Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Laminated Lobster

Latest on the Welsh joke

57 posts in this topic

Dual contract/feeder clubs??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

different rules in different divisions, (playoffs, bonus pionts etc.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dual contract/feeder clubs??

Yes, this is a new one, but we'll have to see.

different rules in different divisions, (playoffs, bonus pionts etc.)

BPs right, not sure what you mean by the playoff differences OR.

So updated list:

1. No automatic P&R between SL and CC.

2. Finances are poor at some CC clubs

3. Attendances are poor at some CC clubs

4. Expansion clubs get exemption from import quotas.

5. Voting rights at the RFL favour SL clubs.

6. Dual contract system

7. Bonus points

Any more?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the challenge cup super league teams are allowed to play more foreign players than CC clubs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, this is a new one, but we'll have to see.

BPs right, not sure what you mean by the playoff differences OR.

So updated list:

1. No automatic P&R between SL and CC.

2. Finances are poor at some CC clubs

3. Attendances are poor at some CC clubs

4. Expansion clubs get exemption from import quotas.

5. Voting rights at the RFL favour SL clubs.

6. Dual contract system

7. Bonus points

Any more?

in the championship all the top teams go into the playoffs, but in championship 1 (or whatever were calling them these days) the team that finishes top does not. they get no income from playoffs. i don't know if prize money for winning the league out weighs what can be earned from winning the playoffs (prize money +gate money). maybe this comes under the p&r banner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
in the championship all the top teams go into the playoffs, but in championship 1 (or whatever were calling them these days) the team that finishes top does not. they get no income from playoffs. i don't know if prize money for winning the league out weighs what can be earned from winning the playoffs (prize money +gate money). maybe this comes under the p&r banner.

Right, gotcha. But surely they'd rather go straight up to the higher league than risk the playoffs? It does seem odd though at times. Fev probably had a better time of it winning the 2007 playoffs than the Welsh did winning the league.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Right, gotcha. But surely they'd rather go straight up to the higher league than risk the playoffs? It does seem odd though at times. Fev probably had a better time of it winning the 2007 playoffs than the Welsh did winning the league.

It is still a question of HOW? Before there is a scheme it is all wishful thinking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It is still a question of HOW? Before there is a scheme it is all wishful thinking.

What's wishful thinking? We haven't said owt yet. Just outlining a few of the major gripes, that's all so far.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, this is a new one, but we'll have to see.

BPs right, not sure what you mean by the playoff differences OR.

So updated list:

1. No automatic P&R between SL and CC.

2. Finances are poor at some CC clubs

3. Attendances are poor at some CC clubs

4. Expansion clubs get exemption from import quotas.

5. Voting rights at the RFL favour SL clubs.

6. Dual contract system

7. Bonus points

Any more?

I'll give this a go Mark.

1. Re-introduce P+R subject to the promoted club fulfilling ground requirements. I do believe a club should have certain minimum standards.

2. Re-distribute finances on a fairer basis throughout league. Maybe on a sliding scale based on league positions.

3. I'm sure with P+R coming back that would give a surge to attendances. Though this does in someways rely on the club being successful. Extra finances would also allow the club to spend more on promoting themselves.

4.Overseas players to be reduced to 2 for ALL clubs. Overseas coaches would count as one. Expansion clubs should enter RL at Championship 1 level though i would give them extra help in promoting and managing their club. Maybe paid from central funds.

5. I don't know what the voting rights of clubs are now but i do not see how one vote per club is wrong. Providing they are full members of RL.

6. Dual contracts should be stopped immediately. Introduce a loan system that is fair and easy to understand.

&. Either introduce bonus points for ALL teams or abandon them.

Over to you people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'll give this a go Mark.

1. Re-introduce P+R subject to the promoted club fulfilling ground requirements. I do believe a club should have certain minimum standards.

2. Re-distribute finances on a fairer basis throughout league. Maybe on a sliding scale based on league positions.

3. I'm sure with P+R coming back that would give a surge to attendances. Though this does in someways rely on the club being successful. Extra finances would also allow the club to spend more on promoting themselves.

4.Overseas players to be reduced to 2 for ALL clubs. Overseas coaches would count as one. Expansion clubs should enter RL at Championship 1 level though i would give them extra help in promoting and managing their club. Maybe paid from central funds.

5. I don't know what the voting rights of clubs are now but i do not see how one vote per club is wrong. Providing they are full members of RL.

6. Dual contracts should be stopped immediately. Introduce a loan system that is fair and easy to understand.

&. Either introduce bonus points for ALL teams or abandon them.

Over to you people.

Good effort mate.

1. Agree with you all the way there.

2. By this I suppose you mean more SKY cash for the CC clubs. It'd be nice for sure, but Im not sure how we could justify this. SKY pays so SL games. We get 100K per club for CC games. Seems about right in terms of market value.

3. An eternal problem. Im not sure how closely attendances are related to P&R between SL & CC. The clubs have got to work hard at this.

4. There are too many imports in SL I agree, but that's their problem. Our league has it about right. With reagrd to expansion clubs getting a dispensation, well that's a difficult one. Celtic & Gateshead/whoever stuffing their teams with aussies doesn't look good, but then there is no local pool of talent for those clubs to draw on so where do they get the players. TBH I think you've got to give them a short term dispensation. Problem is that many expansion clubs find it too hard to move beyond that and to start producing their own players.

5. TBH I don't even know what issues get voted on at the RL council. The board of directors/chief exec. seem to decide everything

6. This is a new thing, so let's see. They're certainly open to abuse, but it may benefit us with the likes of Coady, etc.

7. We've had a couple of years of Bonus Points and I think they're ######.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see NO problem in gaining a Super League licence at all it's simple.

Show the Lincecee's that we play at Elland Road

That we have a

Edited by Bob Fowler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, this is a new one, but we'll have to see.

BPs right, not sure what you mean by the playoff differences OR.

So updated list:

1. No automatic P&R between SL and CC.

2. Finances are poor at some CC clubs

3. Attendances are poor at some CC clubs

4. Expansion clubs get exemption from import quotas.

5. Voting rights at the RFL favour SL clubs.

6. Dual contract system

7. Bonus points

Any more?

8. Approval of the visa's for overseas players last year, which turned out to be wrong resulting in the Celtic deportations, it is also deafeningly quiet regarding the other 13 or so other clubs who had also signed players using the incorrect visas.

9. A salary cap system, which is not ensuring clubs are avoiding financial difficulty, numerous clubs in all divisions are all reporting financial issues.

10. Abysmal attendances for the internationals.

11. The "Magic Weekend" is always reported as a resounding success with a gate of around 60000 across the 2 days, but I'd love to know how many people from the areas where the "weekend" takes place attend, most of the supporters of the clubs attend which would account for the majority of these 60000 IMO. This does not a constitute a success to me.

12. Finishing top of the league does not make you championship winners, that is decided by 1 game, the final, at the end of the season. Surely the best team is the one who consistantly, over the whole season, wins more games than anyone else.

13. A cup competition (NRC) which stops and starts throughout the season resulting in several weeks without a game for most clubs, and a lack of interest with most supporters, due to it being so disjointed.

14. Toulouse being allowed to start in the middle Division instead of the bottom tier, and they are exempt from relegation at the expense of teams around them.

....... If the 14 SL clubs vote for removing every other clubs from existence there is nothing the rest can do. They could also decide with the financial situation as it is at the current time, to keep all of the money from Sky next year if they see fit, then what?

Couple this to the fact that it doesn't matter even if you win the right to join SL on the playing field by winning the league ala Barrow last year, that avenue for success has been removed too, with the introduction of the licencing system with no promotion and relegation.

It saddens me to think that the selected few teams have been allowed to get away with this injustice and closed shop mentality for so long.

The argument has always been the likes of Batley would never compete at SL level, and that is probably true, as it stands, however a baloon payment was payed to Castleford when they were relegated from SL. How that could ever be justified is beyond me? Surely the best way to improve the game would be to pay some kind of baloon payment to help the newly promoted SL side to compete at a higher level. I'm talking about real investment from the RFL, to develop the club's infrastructure, not just short term with playing staff or just enough money to fund a team full of journeymen SL cast offs like Widnes were full of a couple of years back, but help with the set up of junior ranks from under 9's to open age teams, with close links to BARLA. Help with marketing and community development, the kind of work that is going off in development areas to help expand the game, and thus trying to improve the club long term. The stronger the game in the heartlands, the better the opportunity to expand the game in the future to non RL areas. Huge plaudits must go to the development work in the communities that already goes on by clubs themsleves, but with extra resources provided by the RFL it begs the question what improvements could be made to what is already happening.

Sorry if my input is not really welcomed on here, but I started a similar thread on the Batley Website and I wanted to lend a bit of support, so I hope it's welcomed, and to let you know that you're not on your own with your feelings regarding the state of the game.

For what it's worth I believe the only way forward is to break away for SL, but the issue as someone has already stated is the

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8. Approval of the visa's for overseas players last year, which turned out to be wrong resulting in the Celtic deportations, it is also deafeningly quiet regarding the other 13 or so other clubs who had also signed players using the incorrect visas.

9. A salary cap system, which is not ensuring clubs are avoiding financial difficulty, numerous clubs in all divisions are all reporting financial issues.

10. Abysmal attendances for the internationals.

11. The "Magic Weekend" is always reported as a resounding success with a gate of around 60000 across the 2 days, but I'd love to know how many people from the areas where the "weekend" takes place attend, most of the supporters of the clubs attend which would account for the majority of these 60000 IMO. This does not a constitute a success to me.

12. Finishing top of the league does not make you championship winners, that is decided by 1 game, the final, at the end of the season. Surely the best team is the one who consistantly, over the whole season, wins more games than anyone else.

13. A cup competition (NRC) which stops and starts throughout the season resulting in several weeks without a game for most clubs, and a lack of interest with most supporters, due to it being so disjointed.

14. Toulouse being allowed to start in the middle Division instead of the bottom tier, and they are exempt from relegation at the expense of teams around them.

....... If the 14 SL clubs vote for removing every other clubs from existence there is nothing the rest can do. They could also decide with the financial situation as it is at the current time, to keep all of the money from Sky next year if they see fit, then what?

Couple this to the fact that it doesn't matter even if you win the right to join SL on the playing field by winning the league ala Barrow last year, that avenue for success has been removed too, with the introduction of the licencing system with no promotion and relegation.

It saddens me to think that the selected few teams have been allowed to get away with this injustice and closed shop mentality for so long.

The argument has always been the likes of Batley would never compete at SL level, and that is probably true, as it stands, however a baloon payment was payed to Castleford when they were relegated from SL. How that could ever be justified is beyond me? Surely the best way to improve the game would be to pay some kind of baloon payment to help the newly promoted SL side to compete at a higher level. I'm talking about real investment from the RFL, to develop the club's infrastructure, not just short term with playing staff or just enough money to fund a team full of journeymen SL cast offs like Widnes were full of a couple of years back, but help with the set up of junior ranks from under 9's to open age teams, with close links to BARLA. Help with marketing and community development, the kind of work that is going off in development areas to help expand the game, and thus trying to improve the club long term. The stronger the game in the heartlands, the better the opportunity to expand the game in the future to non RL areas. Huge plaudits must go to the development work in the communities that already goes on by clubs themsleves, but with extra resources provided by the RFL it begs the question what improvements could be made to what is already happening.

Sorry if my input is not really welcomed on here, but I started a similar thread on the Batley Website and I wanted to lend a bit of support, so I hope it's welcomed, and to let you know that you're not on your own with your feelings regarding the state of the game.

For what it's worth I believe the only way forward is to break away for SL, but the issue as someone has already stated is the

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12. Finishing top of the league does not make you championship winners, that is decided by 1 game, the final, at the end of the season. Surely the best team is the one who consistantly, over the whole season, wins more games than anyone else.

I agree with almost all of your post other than the one point. I actually enjoy the play-offs nowadays. In footy and rugby they have been a resounding success and extend the number of meaningful games for many clubs right to the end of the season and obviously beyond.

Finishing higher in the league gives you increasing advantages the higher you finish for the play-offs.

A good system, not infallable, but one which provides enhanced entertainment for the fans, and usually the team finishing top has, more oft than not (from memory this so again, subject to scrutiny), gone on to win the comp. i.e. Barrow last year!

I broadly agree to almost everything else you post.

Edited by Robin Evans

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8. Approval of the visa's for overseas players last year, which turned out to be wrong resulting in the Celtic deportations, it is also deafeningly quiet regarding the other 13 or so other clubs who had also signed players using the incorrect visas.

9. A salary cap system, which is not ensuring clubs are avoiding financial difficulty, numerous clubs in all divisions are all reporting financial issues.

10. Abysmal attendances for the internationals.

11. The "Magic Weekend" is always reported as a resounding success with a gate of around 60000 across the 2 days, but I'd love to know how many people from the areas where the "weekend" takes place attend, most of the supporters of the clubs attend which would account for the majority of these 60000 IMO. This does not a constitute a success to me.

12. Finishing top of the league does not make you championship winners, that is decided by 1 game, the final, at the end of the season. Surely the best team is the one who consistantly, over the whole season, wins more games than anyone else.

13. A cup competition (NRC) which stops and starts throughout the season resulting in several weeks without a game for most clubs, and a lack of interest with most supporters, due to it being so disjointed.

14. Toulouse being allowed to start in the middle Division instead of the bottom tier, and they are exempt from relegation at the expense of teams around them.

....... If the 14 SL clubs vote for removing every other clubs from existence there is nothing the rest can do. They could also decide with the financial situation as it is at the current time, to keep all of the money from Sky next year if they see fit, then what?

Couple this to the fact that it doesn't matter even if you win the right to join SL on the playing field by winning the league ala Barrow last year, that avenue for success has been removed too, with the introduction of the licencing system with no promotion and relegation.

It saddens me to think that the selected few teams have been allowed to get away with this injustice and closed shop mentality for so long.

The argument has always been the likes of Batley would never compete at SL level, and that is probably true, as it stands, however a baloon payment was payed to Castleford when they were relegated from SL. How that could ever be justified is beyond me? Surely the best way to improve the game would be to pay some kind of baloon payment to help the newly promoted SL side to compete at a higher level. I'm talking about real investment from the RFL, to develop the club's infrastructure, not just short term with playing staff or just enough money to fund a team full of journeymen SL cast offs like Widnes were full of a couple of years back, but help with the set up of junior ranks from under 9's to open age teams, with close links to BARLA. Help with marketing and community development, the kind of work that is going off in development areas to help expand the game, and thus trying to improve the club long term. The stronger the game in the heartlands, the better the opportunity to expand the game in the future to non RL areas. Huge plaudits must go to the development work in the communities that already goes on by clubs themsleves, but with extra resources provided by the RFL it begs the question what improvements could be made to what is already happening.

Sorry if my input is not really welcomed on here, but I started a similar thread on the Batley Website and I wanted to lend a bit of support, so I hope it's welcomed, and to let you know that you're not on your own with your feelings regarding the state of the game.

For what it's worth I believe the only way forward is to break away for SL, but the issue as someone has already stated is the

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5. I don't know what the voting rights of clubs are now but i do not see how one vote per club is wrong. Providing they are full members of RL.

My understanding is that the voting rights are weighted proportionately by the membership of each competition. eg.

Each CC and CC1 club gets 1 vote = 22 votes or 1 vote each

Each SL club gets 22 divided by 14 votes = 22 votes or 1.57 votes each

BARLA = 3 votes

I'm pretty sure that other areas of the amateur game (eg. SRL, Combined Services, schools etc.) get 1 vote apiece too.

The voting structure is defined so that the combined power of the CC clubs is equal to the combined power of the SL clubs. If SL expanded to 22 teams and the CC reduced to 14, then the CC clubs would have 1.57 votes instead, switching the situation. If SL had 18 teams and the CC 18 teams, then each club would have 1 equal vote.

The irony of this situation is that if the SL clubs and CC clubs are tied on a vote, then the amateur game carries the deciding votes...

Edited by Jonty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well thought out and a very welcome post, even if not everyone agree's with it. I know many Championship clubs are working with local junior teams at schoolboy level. The one danger we have in that is that as soon as a player shows promise the bigger clubs come in and claim him as their own. I wouldn't wish to see a 14 year old tied to any professional club, but if that doesn't happen, then the Champioship clubs could be the one's paying out to make "stars" of the future. I don't see a simple solution, but your post goes a long way in making sense.

Thanks for your support, I too would rather not see any kids tied to any team, however they are being bought from young ages by the bigger clubs like Leeds and Wigan anyway, so one way to help reduce the issue of big clubs buying all, and in some cases wasting, the promising talent is a flat rated salary cap on running junior teams by all clubs, regardless of size, or all clubs having an embargo on signing anyone under the age of 16. This would ensure that the big clubs could not snap up all the best available talent, and meaning they are streets ahead of the other teams, and this would lead to a more evenly contested league system providing even competition throughout junior ranks, aiding the development of future star players up to the professional ranks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for your support, I too would rather not see any kids tied to any team, however they are being bought from young ages by the bigger clubs like Leeds and Wigan anyway, so one way to help reduce the issue of big clubs buying all, and in some cases wasting, the promising talent is a flat rated salary cap on running junior teams by all clubs, regardless of size, or all clubs having an embargo on signing anyone under the age of 16. This would ensure that the big clubs could not snap up all the best available talent, and meaning they are streets ahead of the other teams, and this would lead to a more evenly contested league system providing even competition throughout junior ranks, aiding the development of future star players up to the professional ranks.

The embargo is not going to work.

The kids and their parents want to link up with the pro clubs for numerous reasons: professional training & advice, future contracts, etc.

The clubs want it too, to guide & develop lads from an early age.

There are already numerous regulations in place for all sports (soccer is much worse than RL) about what kids can sign at what age.

It works fine.

The problem is: Are Fev, Batley (your club, but Im not sure if you even have a junior team so an academic point in your case), etc really competing with Wigan & Leeds?

No we're not. If the top clubs want a player of ours at any age, he's gone. It's ALWAYS been like that. The difference is in the past if we had a lad on pro forms at 17 then any future move to a big club would've brought a fee. Now it doesn't.

However, salary cap restrictions mean that clubs like Leeds can't stockpile all their promising youngsters anyway, hence lads like Danny Allen and Michael Coady become available tyo Fev in 2010.

It works both ways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8. Approval of the visa's for overseas players last year, which turned out to be wrong resulting in the Celtic deportations, it is also deafeningly quiet regarding the other 13 or so other clubs who had also signed players using the incorrect visas.

9. A salary cap system, which is not ensuring clubs are avoiding financial difficulty, numerous clubs in all divisions are all reporting financial issues.

10. Abysmal attendances for the internationals.

11. The "Magic Weekend" is always reported as a resounding success with a gate of around 60000 across the 2 days, but I'd love to know how many people from the areas where the "weekend" takes place attend, most of the supporters of the clubs attend which would account for the majority of these 60000 IMO. This does not a constitute a success to me.

12. Finishing top of the league does not make you championship winners, that is decided by 1 game, the final, at the end of the season. Surely the best team is the one who consistantly, over the whole season, wins more games than anyone else.

13. A cup competition (NRC) which stops and starts throughout the season resulting in several weeks without a game for most clubs, and a lack of interest with most supporters, due to it being so disjointed.

14. Toulouse being allowed to start in the middle Division instead of the bottom tier, and they are exempt from relegation at the expense of teams around them.

8. Celtic's problem, one of many. Suggesting all other SL clubs have broken the law is a dangerous comment unless you have proof.

9. It's doing it's job. We're in a recession. Things would be worse without a cap.

10. Yep.

11. Who cares? It's a SL event which is nowt to do with us.

12. RL has always had Championship playoffs apart from a short time from 1973 to 1995. Playoffs are great, action & excitemnet packed.

13. ITs far from perfect, but it's getting better. The CC clubs need their own knockout cup.

14. Yes. They seem to have been deposited in our league as a stepping stone to SL. Ive enjoyed them being here as have tons of FEv fans who have been to FRance, but the way it's been set up wasn't right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The embargo is not going to work.

The kids and their parents want to link up with the pro clubs for numerous reasons: professional training & advice, future contracts, etc.

The clubs want it too, to guide & develop lads from an early age.

There are already numerous regulations in place for all sports (soccer is much worse than RL) about what kids can sign at what age.

It works fine.

The problem is: Are Fev, Batley (your club, but Im not sure if you even have a junior team so an academic point in your case), etc really competing with Wigan & Leeds?

No we're not. If the top clubs want a player of ours at any age, he's gone. It's ALWAYS been like that. The difference is in the past if we had a lad on pro forms at 17 then any future move to a big club would've brought a fee. Now it doesn't.

However, salary cap restrictions mean that clubs like Leeds can't stockpile all their promising youngsters anyway, hence lads like Danny Allen and Michael Coady become available tyo Fev in 2010.

It works both ways.

Good points, and you're right we don't have an academy side at present, and I can see both sides of the argument in Batley's case for the lack of an academy/junior team. We were unsuccessful in gaining many if any real talent over the years, by that I don't wish to take anything away from the lads that turned out every week, but very few made the step up to the 1st team in all the years we ran a team. Batley took the route a couple of years back in signing lads from SL academies who had not made the step up to SL 1st teamers instead, and so far we have signed a few real good lads, Mennel, Gallagher and few others who have been outstanding at CH level.

I suppose what I was trying to say, is the well of young talent seems to be drying up a bit at the amateur levels. I don't know, but is that because the big clubs are snapping them up early, or is it just a case of we are losing the battle to attract young lads away from football?

I may be wrong in my assessment, I honestly can't speak for the like Travellers Saints, Stanley Rangers etc. or any of the local teams around Wakefield Featherstone or Castleford, but I went to see Dudley Hill a few weeks back, and they, and other teams like Thornhill and many others in there division seem to be scratching around for teams rather than having lads that look up to the standards they were at even 5 or 6 years back. Are the lads who don't quite make the grade, who are signed by the likes of Leeds simply becoming disillutioned and leaving the game forever?

Edited by Pride & Heritage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Good points, and you're right we don't have an academy side at present, and I can see both sides of the argument in Batley's case for the lack of an academy/junior team. We were unsuccessful in gaining many if any real talent over the years, by that I don't wish to take anything away from the lads that turned out every week, but very few made the step up to the 1st team in all the years we ran a team. Batley took the route a couple of years back in signing lads from SL academies who had not made the step up to SL 1st teamers instead, and so far we have signed a few real good lads, Mennel, Gallagher and few others who have been outstanding at CH level.

I suppose what I was trying to say the well of young talent seems to be drying up a bit at the amateur levels. I don't know, but is that because the big clubs are snapping them up early, or is it just a case of we are losing the battle to attract young lads away from football?

I may be wrong in my assessment, I honestly can't speak for the like Travellers Saints, Stanley Rangers etc. or any of the local teams around Wakefield Featherstone or Castleford, but I went to see Dudley Hill a few weeks back, and they, and other teams like Thornhill and many others in there division seem to be scratching around for teams rather than having lads that look up to the standards they were at even 5 or 6 years back. Are the lads who don't quite make the grade, who are signed by the likes of Leeds simply becoming disillutioned and leaving the game forever?

Yes, there are arguemts for and against CC clubs bothering with junior/U21 teams. Im glad Fev do, but I can understand why Batley don't.

With regards to numbers, it's hard to say without the facts. There are many counter-attractions today, and many other sports to choose from. You mention the Travs who are long gone, but their successors Featherstone Lions have a very strong junior set up and recently yet another of their old boys made it to international level: Tom Briscoe.

If other BARLA clubs are scrtaching round for players, I hardly think we can simply blame the "big clubs" of SL for that. There are many issues.

Should the kids be playing in the summer to improve conditions?

Many schools used to do great RL development work. Much of that has been destroyed over the years.

Soccer has grown to be enormous and all dominating.

BARLA and the RFL have had a terrible relationship, often to the detriment of the lads themsleves.

Again you mention disillusioned lads at Leeds, but we've just taken three players off them from whom we have high hopes in 2010.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Reading between the lines the reason this move was allowed, was simply because Crusaders owed the RFL money, and they wanted it back, allowing the club to die would lose them this debt, keeping them alive in any way shape or form, gives them a chance to recoup.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bob, the RFL advanced Celtic some of their SKY money for 2010. It's not really a question of 'getting it back' as much as getting their money's worth of having a WElsh SL side for at least 2010 and 2011 till their franchises are up for renewal (which will be interesting).

Phil, whilst accepting that 14 is far too any overseas players (just like most SL clubs in fact), they were faced with no option this year. REcruiting six weeks before the start of the season for proven UK based SL players is impossible. Let's see how they do in the future (and 'no better at all' looks the most likely answer).

For the development of WElsh players we should perhaps be looking at South Wales RLFC in CC1 under the control of (maybe) Iestyn Harris.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



Rugby League World - June 2017

League Express - Mon 17th July 2017