Archived

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

Number 16

Greenwich Admirals call it a day

22 posts in this topic

Very sad.

 

The RLC used to have more clubs each year but right now it's one in, one out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very sad.

 

The RLC used to have more clubs each year but right now it's one in, one out.

I've said it a few times now, the RFL was doing a far better job when it ran the RLC in and around 2004, It allowed players from other winter sports including Rugby League to dip their toe into the game or have a summer jolly, the 6 team divisions where ideal, IMO the competition started to crumble when the RFL started to push the game instead of allowing it to grow at it's own pace.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've said it a few times now, the RFL was doing a far better job when it ran the RLC in and around 2004, It allowed players from other winter sports including Rugby League to dip their toe into the game or have a summer jolly, the 6 team divisions where ideal, IMO the competition started to crumble when the RFL started to push the game instead of allowing it to grow at it's own pace.

Nice to see you again on Saturday, Jim.

It's difficult because some clubs were asking for more. When you have players and clubs getting frustrated with 10 game seasons and wanting more what do you do?

Coventry, Nottingham, Bristol and St Albans for example have developed out of the 10 game season and are able to compete in a full season, with second teams in the shorter season.

As you well know, amateur rugby league clubs all over the country, including heartlands, are fragile entities that rely on volunteers who for any reason can disappear off the scene and without them the club is gone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't there a new club nearby in Beckenham? It just seems bizarre that new clubs are allowed to spring up when there is an existing one that could be strengthened instead of challenged.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't there a new club nearby in Beckenham? It just seems bizarre that new clubs are allowed to spring up when there is an existing one that could be strengthened instead of challenged.

Welcome to rugby league. So many clubs have been started by someone who has left an existing club after an argument, or by people who want to be in charge straight away or enjoy designing logos and ordering kits. Typically they don't last, but can do a lot of damage. Might not be the case here, of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice to see you again on Saturday, Jim.

It's difficult because some clubs were asking for more. When you have players and clubs getting frustrated with 10 game seasons and wanting more what do you do?

Coventry, Nottingham, Bristol and St Albans for example have developed out of the 10 game season and are able to compete in a full season, with second teams in the shorter season.

As you well know, amateur rugby league clubs all over the country, including heartlands, are fragile entities that rely on volunteers who for any reason can disappear off the scene and without them the club is gone.

I know what you mean Tim, it's a pity the RFL don't realise once you've ###### these people off it's hard to get them back and the type of people who where used as their disciples also tend to be the one's who move a lot more with their jobs. Going back to the four teams that look to be going strong out of the old RLC, that's good, but how many clubs/teams are not playing now the RLC has gone and how many players does that mean are no longer putting their boots on in the summer.

 

What is the answer?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Noticed that Sussex defeated Greenwich on Saturday, so I profess to be confused! The news circulating at the Bears vs Chargers game on Saturday was that the Admirals had gone!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Noticed that Sussex defeated Greenwich on Saturday, so I profess to be confused! The news circulating at the Bears vs Chargers game on Saturday was that the Admirals had gone!

 

Was that a real score or do they still generate them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The open age played on Saturday in a London Cup Game.

They are not allowed to have juniors/youth this year due to various disclipline problems last year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The open age played on Saturday in a London Cup Game.

They are not allowed to have juniors/youth this year due to various disclipline problems last year.

 

Fair enough, cheers. I knew that the juniors/youth had received a sanction. I understand that all ages were barred from playing because of issues at U16. 

 

  

Just out of interest what is the name of the new club in Beckenham (I lived the first 21 years of my life there and played football and rugby for the local clubs) are they at BRUFC?

CM

Nat West Sports ground

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know what you mean Tim, it's a pity the RFL don't realise once you've ###### these people off it's hard to get them back and the type of people who where used as their disciples also tend to be the one's who move a lot more with their jobs. Going back to the four teams that look to be going strong out of the old RLC, that's good, but how many clubs/teams are not playing now the RLC has gone and how many players does that mean are no longer putting their boots on in the summer.

What is the answer?

One of the real problems (there were many) was the RFL's inability that trying to implement a one-size-fits-all strategy across the country was a foolish endeavour.

Some clubs were desperate for longer seasons between around 2004-07 and suffered as a result; others were pushed beyond their natural capacity by the same demands.

The RFL also fell into the trap of admitting phantom clubs (again in the interests of symmetry) rather than asking them to test their worth first and was too slow in grasping the merit league concept.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't there a new club nearby in Beckenham? It just seems bizarre that new clubs are allowed to spring up when there is an existing one that could be strengthened instead of challenged.

Beckenham Bears were formed as a result of Greenwich going and not vice versa. Ok not 100% true but they certainly weren't responsible for their downfall

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know what you mean Tim, it's a pity the RFL don't realise once you've ###### these people off it's hard to get them back and the type of people who where used as their disciples also tend to be the one's who move a lot more with their jobs. Going back to the four teams that look to be going strong out of the old RLC, that's good, but how many clubs/teams are not playing now the RLC has gone and how many players does that mean are no longer putting their boots on in the summer.

What is the answer?

In all clubs this is a constant drain on volunteers and those clubs with only a few people running them it has a bigger impact, sometimes fatal.

In my experience the RFL pay only lip service to the theory of valuing their volunteers.

Personally I've told my club I'll volunteer now but only to a level which means I don't have to have direct dealings with the RFL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Beckenham Bears were formed as a result of Greenwich going and not vice versa. Ok not 100% true but they certainly weren't responsible for their downfall

 

Sorry to drag this one up but all the guys involved with the Beckenham committee are either ex-Storm guys or have no previous connection with an RL club.  The Bears were formed this past winter and we were excited to play against our near-neighbour.   Obviously, there are ex-Admirals in the Beckenham ranks but they were players who'd drifted away from Greenwich.  Beckenham's relationship with Greenwich is good, the real problem for Greenwich was the sanction which saw them stripped of their youth system.  Like most rugby clubs of either code, the juniors bring in the cash that supports the senior structure.  Without the juniors and struggling for numbers in the seniors, the club had no reason to continue this season and their remaining players have split roughly 50-50 between Beckenham and Newham.

 

I think the LYJL maybe cut off their nose to spite their face, given they've lost one of the best junior teams in London, perhaps permanently.  If the club can be put back together next season or the year after - I don't know how long this sanction will last - we'll all be better for it.   Personally, I'm of the view that clubs in London need to come together a bit more, try and work for the greater good, such as schools participation and facilities.  However, as was pointed out in another thread, the transient nature of club admins makes this virtually impossible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to drag this one up but all the guys involved with the Beckenham committee are either ex-Storm guys or have no previous connection with an RL club.  The Bears were formed this past winter and we were excited to play against our near-neighbour.   Obviously, there are ex-Admirals in the Beckenham ranks but they were players who'd drifted away from Greenwich.  Beckenham's relationship with Greenwich is good, the real problem for Greenwich was the sanction which saw them stripped of their youth system.  Like most rugby clubs of either code, the juniors bring in the cash that supports the senior structure.  Without the juniors and struggling for numbers in the seniors, the club had no reason to continue this season and their remaining players have split roughly 50-50 between Beckenham and Newham.

 

I think the LYJL maybe cut off their nose to spite their face, given they've lost one of the best junior teams in London, perhaps permanently.  If the club can be put back together next season or the year after - I don't know how long this sanction will last - we'll all be better for it.   Personally, I'm of the view that clubs in London need to come together a bit more, try and work for the greater good, such as schools participation and facilities.  However, as was pointed out in another thread, the transient nature of club admins makes this virtually impossible.

 

Just looking at London itself, not the surrounding counties, London RL lists Hammersmith, Skolars, South West, Elmbridge, Greenwich, Newham, Staines, Beckenham, Barking, Mudchute and Thames Ditton. Eleven clubs running teams at senior level. And then Croydon, Brixton, Richmond, Charlton, Brentwood running juniors only.

 

Some of those are literally next door to one another. Surely it would be better all round for some of those to come together to create stronger clubs, rather than competing with one another? It just doesn't seem like there are enough players, volunteers, etc for the current set up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually think we have too little rugby league, certainly at junior level.  There's a vast swathes of London with nothing.  You have Stanley Park and Carshalton Boys playing RL but 1) the contact between clubs and schools isn't good enough and 2) there's no Carshalton/Sutton-based team to take advantage of it.  There's no junior RL between Staines and Tottenham, where Skolars play.  When I hear people say how well we're doing in London and what a good job the RFL are doing, I wonder what perverse criteria are being used to decide this is a success?  And we're all tenants, nobody owns as much as a vegetable patch on an allotment.

 

Only Staines and Richmond aside are close to each other but they were both Wests "cluster" clubs, as Brixton and Croydon (and previously Addington and Wandsworth) were for Souths.  Mudchute are basically an occasional team for former University of Newcastle players without a home ground, you can't consider them a real club in that respect.  Whether they should consider a merger with Newham is for them to decide.  However, I don't think the problem is too many clubs, it's that we have no unified strategy.  Why shouldn't there be a club in Beckenham and one in Greenwich?  It's far enough away, there are enough people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually think we have too little rugby league, certainly at junior level.  There's a vast swathes of London with nothing.  You have Stanley Park and Carshalton Boys playing RL but 1) the contact between clubs and schools isn't good enough and 2) there's no Carshalton/Sutton-based team to take advantage of it.  There's no junior RL between Staines and Tottenham, where Skolars play.  When I hear people say how well we're doing in London and what a good job the RFL are doing, I wonder what perverse criteria are being used to decide this is a success?  And we're all tenants, nobody owns as much as a vegetable patch on an allotment.

 

Only Staines and Richmond aside are close to each other but they were both Wests "cluster" clubs, as Brixton and Croydon (and previously Addington and Wandsworth) were for Souths.  Mudchute are basically an occasional team for former University of Newcastle players without a home ground, you can't consider them a real club in that respect.  Whether they should consider a merger with Newham is for them to decide.  However, I don't think the problem is too many clubs, it's that we have no unified strategy.  Why shouldn't there be a club in Beckenham and one in Greenwich?  It's far enough away, there are enough people.

It's simple why in one word, "Volunteer's"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Marauder is right (bet you don't hear that often) it's not the amount of teams or clubs or where they are. It comes down to volunteers.

You could have 100 players wanting to play and if there is no one to put the post protecters up, cook the BBQ, clean out the sheds then the club won't last long.

I don't think it's the number of teams that are a problem either, it's the number of clubs.

It's just as much effort to run two games as it is to run one.

Maybe clubs should be made to have a second team (even if that is another club playing near by filling that void). Where you train doesn't have to be where you play?

You could have 2 leagues of 6 or 8 which means each weekend you would have either 3 or 4 double headers - which is about all that London RL needs really.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You need a club culture of mucking in.  It can't be that you turn up and play and that's it.  Take rubbish with you, take turns doing the barbecue and so forth.  However, it seems that most people this season have been having problems with getting numbers out, not volunteers.  Maybe it's a sign of the times, as we all have to work longer hours or take on second jobs and if you don't, you're very fortunate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



Rugby League World - April 2017

League Express - Mon 10th April 2017