There you are people , you should accept and be happy to pay your money to watch SL reserves , because your NOT worth it , your clubs primary purpose should be to help SL clubs get better
So it's all the lower tier clubs fault we can't beat the Aussies
I don't see how you have quoted that post and come to that conclusion?
Instead of looking for any reason to disagree, why don't you look at the other point of view? You might just begin to understand their point.
Players that aren't ready for SL won't be playing in SL. So where do they play?
If we want to get as many players as possible to to standard, they need to play in as high a standard as possible. They are more than talented enough to play in the Championship. But by signing for a Championship club, they would have to most likely go part time, so a dual system allows talented young players to stay full time AND take part in a higher level competition.
In football, tonnes of players who aren't ready for the Premier League go and play in the Championship on loan.
It ain't nice being called things like a complete looney or a troll on more than one occasion. You wouldn't mind if they were grown up enough to apologise! Always the P.M. system if they're too embarrassed!!
OMG Parky. You're complaining about people calling you names and your response is to say they're not grown up and ignore them but talk about them? Seriously? Hardly a grown up response from someone who expects grown up behaviour. Pot. Kettle. Black.
How about taking responsibility for your own actions for a change, be the "bigger person" you're demanding of others and start mending your own bridges. There's a PM system available if you're too embarrassed to talk in public.
I've no idea what your problem is. You've chosen to ignore me and have pathetic pot shots for about a year now. It's amazing that you expect an apology. Again, there's a PM system available if you can't tell me on here.
Heres the reply I received. Someone at the BBC has been busy cutting and pasting rather than dealing with the point of the complaint:
Thanks for contacting us.
I understand you feel unhappy our BBC twitter account @bbcrugby is dedicated to Rugby Union.
Whilst I appreciate your concerns on the matter, we only have the resources to manage a limited number of social media accounts for dedicated sports, and these are created based on audience demand. For example, we have a football account via @bbcmotd, F1 through @bbcf1 with a mixture of general sports coverage on the general BBC Sport @bbcsport account.
As part of our coverage of rugby union, we introduced a dedicated Twitter account and launched @bbcrugby based on demand, and in the page profile we clearly marked the account as being dedicated to rugby union.
Should there be a demand on our @bbcsport page for coverage of rugby league specifically, we would of course review the merits of introducing a dedicated Twitter account in the future as part of our ongoing commitment to cover both codes of the game.
That said, your views are important to us and we welcome feedback from our audience to help us create enjoyable programming for all. I’d like to assure you that I’ve registered your comments fully. We value your feedback, all complaints are sent to senior management and programme makers every morning and I included your points in this overnight report.
These reports are among the most widely read sources of feedback in the BBC and ensures that your complaint has been seen by the right people quickly. This helps inform their decisions about current and future programmes.
Thank you again for taking the time to contact us.
Cut and paste job.
I like how they've completely missed the point.
Her argument is akin to saying:
We only have resources for so many accounts, so we created a dedicated formula 1 account name @bbcmotorsports.
The NRL clubs and the ARL have decided between them that 2015 will be a rest year......
If you look at the last and Next few years, then NRL players will have:
2013: Completed a full season then a great number of them travelled north to play in the RLWC for nations including their own as well as Italy, Fiji, Samoa, Tonga etc etc...., returned back to Aussie for a couple of weeks off, then straight into the pre-season........
2014....Auckland 9's, followed by a full season followed by 81 of the 100 at the 4 Nations playing in that comp, before a couple of weeks off then
2015: Auckland 9's WCC, Full season......AND REST!
2016....9'S, WCC in Australia, Full Season 4 nations......couple of weeks off then
2017: Auckland 9's? WCC? Full Season and RLWC 2017.
I'm knackered just typing that.......but the upshot is that the players salaries are paid for by the Clubs and if the clubs have decided that 2015 is a rest year, I wouldn't be stunned to see a weakened Kiwis squad playing an England side missing a couple of NRL players.
Awwww, bless the poor little darlings. Too tired after their short season to play internationals.
They'll be wanting a break mid season next and an even shorter season...
It does hold us back. We have three parts to the name, none of which we are top draw on: rugby, football and league. And we won't ever win the fight. But that doesn't mean that it's not damn good fun trying.
Is it good fun though? I consider it boring having to continually put up with some snob telling me what rugby is, and irritating when someone who should know better calls it rugby. And frustrating when I read that a new NGB in a new country is not funded because "they already give funding to rugby ".
I think we should have tried to split from the name rugby years ago.
"Create f***ing mayhem. Be reckless. Because that's what's going to get us a f***ing win next week."
The game is chock full of charmers apparently.
If you can't tell the difference between a pre-recorded video that was not in public (giving the listener the opportunity to not listen if offended) and swearing in public over a live radio broadcast (where you do not have the opportunity to not hear it if you don't know it's coming) then you're either stupid or have an agenda.
Not true. Clubs from Ireland, Italy, Scotland & Wales all play in the Celtic League ("RaboDirect Pro 12" as it now called). 7 clubs from that comp qualify for RU's European Cup. The best placed club from each nation (4 clubs) and the 3 highest ranked clubs qualify. The two Italian or Scottish clubs could finish 11th and 12th in the league and the 11th place side would qualify for Europe.
I'd like to see NZ Warriors & Cat Dragons in the WCS and hope it happens - they are the best clubs in their countries every single year. Well done them! :-)
I don't personally care if they do it in union, it's ridiculous there too.
You should have to qualify for a competition to be the best in the World, not get in by default because you are from a different county. It would be like putting Swansea in the Champions League simply because they're from Wales.
Well, having scrolled through the ridiculously long posts by a certain poster playing the victim again, I am in agreement that anyone that thinks you can draw a definite conclusion by just comparing two random crowd figures and doesn't think they need to add any commentary to that point is speaking nonsense.
Facts are facts. The conclusions you make are opinons based on facts. I'm not sure how many crowd threads have to be derailed by the same person posting random crowd figures to compare and then having a go at anyone that has the audacity to disagree with them because he thinks that his comparisons and conclusions are "facts".
I don't mind the idea of having more players on the bench, but you can only use four of them. Other than negating the injuries to specialist positions, it also allows you to blood youth players of you wish. A team might be winning comfortably and feel that it is a good time to bring in a young player to get used to the intensity.
Would it not be a possibility, instead of having French clubs in the Championship itself, to have the French clubs have a conference within the Championship?
To me, and I keep emphasising this, there aren't enough big French clubs in the Elite. It will never be a strong enough league. But if you take a small number of the strong clubs out and have them play against some of the best Championship clubs, you can build one extra club at a time.
What if you took four of the strongest French areas (Toulouse, Aude, Avignon and the area Villeneuve represents) and created a 4 team French conference. Split the Championship into two groups of 6. Play everyone in your conference twice, all the others once, plus Summer Bash makes 21 games (French conference plays everyone in their conference three times, with one of those being the Summer Bash game, to make 21).
Top of each conference goes into the middle 8 plus one team with the highest points total.
Guarantees only two away games and two home games against French for English sides (so not much traveling, it would be the same as having two French clubs in the league).
Guarantees French involvement in the middle 8, so more chance of a French SL side.
A focused area of concentration for French RL that you could expand to six teams.
Really enjoyed that game. Don't mind losing when it's a good close game. No controversial calls that I can think of. Looked a good crowd. Both defences top notch. There were points of the game were the attack threw everything at each other but they just couldn't get through either side. End to end stuff.
Only thing that spoilt it for me were the idiots sat behind me that clearly had no idea what a decent rugby game looks like!
I don't have to make a statement of opinion. I looked up the facts on the origin of pro players and found very few from Halifax and discovered from the late sixties all through the seventies Halifax produced few local players so much so they sank to the bottom of the whole league. Someone else disagreed and told me Halifax had always been a goldmine for players. Straight off the top of the head opinion, denial of facts, no research, just an opinion to keep his clubs end up.[/quote] You don't have to, but you have!
When you look up facts to justify an opinion, it is still an opinion unless the evidence is conclusive (in which case, it is a statement of fact, not opinion).
Your research could be wrong, so people don't have to believe your "facts". Your methodology could be wrong. Your definition of "locally produced" could differ from others.
Just because someone else offers a poor argument doesn't make your argument correct.
Same with crowds in last years relegation battle. week after week crowds for the fixtures were way down on the equivalent games under licensing. Just a fact. It was others who passed the opinions that relegation battles would draw the crowds. So we looked them up 1996-2009 and they didn't then and didn't last year. Who knows what relegation crowds may do this?
A crowd figure is a fact. A showing off a decrease of increase of a crowd figure is a fact. What causes them are opinions. To say the opinion is a fact because the stat is a fact is like saying "there's an animal that's in a stable, horses live in stables, so the animal is a horse." It's really that simple and how you can't see that your facts aren't facts despite being told this many times by many people means only one of two things to me, and I'm not going to say them because you'll cry Wolf again.