it is noboddys fault,
1st if we had a u18s we would be allowed to run a full a scholarship
2nd the money you have to put into a scholarship is unbeleivable, plus the LISA money used to fund this, which now goes to the club towards players,
3rd the rfl have told championship clubs they can only have 10players at each age group at scholarship to save money for both club & rfl,
SO DOWN TO IT ALL ITS ABOUT MONEY FOR BOTH CLUB & RFL

Do you know what i think ,well as Widnes are entering the "elite" in 2012 so therefore can get a decent side for next season ,unless they wait for end of 2011 that is well either way i reckon they should not be able to enter NRC or play in the play offs ,in fact i reckon they should not receive any points at all next season as it won't matter if the finish bottom ,so thats what i think any road

My understanding is that this has nothing to do with our previous Academy problems

Talking to someone involved with Widnes Scholarship over the weekend and it seems that the RFL has two player pathways.

The first involve having a continual pathway through Scholarship 15 & 16, Academy Under 18, Under 20/Reserves and First team.

The second was that players not involved at scholarship would have a pathway through service area and regional progammes funded through the RFL

A meeting was held at the LSV some months ago and clubs had individual meeting to discuss which pathway they choose to follow. My informatant said at the involving Millward, Rowley and Eccleston the club choose to follow the second option.

Widnes already having an academy side choose to stay with option one, he also said that he understood Featherstone and Sheffield had chosen the academy route but was not 100% sure of this,

This seems to support what the Chairman has said and seems to be another case of lies coming out of the LSV and their contunual blaming of the RFL

Didn't we run an U15/16 this year?

Pretty sure we did.

yes we did I filmed all their home games, so we obviously were following option one as above