: Thu May 21, 2009 10:04 am  

VforViking wrote:

fair point. But that was because McCormack never gave him and other young players a chance.

Absolute rubbish.

He played a 17 year old scrum half by the name of Richie Myler his first team debut in a play off semi final up at Cas. He's given debuts to most of the young lads in our squad this season, Grady, Yates, Simm etc.

: Thu May 21, 2009 11:57 am  

manxviking wrote:

A number of clubs have actually suggested this to the RFL.

Well if that is the case put pressure on the club reps to the RFL to make it an agenda item and as there is more clubs below Sooper Dooper there should be no problem geting it carried if they all stick together.

: Thu May 21, 2009 1:21 pm  

AJ Viking wrote:

Absolute rubbish.

He played a 17 year old scrum half by the name of Richie Myler his first team debut in a play off semi final up at Cas. He's given debuts to most of the young lads in our squad this season, Grady, Yates, Simm etc.

he never really gave myler a chance that season, he only got a ten minute spell againest cas. he should have got more game time because joel penny was poor towards the end of the season. grady, yates and simm would have eventually got there chance, but it came quicker than expected with all the off field problems we had last season with adminstration etc.

: Thu May 21, 2009 2:25 pm  

So what's your point regarding Simm/Grady/Yates? That he did give them a chance or was forced too?

Regarding Myler, he absolutely should not have put him in sooner, he's only a small lad (even smaller then) and he had just turned 17. He got more game time towards the end of the season but was protected by McCormack and rightly so. The fact that he got as much game time as he did at that age is credit to both Richie and McCoramck.

: Thu May 21, 2009 2:27 pm  

AJ Viking wrote:

So what's your point regarding Simm/Grady/Yates? That he did give them a chance or was forced too?

Regarding Myler, he absolutely should not have put him in sooner, he's only a small lad (even smaller then) and he had just turned 17. He got more game time towards the end of the season but was protected by McCormack and rightly so. The fact that he got as much game time as he did at that age is credit to both Richie and McCoramck.

Exactly what I was going to post. He wasn't ready then (I recall his kicking was very suspect) and SMc was right.

: Thu May 21, 2009 2:55 pm  

[quote="AJ Viking"]So what's your point regarding Simm/Grady/Yates? That he did give them a chance or was forced too?

exactly, how many of them 3 would make the starting line up currently if we were at full strengh(not including the bench).

: Thu May 21, 2009 3:37 pm  

VforViking wrote:

fair point. But that was because McCormack never gave him and other young players a chance.

I'm not so sure mate. He gave Dayne Donoghue a chance, and Dayne Donoghue, for a 19 year old, was starting to look a good prospect. Unfortunately, the deal he and others were offered was considerably less than they would have been able to get working at a normal job. That wasn't down to McCormack who, I hear, was all for keeping Donoghue.

: Thu May 21, 2009 3:43 pm  

johnny freeman fan club wrote:

So why don`t the clubs do something about it then ,when they go for the freebie away days with the RFL why don`t they propose that all youngsters brought through a club then start playing for the first team are exempt from the salary cap.That way there is an incentive for clubs to bring through the youngsters and if you build up a nucleous of lads like that in the team you will have more money available in the cap to pay for good players as well.At the moment there is no reward for a club to run acadamy sides as they just get taken by Sooper Dooopers.

Wasn't this one of the lies for licensing? So now teams will blood young player without fear of relegation. What a load of rubbish (the RFL I might add).

: Thu May 21, 2009 3:52 pm  

AJ Viking wrote:

So what's your point regarding Simm/Grady/Yates? That he did give them a chance or was forced too?

Regarding Myler, he absolutely should not have put him in sooner, he's only a small lad (even smaller then) and he had just turned 17. He got more game time towards the end of the season but was protected by McCormack and rightly so. The fact that he got as much game time as he did at that age is credit to both Richie and McCoramck.

1st thing McCormack did was ship all of the youth players out on loan. Year after year players could have come through but the likes of Nash, Alcock, Bruce Johnson, Draper, Bowman, Keaveny, Donoghue, Sidlow were continually ignored and shipped out.

To show how far McCormack ignored the youth players, despite starting last year with loads of youngsters in the team, by the time we played Celtic away, we didn't have one home grown player in the squad and even Celtic had 1 or 2. Sure fire way to show we didn't deserve a licence being beaten for youth development by a side who were less then 3 years old and had the reputation for being a team full of Aussies - to make matter worse we were well beaten and it was on Sky - just how bad were we trying to make ourselves look?

: Thu May 21, 2009 5:55 pm  

johnny freeman fan club wrote:

So why don`t the clubs do something about it then ,when they go for the freebie away days with the RFL why don`t they propose that all youngsters brought through a club then start playing for the first team are exempt from the salary cap.That way there is an incentive for clubs to bring through the youngsters and if you build up a nucleous of lads like that in the team you will have more money available in the cap to pay for good players as well.At the moment there is no reward for a club to run acadamy sides as they just get taken by Sooper Dooopers.

johnny freeman fan club wrote:

Well if that is the case put pressure on the club reps to the RFL to make it an agenda item and as there is more clubs below Sooper Dooper there should be no problem geting it carried if they all stick together.

The bit I've highlighted is the problem. The RFL have always worked on the principle of divide and rule.

The majority of clubs in the lower leagues have very little money to develop players anyway, so it's just not a major issue for them. Your own club doesn't even have a reserve side, so why would they make a fuss about it?

Why would the clubs who can bring in a shed load of Aussies be bothered about losing young players? It's hardly an immediate priority for them is it?

Licencing puts the future of every pro RL club in the land in the hands of the RFL. Clubs will now have to bow and scrape before the RFL in the hope of being allowed in SL some time in the future. Rocking the boat for most, over something that barely affects them anyway, is no longer an option.

We are not united. If we were, then Toulouse would not be in the Championship. Do you think that the smaller clubs would be happy a club that cannot be relegated?

Do you think the clubs hoping for a licence in 2012, despite knowing Toulouse would walk right into SL in 2012, would spoil their own chances by backing up the smaller clubs against the move?

The days of challenging the RFL are over! They'll do what they want, when they want, to whom they want and how they want.