agree seems a long way off before we are going to be able to produce a backline capable of ever toppling the aussies

But running,catching,passing,and tackling would be far easy to improve and devolp with a bit of sun on your back than in rain,sleet and snow imo

And also make it more enjoyable for the kids are parents alike

Agree completely with the last bit. But how do we make it less forwards dominated? Are there any quick rule changes we can make to put more emphasis on creative attacking play?

I personally feel we should be using up our overseas quota spots and our salary cap money on world class backs rather than forwards. If they come over, not only will they make our game more appealing, but they'll show our youngsters how to attack and if they're playing in the team they'll be helping to coach the british kids.

This off season has seen some really world class players come over, so we can definitely attract the right quality. The players in the world class bracket though are mainly forwards. Players like Soliola, Eastwood, Fitzgibbon and Dallas Johnson are all quality. Out of the backs that SL clubs have signed how many would you rate as world class, or international level? It's just making it more important to focus on a strong pack to try and stop them though.

Are the rumours true about Andrew Johns coming over to help coach at Warrington in the off season? That's the kind of thing we need. Get the worlds best players in whatever position passing on their tips to our youngsters.

How about the RFL centrally hire top quality specialist coaches such as kicking coaches, sprint coaches, weights coaches etc and get them to work with England, underage representative teams and SL clubs to increase overall standards.

Australian clubs have coaches for everything and you can see the results. Many clubs in England dont employ specialist coaches, either because they cant afford to or see it as not being cost effective for someone that may only do a couple of sessions a week. Most make do with just an all round conditioner who may not even be that well qualified and doesnt have a clue when it comes to specific areas like sprinting. I know Super League players that have taken it upon themselves to go to athletics clubs to be taught how to run correctly to gain speed. This is pathetic for a full time professional sport. If the RFL employ people centrally it makes this more cost effective whilst increasing overall standards.

And therein lies the problem.

Couldn't agree more with a switch to summer rugby. At school it was union in the winter, cricket in the summer. If there'd been another form of rugby available through the summer months I (and a load more union schoolboys) would have biten my hand off to play.

Did you actually read my post before commenting? I never said fill our teams with overseas players. I don't mind if we only have 1 overseas spot available for the whole squad.

The point I made was, don't use the [iavailable[/i spots that we have, for forwards when we already have quality British forwards in the game. If we do decide to get an Aussie or Kiwi playing over here it should be a world class back, that will help to improve our young players in similar positions, by passing on their experience and any tips they have.

Do you seriously think that having no Australian or New Zealand players in our teams at all will improve our game? We need to play against the best players we can week in week out, and learn from the best as well.



This seems like a great idea. How would you run it though? Have like an "elite England squad" or something that meet up regularly, including the top talent from reserve squads and the schools reps?

Or do you mean the RFL hire coaches to work with clubs all the time? So they effectively pay their wages, or a proportion of their wages to help make sure all clubs have a similar coaching structure?

I hear what people back home are saying. But I think people should come here and see what clubs do before commenting. I can't help but notice that over there people have the misconception about how things are done over here.


One more thing to think about.

St Helens just had an U18s come over here and beat all bar one of their australian opponents.

WHY?

The RFL needs to keep more money from the TV deal and invest it in youth set ups. If clubs can pay ageing players $500k plus a year they clearly have too much money!

Did you actually watch what happened on Saturday night????

The reason why we lost on Saturday is because they have developed a back line to die for. Until the british game has more than 3 centres and wingers we will never compete. I cannot think of one british player who would get close to 1-5 of the aussies and thinking they will come over to develop our youth is deluded.

We have to do it ourselves and stop buying talent - how is Matt Orford comming over going to help us?

That however doesn't detract from my original; comment until we have players who can run, pass, catch amd tackle to a high standard for 80 minutes then we are wasting our time even contemplating bringing overe quality to develop our youth.

Hang on, how are we meant to develop these players then? You want them playing in a lower quality competition with less skilled players and you somehow think they're going to magically get better?

Players like Matt Orford will help our youngsters because they will train together. They will see what they do, how they act, how professional they are, etc. As well as these players offering advice to their team mates to help them develop. This is how we learn and get better. Self-teaching can only get you so far.

If you took out all the imports, we'd be even worse against the Aussies in a few years.
Fill us up with imports, and we'd have no team to play the Aussies.

There needs to be a fine balance, which we are beginning to achieve (as it's difficult to get around employment law). But as usual, people over react and go with the "everything or nothing" type argument, much like the "flatcap vs " type arguments. This isn't either/or. It's this much is too much and this little isn't enough and are they good enough?

Mainly because teams would lose players in the summer months for holidays and such and the fact they would have to have some sort of back to back season to adjust


I know kids upto the age of 11 play during the summer though

I can do all of those things to a good standard but I'll never play International Rugby as long as I've got a hole in my . It's not as easy as all being able to learn the basics. It's the whole sporting culture that needs to change.

edited for accuracy

I would've thought that a summer season would benifit the teams as they'll have more kids available who play (in particular) football in the winter.

What ever some posters say about kids choosing to play football because of the prospect of becoming a multi millionaire proffesional, if a kid gets experience playing two sports, he's likely to stick with whichever one he enjoys more, not the one which pays its proffessionals the most.

Well you could bring it in gradually from after age 11 then if back-to-back seasons were a problem. That way they would always be playing in summer.
Either that, or bring in a short season from August to November, then start the new season in March.

I don't think the holidays thing would be too much of an issue, unless they all go on holiday at once! It's not like kids don't have the odd reason not to play games in winter.

I think the main issues would probably be pitch maintenance (i.e. not playing on concrete-like pitches on really hot days) and adjusting to the heat so kids aren't getting heat exhaustion or sun burn.