So does all this make it irelevant being in the 1875 club ?

Yes but you could always join the 1873 club

Isn't this what McNally tried with Mark Field though?
Field looked OK behind the team of 2004 but then got steamrollered game after game during 2005. His confidence went down and I presume he quit the game not long after????

Too many fingers and no i dont live at cas

Mark Field was a good prospect who was totally mishandled by McNally.

He did well and showed promise but was too young to go the full season without a break. When it became obvious to everyone else that Field was starting to struggle McNally failed to see it until Fields confidence was totally shot. The result was that Field never recovered and failed to fulfil his potential.

The 1873 Club is working and we're starting to see results of it in the likes of Jowitt, Crowther & Johnston. At the same time we're attracting some of the regions better 14&15 year olds due to the quality of the resources and the programme available to the Scholarship.

Badly run clubs with under pressure coaches, are far more damaging to young players than P and R will ever be.

I heard on Super League Backchat, that the Championship clubs are going to be allowed 5 overseas.
I would say that this will hinder the youth set up in Super League, as probably these lower grade overseas will get round the strict rules about coming over to play Super League by playing in the Championship and if they are a hit and the club doesn't get promoted, a bigger club will pick them up.

Most damaging thing to young players are the know all agents they get involved with.

Of course you'll have failures and my answer is so what - for me and others differ Mathers is hardly a huge success and Samut even less so. Also Mark Field was grossly misused, wasn't even a F/B was actually a centre at least Jowitt is a FB.

I'm not saying use it as a wholesale policy which I think I made fairly clear but if we don't take chance we'll never move on, Cas did it and it worked this year at least. No guarantees but this is sport not Accountancy and that's how it should be

That is really my point.
I completely agree with everything you say, in that it was the opportunity to do it and young players should have been given the chance when there was no risk.
The problem is that clubs still didn't do it (imho) so now they bring P&R back, how an it be worse.

Personally, I much preferred the franchise system for that reason alone, but that has now gone.

What?

Im talking about speculating on talent not money,your comment makes no sense.

On the issue of NRL teams bringing in young players - they're hardly untested; they have a really high quality comp for feeder teams that sits below the NRL, in which these players will have cut their teeth before you see them play for the parent club.

If we had a more meaningful youth set-up at each club, instead of having allowed the clubs to ditch it to save money, that might help address the problem.

Can't argue with that, all be it a slightly bigger issue. I'm very aware of the disadvantages our young players face mostly through no fault of their own. This is why I narrowed it down to backs who traditionally are ready earlier than most others. It would be a brave coach to do it at Wakefield where unlike Wigan there is no margin for error or ability to buy your way out if it goes wrong. None the less I'd love to see it.

Point proven with London signing Mathers, I believe that they have a young fullback called Innes Macrani (that's a rough attempt at his name), surely Mathers will replace him at London. Craig Hall 'could' be our new full-back for next year i'd rather have Jowitt be given the last four games in preparation for next year cos whats the point playing Mathers, I'd also let the young guns have a proper set of matches, Danny Cowling made his debut against Bradford last year i think, he did only one thing wrong and we don't see him again. Surely Liam Kay is better than any current winger at the club. Mr Webster let the young un's have a go for the last 4