Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

tuutaisrambo

Phil Clarkes thoughts on Dual reg

141 posts in this topic

I see the championship as the league below super league. Where clubs who are not at super league level can enjoy their own semi pro competition and teams with aspirations can build for super league without the boom and bust problems we had with P&R.

It's not a place for Super league teams to send whoever needs keeping fit........they should have their own reserve grade for that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see the championship as the league below super league. Where clubs who are not at super league level can enjoy their own semi pro competition and teams with aspirations can build for super league without the boom and bust problems we had with P&R.

It's not a place for Super league teams to send whoever needs keeping fit........they should have their own reserve grade for that.

I appreciate how you see the Championship.

I also appreciate how RFL/SL appear to see the championship.

It's a massive rift of course.

The only solution for me is honesty. If certain clubs are really serious about SL let's get them in even if we have to move to 16.

If the rest aren't serious or are just pretending then let them do what they collectively honestly want to do.

Where you and I differ immensely is your idea that the Championship is a "semi pro competition (where) teams with aspirations can build for super league".

It's a place where decline and stagnation is the order of the day unless you have access to money and then it's purely the money that builds you up, certainly not the competition you are in.........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well Mr. Clarke has come up with a fine article.

He says "Are we guilty in rugby league of closing the trap door too early? How many players like Tomkins do we 'lose' because we tell them that they are not good enough when they are too young for us to really know?

If this is one of the primary concerns then the answer may end up being the conversion of the Championship into the "A" team, or "feeder" league some predict will happen

We have seen that the 4 DR players, was a "Press release" (i.e. something to play down a major change) as Hunslet broke ranks to pick Moore and Leuluai. They now have brad Singleton who I assume can follow the Clarke route and go on propping for the Leeds sister team until he reaches his best at 22,23,34,25. Thus if the situation "worsens" will it matter as the CC is an open age league and has no "trap door"???

Please correct me if I'm wrong but in principle if abandoning an U23 league is a bad development route, replacing it with an open age league in which there's more permanency amongst the young SL players in the CC teams merely improves things towards Clarke's idea?

Is the CC players nose being put out of joint relevant? Is that a development issue??

I think it's a numbers game with regards to player development that he concerned about which he regards as " akin to development suicide".

If 14 teams all do away with a squad of say 20 players except for 4 dr players they might keep, then that's 210 less players being developed for SL. He makes also a big point of the experiment in Danish soccer where the players predicted to be stars at 15 did not turn out to be the ones who eventually became stars, so dithcing this junior team in the SL might lose us several top players.

Then, the loss of opportuntity for Championship players, due to the rosters being padded with DR players, leads to the loss of more development opportunities and we might miss the next Zak Hardaker because there was no room for him on a Chapionship roster.

He also is concerned about the players cut from the SL squads who do not get picked up by anyone else or become DR players being total;ly lost to the game and a star or stars who were destined to be later developers might be lost to the game. he makes the point that Sam Tomkins might have been lost to the game under the present system.

I don't quite get your point re the Championship club replacing the under 23 team. The players signed by the SL clubs for their under 23 teams, will be signed by whom in the future when there is no under 23 team.

Also the players being signed currently from numerous non tradtitional sources by the expansion Championship 1 clubs, a key reason for their existence being to develop new areas of recruitment, will be greatky curtailed if the places on the Championship 1 team are not there for them because of DR players filling the spots.

Those seem to be his main objections but he also says that this system " will undermine the integrity of the competiton", which seems to be irrelevant to many as they want a devalued second team league to replace the formerly independent competiton which the chairman of the league ha stated he wants to be a vibrant competition worthy of winning in it's own right, but, to me, it's a big loss and is . in effect, a contraction of the game, but never mind, in some 1984 kind of logic, less is more and big brother knows best and is watching and orchestrating everything and we must just suck it up and agree with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The subtext here is that fans of the smaller sides don't want to see a further erosion of the principle of P&R so will use the disingenuous argument of lack of young player development to hide behind. More honesty would be welcome. The benefits of DR are increasing the standard in the Championship and ensuring that good players don't warm benches week in-week out a la soccerball. As long as DR is capped there is little to suggest that lower league sides cannot still produce good players. Also it's a less well voiced argument that said players will improve more playing alongside and against fringe SL players more frequently. They are more rather than less likely to benefit. A lower quality Championship benefits no-one and the idea that throwing more average players at the wall means more good ones will stick is suspect, at best.

Yes we are creating feeder teams and it's for everyone's benefit other than those stuck in the past.

Are you saying that Phil Clark is arguing for p and r. i see no evidence of that. He is arguing against the reduction of the number and opportunity for young players to develop due to the dissolution of the under 23 teams. I do not see any argument for the re introduction of p and r from him.

The idea that young players being jettisoned from the game except for four or five on DR is not a positive. The idea that the young players will benefit the standards of the Championships existing players is not bearing fruit as only one independent Championship club has yet been beaten by a twinned organisation and some of the A teams have been right royally thrashed by independent's.

I beg to differ that Feeder teams are being created for everybody's benefit. They are not even really being created for SL's benefit on the playing development front, only on the financial front.

Have you contacted Phil Clark and told him he is stuck in the past. I bet he won't agree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I appreciate how you see the Championship.

I also appreciate how RFL/SL appear to see the championship.

It's a massive rift of course.

The only solution for me is honesty. If certain clubs are really serious about SL let's get them in even if we have to move to 16.

If the rest aren't serious or are just pretending then let them do what they collectively honestly want to do.

Where you and I differ immensely is your idea that the Championship is a "semi pro competition (where) teams with aspirations can build for super league".

It's a place where decline and stagnation is the order of the day unless you have access to money and then it's purely the money that builds you up, certainly not the competition you are in.........

That sounds good to me....maybe if everyone turns into a super league 'A' team bar a few that will happen.

But as i said i feel sorry for the fans who's clubs have voted for this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The subtext here is that fans of the smaller sides don't want to see a further erosion of the principle of P&R so will use the disingenuous argument of lack of young player development to hide behind. More honesty would be welcome. The benefits of DR are increasing the standard in the Championship and ensuring that good players don't warm benches week in-week out a la soccerball. As long as DR is capped there is little to suggest that lower league sides cannot still produce good players. Also it's a less well voiced argument that said players will improve more playing alongside and against fringe SL players more frequently. They are more rather than less likely to benefit. A lower quality Championship benefits no-one and the idea that throwing more average players at the wall means more good ones will stick is suspect, at best.

Yes we are creating feeder teams and it's for everyone's benefit other than those stuck in the past.

How do Championship players improve simply by playing alongside the odd SL player for a game or two ? The notion that they would is absolutely ridiculous. Championship clubs may as well dispense with their coaching staff as obviously these SL players are going to improve the rest of the squad overnight.

How is the DR system increasing the standards in the Championship ? The biggest user of the system so far is Swinton, take a look at the league table. The likes of Wood & McCarthy have been poor for them, because they didn't want to be there. They're being used for a training run - how does that improve standards ?

It is also a very arrogant assumption to assume that young players attached to SL clubs are better players than experienced Championship players, thereby raising the standards in the Championship. In many cases they aren't - they may have the potential to be but currently they aren't.

Stick to SL, its obvious you know nothing about the game underneath it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How do Championship players improve simply by playing alongside the odd SL player for a game or two ? The notion that they would is absolutely ridiculous. Championship clubs may as well dispense with their coaching staff as obviously these SL players are going to improve the rest of the squad overnight.

How is the DR system increasing the standards in the Championship ? The biggest user of the system so far is Swinton, take a look at the league table. The likes of Wood & McCarthy have been poor for them, because they didn't want to be there. They're being used for a training run - how does that improve standards ?

It is also a very arrogant assumption to assume that young players attached to SL clubs are better players than experienced Championship players, thereby raising the standards in the Championship. In many cases they aren't - they may have the potential to be but currently they aren't.

Stick to SL, its obvious you know nothing about the game underneath it.

Good post.

Its odd how people post with such authority when they haven't really looked into the subject.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its a money decision by SL CEOs and nothing more!

The decision has no basis in whats best for the development of players.

Super league clubs that cant afford to run an U23s, U20s, U18s and 2 scholarships have no right being in SL!

If a reduction in the salary cap is needed in order to pay for the development teams/pathway then so be it, in time the players produced by the system would nullify the need for expensive overseas players and the meagre few top class players wouldnt be able to hold the clubs to ransom thus robbing the clubs of their ability to support development.

The reduction in development teams means players are forced down the route of playing DR in the Championship which in turn displaces Championship players and forces them into Champs 1 or the Amateur game thus displacing players from their teams and so on. The end result is less people playing the game at a time when the sports funding is being cut because of falling participation numbers.

Its a ###### decision made for all the wrong reasons by fools.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The subtext here is that fans of the smaller sides don't want to see a further erosion of the principle of P&R so will use the disingenuous argument of lack of young player development to hide behind. More honesty would be welcome. The benefits of DR are increasing the standard in the Championship and ensuring that good players don't warm benches week in-week out a la soccerball. As long as DR is capped there is little to suggest that lower league sides cannot still produce good players. Also it's a less well voiced argument that said players will improve more playing alongside and against fringe SL players more frequently. They are more rather than less likely to benefit. A lower quality Championship benefits no-one and the idea that throwing more average players at the wall means more good ones will stick is suspect, at best.

Yes we are creating feeder teams and it's for everyone's benefit other than those stuck in the past.

DR could work, and indeed did. A max of 3/4 at any club, under 23 years old and for a min of a month is good for all parties. The reason for Championship clubs twinning is that they have no fans and can't afford to put a team out every week, plus the black hole that is C1 is something to be very scared of.

Overhaul the leagues, two divisions of 10 in SL, and a championship made up of twinned clubs struggling for survival. When a club here no longer needs twinning let them apply every 3 years to move into an expanded SL structure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't quite get your point re the Championship club replacing the under 23 team. The players signed by the SL clubs for their under 23 teams, will be signed by whom in the future when there is no under 23 team.

Clarke says when the kids at Leeds hit 19 they won't have a team at Leeds to gravitate to and all but the best will be struck off the Leeds register because there isn't that one more step up i.e. the U23's.

The SL clubs don't really sign U23's. the players are mainly those who have gravitated through the age ranges.

U15, U17, U19, U23 those are the stages of development.

What i am saying is if Leeds want to really "use" Hunslet then why not

U15, U17, U19, Hunslet

It's the same development system, which Clark laments has been lost by dual Reg.

If the Championship clubs are going to persist in these tie ups then why mess about????

When I watched Hunslet at Parkside it went like this...

Juniors (U16) Intermmediates (U18) "A" team, First team.

Same thing.

Championship clubs only get their players by recruiting SL rejects anyway so what's the difference for them?

They may as well just lay down and be "A" teams and stop pretending and maintain the development structure on behalf of the SL clubs.

Everyone happy except some CC fans and SL wannabees.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with what Phil is saying 100% regarding the future development of Rugby LEAGUE players. However in hard economic times ALL business must cut its cloth to suit and cannot afford to lose money - Or it will not be in business next year. My hope is that the DR system will be a temporary measure until business conditions improve.

But the clubs have and still waste money on over paying players often from Australia. Poor Business management like throwing away tickets for nothing or way too cheaply still goes on. And the clubs could save money in other areas instead of making short term selfish decions and getting rid of academy teams.The fault of clubs making losses is down to the clubs making a right mess of things despite all the millions they have received from Sky. Certain SL clubs are a joke and should not even have been given a licence. The RFL should have had the balls to say SL will be 12 clubs as its clear theres atleast 2 Clubs who shouldnt have been given a licence at the time and it was just a matter of time before they was in trouble

.

It was the SL clubs who made the decision. The RFL have made it very clear that it was not what they recommended, but when the SL clubs rejected that they had to go away and come up with an alternative.

That's democracy, you don't always get the most sensible long-term solutions.

Once again the greed and selfishness of Clubs cause further damage to the game. Clubs only think of themselves which is normal. That doesnt mean its the best decision for SL or the rest of the game. The RFL do have a voice anyway as they decide who gets a licence and set the minimum standards to a large extent. And the question must be asked how can Halifax, Sheffield and Featherstone afford to run atleast 2 academy teams on way less money than a number of SL clubs who have saying they cant? You cant blame the RFL for most of this farce but they for me could and should have done more to say ALL SL clubs and Championship clubs if they wish should run U20/Reserve Grade and U18s.

What was wrong with the loan system that existed? Getting rid of U20s/Reserve grade is just so dumb and short term as its very hard now for overseas players to come back from injury properly. And the option of young players needing to play at a higher level than U20 still could have been loaned out. Dual Regs do little for team spirit and right now makes the Championship a lottery. If Hunslet and Swinton cant afford to play at that level then drop down to Championship 1. The Dual Regs have already cheapened the Championship and what good has it done Swinton for example who have lost all 3 games? Hunslet got spanked at the weekend. And there are strong rumours that a number of Championship players are fed up and want to leave the club due to Dual Regs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Championship clubs only get their players by recruiting SL rejects anyway so what's the difference for them?

Rubbish! Some Championship players recruit many players from their academy because they do things properly. They then sign the odd outsider from SL or Championship. Iain Davies, Ryan Fieldhouse, Sam Smeaton, Martin Ridyard, Jimmy Taylor etc came through Championship Academy or direct from the amateur game to play at Championship level. And do you really expect the badly run academy teams at SL clubs to provide players for 30 odd teams?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about a sense of proportion? Unlikely, I know.

How valid an assumption is it to make that the more young players there are , the more stars we will have? I'm not sure it is a strong relationship. Look for example at the success of the Ireland rugby union side compared with the population of Ireland. Look at the way Italy punches above it weight when teh game is virtually non-existent there. Look at the All Blacks success and the size of their player pool.

In addition, there seems to be a fair but of projection going on here. Suddenly Phil Clarke is the poster boy for the anti-RFL crew when previously he has been derided.

Personally, rather than predict the imminent collapse of civilisation, blaming both SL and Champ clubs for trying to remain or become solvent, maybe we should wait until the end of the season to make a judgement against agreed measures of success.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Clarke says when the kids at Leeds hit 19 they won't have a team at Leeds to gravitate to and all but the best will be struck off the Leeds register because there isn't that one more step up i.e. the U23's.

The SL clubs don't really sign U23's. the players are mainly those who have gravitated through the age ranges.

U15, U17, U19, U23 those are the stages of development.

What i am saying is if Leeds want to really "use" Hunslet then why not

U15, U17, U19, Hunslet

It's the same development system, which Clark laments has been lost by dual Reg.

If the Championship clubs are going to persist in these tie ups then why mess about????

When I watched Hunslet at Parkside it went like this...

Juniors (U16) Intermmediates (U18) "A" team, First team.

Same thing.

Championship clubs only get their players by recruiting SL rejects anyway so what's the difference for them?

They may as well just lay down and be "A" teams and stop pretending and maintain the development structure on behalf of the SL clubs.

Everyone happy except some CC fans and SL wannabees.

If this is the way to go, then Leeds need to fund the whole excercise. They need to buy out Hunslet and fund the whole feeder system. What is the point of Hunslet having independent boards and directors and ground leasing arrangements. In fact what is the point of ordering Hunslet shirts. They may as well play in Leeds shirts and get the benefits from a bulk order one one design shirts from the manufacturer.

The same goes for the other feeeder clubs. Let the SL club fund the whole excercise. What is the point of these teams existing as seperate entities ?

The indepednents should be given very sympathetic consideration on application for SL and let's see what happens. If they can't hack it then they can always either go to the wall or surrender and join up to a SL club as an appendage like the rest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The DR system is understood to save £1.4m p.a

The SL clubs decided to share the Bradford half of their Sky money that was witheld for this season between themselves. If that is £0.6k, then that leaves a £0.8k shortfall between the 14 clubs.

They can't fund that? Its £57,100 each. Surely they can?

The downside of that is the risk to player development, and the structure and integrity of the Championship as a separate competition to SL.

IMO if a player such as a Kevin Brown or a Stefan Ratchford are picked for a one-off appearance on a DR basis, and have such influence over the outcome of that game to achieve a 3 points win, that in the end, makes the difference between obtaining a play-off place or avoiding relegation for the team they represent, then the whole competition has been compromised and is false.

Next year, each SL club has £42,850 less money (as they won't have the Bradford portion) and then they have to fund a reserve team in competitions. But still they can't afford this year?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If this is the way to go, then Leeds need to fund the whole excercise. They need to buy out Hunslet and fund the whole feeder system. What is the point of Hunslet having independent boards and directors and ground leasing arrangements. In fact what is the point of ordering Hunslet shirts. They may as well play in Leeds shirts and get the benefits from a bulk order one one design shirts from the manufacturer.

What is the point of these teams existing as seperate entities ?

Good point.

I really am not sure of the answer.......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rubbish! Some Championship players recruit many players from their academy because they do things properly. They then sign the odd outsider from SL or Championship. Iain Davies, Ryan Fieldhouse, Sam Smeaton, Martin Ridyard, Jimmy Taylor etc came through Championship Academy or direct from the amateur game to play at Championship level. And do you really expect the badly run academy teams at SL clubs to provide players for 30 odd teams?

There's me thinking Championship clubs are exclusively made up of players the SL clubs don't sign.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Next year, each SL club has £42,850 less money (as they won't have the Bradford portion) and then they have to fund a reserve team in competitions. But still they can't afford this year?

Yes, they will. We were bum rushed for two seasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's me thinking Championship clubs are exclusively made up of players the SL clubs don't sign.

At Leigh Pownall, Goulden, Taylor, Hopkins, Nicholson, Penky, Littler, Higson, all came through East/Miners/Academy as did Higham at Wire and Hill arrived at 15.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you saying that Phil Clark is arguing for p and r. i see no evidence of that. He is arguing against the reduction of the number and opportunity for young players to develop due to the dissolution of the under 23 teams. I do not see any argument for the re introduction of p and r from him.

The idea that young players being jettisoned from the game except for four or five on DR is not a positive. The idea that the young players will benefit the standards of the Championships existing players is not bearing fruit as only one independent Championship club has yet been beaten by a twinned organisation and some of the A teams have been right royally thrashed by independent's.

I beg to differ that Feeder teams are being created for everybody's benefit. They are not even really being created for SL's benefit on the playing development front, only on the financial front.

Have you contacted Phil Clark and told him he is stuck in the past. I bet he won't agree.

Clarke isn't arguing for P&R but those on this forum who oppose DR and any kind of erosion of smaller sides' identities generally do, which is my point. I doubt said fans would mind seeing a glut of SL loanees in their sides shirts if the ladder/trap door was still in place a la EPL players regularly spending a season in the soccerball Championship. I suspect theirs is a dishonest dislike of DR hiding beneath a larger disgruntlement, this is my point.

Clarke's comments are well-meaning but IMHO misguided. I have no real gripe with him, he's entitled to his views and is one of the more articulate and interesting spokesmen for our game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is also a very arrogant assumption to assume that young players attached to SL clubs are better players than experienced Championship players, thereby raising the standards in the Championship. In many cases they aren't - they may have the potential to be but currently they aren't.

So why is pretty much every team in the lower tiers rushing headlong to secure DR deals then and this such a big issue in the first place? You're basically turning your own argument against yourself. Hoist by your own petard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's me thinking Championship clubs are exclusively made up of players the SL clubs don't sign.

Au contraire. We now have dual registration and many Championship players are players who the $L clubs do sign. :happy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



League Express - Mon 10th April 2017

Rugby League World - April 2017