Jump to content


Rugby League World Issue 400 - Out Now!

RUGBY LEAGUE WORLD MAGAZINE - ISSUE 401 - OUT NOW!
84 pages, full colour, in-depth coverage from the grassroots through to the international game.
Click here for the digital edition or just download the Rugby League World app from Apple Newsstand or Google Play now.
Click here to order a copy for delivery by post. Annual subscriptions also available worldwide.
Find out what's inside Issue 401
/ View a Gallery of all our previous 400 covers / WH Smith Branches stocking Issue 401
Read Jamie Jones-Buchanan's Top 5 RLW Interviews including Marwan Koukash, Lee Briers, Gareth Thomas, Steve Ganson & Matt King OBE


League Express

Podcast

Photo
- - - - -

Rams and Bulls announce link-up (merged threads)


  • Please log in to reply
281 replies to this topic

#101 John North

John North
  • Coach
  • 1,528 posts

Posted 06 October 2012 - 08:34 AM

The problem is not how the club announced the arrangement.
The problem is how people are choosing to interpret the announcement.
It was the same when MS announced that the club would be interviewing for the new coaching position.
Most of the BS on this board was about how PB was a shoe in and that MS was just blowing smoke up our ar*es.
I expected the gruckeresque comments from Batley fans but some of the dewsbury faithfuls comments seem a litttle OTT to me.
Red Amber Black - Its that simple

#102 Ackroman

Ackroman
  • Coach
  • 1,820 posts

Posted 06 October 2012 - 08:52 AM

The problem is not how the club announced the arrangement.
The problem is how people are choosing to interpret the announcement.
It was the same when MS announced that the club would be interviewing for the new coaching position.
Most of the BS on this board was about how PB was a shoe in and that MS was just blowing smoke up our ar*es.
I expected the gruckeresque comments from Batley fans but some of the dewsbury faithfuls comments seem a litttle OTT to me.


The difference is although Batley fans may have opinions that you may respect or ignore, Dewsbury fans opinions count.

#103 Kelsey The Ram

Kelsey The Ram
  • Coach
  • 385 posts

Posted 06 October 2012 - 09:45 AM

I think it may have been better PR for the club had they not announced it in the way they have. Several dual reg signings would be more palatable for dewsbury supporters than talk about link ups and "synergys" whatever the feck they are.

To many RL fans, after the latest shenanigans at Bradford they are regard Bradford as all that is wrong about the game. So what do we do? A once proud little club, with a rich history and one that has only recently got its own finances in order do, we go and join them!!!

The sooner we get Nigel wood and Ralph rimmer out of the rfl and we see someone emerge to take the game forward from this chaos the better.


We still are that little club with the rich history and a good financial status, it's just that now we're partners with a super league club, who happened to be recently in liquidation threat, weren't we already partners with Bradford anyway?
"Are you tryin' to mug me off in front of my pals?"

#104 Tom Coates

Tom Coates
  • Moderator
  • 934 posts

Posted 06 October 2012 - 09:55 AM

Batley aren't putting them directly in the shop window.

Rams have put their players in the shop window, but that's only one down side (IMO), the other is becoming a part of another club. Maybe not by name, but a little bit of Dewsbury's identity as gone now. It's like the NRL feeder clubs.


Every Championship player is in the shop window. Indeed, that's why many fringe Super League players choose to drop down to the competition, as they want to play regular first team rugby in a strong competition and garner the attention of Super League clubs.

We are not a part of Bradford in any way. We are two clubs who have struck a deal. It's nothing like the NRL feeder clubs.

This annoucement could improve Dewsbury's displays on the field.

If I am a Dewsbury player training week in and week out and giving 100% every week I am going to be annoyed if I lose my place to a Bradford player returning from injury who is playing for Dewsbury to get some match fitness or because he is not good enough to get in the Bradford first team squad.

What could happen is that the Dewsbury players roll there sleeves up in pre-season training and say no Bradford squad player is taking my place. Although it may cause the agreement to collapse/fail it might end up in a good season for Dewsbury.


But this is no different to the dual-reg system that's been in place since 2010.

"We get first refusal on Bradford's fringe stars, and they get first refusal on our players ready to make the step up to the Super League"

What exactly does this mean Tom , they get first refusal , I really , really hope Batley dont go down this route , there is far too many grey areas , im trying to understand all the implications.

but you then contradict it by saying in a later post

Like I said, Bradford will have to go through the same process as any other Super League club if they want to sign our players. They can't cherry pick and snatch at the drop of a hat.

how do they go thro same process , when they have trained with them , and get first refusal ?


Bradford will get a closer look at each of our players than any other Super League club due to the relationship between our two clubs. It means that any player ready and capable of making the step up to the Super League is more likely to do so with Bradford.

In other words, if they 'go', and Bradford want them, then Bradford will be given the opportunity to sign them.

Having said that, the player can choose to join another club if he wants to.

People are putting too much emphasis on the passage of players from Dewsbury to Bradford, with the belief that this is where the Bulls will benefit, when in actual fact the main benefit for Bradford is a potential new avenue for their young players to gain experience.

But Alex finished the season as a Bulldog. The way this sounds, your players would more than likely go mid season if they're going to go.


This just isn't true!

I think it may have been better PR for the club had they not announced it in the way they have. Several dual reg signings would be more palatable for dewsbury supporters than talk about link ups and "synergys" whatever the feck they are.

To many RL fans, after the latest shenanigans at Bradford they are regard Bradford as all that is wrong about the game. So what do we do? A once proud little club, with a rich history and one that has only recently got its own finances in order do, we go and join them!!!

The sooner we get Nigel wood and Ralph rimmer out of the rfl and we see someone emerge to take the game forward from this chaos the better.


But it's more than a dual-reg opportunity. Our players will also get access to Bradford's training and medical facilities and there are one or two other benefits and possibilities for the future, as mentioned in the media release.

#105 Tom Coates

Tom Coates
  • Moderator
  • 934 posts

Posted 06 October 2012 - 09:59 AM

On that point, would GM be allowed to take players from other SL clubs on DR/loan or will we be more or less obliged to take the Bulls ones - one for tom I think ?


We will still be able to take players on loan from other Super League clubs if we like.

#106 BatleyFanAndy

BatleyFanAndy
  • Coach
  • 1,491 posts

Posted 06 October 2012 - 10:03 AM

Some Rams fans are contradicting themselves on a few of these posts. It's boring me to read it now.

Good luck to Dewsbury in this new scheme. I guess we'll all see how it pans out at the end of 2013. I hope my thoughts are wrong and it works out well!


SIGNATURE

#107 DEWSBURY TIL I DIE

DEWSBURY TIL I DIE
  • Coach
  • 2,403 posts

Posted 06 October 2012 - 11:42 AM

Some Rams fans are contradicting themselves on a few of these posts. It's boring me to read it now.

Good luck to Dewsbury in this new scheme. I guess we'll all see how it pans out at the end of 2013. I hope my thoughts are wrong and it works out well!


Well dont worry about it andy. We aint bradfords feeder club. Look at it this way too, when bulls season ticket holders are given discounted rams tickets like we give batley when both clubs dont have games on the same day and let your season ticket holders in for just a 5er, were likely to do the same with bradford next season and it can only help increase our matchday income and also improve our crowds further, especialy if glenn gets us playing well. It may also in the future persuade our dewsbury born bradford fans to stay and support their rightful hometown club instead of bradford if they come and see what the rams have to offer and what were about and enjoy what they see....

I see more benefits for dewsbury than bradford. More players, especialy young players with ambitions to succeed may want to join dewsbury due to the bradford link and see it as a potential stepping stone to try make it to superleague.

Also bradfords training facilities medical faciliies ect ect which will be far more advanced than at the rams will save us alot of money as a club,especialy in pre season with floodlight bills, electric and water bills ect ect... and not having to rent out places to train pre season indoors like gyms ect..

If at the end of the season the partnership isnt working and were losing out as a club imsure mark and glen would cancel the partnership so i dont see the big problem or worry? Mark and glen aint going to do anything which puts our own club in a bad positionand losing out are they. they aint stupid !?

Edited by DEWSBURY TIL I DIE, 06 October 2012 - 11:57 AM.


#108 John North

John North
  • Coach
  • 1,528 posts

Posted 07 October 2012 - 07:46 AM

The difference is although Batley fans may have opinions that you may respect or ignore, Dewsbury fans opinions count.


I dont recall dismissing any dewsbury fan's opinions. get a grip.
Red Amber Black - Its that simple

#109 Ackroman

Ackroman
  • Coach
  • 1,820 posts

Posted 07 October 2012 - 08:45 AM

I dont recall dismissing any dewsbury fan's opinions. get a grip.


Don't be so bloody sensitive. It wasn't a criticism it was an observation. T o o l.

#110 Rambo

Rambo
  • Coach
  • 500 posts

Posted 07 October 2012 - 09:23 AM

Should we a have a successful season next year and we utilise Bradfords players, you can hear the calls from other teams already, saying its only cos they've got all them Bradford players and it will be a "hollow" victory IMO

As other people have said, It is a furrher cheapening of the game below SL level.
Posted Image

#111 Blind side johnny

Blind side johnny
  • Coach
  • 9,233 posts

Posted 07 October 2012 - 10:33 AM

Should we a have a successful season next year and we utilise Bradfords players, you can hear the calls from other teams already, saying its only cos they've got all them Bradford players and it will be a "hollow" victory IMO

As other people have said, It is a furrher cheapening of the game below SL level.


You may be right but in reality it is only what other teams have done in the past with long-term dual reg players - Leigh and their St Helens contingent come to mind.
Believe what you see, don't see what you believe.


John Ray (1627 - 1705)

#112 Blind side johnny

Blind side johnny
  • Coach
  • 9,233 posts

Posted 07 October 2012 - 10:53 AM

I think Warrington did the same with Swinton and Hull did with York, I don't think it's like the Queensland cup or the New South Wales cup (these are the competitions in Australia where a club is a feeder club for a certain NRL team, I've heard a few people mention this on this thread) it's nothing to worry about.

I can assure you all that the championship/championship1 will never become like the Queensland/NSW cups,as Morrison and Sawyer have said themselves that we will never become a feeder club - to anyone. I think the RFL will be some way off the ARL and will not structure rugby league over here like the the ARL structure the game in down under, I can't see it going that way anyway.


These are the real concerns of many who follow CC clubs though. Whilst I appreciate your earnestness Kelsey I don't believe that you are in a position to offer any such assurance that similar changes may not occur within British RL. We do have a reputation for emulating all things Australian, even hiring Aussie coaches in some cases, and there is no reason for feeling confident that this wouldn't become another instance.

We can say that MS or whoever is the leader of any club wouldn't stand for it but is that true? Say other clubs do become effective feeders for SL clubs and through that system gain success on the field that your club can't match? What would follow almost certainly is that attendances would fall, possibly dramatically, when faced with the prospect of watching defeat after defeat. Then what are a club's leaders supposed to do - sacrifice their principles to allow the club to survive or stick to their guns and go down with the ship? Neither is an attractive prospect.

You refer to the Queensland Cup which is a 12 team competition about as strong as the Championship and Ian Webster, ex of Widnes, is presently playing in that competition and was featured in 40/20 magazine recently. In there he says: "The Championship is more consistent due to its "stand-alone" (i.e. non-affiliated) clubs............they can field a settled team week in week out, gaining continuity and consistency...............(in the Queensland Cup) you might see a team line up with seven NRL players one week then only one the next."

This is not the kind of team that I would want to support where we simply cheer the jerseys, never mind who is in them. I appreciate that this isn't the present case but I firmly believe that it may be the thin end of the wedge in a move towards that scenario. What guarantees can the RFL offer that such a development will never be allowed?
Believe what you see, don't see what you believe.


John Ray (1627 - 1705)

#113 Kelsey The Ram

Kelsey The Ram
  • Coach
  • 385 posts

Posted 07 October 2012 - 09:19 PM

We can say that MS or whoever is the leader of any club wouldn't stand for it but is that true? Say other clubs do become effective feeders for SL clubs and through that system gain success on the field that your club can't match? What would follow almost certainly is that attendances would fall, possibly dramatically, when faced with the prospect of watching defeat after defeat. Then what are a club's leaders supposed to do - sacrifice their principles to allow the club to survive or stick to their guns and go down with the ship? Neither is an attractive prospect.

This is not the kind of team that I would want to support where we simply cheer the jerseys, never mind who is in them. I appreciate that this isn't the present case but I firmly believe that it may be the thin end of the wedge in a move towards that scenario. What guarantees can the RFL offer that such a development will never be allowed?


For both prospects not being attractive, in which I agree they're not, I would have guessed MS was a man of his word, but this scheme isn't meant to be a feeder club style scheme, it's more like the dual-reg scheme, I think that maybe this new partnership with Bradford, which more clubs seem to partnering up with SL clubs, will replace dual-reg, I don't know, it could happen, maybe it does?

I acn say that I am with you on not supporting a team where we support the jerseys and not who is in them, I wouldn't like that at all.
"Are you tryin' to mug me off in front of my pals?"

#114 John North

John North
  • Coach
  • 1,528 posts

Posted 08 October 2012 - 08:01 AM

Don't be so bloody sensitive. It wasn't a criticism it was an observation. T o o l.


you seem to be having a problem with your space bar ; )
Red Amber Black - Its that simple

#115 DEWSBURY TIL I DIE

DEWSBURY TIL I DIE
  • Coach
  • 2,403 posts

Posted 08 October 2012 - 04:53 PM

Glenn Morrisons view on the partnership from todays rugbyleague express paper.. " Were realy happy with how the squad as come together and the balance of it sofar", after the signings of Hale, Spiers and Becket, aswel as re signing Scott Spavin.

" Were still looking at a centre, another halfback and maybe a backrower, and that would be it "

" We want to have our own identity, and if we can add to that with A COUPLE OF SEASON LONG LOANS FROM BRADFORD THEN THAT WILL ADD TO OUR DEPTH AND QUALITY"

Hence the partnership, not being a feeder club... ;)

Also to all the worried Batley fans whos been on our forum adding their views on not having links with superleague clubs, looks like your about to do the same as us.....

Edited by DEWSBURY TIL I DIE, 08 October 2012 - 04:55 PM.


#116 Tom Coates

Tom Coates
  • Moderator
  • 934 posts

Posted 08 October 2012 - 05:05 PM

The article on page two of today's paper explains how the system will work.

The thing wasn't actually signed off by the RFL BoD until Friday, so it was tough for anyone to speak too authoritatively on the subject, and I guess nobody will know exactly how it will work in practical terms until the end of the 2013 season. I don't think I contradicted myself (if it's me that Andy's alluding to) but I can understand the confusion.

It's natural to react the way that people have, but I think too much emphasis has been put on the passage of players from Dewsbury (as an example) to Bradford. As I mentioned earlier, the main benefit the Bulls (and any other SL club) will reap from the new partnerships will be the opportunity for their best youngsters to gain experience at a decent level.

...and if that takes the form of season-long loans, as Glenn says in today's paper, then all the better as far as the Rams are concerned.

#117 grumpyoldram

grumpyoldram
  • Coach
  • 2,636 posts

Posted 09 October 2012 - 08:35 AM

The article on page two of today's paper explains how the system will work.

The thing wasn't actually signed off by the RFL BoD until Friday, so it was tough for anyone to speak too authoritatively on the subject, and I guess nobody will know exactly how it will work in practical terms until the end of the 2013 season. I don't think I contradicted myself (if it's me that Andy's alluding to) but I can understand the confusion.

It's natural to react the way that people have, but I think too much emphasis has been put on the passage of players from Dewsbury (as an example) to Bradford. As I mentioned earlier, the main benefit the Bulls (and any other SL club) will reap from the new partnerships will be the opportunity for their best youngsters to gain experience at a decent level.

...and if that takes the form of season-long loans, as Glenn says in today's paper, then all the better as far as the Rams are concerned.

Don't want to make mischief here Tom, but unless I was dreaming it, the original suggestion was that GM would be able to borrow Bulls players not selected for FC's matchday nineteen, which would suggest an altogether more fluid arrangement, Season long loans are an altogether different, and more acceptable (IMO) proposition.

#118 Ackroman

Ackroman
  • Coach
  • 1,820 posts

Posted 09 October 2012 - 09:08 AM

I think the whole academy system is poorly thought out. I can't see why clubs at Championship level feel the need to have one. After all the Rams have done just as well signing the best amateurs in the area rather than developing from the academy. Secondly the Bulls haven't exactly set the world alight with their academy so what are they hoping to achieve now? It seems to me that this gives some fairly average players a level to compete at and if that's the case Bradford shouldn't have signed them in the first place.

Longer term I hope this is a short term fix to allow contracted academy players to receive their contracted payments. Once it's been allow to wither on the vine, a new set up needs putting in place so that clubs only sign players that they intend to play in the first team. The bigger clubs should have a second team if they wish but not use the Championship as a play pen.

I think dual registration wants removing and season long loans should replace them.

What I believe should happen is that if Dewsbury or Bradford identify a youngster or amateur, that player should be allowed to develop under the wing of their amateur club. The player may give the Rams first option to sign for them as a first team squad member but if that doesn't happen the option expires after 2 years. The Rams may also sell their options. On signing the player the professional club should make a payment to the amateur club which should be subsidised by the RFL from a player development fund. Any terms agreed as part of the option should also be paid. if the option expires without being taken up the player should be compensated to some degree.

Through this idea I believe that players first and foremost understand what they are signing into. At SL level there are too many youngsters not getting a game and and being sold a pup by playing in an inferior competition. Also there will be some academy players who just aren't good enough even for championship level so it will also address this. it will also foster better relationships between the RFL and Barla/amateur clubs because the money spent via the clubs on academies will be spent by the clubs on youth development in the amateur sector.

#119 grumpyoldram

grumpyoldram
  • Coach
  • 2,636 posts

Posted 09 October 2012 - 10:23 AM

I think the whole academy system is poorly thought out. I can't see why clubs at Championship level feel the need to have one. After all the Rams have done just as well signing the best amateurs in the area rather than developing from the academy. Secondly the Bulls haven't exactly set the world alight with their academy so what are they hoping to achieve now? It seems to me that this gives some fairly average players a level to compete at and if that's the case Bradford shouldn't have signed them in the first place.

Longer term I hope this is a short term fix to allow contracted academy players to receive their contracted payments. Once it's been allow to wither on the vine, a new set up needs putting in place so that clubs only sign players that they intend to play in the first team. The bigger clubs should have a second team if they wish but not use the Championship as a play pen.

I think dual registration wants removing and season long loans should replace them.

What I believe should happen is that if Dewsbury or Bradford identify a youngster or amateur, that player should be allowed to develop under the wing of their amateur club. The player may give the Rams first option to sign for them as a first team squad member but if that doesn't happen the option expires after 2 years. The Rams may also sell their options. On signing the player the professional club should make a payment to the amateur club which should be subsidised by the RFL from a player development fund. Any terms agreed as part of the option should also be paid. if the option expires without being taken up the player should be compensated to some degree.

Through this idea I believe that players first and foremost understand what they are signing into. At SL level there are too many youngsters not getting a game and and being sold a pup by playing in an inferior competition. Also there will be some academy players who just aren't good enough even for championship level so it will also address this. it will also foster better relationships between the RFL and Barla/amateur clubs because the money spent via the clubs on academies will be spent by the clubs on youth development in the amateur sector.


You've summed up my thoughts exactly on the subject Ackro, I am heartily sick of the "spanish trawler" system of hoovering up any vaguely talented youngsters, (and throwing the tiddlers back damaged and floundering), to a) Make sure they don't go anywhere else B) to provide academy squadfillers and c) to justify the need for an academy and a service area and all the coaches and hangers on that are required to run them. Of course your ideas are far too simple and sensible to ever be considered by either the RFL or the greedy s0ds in SL. :angry:

#120 grumpyoldram

grumpyoldram
  • Coach
  • 2,636 posts

Posted 09 October 2012 - 10:26 AM

You've summed up my thoughts exactly on the subject Ackro, I am heartily sick of the "spanish trawler" system of hoovering up any vaguely talented youngsters, (and throwing the tiddlers back damaged and floundering), to a) Make sure they don't go anywhere else B) to provide academy squadfillers and c) to justify the need for an academy and a service area and all the coaches and hangers on that are required to run them. Of course your ideas are far too simple and sensible to ever be considered by either the RFL or the greedy s0ds in SL. :angry:


Goodness :wacko: - my emotions seem to have run away with me. :o :unsure: :blink:




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users