Dual Reg

[maxwel]

Back to the original thread it seems the NCL management cant take a NO vote, on their website it states they are setting up sub committee to look into other ways of getting those dual reg players into the NCL.

I was asked as to whether I would consider joining this sub committee. My reply was no, had I said yes after airing my views quite strongly at the meeting it would beeen like poacher turning gamekeeper

[bowes]

I think the biggest risk is if the pro clubs form their own league with dual registration.

 

Reserve grade would take players out of the NCL (remember last time we had one it played a different season to the NCL), but I think the NCL have to stand by the clubs' vote nonetheless. In the long run scrapping U16s and introducing reserves may be the best solution

[The 4 of Us]

You have to wonder regarding the leadership on this issue. It doesn't help with all the information in letters and emails and leaving the discussion for forums like this.

With 48 NCL teams being able to give an opportunity to 144 on any weekend (a whole 8 team of 17 players worth) are we really going to have to listen to the same people who voted against this proposal complain they're short on a Saturday?

I'm struck by the half dozen teams who voted for and then changed their decision on the night. The RFL/pro clubs need to dip in their pocket to assist but the sooner RL in this country gets away from the pro-amateur distinction the better. RL has almost done as much damage to itself than RU could ever hope to achieve.

They're all RL players. Let them play.

[TaxiEgg]

But why is the game short on Saturdays?

[Dessie O'Hare]

I'm struck by the half dozen teams who voted for and then changed their decision on the night. 

The original vote was 16 for, 20 against and 10 abstentions. The abstentions were added to the Yes vote so both votes actually increased later and weren't necessarily converted.

[The 4 of Us]

But why is the game short on Saturdays?

Lots of reasons. Talking down the game being near the top of the list.

[The 4 of Us]

The original vote was 16 for, 20 against and 10 abstentions. The abstentions were added to the Yes vote so both votes actually increased later and weren't necessarily converted.

Fair enough. Possibly adds to the air of uncertainty about the whole situation but it appears at least a proportion broke for the in favour camp.

Can't help feel it's self defeating though.

[Dessie O'Hare]

With 48 NCL teams being able to give an opportunity to 144 on any weekend (a whole 8 team of 17 players worth) are we really going to have to listen to the same people who voted against this proposal complain they're short on a Saturday?

They're all RL players. Let them play.

 

The "Let them play" cabal need a re-think on this one as it involves 1200 words of new rules and regulations for humble secretaries and chairmen to adhere to.

 

A club would have been allowed to register 6 players but only play 3, so by your argument yet another 144 would still not be allowed to play.

 

I can only think of 1 NCL team that struggles to regularly fill it's 1st team so that means you would condemn around 140 lesser rated players to make way for players contracted to a professional club. Surely, that's not a prosperous future for the amateur game.

[TaxiEgg]

Who talks the game down , if you use the Nw as an example we have record growth in the region , can you find any recognition of that on any RFL website or media releases .

Don't try and defend the indefensible .

It's RFL policy of only showing any interest in elite programs at the expense of the whole game .

The RFL have changed policy several times over recent years and this as a had a negative effect on the flow of numbers from Youth to open age hence the real problem for the lack of numbers on Saturday as you quote .

The professional game despite millions of Sport England money can not sustain itself and looks to the hard working volunteers to constantly pick up the pieces when plan after plan fails .

It's time the NGB took stock of looking after the whole game and build from the bottom up and work with the community clubs and paying attention to the needs of the community game first and foremost .

A strong vibrant community game lends itself to a strong elite program ,problem is the people at the top are blinkered and are only interested in the pay cheques .

[The 4 of Us]

The "Let them play" cabal need a re-think on this one as it involves 1200 words of new rules and regulations for humble secretaries and chairmen to adhere to.

A club would have been allowed to register 6 players but only play 3, so by your argument yet another 144 would still not be allowed to play.

I can only think of 1 NCL team that struggles to regularly fill it's 1st team so that means you would condemn around 140 lesser rated players to make way for players contracted to a professional club. Surely, that's not a prosperous future for the amateur game.

I think the 3 from 6 was a fair compromise. There's a presumption that 3 would be played every week by an NCL club. That presumes their pro club didn't play them and the NCL club wanted to.

It's a lucky club that manages to turn out the same 17 each week. Assuming they've got a second string with good enough players to step up, then the NCL team is fine. If not, it's the 18's that would suffer (if the club had an 18's).

These are likely to be players that had signed for a club just a year, months or even weeks before. It makes sense to me to keep them close to their amateur club just in case it doesn't work out for them ( which is most likely ). I can really understand the sentiment that they're more likely to walk away from the game if they don't keep that connection.

[bowes]

But why is the game short on Saturdays?

Scholarship taking players out too early, a loss of Sport England money and a general decline in participation in sports