Thursday 11 June 2015 15:08, UK
The 'marquee player rule' has made it even tougher for young players to make the breakthrough in Super League, says Phil Clarke...
Last week saw the clubs finally agree to amend their salary cap rules and introduce a ‘marquee player allowance’. It’s something that they’ve debated for a while and it could have a massive impact on the sport.
In theory it allows them to recruit a ‘world class’ player, from either code of rugby, which would be great for Super League. Gone are the days when a star name like Jonathan Davies would try his hand at the 13-a-side version of rugby. There is more money now in union, plus the salary cap prevented a club from spending a large proportion of its budget on one player. I am not certain that it will have any impact on the game at all but I am excited to see what happens next.
Lots of people have stopped me in the street to ask my opinion on it. They’ve listed names like Cooper Cronk, Sonny Bill Williams and Greg Inglis. A man who follows league and union wondered if Owen Farrell or George Ford would be tempted at some stage in the future to do what their dads did and give it a go.
The ‘marquee player rule’ needs to be implemented in conjunction with the reintroduction of a second team competition for all Super League clubs.
I also bumped into a Bradford Bulls supporter at the motorway services who hoped that this would allow his club to re-sign Sam Burgess when the Bulls are back in Super League. I hope that's the case.
Development
But my bigger concern wasn’t about recruiting players at the top end, it was more about developing them at the bottom. The ‘marquee player rule’ needs to be implemented in conjunction with the reintroduction of a second team competition for all Super League clubs. Our current model for helping players to reach the Super League standard isn’t very good. We couldn’t make it any harder in my opinion, and we need the clubs to invest in a second team competition that allows them to become better prepared to play consistently in Super League.
All of the clubs work hard at helping to improve the young lads that they identify as having potential when they’re at secondary school. I won’t go in to detail here, but they have a scholarship programme and then a team that plays some games at under-16 level. These progress through to playing for the U19s, at which point the clubs then have to effectively decide if they’re going to ‘make it’.
You don’t need to be an expert in talent identification to know that not every player is an Andy Farrell or a Sam Burgess. Some aren’t ready to play in the first team when they’re 17, maybe not even when they’re 21, but that’s not to say they won’t be by the time they get to 23, and then go on to play for England when they’re 25 (Matthew Smith at Wigan is one example).
Demoralising
The current system encourages players not in the first team to be sent out to a club in the lower divisions – they often call it ‘dual registration’. Some also go out on loan but this can be a demoralising experience.
These players train all week with the first team squad of the Super League club that they’ve signed for, then travel on to their own to a club with a totally different agenda. They’re not that bothered about the long-term development of a young player who has no real connection to their club. They just want to win their match that weekend, and I don’t blame them for this.
When I spoke to someone who works in a Super League club in this area, he said: “Kids are sold a dream that’s not true. We sign them and promise them one thing, and then put them through something like a ‘Japanese endurance test’ to see if they still want to play rugby league. We ask them to travel long distances and play against men, which is what we want, but have no control over them.” We tip them off the production line before they’re finished.
The clubs spend considerable time and money helping a player to move from a young prospect to a potential player and then neglect the last part of the process. Creating players for Super League is the most important aspect for all of us, and we don’t have the best environment or competition to do this at present. The U19s competition is too early and the teams in the lower divisions aren’t right either.
Commitment
A club wouldn’t need to sign many more players and it wouldn’t cost as much as some claim, but it would need a commitment. I don’t see the point in voting for a marquee player rule if you’re not prepared to invest at the other end of the spectrum. Where do you think that these marquee players are made? The fundamental question centres on where the development of our best young players takes place. Surely this needs to be in the hands of the clubs that have signed them in the first place.
I won’t go into the rules that prevent players going out to the lower divisions on ‘dual registration’ or on ‘loan’ when we have completed 23 rounds this season. Suffice to say, some young players may go weeks without a game which isn’t helping them to improve, or more importantly, giving them the fun or enjoyment they need. Nor will I go into detail on the drop-out rate of players from the community game. Our current system is turning players off the game at 19 when we need to flick the switch and inspire them even more.
I am not the only person who thinks this. Even the Performance Director of the RFL felt the same way when he made his recommendations to the clubs back in 2011. Sadly, the clubs voted against his plan, believing there was a cheaper way to do it. Maybe now they’ll reconsider when they realise that they don’t have the money to shop in the ‘Marquee’ market.
