Jump to content


Rugby League World - Grand Finals Issue

RUGBY LEAGUE WORLD - THE GRAND FINALS ISSUE - OUT 17 OCT OR DOWNLOAD IT NOW!
Try our Fantastic 4-Issue Bundle Offer:
For just £14, a saving of 10% on the regular cover price, you’ll get:

The Grand Finals Issue (out 17 Oct) – Grand Final drama from both hemispheres plus Four Nations preview
The Four Nations Issue (out 21 Nov) – Fantastic coverage of the Four Nations tournament down under
The Golden Boot Issue (out 19 Dec) – A look back at the 2014 season plus the big reveal of the winner of the Golden Boot
The 2015 Season Preview Issue (out 23 Jan) – How will your team perform in 2015? We preview every club.


League Express

Podcast

Photo
- - - - -

Dual reg/ Twinning

Who is for or against?

  • Please log in to reply
105 replies to this topic

Poll: Dual reg/Twinning (131 member(s) have cast votes)

Who is for and who is against?

  1. For (19 votes [14.50%])

    Percentage of vote: 14.50%

  2. Voted Against (112 votes [85.50%])

    Percentage of vote: 85.50%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#41 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,359 posts

Posted 10 February 2013 - 01:45 PM

Ah, I see. Ignoring this poll, but your 'sample' of 20 posters on another thread was deemed to be gospel.
Granted, this poll isn't scientific, and could have more questions added, but its a guide to the feeling on this board, which is 90% against (as I type this), so its a strong message.
However, my own poll is 100% sure that you won't accept these results as such.


No shaun my "20 posters" crack wasn't gospel at all any figures I come up with will be as baloney as these.

I just go back to the jist of what I believe which is that many Championship fans see these moves as the end of their clubs ambitions to get in the top tier.

You can go and find 2,000 against it if you worked hard enough, we could probably go round the CC clubs and find 5,000 to sign that they were against it.

But what is the point? None of these people have a say anyway, their clubs are the ones who have said yes to it

Or do people believe in fan power? Will a few hundred people threatening to walk away from their CC club unless the board returns to it's independance and vows to pursue a place in SL change policy mid stream?

I think you'd fine such boards stepping down and saying to the fans, you run the club then.

Indeed that's the Hunslet situation. We have no traditional board of businessmen with a few quid. the brillant fans who run things have said that if we end up in the third tier that will be it, so we have to tie in with Leeds and that's it. Hobsons choice.

So what would the point of a poll be down at Hunslet??

Edited by The Parksider, 10 February 2013 - 01:47 PM.


#42 Bleep1673

Bleep1673
  • Coach
  • 3,430 posts

Posted 10 February 2013 - 02:07 PM

For
Swinton RLFC est 1866 - Supplying England with players when most of your clubs were in nappies

#43 Dave T

Dave T
  • Coach
  • 15,185 posts

Posted 10 February 2013 - 02:42 PM

No shaun my "20 posters" crack wasn't gospel at all any figures I come up with will be as baloney as these.

I just go back to the jist of what I believe which is that many Championship fans see these moves as the end of their clubs ambitions to get in the top tier.

You can go and find 2,000 against it if you worked hard enough, we could probably go round the CC clubs and find 5,000 to sign that they were against it.

But what is the point? None of these people have a say anyway, their clubs are the ones who have said yes to it

Or do people believe in fan power? Will a few hundred people threatening to walk away from their CC club unless the board returns to it's independance and vows to pursue a place in SL change policy mid stream?

I think you'd fine such boards stepping down and saying to the fans, you run the club then.

Indeed that's the Hunslet situation. We have no traditional board of businessmen with a few quid. the brillant fans who run things have said that if we end up in the third tier that will be it, so we have to tie in with Leeds and that's it. Hobsons choice.

So what would the point of a poll be down at Hunslet??

perhaps its just a fan poll on a fan forum - a little like the match polls.

#44 keighley

keighley
  • Coach
  • 5,639 posts

Posted 10 February 2013 - 02:56 PM

If the few fans that are left to the A team clubs walk in any numbers, the whole reason for existence for these clubs, other than a an A team in the true sense of the term, will be gone. They may continue as A teams for years but they will be shell clubs, devoid of any raisond'etre.

I hope the SL clubs will be proud of their role is the extinction of 50% of the membership of the RFL.

#45 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,359 posts

Posted 10 February 2013 - 03:03 PM

If the few fans that are left to the A team clubs walk in any numbers, the whole reason for existence for these clubs, other than a an A team in the true sense of the term, will be gone. They may continue as A teams for years but they will be shell clubs, devoid of any raisond'etre.

I hope the SL clubs will be proud of their role is the extinction of 50% of the membership of the RFL.


Oh dear :(

The SL clubs may be pleased on balance that all the resources end up where they count most. In the SKY league.

I'm sure they care, but not enough to hold back the potential and value of SL to the game.

Something you yourself appreciate.

#46 keighley

keighley
  • Coach
  • 5,639 posts

Posted 10 February 2013 - 05:36 PM

Oh dear :(

The SL clubs may be pleased on balance that all the resources end up where they count most. In the SKY league.

I'm sure they care, but not enough to hold back the potential and value of SL to the game.

Something you yourself appreciate.


Transalation " I'm alright, Jack".

#47 RobinHoodHawk

RobinHoodHawk
  • Coach
  • 568 posts

Posted 10 February 2013 - 07:24 PM

I think it's time for a vote of no confidence in the RFL supremos.
They have shown total disrespect for Championship clubs and greed for Super League teams.
My biggest concerns are

Total loss of identity of our Ch clubs
Devaluing and distortion of the competition
Ruining of any business plans / financial investments by the genuine clubs who do have aspirations.
Driving of players away from the game due to lack of opportunity !

I am no longer following my life long team as I think they have got it all wrong and woe betide them if they do get a run of wins as I well know they can't afford it.

I have the utmost respect for Fev, Halifax and Sheffield who have got their house in order and are much better organised than many Super League clubs.

Oh to get back to the sensible structures of the 70's and 80's.

#48 Celt

Celt
  • Coach
  • 1,722 posts

Posted 10 February 2013 - 09:12 PM

On Thursday night Featherstone and Keighley played an under 20's game and this afternoon Featherstone and Sheffield played an under 19's game. All without any central funding. But SL clubs can't afford both???? I just don't get it.


absolutely. as I said in my post, clubs like featherstone are to be commended. the SuperLeague clubs are a disgrace re this - they have to develop players in a pro environment in order to ensure the continued growth and wellbeing of the game at elite level. they are totally failing to do so, in order to save a few quid in the short term. A disgrace.
Rugby League: Alive and Handling

#49 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,359 posts

Posted 10 February 2013 - 11:26 PM

Transalation " I'm alright, Jack".


When you can't answer a point you make it personal. It's not about me.

Championship club fans moan what a financial mess Superleague is in and when they do something about it they moan all the more.

Translate the moans and you get "I'm upset because my club no longer has the chance of top flight RL."

Soccer went massive in the TV era, Union went pro and has three times as much money to offer players, Aussie RL has stepped up a level financially. RL can't get a TV deal to manage a 14 club SL successfully.

Having a childish jibe at me won't change the reality.

Edited by The Parksider, 10 February 2013 - 11:26 PM.


#50 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,359 posts

Posted 10 February 2013 - 11:44 PM

absolutely. as I said in my post, clubs like featherstone are to be commended. the SuperLeague clubs are a disgrace re this - they have to develop players in a pro environment in order to ensure the continued growth and wellbeing of the game at elite level. they are totally failing to do so, in order to save a few quid in the short term. A disgrace.


Far more top players are produced by Superleague clubs than by Championship clubs.

Far more junior clubs play the game in Superleague areas than in Championship club areas.

Where exactly is the total failure?

#51 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,359 posts

Posted 10 February 2013 - 11:49 PM

1. I have the utmost respect for Fev, Halifax and Sheffield who have got their house in order and are much better organised than many Super League clubs.

2. Oh to get back to the sensible structures of the 70's and 80's.


1. Superleague clubs have the burden of having to organise a £4,000,000+ turnover and fund a £1,650,000 wage bill.

How well were Halifax organised when they were last in SL??. They collapsed as did Sheffield.

2. Go back to semi pro RL and watch £18,000,000 a year disappear from the game followed by thousands of fans and budding pro
players.

#52 Terry Mullaney

Terry Mullaney
  • Coach
  • 1,991 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 12:28 AM

Far more top players are produced by Superleague clubs than by Championship clubs.

Far more junior clubs play the game in Superleague areas than in Championship club areas.

Where exactly is the total failure?

So why aren't the SL clubs running reserve sides to accommodate their monopoly on juniors. Don't tell me they can't afford it Parky please.
Wedding Films For The Discerning by Picture House
Free Showreel DVD On Request

http://www.pictureho...ingfilms.co.uk/

#53 Wellsy4HullFC

Wellsy4HullFC
  • Coach
  • 9,926 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 12:51 AM

I want to see how it pans out first before I decide whether I'm for or against it. If a club decides this is good for them, then I aren't going to disagree unless I've got much evidence to back it up.

The main issue seems to be that (some) Championship clubs don't want to be treated as a feeder club. Surely they have the power to not sign the agreement then?

The standards of both the SL and the Championships 'should' improve (in theory). However, the meaning of one comp is in question. No (automatic) promotion and now some are effectively feeder clubs. I want to see standards improving, but if you relegate the Championship sides to mere feeder teams with no hope of promotion it could die and then there's be no feeder teams left for the clubs.

Is there something in the middle? Bring back promotion with only non-feeder clubs eligible for promotion? Scrap the feeder system but allow SL clubs to field their 'A' teams in the Championships?

At the end of the day, no one has forced the Championship clubs into a partnership with a SL club. They must see some benefit in the arrangement.
Posted Image

#54 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,359 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 07:40 AM

So why aren't the SL clubs running reserve sides to accommodate their monopoly on juniors. Don't tell me they can't afford it Parky please.


They've afforded it for 17 years Terry of course they have. But business is about profit and opportunity. The Championship clubs are totally clear they are twinning to get players to avoid relegation and the dire consequences of that. The Superleague clubs are clear they are twinning to save £100,000 a year they can spend elsewhere on the business.

If that leaves Powell and Aston hopping mad do you think the Superleague clubs care? Do you think any big club over the years way back before SL cared when it took advantage of the smaller clubs??

Why did you ask me this question Terry, the answer is clear?

On your point Superleague has a monopoly on all the best junior players, that begs the question why do Fev and Sheffield run academies then? I suppose we could swallow the idea they are well organised and a shining example to useless SL clubs but again the answer is obvious - it's to tick the boxes for a Superleague application.

They are all just looking after themselves the best they can.

Edited by The Parksider, 11 February 2013 - 09:14 AM.


#55 Terry Mullaney

Terry Mullaney
  • Coach
  • 1,991 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 10:19 AM

They've afforded it for 17 years Terry of course they have. But business is about profit and opportunity. The Championship clubs are totally clear they are twinning to get players to avoid relegation and the dire consequences of that. The Superleague clubs are clear they are twinning to save £100,000 a year they can spend elsewhere on the business.

If that leaves Powell and Aston hopping mad do you think the Superleague clubs care? Do you think any big club over the years way back before SL cared when it took advantage of the smaller clubs??

Why did you ask me this question Terry, the answer is clear?

On your point Superleague has a monopoly on all the best junior players, that begs the question why do Fev and Sheffield run academies then? I suppose we could swallow the idea they are well organised and a shining example to useless SL clubs but again the answer is obvious - it's to tick the boxes for a Superleague application.

They are all just looking after themselves the best they can.

I'm not sure how running an under 20's side ticks a box when SL clubs have abandoned reserve team football. Perhaps Rovers are determined to do things the right way regardless of the nonsense that's going on around them. A monopoly on juniors was your point, not mine Parky.

By the way, remember the name, Jack Bussey. Another star in the making and several others will follow him too.

Edited by Terry Mullaney, 11 February 2013 - 10:21 AM.

Wedding Films For The Discerning by Picture House
Free Showreel DVD On Request

http://www.pictureho...ingfilms.co.uk/

#56 Keith T

Keith T
  • Coach
  • 8,915 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 01:02 PM

I just go back to the jist of what I believe which is that many Championship fans see these moves as the end of their clubs ambitions to get in the top tier.


That may be your very one eyed view but the Championship fans that I meet and converse with seem more discontent about a weak governing body that is allowing SLE to dictate policies that concern not only their clubs but also Championship clubs.

There is quite a lot of discontent of this system and yet what is the main response from the RFL? To take it up with the UKBA to try and get the regulation relaxed to allow SL clubs visa players permission to play on loan at Championship clubs to gain fitness.

How does that address problems that clubs are outlining to the RFL? All that is doing is appeasing Gary Hetherington so that he can get Kylie Leuluai some game time.

For everything else that has been raised by clubs and individuals the response seems to be "well lets suck it and see".

I remember when .............................

"It is impossible not to feel a twinge of sympathy for Workington Town, the fall guys this season for the Super League's determination to retain it's European dimension, in the shape of Paris. While the French have had every assistance to survive, the importance of having a flagship in a heartland area like West Cumbria has been conveniently forgotten." - Dave Hadfield - Independent 25th August 1996.


#57 shaun mc

shaun mc
  • Coach
  • 1,712 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 01:32 PM

That may be your very one eyed view but the Championship fans that I meet and converse with seem more discontent about a weak governing body that is allowing SLE to dictate policies that concern not only their clubs but also Championship clubs.

There is quite a lot of discontent of this system and yet what is the main response from the RFL? To take it up with the UKBA to try and get the regulation relaxed to allow SL clubs visa players permission to play on loan at Championship clubs to gain fitness.

How does that address problems that clubs are outlining to the RFL? All that is doing is appeasing Gary Hetherington so that he can get Kylie Leuluai some game time.

For everything else that has been raised by clubs and individuals the response seems to be "well lets suck it and see".


Good post Keith
That reply from the RFL gave us an insight into where the RFL's priorities lie. Sort out the discontent, paper-thin regulations and inequality - no. Lets see how we can get Leuluai some game time first.

#58 Viking Warrior

Viking Warrior
  • Coach
  • 5,198 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 01:37 PM

in it's original form of helping the development of potential young talent then an unreserved YES......................as a mdium to keep established players fit (wood, mccarthy and gardner) then a definite NO.
"Why is Napoleon crying ?" said one sailor to the other, "poor ###### thinks he's being exiled to st helens" came the reply.



https://scontent-a-l...276002364_n.jpg

#59 Viking Warrior

Viking Warrior
  • Coach
  • 5,198 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 01:44 PM

being a widnes fan i have experienced both sides of the argument, we were linked with wigan for DR and from that deal we discovered a superbly talented young half back in joe mellor, now we are the superleague club it's fantastic to watch young lads like declan hulme get the chance of genuinely competetive first team rugby which will aid their long term development.
"Why is Napoleon crying ?" said one sailor to the other, "poor ###### thinks he's being exiled to st helens" came the reply.



https://scontent-a-l...276002364_n.jpg

#60 Keith T

Keith T
  • Coach
  • 8,915 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 02:13 PM

Last season Workington Town and HKR announced a partnership which included the "loan" of one or two young players to Town to assist the players development in the game.

Three young players were nominated for loan but after 1 game two of the players decided that they didn't want the hassle of travelling from Hull to west Cumbria once or twice a week. The other lad, Dave Petersen, stuck it out and ended up being one of the nominations for Championship 1 Young Player of the Year award.

Near the end of the season we took two lads from Salford on dual registration (Andy Morris and Adam Walne) plus another from Wakefield (Chris Annikin). These three lads only managed a handful of game between them for Town but all did very well.

At the very end of the season Town were hit by numerous injuries and suspensions and found themselves struggling for players and it culminated with a midweek match away at Gateshead where the four dual registered players weren't available from their SL clubs and we had to play two players recalled out of retirement, a 17 year old prop on the wing, other players out of position and we named 2 of the injured players on the subs bench to avoid getting a fine for not naming 17 players.

The point I am trying to show here is that there wasn't a great deal wrong with the dual registration system last season except as shown with us that the players involved were very much in the control of the SL clubs and the Championship clubs could not rely on their availability.

The system only required some sort of tightening up of this sort of thing to make it work to the benefit of everyone but the system that has been brought in and the way some clubs are using it has been more in favour of the SL clubs to get some senior players game time rather than developing young players, which we were all told was the thinking behind it.

Edited by Keith T, 11 February 2013 - 02:15 PM.

I remember when .............................

"It is impossible not to feel a twinge of sympathy for Workington Town, the fall guys this season for the Super League's determination to retain it's European dimension, in the shape of Paris. While the French have had every assistance to survive, the importance of having a flagship in a heartland area like West Cumbria has been conveniently forgotten." - Dave Hadfield - Independent 25th August 1996.