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
- - - - -

Phil Clarkes thoughts on Dual reg


  • Please log in to reply
139 replies to this topic

#61 jpmc

jpmc
  • Coach
  • 485 posts

Posted 22 February 2013 - 12:13 AM

I am not a believer in this sort of system so, no, I am not in favour of it. However, because of other clubs taking this course and us having just managed to get out of Championship 1 after 10 years I can see why our club took this option so as not to be left behind.

We had dual registered players last year from different clubs but we were let down when those players were made not available to us by their SL clubs, so again I can see some merit in a SL club "offering" players to a Championship club but the system as we have been foisted with is not fit for purpose and poses more questions than answers.

So are you happy for workington to be become the widnes A team so long as it keeps you in the championship?

#62 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 16,942 posts

Posted 22 February 2013 - 08:14 AM

So are you happy for workington to be become the widnes A team so long as it keeps you in the championship?


Apologies to Keith but he said he was resigned to it surely?

It's occured to me that it doesn't matter how far any club takes this thing as long as it never blocks an independent club's ambition.

#63 sweaty craiq

sweaty craiq
  • Coach
  • 1,525 posts

Posted 22 February 2013 - 10:19 AM

It's occured to me that it doesn't matter how far any club takes this thing as long as it never blocks an independent club's ambition.


We need to restructure with 2 leagues of FT ambitious clubs and a league of clubs who can no longer survive paying players twinning with the FT clubs as a mixed league.

#64 Griff

Griff
  • Coach
  • 7,618 posts

Posted 22 February 2013 - 10:32 AM

It's occured to me that it doesn't matter how far any club takes this thing as long as it never blocks an independent club's ambition.


Take it too far and it might.

Although I don't think we've reached that level yet.
"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

#65 Griff

Griff
  • Coach
  • 7,618 posts

Posted 22 February 2013 - 10:36 AM

We need to restructure with 2 leagues of FT ambitious clubs and a league of clubs who can no longer survive paying players twinning with the FT clubs as a mixed league.


Where will the money come from ? Full time players need a guaranteed level of income to pay the mortgage. All 25 of them. Not just the 17 who play.

It's a huge additional cost - probably double the current part time payroll.

And then there's the staff ......

Will that be funded by bigger crowds ? Probably not - second tier rugby will get second tier crowds. Full time or part time.
"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

#66 DeadShotKeen

DeadShotKeen
  • Coach
  • 1,230 posts

Posted 22 February 2013 - 12:39 PM

You obviously know very little about the Championships and even less about the dual registration system that has been imposed.

SL clubs have been discussing this since last April about finding a way around getting rid of Under 18's and Under 20's to save them money. The RFL worked with them and suggested that they do away with both those age groups and just retain Under 19' s and Under 23's. Despite one or two SL clubs disagreeing they voted to also do away with the Under 23's as well as the other two age groups.

All that was done before the Championship clubs had even met to discuss the ramifications of what was happening and also prior to that meeting Leeds and Hunslet had already announced their partnership and one or two other clubs had been working to make similar arrangements.

Once that particular ball had started rolling other clubs could see that if they didn't go down the same route then they could be left behind and easily be relegated to the Championship 1 at the end of the season. That fact has had more to do with the upset over dual registrations than any talk of P & R to Sl being reinstated.



Well I knew all of that so I’m not really sure on what basis I’m ignorant. Because I don’t follow a Championship or Championship 1 side, I expect. Not really a very strong position for you to take. I want to see what is best for all teams at all levels and IMHO a system of feeder clubs that still retain some local identity whilst being encouraged to operate within their means at a level outside of Super League is the best for all concerned. The poster above has highlighted your hypocrisy. If it’s the relegation trap door you fear then campaign against P&R between the Championships and not DR.

The opponents of DR on here are giving very mixed signals:

“It’s not fair to our lads”

“But the SL cast-off lads aren’t as good as our lads anyway”

“We don’t need or want them”

“But we might go down without them so we should have them”

Essentially IMHO they all want a crack at Super League so it’s a mixture of jealousy and fear we’re hearing here, rather than anything more justifiable.

Make your minds up what and where your gripe is here, because like it or not the game is modernising.

#67 marklaspalmas

marklaspalmas
  • Coach
  • 11,379 posts

Posted 22 February 2013 - 01:06 PM

DSK, it's always better just to state your own views instead of misrepresenting the opinions of others.

 

You Can't Buy Team Spirit

 

 

 

 


#68 shaun mc

shaun mc
  • Coach
  • 1,612 posts

Posted 22 February 2013 - 01:42 PM

So are you happy for workington to be become the widnes A team so long as it keeps you in the championship?


Can you be clear about where you see Workington as being Widnes' A team.....?
Widnes don't have a game this weekend - yet only 1 Widnes player is in Town's squad for Sundays game against one of the top sides.
Normally an A team in these circumstances would be pretty full of blokes needing match fitness. There are probably at least 5 or 6 who need some game time, who haven't really appeared for either Widnes or Town.

#69 keighley

keighley
  • Coach
  • 5,200 posts

Posted 22 February 2013 - 01:50 PM

A famous quote on re organisation seems to sum up this DR mess perfectly. It is reproduced below. The SL teams and the championship teams were stabilising and coalessing into functioning teams with a recognisable player development structure and suddenly a new situation came up, i.e. SL teams couldn't afford player developement so, rather than address it within the existing structure of SL they "reorganised", ditching developement junior teams and ruining the championships in the process. "An illsuion of progress" indeed producing the results in the last line of the quote to the letter.

"We trained hard, but it seemed that every time we were beginning
to form up into teams, we would be reorganized. I was to learn later
in life that we tend to meet any new situation by reorganizing;
and a wonderful method it can be for creating the illusion of progress
while producing confusion, inefficiency, and demoralization."

#70 sweaty craiq

sweaty craiq
  • Coach
  • 1,525 posts

Posted 22 February 2013 - 02:27 PM

Where will the money come from ? Full time players need a guaranteed level of income to pay the mortgage. All 25 of them. Not just the 17 who play.

It's a huge additional cost - probably double the current part time payroll.

And then there's the staff ......

Will that be funded by bigger crowds ? Probably not - second tier rugby will get second tier crowds. Full time or part time.


The money is already there, its about using it better. 14X £1.3m = £19.2m, 10 x £1.3m = £13m, 10 X £700k= £7m = £20m total which is roughly existing deal incl the champiuonships 100k or so.

That second tiers gates will be pretty decent imo especially with a tier 1 place up for grabs, and the tier 1 will be huge as an elite comp with few 'easy' fixtures

#71 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 16,942 posts

Posted 22 February 2013 - 02:29 PM

We need to restructure with 2 leagues of FT ambitious clubs and a league of clubs who can no longer survive paying players twinning with the FT clubs as a mixed league.


Well you need to consider that the clubs who have scrambled for the DR thing have done so primarily to ensure they do not get relegated to a third tier.

If the league was to go to two divisions of independant clubs all the twinning clubs would be forced to back out of their arrangements.

In terms of your word "ambitious" clubs, I frankly see ambition at no more than about 14 clubs anyway.

Are London and Cas currently "ambitious" are Halifax displaying real "ambition" by action rather than lip service?

#72 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 16,942 posts

Posted 22 February 2013 - 02:31 PM

The money is already there, its about using it better. 14X £1.3m = £19.2m, 10 x £1.3m = £13m, 10 X £700k= £7m = £20m total which is roughly existing deal incl the champiuonships 100k or so.

That second tiers gates will be pretty decent imo especially with a tier 1 place up for grabs, and the tier 1 will be huge as an elite comp with few 'easy' fixtures


I wouldn't waste £700K on any club unless it was "ambitious". Name your twenty!!

#73 sweaty craiq

sweaty craiq
  • Coach
  • 1,525 posts

Posted 22 February 2013 - 03:30 PM

I wouldn't waste £700K on any club unless it was "ambitious". Name your twenty!!


Bradford, Leeds, Hull, Hudds, Wakey, Saints, Wigan, Wire, London, Cats - Tier 1. 27 games and 1 down

Widnes, Salford, Cas, HKR, Toulouse, Fax, Fev, Leigh, Sheffield, and hopefully a Welsh club - Tier 2. 27 games and 1 up via play offs

Barrow, Haven, Town, Gateshead, Batley, Keighley, Dewsbury, Swinton, Oldham, Rochdale, Skolars, Oxford, Gloucester, Hemel - Tier 3 - 26 games and a KO comp

#74 sweaty craiq

sweaty craiq
  • Coach
  • 1,525 posts

Posted 22 February 2013 - 03:37 PM

Well you need to consider that the clubs who have scrambled for the DR thing have done so primarily to ensure they do not get relegated to a third tier.

If the league was to go to two divisions of independant clubs all the twinning clubs would be forced to back out of their arrangements.

In terms of your word "ambitious" clubs, I frankly see ambition at no more than about 14 clubs anyway.

Are London and Cas currently "ambitious" are Halifax displaying real "ambition" by action rather than lip service?


We only have 5/6 clubs then who are ambitious, which is too few for the game to continue in its present form. Wigan/Wire/Saints/Hull/Leeds with Hudds next to step up.
Clubs outside SL currently who have or are investing in facilities, jnr structures and ambitions to play at a higher level are included in my 20 with demonstrable ambition.

#75 Griff

Griff
  • Coach
  • 7,618 posts

Posted 22 February 2013 - 04:10 PM

That second tiers gates will be pretty decent imo especially with a tier 1 place up for grabs, and the tier 1 will be huge as an elite comp with few 'easy' fixtures


Well, imo, they won't. The second tier is still the second tier. Toulouse won't help increase crowds. Doubtful whether a Welsh team will. I just think you're unduly optimistic here.
"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

#76 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 16,942 posts

Posted 22 February 2013 - 04:39 PM

Bradford, Leeds, Hull, Hudds, Wakey, Saints, Wigan, Wire, London, Cats - Tier 1. 27 games and 1 down

Widnes, Salford, Cas, HKR, Toulouse, Fax, Fev, Leigh, Sheffield, and hopefully a Welsh club - Tier 2. 27 games and 1 up via play offs

Barrow, Haven, Town, Gateshead, Batley, Keighley, Dewsbury, Swinton, Oldham, Rochdale, Skolars, Oxford, Gloucester, Hemel - Tier 3 - 26 games and a KO comp


Thanks for the interesting replies.........

#77 sweaty craiq

sweaty craiq
  • Coach
  • 1,525 posts

Posted 22 February 2013 - 07:18 PM

Thanks for the interesting replies.........


It is my complete pleasure

#78 jpmc

jpmc
  • Coach
  • 485 posts

Posted 23 February 2013 - 12:45 AM

Apologies to Keith but he said he was resigned to it surely?

It's occured to me that it doesn't matter how far any club takes this thing as long as it never blocks an independent club's ambition.


How do you think it would block an independent clubs ambitions?

#79 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 16,942 posts

Posted 23 February 2013 - 07:45 AM

How do you think it would block an independent clubs ambitions?


I don't think it would now. The CC club who really wants Superleague and is acting on it has the playing qualification/criteria already, as do the clubs just saying they want SL. If all things stay the same the only way an ambitious club would be blocked in future is if the "A" teams stop them winning that playing criteria. Lets say Keighley got all serious, but the "A" teams won the prizes that qualify clubs for SL?

This is the unknown quantity, Can SL "A"/U23 teams dominate the Championship?. Powell and Aston seemed to fear it. I'd be interested in yours or anyone's thoughts on that?

If they can't then the CC will go on to be two comps in one. four club Championship and ten club relegation battle.

I wonder which fixtures will become the big four pointers later in the season?

Edited by The Parksider, 23 February 2013 - 07:46 AM.


#80 JohnM

JohnM
  • Coach
  • 19,845 posts

Posted 23 February 2013 - 09:07 AM

A famous quote on re organisation seems to sum up this DR mess perfectly. It is reproduced below. The SL teams and the championship teams were stabilising and coalessing into functioning teams with a recognisable player development structure and suddenly a new situation came up, i.e. SL teams couldn't afford player developement so, rather than address it within the existing structure of SL they "reorganised", ditching developement junior teams and ruining the championships in the process. "An illsuion of progress" indeed producing the results in the last line of the quote to the letter.

"We trained hard, but it seemed that every time we were beginning
to form up into teams, we would be reorganized. I was to learn later
in life that we tend to meet any new situation by reorganizing;
and a wonderful method it can be for creating the illusion of progress
while producing confusion, inefficiency, and demoralization."



Quite so, as it is pure fictional nonsense attributed to a Roman writer Petronius who was also firmly rooted in the past...but some 2000 years ago.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users