the Under 20's to join in a cup competition, but I'd want that as a separate competition (Regal Trophy anyone?) rather than replacing the Northern Rail.

No, no ,no ,no Matt , they all want to ' fix ' us , because let's face it SL is perfik , innit

Is that the one York stuck 130 points past ? , obviously up to the required standard then

Which one did York beat?