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
- - - - -

Phil Clarkes thoughts on Dual reg


  • Please log in to reply
139 replies to this topic

#81 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,717 posts

Posted 23 February 2013 - 10:41 AM

A famous quote on re organisation seems to sum up this DR mess perfectly. 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 illusion of progress" indeed. p


It's up to you if you want to just make out RFL/SLE haven't a clue, you'll be joining fellow detractors on here.

Others may wish to remind you SL started out as a concept of putting all the resources the game had into one aim - an Elite league pulling a big TV contract.

Resistance came from fans and clubs, but the RFL/SLE didn't give up and now we see what resources Hunslet have, directly contributing heavily to the progress of Leeds.

As usual Hetherington leads this real progress.

#82 Griff

Griff
  • Coach
  • 7,912 posts

Posted 23 February 2013 - 10:49 AM

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?


I don't think they can dominate either. But if this DR was taken too far , it could skew results and league tables. It is then that the play-offs come in to their own and we need to take care over who should play in those. By the time they come around, some $uperleague clubs may have ended their season......

Powell and Aston were indeed concerned about the "integrity of the competition" which was a phrase mentioned frequently at the meeting with Ralph Rimmer. However, there is also the issue of player development and how an ambitious club might put itself in a position to apply for $uperleague. We still do have promotion and relegation, albeit every three years. It is the declared intention that (at least) one club - subject to meeting the criteria - will be promoted but at present the pathway is unclear. It's difficult to run development teams when there's no-one else to play. Last year's six team Reserve Grade wasn't great.
"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

#83 shaun mc

shaun mc
  • Coach
  • 1,885 posts

Posted 23 February 2013 - 11:41 AM

It's up to you if you want to just make out RFL/SLE haven't a clue, you'll be joining fellow detractors on here.

Others may wish to remind you SL started out as a concept of putting all the resources the game had into one aim - an Elite league pulling a big TV contract.

Resistance came from fans and clubs, but the RFL/SLE didn't give up and now we see what resources Hunslet have, directly contributing heavily to the progress of Leeds.

As usual Hetherington leads this real progress.


Whilst the original Sky deal may have talked about merging sides, it didn't have any direct influence past that top tier.
DR of last year may have been the start of this, but its certainly not attributable to Sky.
IMO its completely down to clubs at the top end being unable to either finance or organise their player development pathways to give squad players and the best youngsters in their area the greatest opportunities to become established 1st team SL players or even better.
Why they feel they need to abandon reserve grade this year and all its ramifications is perplexing to put it mildly. Yet they are going to put it all back together again next year, with funding and players. Now that bit is really way off kilter. Are Warrington going to ask Swinton for their players back? How will Swinton cope? Where will the players re-appear from? How will they fund it - is there something happening we don't know about next year?

#84 jpmc

jpmc
  • Coach
  • 577 posts

Posted 23 February 2013 - 12:39 PM

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?


I don't think its a problem that the linked clubs will cause a problem to the established top 5,at least not this season.

Iv'e nothing against swinton,hunslet,york ect being reserve teams to sl clubs as that appears to be what they want,i just don't understand why the clubs that want to be in charge of there own destiny are having to play in the same league.
Just reduce the league back down to ten or even 8 clubs and introduce a licencing system for admittance so that if the league is to grow again the clubs in the reserve league must prove they can be self sustaining.

I think the games between barrow,swinton,york and hunslet are the big games at the bottom end

#85 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,717 posts

Posted 23 February 2013 - 02:06 PM

I don't think they can dominate either. But if this DR was taken too far , it could skew results and league tables. It is then that the play-offs come in to their own and we need to take care over who should play in those. By the time they come around, some $uperleague clubs may have ended their season......

Powell and Aston were indeed concerned about the "integrity of the competition" which was a phrase mentioned frequently at the meeting with Ralph Rimmer. However, there is also the issue of player development and how an ambitious club might put itself in a position to apply for $uperleague. We still do have promotion and relegation, albeit every three years. It is the declared intention that (at least) one club - subject to meeting the criteria - will be promoted but at present the pathway is unclear. It's difficult to run development teams when there's no-one else to play. Last year's six team Reserve Grade wasn't great.


Thank you for the view. It seems to me less and less clubs truly "ambitious" for SL exist now. I also take the point that if you want to set up your own development teams outside SL as you say there's nobody to play.

Doesn't this show the creep towards no overlap between SL and CC?

#86 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,717 posts

Posted 23 February 2013 - 02:09 PM

IMO its completely down to clubs at the top end being unable to either finance or organise their player development pathways to give squad players and the best youngsters in their area the greatest opportunities to become established 1st team SL players or even better.Why they feel they need to abandon reserve grade this year and all its ramifications is perplexing to put it mildly. Yet they are going to put it all back together again next year, with funding and players. Now that bit is really way off kilter. Are Warrington going to ask Swinton for their players back? How will Swinton cope? Where will the players re-appear from? How will they fund it - is there something happening we don't know about next year?



Thank you. You say.....

"Abandon reserve grade this year and ..............they are going to put it all back together again next year, with funding and players".

I never picked that up??? Who said they will do this and what exactly are they doing??

#87 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,717 posts

Posted 23 February 2013 - 02:11 PM

I don't think its a problem that the linked clubs will cause a problem to the established top 5,at least not this season.

Iv'e nothing against swinton,hunslet,york ect being reserve teams to sl clubs as that appears to be what they want,i just don't understand why the clubs that want to be in charge of there own destiny are having to play in the same league.
Just reduce the league back down to ten or even 8 clubs and introduce a licencing system for admittance so that if the league is to grow again the clubs in the reserve league must prove they can be self sustaining.

I think the games between barrow,swinton,york and hunslet are the big games at the bottom end


Thanks for the views - No wins keighley play Swinton tommorrow - 4 pointers already!!

#88 shaun mc

shaun mc
  • Coach
  • 1,885 posts

Posted 23 February 2013 - 02:28 PM

Thank you. You say.....

"Abandon reserve grade this year and ..............they are going to put it all back together again next year, with funding and players".

I never picked that up??? Who said they will do this and what exactly are they doing??


Parky, as far as I'm aware, and I'll stand to be corrected, that next season will be one that has a proper reserve team competition re-instated for SL clubs?
Maybe that has been compromised in the past 3-4 weeks, and maybe SL clubs will look at the reserve team competition differently now that they can see there's a resource (Championship club) that can be used to keep squad players match fit, provide a better level of competition and young player development than existed previously, and also be used to give established 1st teamers a run out after injury.
All that needs to happen is for the RFL to find the loopholes in the visa rules that allows such as Leuluai to play for Hunslet, then its probably job done.

#89 Egg Chasing

Egg Chasing
  • Players
  • 9 posts

Posted 23 February 2013 - 05:05 PM

Here are mine.
Rugby League Blog - www.eggchasing.wordpress.com

Follow Me On Twitter - @egg_chasing

#90 jpmc

jpmc
  • Coach
  • 577 posts

Posted 23 February 2013 - 10:06 PM

Thanks for the views - No wins keighley play Swinton tommorrow - 4 pointers already!!


Well i thought Keighley would have won tonight so it looks like your right and there could be lots of 4 pointers this season

#91 Griff

Griff
  • Coach
  • 7,912 posts

Posted 24 February 2013 - 08:16 AM

Well i thought Keighley would have won tonight so it looks like your right and there could be lots of 4 pointers this season


What's this four pointer business ? :unsure:
"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

#92 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,717 posts

Posted 24 February 2013 - 08:25 AM

What's this four pointer business ? :unsure:


I know you are one for numerical accuracy, and I know there's a bonus system in CC, but the term "four pointer" is not being used in it's literal context here Mr. Picky :D

#93 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,717 posts

Posted 24 February 2013 - 08:33 AM

Parky, as far as I'm aware, and I'll stand to be corrected, that next season will be one that has a proper reserve team competition re-instated for SL clubs?


Shaun,

On Monday it was reported the RFL refused to consider a call for rule changes saying they would not change rules that have "only effectively been in operation for two weeks". There was talk of a review towards the end of the season and Rimmer who was the spokesman pointed to there having been a nine month consultation with "the clubs" ( SL, CC or both I dunno?) so effectively the RFL would not be pushed into changes............

.............By I assume five clubs who met this week (well four as Barrow did not attend the meeting with Leigh, Halifax, Sheffield and Fev) to sign a "memorandum" calling on a re-think and calling for fellow CC clubs to boycott dual registration.

I see nothing about a new competition next year, but I see a stand off here and it's those for DR at it stands 33 clubs those against DR as it stands 5 clubs.

Edited by The Parksider, 24 February 2013 - 08:34 AM.


#94 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,717 posts

Posted 24 February 2013 - 08:52 AM

Here are mine.


Thanks for your thoughts.

I don't however quite understand your point that if senior pro's drop to CC clubs for game time that displaces developing professional players??

Years ago Hunslet signed Kelvin Skerret, and as a youngster he developed well with us (we were an independant competetive club in those days) alongside such as Jimmy Lowes and Sonny Nickle. All three eventually moved on to top clubs.

Today we are a shadow of our former selves. We don't sign any budding professionals and so if Leuluai and Moore prop for us it doesn't replace a sonny Nickle or a Kelvin Skerret. It doesn't leave anyone "sitting in the stands" that could go on to late develop as a Superleague player.

If we did have a promising young prop, if we did have another Kelvin he'd be in the XV11 anyway alongside Moore and Leuluai that's for sure.

The quality young SL players you quote didn't play at Championship clubs, they started as junior amateurs and went through the SL development system, and I'd respectfully suggest that the championship clubs don't actually develop professional players, (until now!) Today the Championship is by-passed by up and coming players, and so this may be why when needs must so many of these clubs want access to these players in their bid to survive.

I appreciate that lads have their noses shoved out when players from the "senior club" take their places, but the danger of using that argument may be that the clubs extend dual reg to full blown "A" teams in which (at least in the Hunslet/Leeds scenario) Hunslet formally become part of Leeds allowing overseas players to play, and if that leaves semi pro lads "in the stand" (players who didn't make it in academies or players who were never signed for academies) then Hunslet won't sign them in the first place.

This won't be a drain of talent??

Edited by The Parksider, 24 February 2013 - 08:55 AM.


#95 shaun mc

shaun mc
  • Coach
  • 1,885 posts

Posted 24 February 2013 - 10:37 AM

Shaun,

On Monday it was reported the RFL refused to consider a call for rule changes saying they would not change rules that have "only effectively been in operation for two weeks". There was talk of a review towards the end of the season and Rimmer who was the spokesman pointed to there having been a nine month consultation with "the clubs" ( SL, CC or both I dunno?) so effectively the RFL would not be pushed into changes............

.............By I assume five clubs who met this week (well four as Barrow did not attend the meeting with Leigh, Halifax, Sheffield and Fev) to sign a "memorandum" calling on a re-think and calling for fellow CC clubs to boycott dual registration.

I see nothing about a new competition next year, but I see a stand off here and it's those for DR at it stands 33 clubs those against DR as it stands 5 clubs.


Ingenious use of numbers there........how did you manage to include North Wales for example, who have no tie up?

(Should they add up to 37 clubs not 38 btw)

Turning it around I'd argue that its 16 clubs for DR as it now stands (14 SL plus Swinton and Hunslet) and 21 against. DR now isn't what the remainder of the clubs understood it to entail. I'd stick my neck out and say that more clubs below SL level would vote for limited DR (such as max 5 players 23 or under) rather than whole squads.

I'll have to dig out some threads or back editions of LE to see if there is to be a SL reserve team comp next season. Nobody else has posted one way or another. There could well be a re-assessment and retain DR or feeder teams (as it can't really be called DR) and go away from reserve teams completely.

I'm aware that the current situation will be retained until the end of the season, unless the 5 non-DR teams can gain enough purchase to develop a re-think earlier. There has certainly been quotes from coaches of DR clubs along the lines of "well this isn't how we understood it would work'" and how difficult a situation they now find themselves in trying to keep their local squad happy as well as how they utilise available DR players. A shift of responsibility by SL clubs.

The RFL are just sitting back and seeing how it all evolves, rather than dealing with some of the serious ramifications. Many RL supporters on this main board and the individual sub-boards can see these ramifications, and are looking ahead and looking wider into the whole scenario, and its not just 1 or 2 posters. The RFL are either aware of these and just letting it happen (as maybe it was their plan all along) or are ignoring it or just have been so naive and not thought it through.
The fact that the RFL are spending their time and energy looking into how overseas players and the current Visa's can be used in a DR situation says it all really.

#96 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,717 posts

Posted 24 February 2013 - 11:40 AM

1. Ingenious use of numbers there........how did you manage to include North Wales for example, who have no tie up? Turning it around I'd argue that its 16 clubs for DR as it now stands and 21 against.

2. I'm aware that the current situation will be retained until the end of the season, unless the 5 non-DR teams can gain enough purchase to develop a re-think earlier.

3. The RFL are just sitting back and seeing how it all evolves, rather than dealing with some of the serious ramifications. Many RL supporters on this main board and the individual sub-boards can see these ramifications, and are looking ahead and looking wider into the whole scenario, and its not just 1 or 2 posters. The RFL are either aware of these and just letting it happen (as maybe it was their plan all along) or are ignoring it or just have been so naive and not thought it through.

4. The fact that the RFL are spending their time and energy looking into how overseas players and the current Visa's can be used in a DR situation says it all really.


1. I'll go with you Shaun, not that either of use have the final say!

2. Well only 5 wanted to know, we shall see if the DR clubs join the 5 or ignore them.

3. Great summary either the RFL have planned this or have been completely naive.

4. So your going for a cunning plan?

That's exactly how I see it, they (along with SL clubs) are manipulating the game below SL for the benefit of SL.

Love it more than life itself or laothe it to death, Superleague is highly important to the game and the RFL/SLE will go ahead with whatever they feel helps secure it.

2015 may be when the last bus leaves for Superleague.......

#97 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,717 posts

Posted 24 February 2013 - 11:43 AM

Serious ramifications. Many RL supporters on this main board and the individual sub-boards can see these ramifications.


The question here is do SL and RFL recognise "serious ramifications"?

Serious for who?

What definitively are they??

#98 jpmc

jpmc
  • Coach
  • 577 posts

Posted 24 February 2013 - 12:00 PM

Surely the decision as to wether this seasons DR system stays in place for next season and onwards, rests with the championship clubs not with sl or EVEN the rfl?

#99 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,717 posts

Posted 24 February 2013 - 12:07 PM

Surely the decision as to wether this seasons DR system stays in place for next season and onwards, rests with the championship clubs not with sl or EVEN the rfl?


Decision making and the rules that govern that are something I would always ask Padge to comment on.

As it stands five clubs have decided to say "no" and are asking for support for their stance.

If that is not forthcoming I would say that whatever the decision making process is it won't matter will it?.

#100 jpmc

jpmc
  • Coach
  • 577 posts

Posted 24 February 2013 - 12:29 PM

Was there any rules passed or voted on by the championship clubs which has allowed this situation to arise?


To answer your third point - no it wont.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users