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
- - - - -

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

#61 keighley

keighley
  • Coach
  • 6,048 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 03:17 PM

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.


You're right it's not about you. That statement was about the attitude of SL clubs towards the championships and their lack of concern for the health of the game outside of SL. That's their attitude as you stated. Your post about their attitude is summed up as " I'm alright Jack". a famous quote from the last century about the smug and selfish attitude prevalent in industrial/workplace relationships.

How you interpret that as a jibe at you, well, maybe delusions of grandeur.

Yes, SL clubs needed to do something to right their financial ship. The problem is that their solution might well lead to the demise of any competition outside of SL as an independent enitity and either result in the death of clubs or their relegation to strictly A team operations and nothing more. All this to solve the SL probelms of overspending. It's a classic " I,m alright Jack" moment and the follow up to that is " Eff the rest, I've got mine ".

What soccer and Union and the NRL has to do with internecine fratricide within the British RL community I have no idea.

#62 Superdude

Superdude
  • Coach
  • 177 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 03:21 PM

To increase the playing standards of RL in this country we need the best players playing regullary in a tough competition. SL clubs (like the Wolves) stock piling good players with no suitable reserve team is ridiculous, whilst clubs like Cas struggle to get 17 SL standards players on the park each week. Dual Reg therefore addresses this issue.....

I fear that "loaning" out players who have nowhere else to play (to lower levels of the RL) will only prevent playersfrom championships clubs) the opportunity to play at a suitbale level. Amateur RL is losing players at a rapid rate and I fear these championship level players may be lost to the game for good. There is a good number of ex-RL lads playing RU now as the number of teams / clubs allows players to find a level suitable with good financial rewards.

NET RESULST -SUper league grows stronger in the short term, and hundreds give up rugby league. Then where do th enext generation of players come from?

#63 keighley

keighley
  • Coach
  • 6,048 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 03:31 PM

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.


That was then and this is now. Wakefield, Bradford, Crusaders abd Salford have collapsed very recently. Why don't you pillory them?

I'm sure most Championship clubs would love to have the Sky money to play with. Burden? I'm sure they would love to have that burden and the wage bill does not have to be that size if the club cannot afford it.

#64 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,705 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 05:05 PM

NET RESULT -Super league grows stronger in the short term, and hundreds give up rugby league. Then where do th enext generation of players come from?


The junior set ups all SL clubs should be creating starting with schools, then onto local junior clubs then onto the SL academy.

Your right you have to have the players, but lots on here would kick Broncos out,cheered and sneered when Crusaders went under and can't understand why we have the French in SL.

#65 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,705 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 05:08 PM


That was then and this is now. Wakefield, Bradford, Crusaders abd Salford have collapsed very recently. Why don't you pillory them?


I don't pillory any club it's the attitude that top CC clubs are marvellous and well run and SL clubs are just useless.

It's a silly bias.

#66 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,705 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 05:10 PM


All this to solve the SL problems of overspending.


No it isn't. It's been accepted by CC clubs to try to stave off damaging relegation first and foremost.

The devils are the CC clubs.

#67 Derwent

Derwent
  • Coach
  • 8,099 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 05:19 PM

No it isn't. It's been accepted by CC clubs to try to stave off damaging relegation first and foremost.

The devils are the CC clubs.


One preceded the other. The original driver was to save money at SL clubs. The rest followed after some lower Championship clubs jumped ranks before the meeting of Championship clubs to discuss the issue. Other clubs who were likely to be at the bottom end looked at this and decided they better do something similar or they'd be struggling. But let's not pretend it didn't originate as a SL plan to cut costs when it clearly was.

#68 Keith T

Keith T
  • Coach
  • 9,006 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 05:21 PM

Parky what are you talking about?

This all started to save money for SL clubs. Have a look at the timelines in the RFL article here (RFL News 10th February 2012). Championship clubs hadn't even had a chance to discuss it with other Championship clubs until September 2012 by which time the SL clubs had not only decided but some had actually set about setting up partnerships - Leeds and Hunslet leading the way.

Yes, some clubs jumped on the bandwagon to get a partnership before there was none left to partner so that they weren't left behind but the over-riding reason for this present system is all down to the SL clubs, especially those that turned down the chance to have a SL reserves (Under 23) league to save £100k each.

Edited by Keith T, 11 February 2013 - 05:26 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.


#69 RSN

RSN
  • Coach
  • 4,270 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 06:07 PM

Parky what are you talking about?

This all started to save money for SL clubs. Have a look at the timelines in the RFL article here (RFL News 10th February 2012). Championship clubs hadn't even had a chance to discuss it with other Championship clubs until September 2012 by which time the SL clubs had not only decided but some had actually set about setting up partnerships - Leeds and Hunslet leading the way.

Yes, some clubs jumped on the bandwagon to get a partnership before there was none left to partner so that they weren't left behind but the over-riding reason for this present system is all down to the SL clubs, especially those that turned down the chance to have a SL reserves (Under 23) league to save £100k each.


This. The move was obviously to try and save SL clubs money, I don't think there was even a meeting between CC clubs to discuss this I think Hunslet came out with it as they realised they were destined to go down. Therefore leading everyone else to jump on.

I do think a few SL clubs were against the scrapping of the under 23s though, I don't think Wire were in favour of it but what's done is done now.

#70 shaun mc

shaun mc
  • Coach
  • 1,885 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 07:57 PM

What I can't understand is that we've had 17 years of Sky monies - £200 million plus.
And yet we have a player development system that is not fit for purpose and the clubs can't afford £100k p.a to run their player development.
There are clubs who have been in the top tier for all of the 17 years, not been even near relegation, and still need to rely on a lower grade competition to keep squad players fit and to develop their youngsters. These lower grade clubs - who receive 90% less central/guaranteed/Sky funding, yet these clubs can interact and develop links with their communities, develop their facilities and provide a full player pathway. But the top clubs simply can't or can only put their eggs in the one basket at a time. Its a clear indication of failure.
The situation could be tempered a bit if say like British Cycling that we were now leading the world and winning stuff. Trouble is, we aren't.

#71 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,705 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 10:17 PM

Parky what are you talking about?

This all started to save money for SL clubs.


It only started when the first Championship club threw away it's independance.

Up to then nobody had actually done anything.

#72 Keith T

Keith T
  • Coach
  • 9,006 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 10:23 PM

It only started when the first Championship club threw away it's independance.

Up to then nobody had actually done anything.


Now you are being silly!! Just for once admit you are wrong.

Read the timeline from the RFL. The SL clubs started talking about doing away with junior grades back in April 2012, then again in July 2012 and in to August 2012 when the first mention of a Championship club (Hunslet) becoming a partner evolved. The Championship clubs didn't meet until September 2012, after it had been cut and dried. As the RFL report says by this time other clubs were talking to each other about partnerships.

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.


#73 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,705 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 10:24 PM

What I can't understand is that we've had 17 years of Sky monies - £200 million plus.


And 17 years of paying professional wages £300 million plus.

From 2006 all SL clubs were made to run academies, and academies they run, and still do now.

So I don't know where the fundamental failure is here Shaun?

The main thing we need is the twinning agreements not to get in the way of the ambitious CC clubs.

#74 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,705 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 10:28 PM

Now you are being silly!! Just for once admit you are wrong.

Read the timeline from the RFL. The SL clubs started talking about doing away with junior grades back in April 2012, then again in July 2012 and in to August 2012 when the first mention of a Championship club (Hunslet) becoming a partner evolved. The Championship clubs didn't meet until September 2012, after it had been cut and dried. As the RFL report says by this time other clubs were talking to each other about partnerships.


I'm happy to concede any point to you Keith, but answer mine. It took a Championship club to decide to twin and then go ahead and break ranks before the problem started. So Hunslet started it??

#75 Viking Warrior

Viking Warrior
  • Coach
  • 5,238 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 10:32 PM

The junior set ups all SL clubs should be creating starting with schools, then onto local junior clubs then onto the SL academy.

Your right you have to have the players, but lots on here would kick Broncos out,cheered and sneered when Crusaders went under and can't understand why we have the French in SL.


no i certainly wouldn't want broncos kicked out and no i certainly didn;t cheer when crusaders went #### up!!. and yes i can't see what having french clubs in super league is improving their national game, they are still as poor today as they were pre 2005
"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

#76 Keith T

Keith T
  • Coach
  • 9,006 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 10:34 PM

I'm happy to concede any point to you Keith, but answer mine. It took a Championship club to decide to twin and then go ahead and break ranks before the problem started. So Hunslet started it??


But that isn't when it started. The SL clubs had already decided what they were going to do probably because Leeds and Hunslet had been in talks for several weeks before but the idea came from the SL clubs. That is where it was born and Leeds and Hunslet were joined at the hip before some of the other Championship clubs had even discussed it until their meeting in September. By the RFL meeting in October there were several others linked or in talks to link.

If you want to claim that it was started by a Championship club then so be it but I think most people can see where it started.

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.


#77 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,705 posts

Posted 12 February 2013 - 07:06 AM

But that isn't when it started. The SL clubs had already decided what they were going to do probably because Leeds and Hunslet had been in talks for several weeks before but the idea came from the SL clubs. That is where it was born and Leeds and Hunslet were joined at the hip before some of the other Championship clubs had even discussed it until their meeting in September. By the RFL meeting in October there were several others linked or in talks to link.

If you want to claim that it was started by a Championship club then so be it but I think most people can see where it started.


OK I concede, the SL clubs pushed this on the CC clubs. They could have ensured the integrity of CC by backing off.

#78 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,705 posts

Posted 12 February 2013 - 07:08 AM

no i certainly wouldn't want broncos kicked out and no i certainly didn;t cheer when crusaders went #### up!!. and yes i can't see what having french clubs in super league is improving their national game, they are still as poor today as they were pre 2005


Indeed France is poor/slow at turning up quality RL players.

So is a lot of M62 land.

And London ain't as hot as we think.

#79 Terry Mullaney

Terry Mullaney
  • Coach
  • 1,991 posts

Posted 12 February 2013 - 08:46 AM

I'm happy to concede any point to you Keith, but answer mine. It took a Championship club to decide to twin and then go ahead and break ranks before the problem started. So Hunslet started it??

So did Hunslet ring Leeds with the idea? Think not Parky. It was a calculated plot hatched by SL clubs, all it needed was one CC club to be snared into the trap and Bingo, reserve sides at a fraction of the cost and to hell with the credibility of the Championship and damage to player development. The SL clubs callously exploited the financial weaknesses of their potential 'partners' knowing that the dire threat of relegation would force their hand. Despicable but not surprising. The Rugby League Family eh?

Edited by Terry Mullaney, 12 February 2013 - 08:49 AM.

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

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

#80 Dave T

Dave T
  • Coach
  • 15,831 posts

Posted 12 February 2013 - 12:48 PM

One point on the SL clubs looking to save money - I'm not sure why people are ignoring the 2nd reason, which was highlighted in the RFL's update.

Some clubs wanted the reduction in costs, some wanted the system changed because they didn't feel the structure was right. I'm not convinced this structure is right, but people shouldn't just pick and choose elements of the reason to suit their argument and to bash the clubs or the RFL.

I'm not convinced that Wigan and Leeds will have wanted the age group scrapping to save £100k - although that's just my feeling. Similarly I'd expect the likes of Hull to be happy to invest £100k if the system was working properly and providing a suitable pathway.

There must be an assumption that the system wasn't right - as I say I don;t believe this system is right - but I don;t have the facts to hand.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users