zylya

In inverted commas because it's not boring, that's just the term that someone else used. The point is that it doesn't take crazy out-there solutions that make for good news stories, it just takes consistent effort applied regularly.

I was thinking of areas like Coventry and Bristol (plus other new areas that might use tag to grow the sport) where there are fewer community clubs than London.

From a non-heartlands perspective, it's likely to be a travel issue. If you can run a tag league in one location and get 4 or 5 teams there, you have a competition with zero travel. If you just added a tag team to each community club, you would have some clubs with loads of travel. I've been a big believer in social formats of the game - not necessarily to recruit players, but as a way of engaging club members and finding volunteers etc. I think the model of a community club hosting a tag league is a really good one - not that the players represent your club, but that the club is the home base for them.

With all the stuff coming out around a community membership scheme, I imagine the reason that TTRL will stay as-is will be the franchising model. Obviously if tag remains entirely self funding (and profitable for franchisees of course) then it will continue to grow.

Boring as in it doesn't give you flashy headlines, or interesting soundbites. Obviously there's a deep personal reward for people involved on the ground, but a slow increase in number of players doesn't make for an interesting story. Of course, once you start to aggregate your gains, you end up with a situation like Newcastle, where they're now sitting on an excellent community programme and suddenly it is an interesting story. Boring as in it doesn't generate forum discussion. People are generally conditioned to look for magic bullet solutions - the kind of "if we just did this, then we'd have everything we need" when the reality is it's a long term application of small efforts. You're right though - it's not boring for the people involved!

Real development is absolutely "boring", small marginal gains type work. Sometimes you'll get lucky and hit a perfect storm of factors - e.g. if Scotland do well in the 2021 RLWC then there'll be a corresponding jump in interest in community RL in the country. But for the most part, it's a case of showing up every week, providing quality experiences for players and trying to create something meaningful.

Yeah, it's interesting, I've got a mate who is trialling for one of the England touch teams (over 35s I think?). For a lot of players where I am, touch is a Union thing for Union players but if you're in a League session and you say "let's play touch" people will naturally do League things (PTB, retreat on touch etc). For Union, although they roll the ball (although everyone calls it a chicken scratch) there's no retreat on a tackle mirroring the back foot rules of Union. So I think that this idea that people naturally associate Touch with either code just depends on your existing bias - if you're a League person, you'll see it as a non-contact version of League and same if you're a Union person, the same thing. And the players who play Touch under England Touch rules see themselves as very separate to either - they're trying to get people to recognise their sport as its own thing. There's a lot of benefits to having a social touch thing - both the local Rugby Union and Rugby League club are now running "social touch" which are a weird conglomeration of various rules (and another Union club locally has just started advertising to do the same), mostly played for a social outlet and a bit of fitness between older lads. As someone who coaches at both clubs, what's interesting for me is that there are generally more people at Touch sessions than at 1st team sessions. So it seems to me like the best thing for clubs to do, especially community clubs, is to run their own touch sessions - especially if it's attracting players who are too old for full contact RL any more. Not only are they engaging with the club, but they're of an age where they might become volunteers or own their own business/know someone who does, and therefore could become a sponsor. I think it's difficult/impossible to gain any real traction just by saying "ok it's Touch RL now." Even if you slap RFL branding on everything and use the word League over and over again. I think clubs have to build their own Touch/TTRL offers into their regular activities and get people engaged. A good example would be how active Cov Bears are in the Warwickshire TTRL. Especially for clubs outside the traditional Heartland areas, having non-contact versions is a good way to get people involved from a broader sphere than your contact players. Perhaps we have to broaden our definition of what counts as a "player" but also be aware of the opportunities to transition someone from touch player to contact player or to a different role within the club: volunteer, sponsor, supporter etc. Perhaps something that professional clubs could run in association with their local grassroots clubs - players could then transition into volunteer and playing roles with the grassroots clubs, and supporters for the pro club.