Everyones blaming the RFL when really its the 2/3rds of the SL clubs who couldnt afford to keep the under 21 's so this is the result of this, its the teams like Leeds and Warrington who were teams that wanted to keep the under21's, are exploting the rules now just because they can.
The silly Championship chairman of the clubs thats have agreed to partner with SL clubs are really just putting a nail in the coffin of what was a good competitive league, which last year had some great closely contested ,matches, now its become a farce and will result in driving the crowds away. If anyone thinks these fans will watch the SL teams instead they are deluded.
Surely the RFL should give step in and sort the mess out and bring in something in salary cap that would allow the SL clubs not to spend all their money on the first team but save some to invest in the futureof our game, ie the young players coming through.

Meeting at Red Hall with SL chairmen and Nigel Wood,

"Nigel, we need to increase attendances at SL matches, any ideas?"

"How about attracting people who already fans?"

"Good idea, but where are these people?"

"At championship clubs. We totally devalue their league and they stop going to watch and come to SL matches instead! Dual Registration system anyon?"

"Wow Nigel. Genius. Almost as good as everything you did when at Halifax. You'll never beat that fantastic Bluesox nickname. You certainly deserve that post and salary Nigel"

Like most things there is opportunity here, but some people are letting their personal issues blind them and their parochialism lead them.

If you step back and look at the situation, there are plenty of positives in this arrangement, for SL clubs and for the lower league clubs. But as usual certain parties are only focusing on the negatives and howling in the wind about how everything should be wrecked and started again. That shouldn’t happen.

In isolation, I don’t think it is a particularly bad thing for, even mature players, playing in the championship to regain form/fitness. I don’t think it is a bad thing, in fact I think it is a pretty good thing that young players who aren’t quite at SL level are playing at a slightly lower level. It is what should happen.

the question seems to be over the independence of the clubs, with them being seen by some as less than even a junior partner and more a reserve side for SL clubs. So the issue isn’t that better young players are playing in the Championships because that is undeniably a good thing, nor is it established players regaining form and fitness in the championships, again this is how it should work. The issue is how we get the championships to function as a development pool for Super League, where young players have a clear pathway of which the lower leagues are an important and integral part, where more established players can regain form and fitness which brings up the playing standards, but where the competition is worthwhile in its own right and where clubs retain their character and independence but are seen as part of a cog in the machine, not as a reserve or youth side. Those are the issues to address and the solution to find.

Whilst having a pop at Nigel Wood may be fun, and there are plenty of fat jokes to go around, im sure some of them are even funny, and whilst the woe is me crowd seem so blinded to opportunity by their negativity that if they fell in a barrel of boobs they would come up sucking their own thumb, there is a real opportunity here for the championship clubs to reinvent themselves and set in their place and importance to the wider game. Perhaps even get the opposite of what they are fearing and rather than see this as an attempt to steal fans from the lower leagues to SL but an opportunity to get SL fans watching some lower league rugby.

Opportunity for who. The only blind person here is you Smokey. Wire and Leeds have stuck two fingers up to the system. They are now also stuck as to how they get their quota players match fit as the UKBA have quite rightly stepped in to put a stop to players breaching their vias conditions. Nigel (£300k) Wood thought he could get away with it. In fact I reckon this problem was only thought about in the last couple of weeks. Tony Smith alluded to it a few days ago, and the UKBA have for the time being anyway put a spoke in the wheels of greed. Pay the players less boys and you could afford to develop your youth and our game.

Well Bradford have now had clearance from UKBA for Adrian Purtell to play for Dewsbury, so I wouldn't expect any further problems for other clubs/players.

Opportunity for everyone.

Why does every dealing the clubs have to be confrontational? Why is it Leeds and Wire sticking two fingers up at the system and not simply using an imperfect system to get the best results they can? When you strip away the identity issue (Which I agree needs to be addressed) and the petty parochialism (which is, as it should ignored) then it is a good thing that this quality of player is playing in the lower leagues. It is better for them to have a better quality of player.

The UKBA were aware of the situation, they had been informed and are making a more permanent change to address that issue, and have infact already made allowances.

And it isn’t all about greed, look at what Leeds and Hunslet are doing, look at what they are doing in the schools around leeds and GH and BMs plans for amateur and schools coaching. It is absolutely outstanding. Leeds are a club which makes profits and turns over £13m, the roughly 10% of that they spend on wages doesn’t stop them investing in youth development.

Remove your victim mentality, ignore your parochialism, they aren’t out to get you, stop being bitter, there are many many benefits to this system, that a pathway from amateur, through lower leagues, to SL isn’t an attack on the lower leagues, it is the ideal, it is the best situation for amateur, lower league and SL clubs.

There is an issue with identity, I think everyone accepts that. I don’t think anyone sees a long term future with the championships as a reserve side or youth side. But when we solve that issue of how we stop championship clubs being identified as reserve sides or youth sides then we have a good structure for the game. My view that you are blinded by petty parochialism is based on the fact that rather than look for solutions to that issue, rather than look for a way to promote the character and identities of clubs under this or a similar system, you just complain that it is happening in the first place. Having the best youngsters, and mature players returning to form/fitness playing for lower league teams is a good thing for everyone involved.

Isn't that under the regular loan system (i.e. minimum 1 month) rather than dual registration?

Smokey,

I have a sow's ear and would like a purse.

Over to you

(although I do agree about youth development but maybe over an extended load period?)

SL1 = 8 teams. Top team straight to GF, 2nd & rd teams GF eliminator

SL2 = 12 or 14 teams

Give the championships their niche as something closer to college gridiron than a second division ala football.

Take away youth development from SL clubs completely, why are we aligning players with clubs at 15, shuffling them out again at 18/19 and bringing them in again at 20/21. Doesn’t seem to make much sense to me.

My preference, which I stated before The RFL takes control of all youth development up to the age of 17(end of season when they turn 17),

At 18 players join a championship or championship 1 club, who run a 1st team and a reserve team.

At the end of the season in which they turn 19, they can declare themselves eligible for an SL draft.

Players then join SL clubs, but stay affiliated to their championship/championship 1 club.

Take Zak Hardaker as an example, he goes through the RFL youth development, signs for Featherstone, Fev bring him through

He goes to Leeds at 19, When he plays for England he is listed as Zak Hardaker Leeds Rhinos/Featherstone Rovers. Fev are given a bonus for him becoming an international.

Should Hardaker be dual registered, he can only be dual registered to Fev.

I think that this would work out for everyone. The RFL can take a more rounded approach at the youngest levels, where basic skills are more important than victories. They can spread around the very best coaches to work with the kids that would be far too expensive for one club to afford. I.e pay £60k to Darren Lockyer and get him working with all the best half backs and fullbacks in the country between the ages of 13 and 17 for 6 months.

Lower league clubs have a clear and defined place within the RL structure, they have a competition to win and a better level of player playing for them. They would also act as a feeder league for SL but be completely independent of SL clubs. They can take DR players but those will be DR players with a personal link to that club and a history and affiliation completely separate to the SL club. It would also make it easier for the game to achieve its ‘strategic aims’ with regards to club location. It would mean an expansion club would simply need to concentrate on making itself a viable business, marketing itself, building links with the local community etc, and they are guaranteed a steady stream of good quality, credible players from the outset. I also think it would build great interest in the game at lower league level. People would talk about it, they would look it at, they would watch it. Can you imagine how much publicity someone like Tomkins would have built in the lower leagues. I can perfectly imagine a player like Stevie Ward being an attraction to fans of SL clubs this year having had a year in the championships already, probably playing most games, and standing out this year. SL fans would want to go to hunslet to watch him, or their local team when hunslet played them. To see who their team maybe getting next year. It removes this competition we seem to have between some clubs who are on massively different levels.

For SL clubs, they get a steady stream of distributed talent and they don’t really need to do much for it.

The elite competition reflects the number of teams a country can sustain. The standard of the games would be better, more intense and more productive in producing international players which allows the RFL to market the game based on international competition which as the RFU show is the most financially productive revenue stream and one currently non existent to RL. Odd that the RFL are desparate to market the game using the World Cup, cannot figure out why Less games for the elite, more rep/international fixtures ? and/or better results internationally? More academy teams / set up based on development rather than the financial capabilities of club who are not capable of being elite.

8 + 12/14 = more teams than the current SL competition and allows the 12 / 14 clubs to develop without overstretching themselves financially. Some clubs currently in the championship would benefit greatly.

If necessary, bring back a mid season cup competition, air on the BBC / ITV, bring back relegation / promotion. A more gradual extended climb to the elite eliminates (hopefully) too artificial promotion of development areas only for the clubs to go belly up.

What would you do Bear?

Yes 8 + 12/14 does = more than 14.

However 8 doesn’t. Your re-named championship doesn’t really achieve much.

You are still ignoring that less games = less income.