Jump to content


Rugby League World Issue 400 - Out Now!

RUGBY LEAGUE WORLD MAGAZINE - ISSUE 400 - OUT NOW!
84 pages, 38 years of history from Open Rugby to the present day.
Click here for the digital edition to read online via smartphone, tablet and desktop devices including iPhone, iPad, Android & Kindle HD.
Click here to order a copy for delivery by post. Annual subscriptions also available worldwide.
Find out what's inside Issue 400
/ View a Gallery of all 400 covers / WH Smith Branches stocking Issue 400
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
- - - - -

NWC 16-18 EGM?


  • Please log in to reply
45 replies to this topic

#1 clarky1975

clarky1975
  • Players
  • 35 posts

Posted 23 June 2013 - 11:49 AM

Our club got this email yesterday

 

Dear Club Secretary
 
In response to our application to convene an EGM that was seconded in writing by Eccles ARLFC, Hilary Steele as Chairperson for the League has informed our club via e-mail that we require 30% of the member clubs to support our initial application before she will formally set a date for the EGM.
 
In requesting the EGM we are going to call for a vote of no confidence in the committee as a whole.
 
Below are the grounds with which we, Wigan St Judes, submit a "vote of no confidence".

The numerous decisions taken by the NWC management committee throughout the last two consecutive seasons that have devalued the integrity of any competition theNWC 16's-18's League have put in place, which as a result has fostered discontent and a growing lack of interest within many players and coaches.

The continued lack of regular meetings and meaningful communication from the League to the clubs regarding significant concerns raised earlier in the season on several subjects, in particular professionally contracted players playing within the league.

The fragmented and disorganised fixture schedule currently in place and recent breakdown of meaningful competition and league structure at U18's.

The decision by the management group to restructure the U18's leagues in their entirety without prior consultation with the clubs.
 
As a club we are aware that there are a number of new candidates that are willing to step forward and take up the voluntary roles on the committee should our motion for a vote of no confidence be carried by a majority during the EGM.
 
If you could reply via e-mail at your earliest convenience stating if you wish to support our application for the EGM, or alternatively if you do not, it would be very much appreciated.
 
 
Yours in sport
 
 
 
Dave Lavin
Junior Club Secretary
Wigan St Judes ARLFC
 

Edited by clarky1975, 23 June 2013 - 12:49 PM.


#2 Nev V Dawn

Nev V Dawn
  • Coach
  • 286 posts

Posted 23 June 2013 - 05:43 PM

 

Our club got this email yesterday

 

Dear Club Secretary
 
In response to our application to convene an EGM that was seconded in writing by Eccles ARLFC, Hilary Steele as Chairperson for the League has informed our club via e-mail that we require 30% of the member clubs to support our initial application before she will formally set a date for the EGM.
 
In requesting the EGM we are going to call for a vote of no confidence in the committee as a whole.
 
Below are the grounds with which we, Wigan St Judes, submit a "vote of no confidence".

The numerous decisions taken by the NWC management committee throughout the last two consecutive seasons that have devalued the integrity of any competition theNWC 16's-18's League have put in place, which as a result has fostered discontent and a growing lack of interest within many players and coaches.

The continued lack of regular meetings and meaningful communication from the League to the clubs regarding significant concerns raised earlier in the season on several subjects, in particular professionally contracted players playing within the league.

The fragmented and disorganised fixture schedule currently in place and recent breakdown of meaningful competition and league structure at U18's.

The decision by the management group to restructure the U18's leagues in their entirety without prior consultation with the clubs.
 
As a club we are aware that there are a number of new candidates that are willing to step forward and take up the voluntary roles on the committee should our motion for a vote of no confidence be carried by a majority during the EGM.
 
If you could reply via e-mail at your earliest convenience stating if you wish to support our application for the EGM, or alternatively if you do not, it would be very much appreciated.
 
 
Yours in sport
 
 
 
Dave Lavin
Junior Club Secretary
Wigan St Judes ARLFC
 

 

 

Sadly I believe that Mrs Steele is not in the best of health and the treatmeant she is undergoing is seriously hampering her rationale.

 

The NWC 16 - 18  has collectively made some obvious wrong judgements over the past few years but have been happy to stand by the figurehead until now. As the seasons have shown the amateur game at this level has played a poor second fiddle to the academies but now it looks as though the camel's back and volunteers' patience have finally given way. 

 

However prospective candidates for leadership however could include RFL personnel, as this is the area of the game that the RFL hold precious and beware of the dreaded MOU, if that raises it's head it could prove more catastrophic than the Jabberwocky.

 

Perhaps this episode in the amateur game's history could see NWC 16 - 18 emerge on a new route under a different guise. Whatever happens please consider Hilary Steele MBE, it would be pleasant for her to be allowed to leave with dignity.


Edited by Nev V Dawn, 23 June 2013 - 06:35 PM.


#3 LordCharles

LordCharles
  • Coach
  • 671 posts

Posted 23 June 2013 - 06:44 PM

Its doubtful the clubs would vote for an RFL employee to Chair the League, but things definitely need to change considerably at youth level that is for sure. 



#4 Nev V Dawn

Nev V Dawn
  • Coach
  • 286 posts

Posted 23 June 2013 - 07:04 PM

Its doubtful the clubs would vote for an RFL employee to Chair the League, but things definitely need to change considerably at youth level that is for sure. 

 

Stranger things have happened my Lord, if not actually chairng the league there could be some RFL string pulling and putting the chair in an emperorer's new clothes scenario.

 

And if all else fails the RFL just takes the MOU to the letter and take charge of the league. I've read your various posts on this document of which I believe you are well conversant on.



#5 LordCharles

LordCharles
  • Coach
  • 671 posts

Posted 23 June 2013 - 07:38 PM

Stranger things have happened my Lord, if not actually chairng the league there could be some RFL string pulling and putting the chair in an emperorer's new clothes scenario.

 

And if all else fails the RFL just takes the MOU to the letter and take charge of the league. I've read your various posts on this document of which I believe you are well conversant on.

 

As it stands the clubs would have to vote in any new management committee, that said the League is in a very precarious position as a result of signing the MOU.

 

The MOU effectively circumvents the existing constitution by agreeing to adopt the RFL's operational rules once ratified.

 

The draft copy of the Operational Rules for Tiers 3 & 4 is a document that needs to be scrutinised in depth and has the capability to ultimately remove the League from the member clubs and place it in the hands of the RFL.

 

To give an example, as mentioned previously the MOU states that the League agree's to adopt the RFL's operational Rules for Tiers 3 & 4 once ratified.

 

The following is taken from the draft copy of the ratified Operational Rules for Tiers 3 & 4 that the RFL are looking to get rubber stamped by the Community Board in October 2013 and then adhere to from the 2014 season onwards.

 

B1:1     Administration

 

B1:1:1   The Management Groups shall be governed by the RFL under the terms of these Operational Rules.

 

C4          RELEVANT COMPETITION MANAGEMENT GROUP  

C4:1        The RFL shall appoint each Management Group to run the relevant Competition in accordance with the Memorandum of Understanding. 

Glean from that what you will, but it is not in the interests of the amateur game that is for sure and I can supply many more examples that would also not be in the best interests of the amateur game and effectively allow the RFL to empower themselves if they so wish within any Regional League that has signed the MOU.

Regional Leagues are a Democratic society, who without that democracy and ability to tread a path that they collectively choose are in grave danger, so protecting that democratic right and voice has to be of paramount importance to any regional league committee, yet under the MOU it is potentially threatened. 


Edited by LordCharles, 23 June 2013 - 07:55 PM.


#6 LordCharles

LordCharles
  • Coach
  • 671 posts

Posted 23 June 2013 - 07:46 PM

And just to be clear, a League's Member Clubs govern the Management Group annually and appoint elected officers via way of vote at an AGM to run the League in line with its own democratically governed Constitution and Operational rules, nobody else.


Edited by LordCharles, 23 June 2013 - 07:57 PM.


#7 Marauder

Marauder
  • Coach
  • 11,690 posts

Posted 23 June 2013 - 07:52 PM

As it stands the clubs would have to vote in any new management committee, that said the League is in a very precarious position as a result of signing the MOU.

 

The MOU effectively circumvents the existing constitution by agreeing to adopt the RFL's operational rules once ratified.

 

The draft copy of the Operational Rules for Tiers 3 & 4 is a document that needs to be scrutinised in depth and has the capability to ultimately remove the League from the member clubs and place it in the hands of the RFL.

 

To give an example, as mentioned previously the MOU states that the League agree's to adopt the RFL's operational Rules for Tiers 3 & 4 once ratified.

 

The following is taken from the draft copy of the ratified Operational Rules for Tiers 3 & 4 that the RFL are looking to get rubber stamped by the Community Board in October 2013 and then adhere to from the 2014 season onwards.

 

C4          RELEVANT COMPETITION MANAGEMENT GROUP  

 

C4:1        The RFL shall appoint each Management Group to run the relevant Competition in accordance with the Memorandum of Understanding. 

 

 

 

Glean from that what you will, but it is not in the interests of the amateur game that is for sure and I can supply many more examples that would also not be in the best interests of the amateur game and effectively allow the RFL to empower themselves if they so wish within any Regional League that has signed the MOU.

Regional Leagues are a Democratic society, who without that democracy and ability to tread a path that they collectively choose are in grave danger, so protecting that democratic right and voice has to be of paramount importance to any regional league committee, yet under the MOU it is potentially threatened. 

Have the NCL signed this document ? If so  C4:1 Looks like the position some could be jockeying for :rtfm:  sign


Carlsberg don't do Soldiers, but if they did, they would probably be Brits.



http://www.pitchero....hornemarauders/

#8 Nev V Dawn

Nev V Dawn
  • Coach
  • 286 posts

Posted 23 June 2013 - 08:08 PM

As it stands the clubs would have to vote in any new management committee, that said the League is in a very precarious position as a result of signing the MOU.

 

The MOU effectively circumvents the existing constitution by agreeing to adopt the RFL's operational rules once ratified.

 

The draft copy of the Operational Rules for Tiers 3 & 4 is a document that needs to be scrutinised in depth and has the capability to ultimately remove the League from the member clubs and place it in the hands of the RFL.

 

To give an example, as mentioned previously the MOU states that the League agree's to adopt the RFL's operational Rules for Tiers 3 & 4 once ratified.

 

The following is taken from the draft copy of the ratified Operational Rules for Tiers 3 & 4 that the RFL are looking to get rubber stamped by the Community Board in October 2013 and then adhere to from the 2014 season onwards.

 

B1:1     Administration

 

B1:1:1   The Management Groups shall be governed by the RFL under the terms of these Operational Rules.

 

C4          RELEVANT COMPETITION MANAGEMENT GROUP  

C4:1        The RFL shall appoint each Management Group to run the relevant Competition in accordance with the Memorandum of Understanding. 

Glean from that what you will, but it is not in the interests of the amateur game that is for sure and I can supply many more examples that would also not be in the best interests of the amateur game and effectively allow the RFL to empower themselves if they so wish within any Regional League that has signed the MOU.

Regional Leagues are a Democratic society, who without that democracy and ability to tread a path that they collectively choose are in grave danger, so protecting that democratic right and voice has to be of paramount importance to any regional league committee, yet under the MOU it is potentially threatened. 

 

It's quite simple my Lord, the RFL have got leagues by the short and curlies with them signing the MOU.  



#9 LordCharles

LordCharles
  • Coach
  • 671 posts

Posted 23 June 2013 - 08:11 PM

The issue is though, that the clubs are not aware of this and will not be until its too late if we are not careful.



#10 Nev V Dawn

Nev V Dawn
  • Coach
  • 286 posts

Posted 23 June 2013 - 08:12 PM

And just to be clear, a League's Member Clubs govern the Management Group annually and appoint elected officers via way of vote at an AGM to run the League in line with its own democratically governed Constitution and Operational rules, nobody else.

 

Quite simple once again, the RFL is a business the amateur game is a recreational culture 



#11 LordCharles

LordCharles
  • Coach
  • 671 posts

Posted 23 June 2013 - 09:43 PM

Considerable concern has to also be raised in relation to the complete lack of policy, protocol, procedure and absolutely no content whatsoever relating to RFL performance initiatives such as scholarships and academies within the draft operational rules for Tiers 3 & 4.

 

These initiatives have the potential to impact considerably on the youth game at amateur level, yet there is nothing at all in the draft operational rules to outline any scenario relating to them, which is far to coincidental when you consider the following.

 

“Management   Groups”

 

means a body responsible for the operation of any relevant Competition, appointed by the Community Board;

 

 

“Memorandum of Understanding”

 

means the terms of reference signed by the relevant Competition and the RFL setting out the basis upon which that Competition shall be managed.

 

 

"Relevant Competition"

 

means a League or Competition which has signed up to abide by these Operational Rules and in which a Club participates;

 

 

"Community Board "

 

means the Board constituted pursuant to Article 79 of Articles of Association of the RFL (Governing Body) Limited;

 

 

A1:1     CLUBS

 

A1:1:1   All Clubs which participate in any Relevant Competition governed by these Operational Rules are deemed, by acceptance of the invitation, to be bound by the Operational Rules, the rules and regulations of any body of which the Relevant Competition is a member or affiliated with, the terms of any agreement entered into by the Management Groups with the RFL and the Laws of the Game and accept the jurisdiction of the Community Board. 

 

 

A1:4     DELEGATION OF RESPONSIBILITIES TO MANAGEMENT GROUPS

 

A1:4:1   The day to day running of the Relevant Competitions will be delegated to the relevant Management Groups.  The Management Group will have the power to make decisions consistent with these Operational Rules.  In the event of an issue falling outside of these rules the decision will be referred to the RFL Community Board.

 

A1:4:2   At all times the RFL will retain ultimate jurisdiction over the running of any Relevant Competition and shall maintain the right to impose sanction upon any Club or person subject to the Operational Rules at its own discretion.

 

A1:6     AMENDMENTS

 

A1:6:1   Any amendments to these Operational Rules shall be proposed and discussed by the Community Game Regulatory Group. The Community Board will have the overall control to approve any changes before being presented to the RFL Board.

 

B1:1     Administration

 

B1:1:1   The Management Groups shall be governed by the RFL under the terms of these Operational Rules.

 

C4          RELEVANT COMPETITION MANAGEMENT GROUP  

C4:1        The RFL shall appoint each Management Group to run the relevant Competition in accordance with the Memorandum of Understanding. 


Edited by LordCharles, 23 June 2013 - 09:45 PM.


#12 LordCharles

LordCharles
  • Coach
  • 671 posts

Posted 23 June 2013 - 09:55 PM

You would hope that any Management Group would be making their membership fully aware of the implications of this type of document and taking a vote prior to agreeing to abide by it?

 

However in signing the MOU the Management Groups have already agreed in principle to abide by it so where does that put the clubs and their constitutional democratic rights?



#13 LordCharles

LordCharles
  • Coach
  • 671 posts

Posted 10 July 2013 - 09:58 PM

The sooner this EGM happens the better after tonights July League meeting fiasco.

 

It comes to something when the Management Committee tell the clubs they can take a vote in January 2014 on wether or not they want to accept the RFL's Operational rules, when in fact they need to do it before October 2013 if they don't want to accept them!!!!!

 

Furthermore, if your club wants a copy of the operational rules you need to request a copy as they are not being sent to each club as a matter of course, even if they are of significant importance!!!

 

Totally disillusioned by how completely inept the NWC 16's-18's Management Committee is as a whole!


Edited by LordCharles, 10 July 2013 - 10:04 PM.


#14 Marauder

Marauder
  • Coach
  • 11,690 posts

Posted 10 July 2013 - 11:42 PM

You would hope that any Management Group would be making their membership fully aware of the implications of this type of document and taking a vote prior to agreeing to abide by it?

 

However in signing the MOU the Management Groups have already agreed in principle to abide by it so where does that put the clubs and their constitutional democratic rights?

Unless there is a promise of a MBE - Seriously I can not understand why the operational rules are needed and how could the RFL stop any team, club, league from putting two fingers up to them and walk away after they have signed them.


Carlsberg don't do Soldiers, but if they did, they would probably be Brits.



http://www.pitchero....hornemarauders/

#15 LordCharles

LordCharles
  • Coach
  • 671 posts

Posted 11 July 2013 - 09:18 AM

Unless there is a promise of a MBE - Seriously I can not understand why the operational rules are needed and how could the RFL stop any team, club, league from putting two fingers up to them and walk away after they have signed them.

 

MOU

 

Clause 3 :    Adopt the RFL Community Game Operational Rules as and when approved by the RFL Community Board after consultation with the League



#16 tim2

tim2
  • Coach
  • 8,264 posts

Posted 11 July 2013 - 10:06 AM

If the clubs walk away en masse and start up another league that affiliates to BARLA, the MOU isn't worth the paper it's written on.

It would not make sense for the RFL to let that happen, but until they actually address the fundamental cause of the youth rugby problem things are just going to get worse.

I assume the "no confidence" proposers actually have a plan for what happens if they win? Is there a replacement committee willing to do the job in the current conditions?
North Derbyshire Chargers - join the stampede

Marathon in 2014 - the hard work starts now

#17 LordCharles

LordCharles
  • Coach
  • 671 posts

Posted 11 July 2013 - 11:08 AM

If the clubs walk away en masse and start up another league that affiliates to BARLA, the MOU isn't worth the paper it's written on.

It would not make sense for the RFL to let that happen, but until they actually address the fundamental cause of the youth rugby problem things are just going to get worse.

I assume the "no confidence" proposers actually have a plan for what happens if they win? Is there a replacement committee willing to do the job in the current conditions?

 

 

Tim

 

If the clubs walk away "En Masse" it will be down to the RFL, via the Community Board and its policy, to allow/decide where those clubs will play or if they can form a new regional league. BARLA or any other entity cannot set up another League where one already exists, as this would be a direct breach of Community Board policy.

 

The "No Confidence" proposers have a long term vision, a number of volunteers ready to step in and a fresh approach and playing format that will assist in rectifying a number of issues that currently exist within the playing structure at youth level in the NWC.

 

They also have the potential to attract and work with partners and sponsors for the overall long term benefit and security of the 16's-18's Youth League and their member clubs in the NWC.



#18 Teamplayer

Teamplayer
  • Players
  • 7 posts

Posted 11 July 2013 - 12:01 PM

Tim

 

If the clubs walk away "En Masse" it will be down to the RFL, via the Community Board and its policy, to allow/decide where those clubs will play or if they can form a new regional league. BARLA or any other entity cannot set up another League where one already exists, as this would be a direct breach of Community Board policy.

 

The "No Confidence" proposers have a long term vision, a number of volunteers ready to step in and a fresh approach and playing format that will assist in rectifying a number of issues that currently exist within the playing structure at youth level in the NWC.

 

They also have the potential to attract and work with partners and sponsors for the overall long term benefit and security of the 16's-18's Youth League and their member clubs in the NWC.

When will the EGM be held ? also if support is needed wouldn't it be better to tell everybody who the volunteers are that are hoping to take over the league surely it is better to know as you may get more support than clubs worried that they may have more confidence in the committee now than a mysterious new one that they have to have faith in. as they say better the devil you know.  Also who would manage the league until a new committee was put in place etc.?



#19 LordCharles

LordCharles
  • Coach
  • 671 posts

Posted 11 July 2013 - 01:24 PM

When will the EGM be held ? also if support is needed wouldn't it be better to tell everybody who the volunteers are that are hoping to take over the league surely it is better to know as you may get more support than clubs worried that they may have more confidence in the committee now than a mysterious new one that they have to have faith in. as they say better the devil you know.  Also who would manage the league until a new committee was put in place etc.?

 

If the EGM goes ahead and the "Vote of no confidence" is carried, then the existing committee would remain in temporary charge until a date for the re-election of officers is set, usually about 14 days I think.

 

This would allow time for any interested parties to submit formal notice of their intention to stand for the available positions, it also allows the opportunity for anyone off the existing committee to submit their intention to stand again should they choose to do so.



#20 Teamplayer

Teamplayer
  • Players
  • 7 posts

Posted 12 July 2013 - 09:12 PM

If the EGM goes ahead and the "Vote of no confidence" is carried, then the existing committee would remain in temporary charge until a date for the re-election of officers is set, usually about 14 days I think.

 

This would allow time for any interested parties to submit formal notice of their intention to stand for the available positions, it also allows the opportunity for anyone off the existing committee to submit their intention to stand again should they choose to do so.

Why would any of the existing committee members want to submitt their intent on standing again, if you have told them you don't have any confidence in them.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users