Archived

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

tuutaisrambo

Phil Clarkes thoughts on Dual reg

141 posts in this topic

Clarkes got that absolutely 100% correct.

The people making these decisions are, in the majority, not qualified to do so and base their decisions on financial not development reasons.

I wonder what scientific studies underpin the reasoning behind the switch to U19s and Duel Reg, I strongly suspect the answer is a big fat NONE!

Do any of those decision makers have a back ground in elite athlete development,

Do they understand the science behind the aquisition of sports motor skills and the environments in which they should be learned

There are a multitude of elements to be considered but they all deal with whats best for development rather than the commercial aspects and therein lies our problem, like the NHS we are top heavy with Managers and beurocrats and paper thin with experienced industry professionals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Clarkes got that absolutely 100% correct.

The people making these decisions are, in the majority, not qualified to do so and base their decisions on financial not development reasons.

I wonder what scientific studies underpin the reasoning behind the switch to U19s and Duel Reg, I strongly suspect the answer is a big fat NONE!

Do any of those decision makers have a back ground in elite athlete development,

Do they understand the science behind the aquisition of sports motor skills and the environments in which they should be learned

There are a multitude of elements to be considered but they all deal with whats best for development rather than the commercial aspects and therein lies our problem, like the NHS we are top heavy with Managers and beurocrats and paper thin with experienced industry professionals.

Absolutely right and to make matters worse the highly paid beurocrats who have the power and are supposed to govern the sport haven't got the balls to do so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A very well-reasoned argument. Hard to disagree with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutely right and to make matters worse the highly paid beurocrats who have the power and are supposed to govern the sport haven't got the balls to do so.

Is it highly paid bureaucrats or the bumbling amateurs who populate the Council chamber ?

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Phil Clarke talking sense - that'll never do ;)

Still gets a Wigan mention in :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People have taken to calling me Jewel Reg since I nicked those diamonds from Brussels Airport.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it highly paid bureaucrats or the bumbling amateurs who populate the Council chamber ?

The fault lies with all of them but I think I'm right in saying that the RFL has the power to dictate where necessary. In the best interests of the sport they should have forced the SL clubs to run an adequate second tier. If Fev and Sheffield can afford to do it so can the elite.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it highly paid bureaucrats or the bumbling amateurs who populate the Council chamber ?

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Phil Clarke has articulated perfectly what myself and many other detractors of this system have been saying re lack of opportunities for Championship players, loss of interest, lack of opportunities for junior players, loss of integrity for the status of the Championship clubs.

The RFL, if indeed they disagreed with it, had the power to ban such DR agreements and not let SL dictate things that are not in the best interests of the game only in the best interests of SL. Now clubs have started bending the rules by registering whole squads and signing part of their squads on to the Champions roster as did Warrington at Swinton, then it is even worse.

Phil Clarke was a SL and international player at the very top level and is now a broadcaster for for the games flagship Sky sports station. He knows what he's talking about and hopefully this regrettable situation will be defused and eliminated, but I'm not holding my breath.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Phil should have a word with his agent brother who seems hell bent on getting as many of his RL players to leave the game and go to RU

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent from Phil Clarke.

Although have to say, I haven't spoken to anyone who agrees with the new set up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The RFL, if indeed they disagreed with it, had the power to ban such DR agreements

Did they? I'm getting the impression more and more often that they don't have much power at all. The power seems to rest in the hands of the Superleague clubs, which I think is somewhat concerning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I agree the current system isn't ideal, perhaps the dual- registration component isn't the source of the problem. After all, the NRL uses a dual registration type system, with the NSW and Qld cup feeder clubs used in the same way as the championship. I think the problem isn't the DR process, but he lack of junior comps that underpin it.

In the NRL, clubs have a system with U-16, U-18, U-20 and Qld/NSW Cup teams, as well as the first grade team. If the ESL also had similar junior structures, to compliment dual registration, then I think it could work well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Hidden by John Drake, February 20, 2013 - No reason given

While I agree the current system isn't ideal, perhaps the dual- registration component isn't the source of the problem. After all, the NRL uses a dual registration type system, with the NSW and Qld cup feeder clubs used in the same way as the championship. I think the problem isn't the DR process, but he lack of junior comps that underpin it.

In the NRL, clubs have a system with U-16, U-18, U-20 and Qld/NSW Cup teams, as well as the first grade team. If the ESL also had similar junior structures, to compliment dual registration, then I think it could work well.

G'day Brucie - I have no experience of Koala breeding or Kangaroo boxing, and as such I would never advise you the subject.

Share this post


Link to post

Did they? I'm getting the impression more and more often that they don't have much power at all. The power seems to rest in the hands of the Superleague clubs, which I think is somewhat concerning.

The SL have the agreement with Sky, not the RFL, and thus control the money but I would have thought the RFL were in charge of player registrations and administration matters and should be able to dictate dual registrations and not allow them to be registered in the best interests of the game. However, money talks and the SLhave it so maybe you are right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Phil Clarke has articulated perfectly what myself and many other detractors of this system have been saying re lack of opportunities for Championship players, loss of interest, lack of opportunities for junior players, loss of integrity for the status of the Championship clubs.

The RFL, if indeed they disagreed with it, had the power to ban such DR agreements and not let SL dictate things that are not in the best interests of the game only in the best interests of SL. Now clubs have started bending the rules by registering whole squads and signing part of their squads on to the Champions roster as did Warrington at Swinton, then it is even worse.

Phil Clarke was a SL and international player at the very top level and is now a broadcaster for for the games flagship Sky sports station. He knows what he's talking about and hopefully this regrettable situation will be defused and eliminated, but I'm not holding my breath.

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??

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely it's only for the benefit of those who are gaining an 'A' team on the cheap.

Taking it back to the P&R argument is irrelevant - Surely teams who stand alone and opt out of these 'partnerships' will have less competition for licences and therefore it will be good for them.

Phil Clarke puts up a valid argument re development of players but it's the supporters of championship clubs (the most important part of any sport) who i feel sorry for.

Your team may be improved greatly by these DR players but they aren't your players......it's not your team anymore....it's just rubbish to save SL money.

Anyone who thinks this arrangement will improve the integrity of the championship competition is kidding themselves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely it's only for the benefit of those who are gaining an 'A' team on the cheap.

Taking it back to the P&R argument is irrelevant - Surely teams who stand alone and opt out of these 'partnerships' will have less competition for licences and therefore it will be good for them.

Phil Clarke puts up a valid argument re development of players but it's the supporters of championship clubs (the most important part of any sport) who i feel sorry for.

Your team may be improved greatly by these DR players but they aren't your players......it's not your team anymore....it's just rubbish to save SL money.

Anyone who thinks this arrangement will improve the integrity of the championship competition is kidding themselves

Absolutely. It won't improve the integrity of the Championship at all.

But what does that mean? I have never believed that Superleague wannabees and superleague relegated clubs continuing to operate at pro level ever gave the Championship any integrity. What are the Championship competitions about primarily?

Are they for the sake of winning the trophies or ticking the SL box because to me many people have greeted winning cups with a cry of "now we can apply for Superleague".

Batley aside all the trophy winners in the CC are valuing the SL entry key as the prize first and foremost.

The other major "prize" that has evolved is the avoidance of relegation! Most CC clubs aren't aiming for the stars no they are aiming to keep out of the mire, so we have two seperate competitions in one neither of them being about trophies.

As always we get trapped in looking at things "as they are" rather than where they are going. As long as the Superleague prize is being chased clubs like leigh, Fev, Fax, Sheffield who are at the top, and are relatively vibrant the fans respond. How many SL rejections before Leigh become another Doncaster? How long before Hunslet ends up a true "A" team and fully replaces Leeds U 23's removing Phil Clarkes major argument?.

Yes it's the supporters of Championship clubs who will take the brunt of the effect of these moves, but hey - Leeds and Hunslet have already agreed that they will play Fridays and Sundays and avoid clashing. then Hunslet fans can go watch Leeds and leeds fans can go watch Hunslet.

But oddly enough the latter isn't happening, and the clubs future looks set to be an "A" team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Yes we are creating feeder teams

2. And it's for everyone's benefit other than those stuck in the past.

1. Well i think what is happening isn't a mistake to save a few quid we will regret when it mucks up "development". What HAS happened is nothing but a pigs ear. But as you indicate it may well e the thin end of the wedge. All we need is for the smaller Championship clubs to be fully beholden to their "partners" such that things can creep on to clubs like hunslet replacing the Leeds U23 side which AFAIK was for late developers and returning from injury senior players?

In that form Hunslet will never be a feeder club. It will be an integral part of a development system that existed up to last year in SL. When Clark talks about dropping the U23's he should wait and see if the Chamionship clubs who have linked to SL clubs becomes the U23's.

For me Feeder clubs is the wrong name, if Hunslet are anything to go by U23/"A" team fits like a glove.

2. Naughty naughty Mr. DSK no need for that. RL fans have a right to want to enjoy the game whatever way they want and if that includes slavish loyalty to one team, then remember that's what MOST fans are.

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