To be honest I'm not sure what you're trying to say.

You are laying the blame for scrapping the A team league at the RFLs door, or have I misunderstood what you posted?

If the clubs' want the A team system back, the RFL will implement it.

It's not gonna happen.

Fair enough but does it really matter as it's short sighted in my opinion.

We need somewhere for over age players to go. Dual ref isn't working. For me there has to be a link between club and player which is what the A team offered and duel reg doesn't.

Feeder clubs don't offer the answer because the SL isn't fixed like it is in Australia. Dewsbury for example would be an ideal feeder club for us but they won't do it even though they will never be a SL team. Who can blame them.

It's a tricky one, however I not convinced that A teams are as expensive as they are made out to be, just my opinion.

Every single Youth Development practitioner at every club has been calling for a Reserves, A team, U23s or whatever till they’re blue in the face but the clubs won’t bring it back despite the state of the game and glaringly obvious. It’s not the RFL

Halifax are running a reservve team next year. Apparently they're funding it through the board & sponsorship deals ring fenced just for the reserve team. They'll be playing the better U19's and guys who don't make the 17, plus guys coming back from injury. Shows what can be done even at their level.

It’s happening in football as well Avenger, Huddersfield have stopped their academy’s to save money and hopefully get the top teams cast offs for their 18s and onwards I’ve no doubt we will do the same as we’ve done in the past and been successful at it.

I absolutely agree with you, but A teams sit between FT and PT set-ups - too expensive for what they produce (and not enough players for FT), and overall too low a quality to be worth investing in).

Clubs can't afford a reserve team but they can afford to vote for marquee players. It's about priorities for me, and developing players beyond 19 doesn't seem to be one of them.

It's a fine initiative, but these are largely amateurs playing for a match fee - no contract and not FT professionals.

That model is no good for SL clubs, who need/want to be only paying players capable of playing at the higher level.

They decided long ago to invest in youth and hope to identify who will and won't succeed early...and discard the rest.

I liked the U21's league, where a number of over-age players were allowed (e.g. those playing for form or returning from injury), but clubs' felt they were running this set-up to keep 3 or 4 players warm. it's much cheaper to send them out on DR.

It’s not just over age players that benefit from reserve team Rugby but the first team players too. How many times do we see a player return from a few weeks injured and look off the pace for one/two matches. And as we saw this year one or two matches is the differences between making top 4.
Also it gives lads a chance to showcase there abilities if they aren’t in the first 17 and push for a starting place increasing competition for places and thereby raising performance levels.

I remember back in the 60's players like the great Ken Hirst staying at the club from being a 16 year old all through his career, but for the most of it he was back up to such as Smith, Coetzer, and Prinsloo etc. He seemed happy enough playing in the A team competition, which was very competitive for players.

Spot on. It's not money it's the will to make it work. RL biggest failure has been short term thinking and the actions that follow.

God only knows how much our current North American adventure will cost us but I doubt it will be worth it.