Jump to content


Rugby League World Issue 400 - Out Now!

RUGBY LEAGUE WORLD MAGAZINE - ISSUE 400 - OUT NOW!
84 pages, 38 years of history from Open Rugby to the present day.
Click here for the digital edition to read online via smartphone, tablet and desktop devices including iPhone, iPad, Android & Kindle HD.
Click here to order a copy for delivery by post. Annual subscriptions also available worldwide.
Find out what's inside Issue 400
/ View a Gallery of all 400 covers / WH Smith Branches stocking Issue 400
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
- - - - -

Conference entry criteria


  • Please log in to reply
33 replies to this topic

#21 Spidey

Spidey
  • Coach
  • 428 posts

Posted 10 January 2013 - 06:06 PM

According to their web page they have applied to join the Yorkshire Mens league as their application to join the NCL was rejected without an explanation.Posted Image


I doubt there was no explanation if they applied correctly. Its pretty well known they do not fulfill minimum criteria, but this is old new now isn't it ?

#22 The knowledge

The knowledge
  • Coach
  • 194 posts

Posted 10 January 2013 - 07:44 PM

It's pretty well known just sums NCL rup. Full clear concise reasons should be simple for NCL committee to supply but they can't because the minimum criteria are so poorly worded, even where it seems clear they are not applied universally. The MC need a full rewrite and as part of the process when an application fails a clear and full response giving all reasons for failure should be the absolute minimum provided by the NCL.

If clear that if official reasons are not provided re why an application failed a club would find it impossible to measure whats needed to meet them.

#23 bowes

bowes
  • Coach
  • 10,713 posts

Posted 10 January 2013 - 08:16 PM

Feedback would have been a good idea. Even though I can understand why some clubs got rejected (even though a courtesy explanation would have been a good idea) the reasoning behind Northampton and Bristol's rejection in particular is very unclear. I happen to know it wasn't geography but can't say how I know this.

Edited by bowes, 10 January 2013 - 08:16 PM.


#24 LONGMAN

LONGMAN
  • Coach
  • 824 posts

Posted 11 January 2013 - 08:13 AM

It's pretty well known just sums NCL rup. Full clear concise reasons should be simple for NCL committee to supply but they can't because the minimum criteria are so poorly worded, even where it seems clear they are not applied universally. The MC need a full rewrite and as part of the process when an application fails a clear and full response giving all reasons for failure should be the absolute minimum provided by the NCL.

If clear that if official reasons are not provided re why an application failed a club would find it impossible to measure whats needed to meet them.


As far as i am aware they didnt actually apply; just showed interest.
But its clear they fell short on the club mark, the two open age teams, along with the youth, junior and mini-mod structure.

#25 Spidey

Spidey
  • Coach
  • 428 posts

Posted 11 January 2013 - 08:44 AM

As far as i am aware they didnt actually apply; just showed interest.
But its clear they fell short on the club mark, the two open age teams, along with the youth, junior and mini-mod structure.


I suppose that's why they didn't get feedback on an application that doesn't actually exist. The NCL are good with regards to communications, thats why I was surprised to hear that a club had not been told why they were unsuccessful

#26 thestatman

thestatman
  • Coach
  • 1,577 posts

Posted 11 January 2013 - 05:39 PM

All the whining that Bramley have done along with the press releases slamming the NCL management (when they are clearly miles away from meeting the criteria) aren't exactly going to endear themselves to the current members (who would have to vote on any future applications) that know damn well what a god job the Management Committee does on behalf of its members. You can cite the fact that the criteria aren't always rigidly applied all you want but a club falling slightly short in one area, with a clear plan and ambition to fix it, is a long way from failing on almost every count. If the people at Bramley put half of the energy into building an excellent community club than they do into whinging about how hard done to they are they'd already be a long way to meeting the criteria!

Edited by thestatman, 11 January 2013 - 05:40 PM.

SINGING MY MUM'S A .......

 

 

Views are my own and not necessarily those of Thatto Heath Crusaders!!


#27 The knowledge

The knowledge
  • Coach
  • 194 posts

Posted 11 January 2013 - 06:50 PM

I don't always agree with Bowes but he has it spot on, simple clear feedback to clubs avoids any doubt and then theres no need for what's seen as slamming the NCL to get the facts. Why have minimum criteria at all if its not universally applied.

Once again the reasons for turning down the application have not been communicated clearly. If the NCL see that simply seeking to clarify the reasons is whining then it could be said they are very far from doing a ''god job'' (a freudian slip if ever there was one).

Its telling that once again a phrase like ~ they are clearly miles away from meeting the criteria ~ is used rather than the NCL providing the facts which would seem to be a simple task for such a well run organisation.

#28 thestatman

thestatman
  • Coach
  • 1,577 posts

Posted 11 January 2013 - 11:43 PM

I'm not sure the NCL see it as whining, i'm pretty sure they haven't said, suggested or even insinuated that they do. I haven't said that they do, only given a personal perception and a suggestion on how people at NCL member clubs may view it (I maybe completely wrong with that suggestion). It certainly isn't my place to speak on behalf of the NCL only on behalf of myself. I just feel that any perception of hostility towards the league and its management is unlikely to help Bramley in any future application they may make, where they would need votes from the current member clubs (and those clubs alone) to be elected to the league.

Edited by thestatman, 11 January 2013 - 11:44 PM.

SINGING MY MUM'S A .......

 

 

Views are my own and not necessarily those of Thatto Heath Crusaders!!


#29 Spidey

Spidey
  • Coach
  • 428 posts

Posted 14 January 2013 - 11:16 AM

Once again the reasons for turning down the application have not been communicated clearly. If the NCL see that simply seeking to clarify the reasons is whining then it could be said they are very far from doing a ''god job'' (a freudian slip if ever there was one).


Did they ACTUALLY apply though, or just express an interest... one would demand feedback, one would not

#30 LONGMAN

LONGMAN
  • Coach
  • 824 posts

Posted 14 January 2013 - 11:35 AM

Did they ACTUALLY apply though, or just express an interest... one would demand feedback, one would not


According to one of the NCL reps. they never actually officially applied hence the reason for no feed back.

#31 bowes

bowes
  • Coach
  • 10,713 posts

Posted 14 January 2013 - 11:44 AM

How come they never officially applied? Did the NCL just invite the clubs they wanted in out of the expressions of interest to submit an official application?

#32 Spidey

Spidey
  • Coach
  • 428 posts

Posted 14 January 2013 - 03:25 PM

According to one of the NCL reps. they never actually officially applied hence the reason for no feed back.


Makes sense... I expect they need to look a bit closer at home in the future. I hope when they are ready they join the NCL

#33 jaguar

jaguar
  • Players
  • 81 posts

Posted 14 January 2013 - 04:33 PM

How come they never officially applied? Did the NCL just invite the clubs they wanted in out of the expressions of interest to submit an official application?

Why they didn't actually apply probably came from them knowing that they didn't meet any of the criteria. For starters they only have one team; no second team, no youth or junior teams. Facilities come next - and whilst the facilities they have used belonging to another club are superb - NCL teams cannot share grounds with another NCL team.

The NCL didn't "just invite the clubs they wanted in out of the expressions of interest to submit an official application". The majority of the clubs that applied actually got in, with just a few on the fringes that didn't meet enough of the criteria.

Perhaps Bramley expected that they deserved to get in just because they were Bramley. Even Warrington Wizards had to do a lot of work before they got to the stage of even being considered the second time round.

#34 bowes

bowes
  • Coach
  • 10,713 posts

Posted 14 January 2013 - 04:43 PM

Why they didn't actually apply probably came from them knowing that they didn't meet any of the criteria. For starters they only have one team; no second team, no youth or junior teams. Facilities come next - and whilst the facilities they have used belonging to another club are superb - NCL teams cannot share grounds with another NCL team.

The NCL didn't "just invite the clubs they wanted in out of the expressions of interest to submit an official application". The majority of the clubs that applied actually got in, with just a few on the fringes that didn't meet enough of the criteria.

Perhaps Bramley expected that they deserved to get in just because they were Bramley. Even Warrington Wizards had to do a lot of work before they got to the stage of even being considered the second time round.

That would make sense but doesn't explain why they're complaining about non admission if they didn't apply?




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users