144 replies to this topic

[Marauder]

Well said sam

Well said sam

Shambolic dying Association, lol - Has your committee just signed the MOU without consultation with your clubs.

[Sam Armstrong]

Shambolic dying Association, lol - Has your committee just signed the MOU without consultation with your clubs.

Not going to go over old ground Marauder with either yourself or our bitter friend HospitalPass in his latest disguise on this Forum as Lord Charles.

The League's democratically elected Management Committee who are voted in to represent the best interests of our Clubs & Players did indeed sign the MOU but not "just", we did it over 12 months ago as we work together (as we always have), in partnership with the other Y & J Leagues & the sports governing body to run a succesful summer programme and help develop coaches and players. The MOU was nothing more than a formalisation of that "gentleman's agreement" and one which the NW Counties' players and coaches stand to benefit far more than the RFL from.

We have always. in principle, worked our own Constitution around the RFL's (and BARLA's when we were a full member) and, despite what the doommongers would like to imply we still retain our rights to incorporate uniquely local rules in our Constitution though, I'm sure you'll agree, we should ALL be playing to the same rules so the sooner we Y & J Leagues can either incorporate these local anomolies into the national rules, accept someone does it better and agree to their option but ultimately remove the variances the better.

This 1st season was always going to be difficult and that there would be a learning curve, we anticipated that (though not the persistent rain) and there were things already in place that have impacted on the number of games available to our U15s but this has, as we said it would be, been addressed for next season and the long gaps some teams have suffered this season will be a thing of the past.

Edited by Sam Armstrong, 05 August 2012 - 07:13 PM.

[Marauder]

Not going to go over old ground Marauder with either yourself or our bitter friend HospitalPass in his latest disguise on this Forum as Lord Charles.

The League's democratically elected Management Committee who are voted in to represent the best interests of our Clubs & Players did indeed sign the MOU but not "just", we did it over 12 months ago as we work together (as we always have), in partnership with the other Y & J Leagues & the sports governing body to run a succesful summer programme and help develop coaches and players. The MOU was nothing more than a formalisation of that "gentleman's agreement" and one which the NW Counties' players and coaches stand to benefit far more than the RFL from.

Wer have always. in principle, worked our own Constitution around the RFL's (and BARLA's when we were a full member) and, despite what the doommongers would like to imply we still retain our rights to incorporate uniquely local rules in our Constitution though, I'm sure you'll agree, we should ALL be playing to the same rules so the sooner we Y & J Leagues can either incorporate these local anomolies into the national rules, accept someone does it better and agree to their option but ultimately remove the variances the better.

This 1st season was always going to be difficult and that there would be a learning curve, we anticipated that (though not the persistent rain) and there were things already in place that have impacted on the number of games available to our U15s but this has, as we said it would be, been addressed for next season and the long gaps some teams have suffered this season will be a thing of the past.

Love how you point out your a democratically elected committee then make a very big decision without consulting the same clubs who have democratically elected you.

However I'll agree the management committee has to manage, but surely a subjet as important as the MOU should have gone to the clubs first or has the RFL given your committee the power to make decisions without your clubs permission?

Once the clubs get disgruntled they will go running back to BARLA regardless of any signed MOU

[Sam Armstrong]

So, another one who clearly doesn't understand the MOU. It was NOT a big decision .... it was something we informally had already been doing for several seasons.

You need to speak to Lord Charles/HospitalPass/Specsavers/Nowtbuttrouble/Lobbygobbler or whatever other nom de plumes he's using this week to try to be seen to be supporting his own argument.

In 12 months he/they (and now you) are the only ones who have raised any concerns whilst everyone else recognises it for exactly what it is .... a positive partnership.

Old news .... move on!!

Edited by Sam Armstrong, 05 August 2012 - 07:40 PM.

[LordCharles]

Sam just outline how everybody (Member Clubs) recognises it for what it is when you only recieved the final draft of the MOU on the day of the AGM at the very earliest from the RFL?

Also at that point and prior to the members voting on the night at the AGM they had no knowledge of such a document, therefore they voted merely on the switch to a March to November season, not to accept a document and its conditions/clauses which you may not of had in your posession as a Committee at that point so therefore could not inform the member clubs of.

This document was also never mentioned in any capacity or minuted as ever being mentioned at any NWC monthly meeting or as being circulated in any direct official correspondance to member clubs. In fact the document and its contents/clauses were not highlighted until some considerable time after it was signed and the issue or potential ramifications of it conditions/clauses were raised and you refused to answer or attempted to play them down as insignificant and innoculous.

So if the members are not aware, their opinions not canvassed and the document is not formally circulated given its terms and conditions, yet you as a management Group sign it on their behalf without their knowledge then they are not going to raise any concerns are they because they don't know anything about it or its contents.

Which under rule 4.06 of the constitution puts you in breach as a management group, as this document (MOU) clearly states the League will adopt and operate to the RFL's Operational Rules of Tiers 3 & 4 of the Community Game.

Yet changes to any operational rules under 4.06 of the current constitution must been done following correct constitutional protocol and the said changes being proposed and seconded before the members, prior to a democratic members vote taking place to determine the outcome/acceptance or not of any proposed rule change.

Consequently rule change of such gravity also signifies the watering down of the democratic protocol by which the League is governed under its existing constitution and members democratic right, as under the Operational rules of Tiers 3 & 4 of the Community Game the process for rule change for which the Regional Leagues will then adhere to will be governed by the Regulatory Group, not a democratic process or vote by the member clubs of any regional league.

My point being that if you represent the members of the League as you are elected to do then surely once a document of this nature is presented to the Management Group by the RFL it is your responsibility to circulate it and canvass opinion from the members prior to it being signed on their behalf, rather than attempt to keep it quiet as you very clearly did!

Edited by LordCharles, 05 August 2012 - 11:22 PM.

[Marauder]

So, another one who clearly doesn't understand the MOU. It was NOT a big decision .... it was something we informally had already been doing for several seasons.

You need to speak to Lord Charles/HospitalPass/Specsavers/Nowtbuttrouble/Lobbygobbler or whatever other nom de plumes he's using this week to try to be seen to be supporting his own argument.

In 12 months he/they (and now you) are the only ones who have raised any concerns whilst everyone else recognises it for exactly what it is .... a positive partnership.

Old news .... move on!!

Old news move on because we would like to keep it buried, out of sight out of mind etc

[Marauder]

So, another one who clearly doesn't understand the MOU. It was NOT a big decision .... it was something we informally had already been doing for several seasons.

You need to speak to Lord Charles/HospitalPass/Specsavers/Nowtbuttrouble/Lobbygobbler or whatever other nom de plumes he's using this week to try to be seen to be supporting his own argument.

In 12 months he/they (and now you) are the only ones who have raised any concerns whilst everyone else recognises it for exactly what it is .... a positive partnership.

Old news .... move on!!

It seems to me you've given the RFL the rights to start an elite league which is leaving your member clubs short of players.

[TaxiEgg]

Below will be the acid test ,

We made an agreement with BARLA at least 3 probably 4 season ago that a Yr 11 player signing a professional contract would be allowed to complete his amateur season as an Under 16.

If you recall, BARLA were saying that the players were now professional and no longer eligible, we explained that this was not in their clubs interests and at the time the clubs in their National Cup Final would not have been able to raise a side. Fortunately, they saw sense and allowed them to finish their commitments to their amateur club in any remaining league or National Cup. The professional clubs were allowed to play them in their Academy games but priority was to be given to their amateur club.

This season because both professional and community seasons are concurrent it was decided that a Yr 11 player being contract registered as an Under 16 with a pro club could not play for his professional club until next season, so freeing him to complete his league, cup and playoff commitments with his community club.

There has been a Heads of Youth meeting earlier today and BJ has reminded them that the player must be allowed to complete his community season. Obviously clubs will be reluctant to release them for any other games that may be arranged after the official season has finished as they will want them at the start of their pre-season trainning.

If you can find out who has said they are not available I will have a word with them just to re-iterate the position.

Regards

Bill




Bill Appleton
Operations & Performance Consultant


Let us see the commitment to the amatuer game .

[LordCharles]

Interesting, as I was speaking to a colleague only last Monday who coaches an U16's team in Wigan who said as of September Warrington had told one of his players that he could not play for his Community club as he was their (Warrington's) player from that point on.

Obviously it was prior to the Heads of Youth meeting, so we will see how the Pro clubs react given that they have a contractual agreement with these players as professionals and its likely that some may still be required to play for their Community Clubs as late as November due to the lack of fixtures being completed earlier in the season for one reason or another.

Again it is another impracticality for the Community Clubs and players to deal with at the U16's age group.

The U16's season would normally be finished in May, however it is now less than 2 month's old in May since the switch to the New March - Nov season and brings with it a whole new set of obstacales for Community Clubs to deal with at the age group outside of Holidays, Wet weather, family gatherings etc, as outside of signing for professional clubs many look to gain employment, take up further education studies from September that may be based outside of their local area or enrol in the armed forces etc etc, which unfortunately may mean some will struggle to field teams regularly due to the players having other commitments which they would not normally of had at that age group in a traditional Sept - May season as they would have still been in, or only just finishing their high school education.

Edited by LordCharles, 06 August 2012 - 07:39 AM.

[Sam Armstrong]

My point being that if you represent the members of the League as you are elected to do then surely once a document of this nature is presented to the Management Group by the RFL it is your responsibility to circulate it and canvass opinion from the members prior to it being signed on their behalf, rather than attempt to keep it quiet as you very clearly did!

Not prepared to go over this garbage on yet another Forum. ... you've been answered several times as anyone can see if the visit the League's Forum (http://www.nwc13-15arl.co.uk/forum/) but hey ..... we forget that. in your world only you are right and no answers, no matter how many times they are spelt out to you, are valid.

Just look at the swell of support your numerous posts have received .... oh, hang on, basically NONE because no-one, apart from your bitter little self sees any issue whatsoever and have all moved on.

[LordCharles]

Your posts all seem to revolve around personal insults Sam rather than rational and reasoned debate, perhaps you should ask yourself, given your position as a representative of the NWC 13's - 15's Management Group and the evidence on hand, ie your every post containing personal insults, just who it is in fact that is bitter?

The fact that you regulate/moderate your own forum to limit or remove any user or post that raises pertinent points or issues that you do not, for whatever reason, wish to answer or engage in debate with which you are not entirely comfortable in and again resort to hurling personal insults rather than openly debate, is clearly something you personally have an issue with, which on the face of it is slightly worrying that you should feel such action is necessary, particularly in a democratic society where opinions differ and free speech is in fact allowed.

Edited by LordCharles, 06 August 2012 - 07:52 AM.

[Sam Armstrong]

We have not locked any threads and you are the first to be banned from our Forum after getting bored of the same waffle over and over again and doing your damnedest to disrupt and/or bad mouth the League!! Congratulations!

Edited by Sam Armstrong, 06 August 2012 - 08:30 AM.

[LordCharles]

We have not locked any threads and you are the first to be banned from our Forum after getting bored of the same waffle over and over again!! Congratulations!

You have in fact removed a thread and by your own admission you simply do not like my opinion and view, as such you have banned me from expressing it and raising pertinent issues that you, as a member of the Management Group failed to do.

Edited by LordCharles, 06 August 2012 - 08:39 AM.

[Sam Armstrong]

It was not solely my decision though I was the Moderator who removed you.

[LordCharles]

It was not solely my decision though I was the Moderator who removed you.

So no breach of the AUP, you just don't like my opinion or view on certain issues, as such you will just silence anyone who's opinion differs to that of yours or the management group by way of banning them from your forum.

Which makes me wonder how you will react should member clubs choose to move back to a Sept - May season under the proposed New Barla U13's - U18's League.

Will you ban them and their teams from ever returning to the NWC's 13's - 15's March - November League?

Edited by LordCharles, 06 August 2012 - 09:12 AM.

[Dessie O'Hare]

Is any of this domestic dispute relevant to this thread on the new BARLA league?

[Sam Armstrong]

Not in the slightest Dessie.

[Li0nhead]

Is any of this domestic dispute relevant to this thread on the new BARLA league?

Just to bring it back.....

Seems a good number of the youth teams in Yorkshire are happy with winter:
http://www.barla.org...ils.asp?id=2971

[Marauder]

Just to bring it back.....

Seems a good number of the youth teams in Yorkshire are happy with winter:
http://www.barla.org...ils.asp?id=2971

A lot of NCL sides on those lists.

[TaxiEgg]

Putting all the politics to one side ,the RFL have stated that this is a four season experiment and have also stated they would equally support the community in whatever playing season they prefer .
Loooking at some interesting info from League express this morning all is not good within the game , Sport England state a reduction in participation especiially at open age , redunancies at RFL 40 odd posts going poor crowds outside superleague in the championships .
So as the summer experiment worked outside Super League or even in Superleague looking at the Bradford debacle and rumours of Salford close to administration.

We need to look at all the facts and not just bury our heads in the sand and say Summer is the be all and end all of the game .
We have to find a best fit for each and every part of the game, putting all our eggs in one basket is a very dangerous option.

For me I would return back to a traditional season and explore a winter break for Championship and the Amatuer game and leave the Summer to superleague .