Under 23's Fixtures : Thu Feb 09, 2012 12:49 pm  

Is there an under 23's fixture list out (non on fax website). Karl mentioned that Sam might get a run out at next fridays under 23 game at Featherstone. Is this a proper fixture or a friendly?

Re: Under 23's Fixtures : Thu Feb 09, 2012 1:10 pm  

Friendly kicking off at 8pm I think

Re: Under 23's Fixtures : Thu Feb 09, 2012 4:12 pm  

Yeah that one is a friendly. I heard last night that there's something like six clubs registering a side with York recently added to the list so possibly the fixtures or format haven't been finalised just yet.

Re: Under 23's Fixtures : Thu Feb 09, 2012 4:47 pm  

According to this weeks League Express, Rochdale have dropped out of the U23 league in favour of only playing friendlies, mainly at home (due to cost of travelling away). It also states that it only leaves 5 teams in the league, Fax, Fev, Sheffield, Keighley and Oldham. Looks like there will be lots of 'friendlies' this season.
I hope the RFL and their wonderful ideas aren't expecting Championship clubs to fund a team competing only against 4 formal opponents. Raising £25k through the supporters doesn't seem likely if that is the depth of the competition. Maybe the RFL should dig deep instead of funding Odslum and it's SL projects.

Re: Under 23's Fixtures : Thu Feb 09, 2012 5:38 pm  

RFL have been waiting for those Clubs who said they would enter an Under 23 team to confirm. . Rochdale have opted out . . so currently no fixtures yet sorted out by RFL. . once they are we'll put them on the web site


The game on Feb 17th against Featherstone is a friendly and it may allow us to test a couple of the injured players on their way back from surgery

Mike

Re: Under 23's Fixtures : Thu Feb 09, 2012 7:25 pm  

RFL organised as ever then?!!

[Wheels]

Re: Under 23's Fixtures : Thu Feb 09, 2012 10:15 pm  

SIMMSFAXTEDDY wrote:

RFL organised as ever then?!!

And this is the RFL's fault how?

Re: Under 23's Fixtures : Sat Feb 11, 2012 10:53 am  

The RFL should force ALL championship clubs to run a u23 team. Championship 1 clubs optional though if they get promoted then they must put in a U23 team.And maybe even help subsicize some of the travelling costs. The RFL have made a real mess of the u23s and as they are responsible for its operation should be making sure its run well. I remember BJ Mather from the RFL telling Fax and others how he wanted things and not best for the clubs-I think he forced Halifax to stop the scholarship programme a couple of years ago. I am sure MM can add more to this story. This saw a load of Fax scolarship lads end up at SL clubs. I know other clubs have not been impressed with the attitude of the RFL and how they run the u23s and see it as either a waste of time or something they want to do but get little help from the RFL to make it a good challenging comp.

Re: Under 23's Fixtures : Sat Feb 11, 2012 12:03 pm  

If the RFL are serious about the Amateur game and a viable path for players to come from there to the professional ranks, then a credible u23s/reserves set up needs to be established and stuck with.

The money they've thrown away sending it in the direction of Crusaders ect could have been far better spent this way

Re: Under 23's Fixtures : Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:23 pm  

The Lucky Black Cat wrote:

The RFL should force ALL championship clubs to run a u23 team. Championship 1 clubs optional though if they get promoted then they must put in a U23 team.And maybe even help subsicize some of the travelling costs. The RFL have made a real mess of the u23s and as they are responsible for its operation should be making sure its run well. I remember BJ Mather from the RFL telling Fax and others how he wanted things and not best for the clubs-I think he forced Halifax to stop the scholarship programme a couple of years ago. I am sure MM can add more to this story. This saw a load of Fax scolarship lads end up at SL clubs. I know other clubs have not been impressed with the attitude of the RFL and how they run the u23s and see it as either a waste of time or something they want to do but get little help from the RFL to make it a good challenging comp.

Most teams scrapped there under 23's because of the cost .Teams where also forced under the rules of the competition to play players due to there age rather than ability which means if you have players over the age of 23 who are recovering from injury or need a player to gain some confidence and form you are restricted to who the team can play.
The under 23 competition should be scrapped altogther and replaced with the old system when teams run an open age Academy side and an Under 18's side. The current standard of the Under 23 Championship is probably on a par with Conference Rugby. Halifax's 62-0 thrashing against North Wales Crusaders highlights that Halifax's under 23 side would struggle to compete with the likes of Siddal and other top amateur sides.