Jump to content


TotalRL.com Shop Alert: Last Ordering Date for Free Pre-Xmas Delivery within UK: 2pm Thursday 18th December!!
Rugby League Yearbook 2014/15 The Forbidden Game League Express League Express Gift Card Rugby League World Rugby League World Gift Card
Buy Now £14.99 / Kindle Buy Now £14.99 / Kindle Print / Digital Subscription Gift Cards Print / Digital Subscription Gift Cards



Photo
- - - - -

are we due another payout from the rfl


  • Please log in to reply
15 replies to this topic

#1 oldrover

oldrover
  • Coach
  • 6,164 posts

Posted 15 December 2012 - 12:00 PM

compensation for the abandoned under 23s

Edited by oldrover, 15 December 2012 - 12:01 PM.

joe mullaney is a god
the only good tiger is a stuffed tiger

Posted Image

#2 Griff

Griff
  • Coach
  • 7,912 posts

Posted 15 December 2012 - 01:33 PM

compensation for the abandoned under 23s


Thinking of suing, OR ? :blink:
"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

#3 oldrover

oldrover
  • Coach
  • 6,164 posts

Posted 15 December 2012 - 04:32 PM

i'll tell you what' apart from superleague, this has peed me off more than anything else
joe mullaney is a god
the only good tiger is a stuffed tiger

Posted Image

#4 thundergaz

thundergaz
  • Coach
  • 3,148 posts

Posted 15 December 2012 - 06:35 PM

i'll tell you what' apart from superleague, this has peed me off more than anything else


Totally agree OR. It's disgusting the way the champ clubs are treated. The RFL have made it clear hundreds of times that you need all the academy levels to progress to SL and we have invested very heavily in our academy's to progress to SL only now to be told we won't need an under 23s. I'm fed up of the RFL changing the goal posts just to suit the clubs in SL that's not a business that's being dictated to by the so called big clubs. Also what chance do we have of getting into SL? When they change the goal posts to help the teams that are already there.

#5 oldrover

oldrover
  • Coach
  • 6,164 posts

Posted 15 December 2012 - 06:52 PM

Totally agree OR. It's disgusting the way the champ clubs are treated. The RFL have made it clear hundreds of times that you need all the academy levels to progress to SL and we have invested very heavily in our academy's to progress to SL only now to be told we won't need an under 23s. I'm fed up of the RFL changing the goal posts just to suit the clubs in SL that's not a business that's being dictated to by the so called big clubs. Also what chance do we have of getting into SL? When they change the goal posts to help the teams that are already there.

not only does it affect our club (which pi55es me off), but it affects the pathway for the academy players and our ability to harvest the late developers throughout the game. they are not all the finished article at 20 years old. some don't even start till they're 16.
joe mullaney is a god
the only good tiger is a stuffed tiger

Posted Image

#6 thundergaz

thundergaz
  • Coach
  • 3,148 posts

Posted 15 December 2012 - 07:03 PM

not only does it affect our club (which pi55es me off), but it affects the pathway for the academy players and our ability to harvest the late developers throughout the game. they are not all the finished article at 20 years old. some don't even start till they're 16.


I agree again OR but how many players are we going to have to release or will want to leave now? I know the club could keep them signed on but what would be the point in costing us money when they most likely wont get much game time if any. Maybe loan them out but with the SL link ups that maybe dead in the water too. Words can't describe this fiasco that the clowns at red hall have come up with yet again another April fool moment from the clowns being dictated to. My New Years resolution is for the RFL to grow a pair and tell the so called big clubs this is what's happening lump it or like it.

#7 oldrover

oldrover
  • Coach
  • 6,164 posts

Posted 15 December 2012 - 08:30 PM

what i would like to see is 16s, 19,s and 22s.i guess a coach will have a good idea if a player is gonna make it by the age of 22. i think the 3 year gap between each group should be the maximum and from 22 to open age is about right. the main thing is that it is universal throughout the game. also bear in mind, the way it's set up, it's quite possible for 23 year olds to be playing for the 22s
joe mullaney is a god
the only good tiger is a stuffed tiger

Posted Image

#8 LOWFIELD

LOWFIELD
  • Featherstone Rovers Forum
  • 3,888 posts

Posted 16 December 2012 - 12:41 AM

To enter the amateur national conference a team amongst other things must have teams at all age groups from U8s to U18s, im not suggesting clubs should have teams from u8s but surely they should have teams from u14s for crying out loud they get 1.3 million from sky. The people running this game and the super league clubs that support them are an utter disgrace, there so shorth sighted its unreal, but never mind because Wakey have just bought an Aussie so who needs the juniors. We will never ever beat the Aussies again

#9 oldrover

oldrover
  • Coach
  • 6,164 posts

Posted 16 December 2012 - 09:00 AM

To enter the amateur national conference a team amongst other things must have teams at all age groups from U8s to U18s, im not suggesting clubs should have teams from u8s but surely they should have teams from u14s for crying out loud they get 1.3 million from sky. The people running this game and the super league clubs that support them are an utter disgrace, there so shorth sighted its unreal, but never mind because Wakey have just bought an Aussie so who needs the juniors. We will never ever beat the Aussies again

+1
joe mullaney is a god
the only good tiger is a stuffed tiger

Posted Image

#10 Steve Slater

Steve Slater
  • Coach
  • 1,941 posts

Posted 16 December 2012 - 09:33 AM

More and more potential stars will never be seen on the big stage. If you have two rivals for the same position you have to ditch one, but if there's very little to choose between them, who knows which one would have turned out the better? It reminds me of the 70's and 80's when big clubs such as Leeds used to sign the best juniors from all over Yorkshire and then discard 90% of them due to lack of opportunity (eg. Chris Burton). Due to the demand for success, rather than giving these youngsters the opportunity they would sign tried and tested players from the 2nd. Division and the lower reaches of the 1st. At least the other clubs received a transfer fee back then, nowadays they have to pay next to nowt for them!

#11 Griff

Griff
  • Coach
  • 7,912 posts

Posted 16 December 2012 - 10:47 AM

what i would like to see is 16s, 19,s and 22s.i guess a coach will have a good idea if a player is gonna make it by the age of 22. i think the 3 year gap between each group should be the maximum and from 22 to open age is about right. the main thing is that it is universal throughout the game. also bear in mind, the way it's set up, it's quite possible for 23 year olds to be playing for the 22s


Personally, I think three years is too much. How many 16 year olds are going to cut the mustard at U19?

What pees me off is this. We need P+R back. To do that successfully, we need to have an underclass of club - not necessarily the whole Div 2 - who are prepared and able to seamlessly make the transition. One criterion is development - yet the RFL put every obstacle they can think up in the way of Div 2 and 3 clubs having a development infrastructure.

It's only about 15 years since virtually every club had an Alliance team. And an Academy team. There's more money in the game than ever. Why can we no longer afford the basics ? :mellow:
"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

#12 oldrover

oldrover
  • Coach
  • 6,164 posts

Posted 16 December 2012 - 10:56 AM

Personally, I think three years is too much. How many 16 year olds are going to cut the mustard at U19?

What pees me off is this. We need P+R back. To do that successfully, we need to have an underclass of club - not necessarily the whole Div 2 - who are prepared and able to seamlessly make the transition. One criterion is development - yet the RFL put every obstacle they can think up in the way of Div 2 and 3 clubs having a development infrastructure.

It's only about 15 years since virtually every club had an Alliance team. And an Academy team. There's more money in the game than ever. Why can we no longer afford the basics ? :mellow:

i agree it's a big jump at the younger end, but better than nothing, plus some of those lads would be 17. my grandson will be 19 in january, but would still have qualified for the u18s this season.
joe mullaney is a god
the only good tiger is a stuffed tiger

Posted Image

#13 Bob Crowther

Bob Crowther
  • Coach
  • 2,661 posts

Posted 16 December 2012 - 05:27 PM

More and more potential stars will never be seen on the big stage. If you have two rivals for the same position you have to ditch one, but if there's very little to choose between them, who knows which one would have turned out the better? It reminds me of the 70's and 80's when big clubs such as Leeds used to sign the best juniors from all over Yorkshire and then discard 90% of them due to lack of opportunity (eg. Chris Burton). Due to the demand for success, rather than giving these youngsters the opportunity they would sign tried and tested players from the 2nd. Division and the lower reaches of the 1st. At least the other clubs received a transfer fee back then, nowadays they have to pay next to nowt for them!

This situation is prevalent in every sport Steve. All based on financial facts and figures, balance sheets, easy options and a "quick fix" mentality.
It will eventually bring down many sports due to financial bankruptcy as we witness the obscene sums being paid out in salaries to the participants, many of them being from other climes. I may not live to see it, but I would love to say "I told you so". Sick to death of the greedy, grasping suits who seem intent upon bringing our beloved game to its knees.

#14 jamescolin

jamescolin
  • Coach
  • 3,281 posts

Posted 16 December 2012 - 09:24 PM

Sport is in a bad way due to mismanagement and economic forces. But I don't think it will soon die. More and more clubs of every type are coming under the control of rich people from the Middle East.There are speculators amongst the oil barons who see easy and quick pickings at good prices. This trend will continue and our authorities will keep playing into their hands. Eventually some other option will crop up and the funds will disappear THEN we WILL have trouble. It is time for a strong man to appear to take control and put things right. Perhaps he (or she) could put the country right at the same time. We are slowly being taken over in all aspects of life by foreigners.

#15 Steve Slater

Steve Slater
  • Coach
  • 1,941 posts

Posted 16 December 2012 - 09:57 PM

Sport is in a bad way due to mismanagement and economic forces. But I don't think it will soon die. More and more clubs of every type are coming under the control of rich people from the Middle East.There are speculators amongst the oil barons who see easy and quick pickings at good prices. This trend will continue and our authorities will keep playing into their hands. Eventually some other option will crop up and the funds will disappear THEN we WILL have trouble. It is time for a strong man to appear to take control and put things right. Perhaps he (or she) could put the country right at the same time. We are slowly being taken over in all aspects of life by foreigners.

I agree Colin, the sport won't die, but it might need major cut-backs, such as reductions in wages and overseas quotas. If wages are bringing clubs to their knees, clubs should bite the bullett and reduce them, even if it means losing the top stars to Union and to Oz. The Welsh Rugby Union were losing top players to Rugby League in droves before professionalism came in, but they unearthed world class replacements as quickly as their predecessors headed north, and they still dominated the European game.
The RFL should cut the salary cap if they can't afford to run reserve and junior teams, and concentrate on developing talent to beat the Aussies, rather than worrying about losing the odd mercenary or two.

#16 Railway End

Railway End
  • Coach
  • 665 posts

Posted 19 December 2012 - 05:31 PM

The RFL should cut the salary cap if they can't afford to run reserve and junior teams, and concentrate on developing talent to beat the Aussies, rather than worrying about losing the odd mercenary or two.


Couldn't agree more. The ones I feel really sorry for are the U20' we have signed from SL clubs. Many of these lads would have felt they had been thrown a lifeline after the 20's competition was scrapped. Now they will have no U23 season to play. If they are unable to make an immediate impression on DP and get into the first team, where will their careers go?

"Rugby League is rugby in the simplest form in the sense that it's about great defence, great tackling technique, good handling, good passing, catching and great kicking."

 

 Stuart Lancaster - England Rugby Union Head Coach - October 2013





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users