I'm not saying we are doing it, but, that we should be doing it, or at least trying to do it as it's more sustainable in the long run. Someone mentioned barcelona fgreshening up tyeir squad regularly butr the also have a high proportion of players trained 'in house'? They didn't buy Messi for £100m from a Bayern Munich.

Messi didn't grow up in the suburbs of Barcelona did he, they shipped him over as a teenager from the other side of the world.

It would be great if we could have scouts out in Queensland picking up the next Greg Inglis for our academy but it wouldn't be allowed (nor would he get a work permit).

Surely what we need to do is to develop as many top class juniors as we can. Then where we have gaps, we buy in the best talent we can find, regardless of who they are, or where from.

If we don't have sufficient quality coming through, then we buy in a team. I think it's as brutally logical as that, because we can not 'afford' to be less than a top 4 side.

We are at a disadvantage to both Wigan and Leeds, as the former can attract quality youngsters from their locale, whilst Wigan have a fantastic bedrock of schools and clubs to draw youngsters from. So we will inevitably need to get the check book out from time to time.

I accept your argument and of course knew that Messi wasn't a local lad, it's within the rules of their game and we must operate within the rules of ours when scouting.

My proposition is that we need to be aiming for promoting from within as a first alternative rather than a last resort and that the chequebook isn't the only answer particularly given the state of RL generally and certainly care should be taken when paying out for 'the finished article'

I should also add that when I say develop our own juniors, there are only 7 of our U19's that have come from local clubs and schools. The rest are drawn from the 'four corners'; Kells, Orrell, Hunslet, Golbourne, Telford etc etc. I don't see that as an issue.

Golborne isn't exactly a million miles away though

Is that any different from what we have done anyway?

Wood, Riley, Harrison, Cooper, McCarthy, Blythe, Evans, O'Brien, Williams, Currie - all of these have come through our Academy and been given their chance in the first team. Then there are guys like Penny, Pickersgill, Mitchell and going back further, Noone, Sibbit, Hulse, Alstead and Mark Gleeson, all of whom played significant time in the first team.

Some of these players were not up to being in a top side and you could also say some of the current ones that are being given a chance are not up to being in a top side either, but at least they are getting their chances. You cannot accuse Warrington of only seeing promoting academy players as a last resort - if anything we tend to promote too many and would benefit from being more ruthless, there are some lads who get their chance at Warrington that would be filtered out sooner at a club like Leeds or Saints.

As for the finished article, it comes in two forms:
- high promise that has come through other clubs Academies, that just needs polishing (Westwood, Grix, Hill, Atkins, Ratchford, Myler)
- established top class players (Morley, King, Hicks, the Monaghans, Hodgson, Waterhouse).

All successful sides that win trophies have a balance of the three types of player - promoted academy products, high promise from other clubs, established top class players. Go back and look at every successful side - Wigan in the 80s and 90s, Bradford/Saints in the 2000s, Leeds in the past 10 years, they all fit that bill and so do we under Tony Smith. We are not underpromoting home grown players compared to them.

But you will not win trophies without those finished article players.

Fans like the idea of a team full of home grown products but it will not win trophies. Even Man United when they brought through Giggs, Beckham, Scholes, Nevilles etc would have not been successful without the likes of Cantona, Schmeichel, Keane.

The alternative reality in the past few years would have been that rather than sign those finished article players we could have stuck with Sibbit, Noone, Penny, Pickersgill and so on instead. We would have won nothing.

True. Well if you include it in our area, that would make 10 U19's from a total of 31.

I was given the figure of 7% of the players who start with the Academy ever playing first team.

7% is that a general figure or at Wire?

It's the RFL's figures gathered from all SL clubs over the past few years. As a rule of thumb, only two SL standard players will emerge from each intake of U15 / U16's.

I would imagine that figure is considerably less in top class Football.