: Sat Feb 14, 2009 6:47 pm  

TRB wrote:

I would suggest that Hull were heading in exactly the right direction during Kear's time there.

This is a futile argument. It is obvious that we do not have the financial clout that Leeds do, and therefore we have not had the luxury of being to invest as heavily in youth development - and the cost of signing players has risen substantially recently.The rest of the game can only applaud the work that Leeds have undertaken in this respect and you have set the benchmark for it.

However (and there is one), some of your supporters fail to appreciate the strength in depth that Leeds have over a club like Wakey. The equivalent players from your squad, to those missing from our side last night would have included McGuire, Burrows, Diskin, Buderus, Senior, Donald, Leuluai, & Lautiti. That it no way means that our players are as good as those, just that they are as important to us as they are to you.

We are doing it tough and hanging in there. You are happy with a win and we are happy with the performance (in the circumstances). I'd like to think we could leave it there, but I know there are some that just won't let it lie!

Whilst your post makes a lot of sense the bit in italics I strongly disagree with.

It's a fallacy.

Leeds have been investing in youth since the start of Super league. Remember when Caddick and Hetherington took over we were insolvent. We still had the likes of Sinfield and JJB at the club.

Of course, having resources helps but we didn't always have them and it didn't prevent us pursuing a youth policy nor should it prevent clubs like Wakey. The fact is Wakey and others have in the past paid appallingly scant regard to youth development. To excuse that away with "well, we're not as rich as you" is lazy and wrong.

Saints aren't as rich as us and they#re the other great club and promoting youth. It's no coincidence that the strength of Sl lies with us and them.

: Sat Feb 14, 2009 7:57 pm  

Your right, we should have taken a greater interest in youth development a long time ago but let's look to the future and if we can keep going they way we are I am sure we will do just fine.

The most important thing is we are now improving in teh youth area and are puting more money into it, which I am sure will help in the long run and prove a good investment

: Sat Feb 14, 2009 8:31 pm  

I understand that this a thread about Wakey but they have acknowledged their previous failure to develop youth. The teams really guilty that have had the resources and ignored youth development or at least its implementation with regard to their own 1st team squads were Bradford, Wigan and to a lesser extent Warrington.

: Sat Feb 14, 2009 8:42 pm  

lad13 wrote:

My word this is an interesting thread - whens the my Dad's bigger than your Dad line gonna come in?

Do you know which one is your dad - must be very confusing when they're all introduced as 'Special Uncles'?

: Sat Feb 14, 2009 11:23 pm  

G1 wrote:

Whilst your post makes a lot of sense the bit in italics I strongly disagree with.

It's a fallacy.

Leeds have been investing in youth since the start of Super league. Remember when Caddick and Hetherington took over we were insolvent. We still had the likes of Sinfield and JJB at the club.

Of course, having resources helps but we didn't always have them and it didn't prevent us pursuing a youth policy nor should it prevent clubs like Wakey. The fact is Wakey and others have in the past paid appallingly scant regard to youth development. To excuse that away with "well, we're not as rich as you" is lazy and wrong.

Saints aren't as rich as us and they#re the other great club and promoting youth. It's no coincidence that the strength of Sl lies with us and them.

I can accept what you say, but I still add into that the fact that we were skint - completely in 2000 - and all of our available funds were taken up just staying in SL, which if we hadn't done so, would have meant we weren't even at the races now. So, the use of the word 'rich' is only relevant to the each club involved and some clubs clearly have a bigger income / turnover than others, that's not lazy and it's not wrong, it's a statement of fact and I wish it weren't so.

We are well aware of the challenges we face in this area and steps are being taken to improve our junior development even now, which should help us as a club and, if all clubs continue down this line, will help the game and the national teams in general!

: Mon Feb 16, 2009 10:43 am  

lad13 wrote:

My word this is an interesting thread - whens the my Dad's bigger than your Dad line gonna come in?

About now.

(Re: Frankie Boyle) "My Dad'll sh*g your Dad. And your Dad will enjoy it."