League One

[Hela Wigmen]

15 minutes ago, Toby Chopra said:

Why? Teams aren't getting anywhere stuck in a failing L1. IF we start with an assumption that financial support for L1 will fall after 2021 then we need a more realistic structure for the sport.

Most of the historic heartland teams like Keighley, Workington etc would benefit financially from being back with their semi-pro peers, while the developing teams need a competition more suited to their development goals. 

Sticking our fingers in our ears and pretending change isn't happening isn't viable. Sometimes you have to make difficult short term decisions for the longer term benefit. 

Obviously if the TV contract goes up we can do something much more ambitious, but that seems an unlikely scenario at the moment. 

So just some parochial nonsense, then?

 

[Mr Plow]

24 minutes ago, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

Skolars, Coventry and West Wales would obviously be in. Hemel, Oxford and Gloucestershire may be able to rejoin and compete in a League One South competition. I’d also like to see a 2nd team in South Wales. Nottingham has a strong grassroots scene, they may be able to host a League One South side, as is the case with  London, so many amateur sides in London they should be able to sustain a few sides at that level. Throw it open to bids. 

Oxford and Gloucestershire don’t exist anymore. Hemel sold their place to Ottawa so there’s just the amateur club. The two Welsh clubs we have have moved about a bit so I can’t see a 3rd team entering. 
 

Don’t get me wrong it’s be great to have a strong group of clubs in the south but how many can afford to enter League 1, especially when CF will be lower post 2021. I worry about the future of some heartland clubs never mind potential new clubs

[Toby Chopra]

12 minutes ago, Hela Wigmen said:

So just some parochial nonsense, then?

 

A realistic plan based on changed circumstances. All I see from others are pie in the sky proposals based on non existent funding streams. 

Propose something realistic and I'll read with interest. 

[Toby Chopra]

1 hour ago, Eddie said:

Where do North Wales Crusaders fit in with that? 

Good question. NWC are effectively a heartland team given almost all their players are pulled from the existing game. 

The problem with both Welsh teams is that they are in small towns, miles from the thriving Welsh community game in the valleys. They are just islands on their own sustained by enthusiastic owners bringing in outside players, watched by a loyal but very small fanbase. Welsh L1 teams should be integral parts of the Welsh player development pathway, otherwise is it really the best use of £140k a year in financially straightened times?

 

[Magic XIII]

13 hours ago, wiganermike said:

I would assume that would be a bond asked of overseas clubs only (to cover costs incurred in the event of them withdrawing mid-season) and wouldn't apply to UK clubs entering League 1. I don't expect the RFL would ask Medway Dragons, Nottingham Outlaws, or Valley Cougars for example to stump up £500k to enter League 1 if they wished to, as the costs of participating against them are likely to be much smaller (and thus losses from them withdrawing less devastating) compared to overseas clubs.

As far as I am aware, Medway Dragons have never played at any leading level of Open Age - NL3 and alike - so no idea why they would be approached.

[Eddie]

Expecting amateur or at best semi professional clubs to travel the length of the country for a league game in front of 200 fans isn’t sustainable. Football, a far richer sport, doesn’t do it below conference level, and I’d wager there’s considerably more money in the national leagues north and south than there in RL League One. 
 

So regionalisation seems sensible, but as someone said earlier, that would mean the Southern teams don’t get the benefit of playing heartlands teams. It’s a difficult one. 

[Hela Wigmen]

3 minutes ago, Toby Chopra said:

A realistic plan based on changed circumstances. All I see from others are pie in the sky proposals based on non existent funding streams. 

Propose something realistic and I'll read with interest. 

No, you’re being parochial and nonsensical based off nothing other than location. 

There are more to the expansion clubs than just what you see on the back page of League Express on a Monday. They’re about more than results. To lose these sides to protect a handful of northern clubs who, realistically, offer the game very little is short-sighted and small time behaviour. These clubs are vital to the growth of the game and within their respective communities with West Wales, Coventry and London predominantly being made up of players from their local areas. 

There’s most definitely a place in the game for League One and for all of its clubs but much like Rugby League in the UK as a whole, it needs to be decided that what that looks like and a road map of how that is going to be achieved. But this is Rugby League and I won’t hold my breath on that happening. 

Does the game want League One to be a development league again? If so, how do you achieve that? I can’t see too many UK based clubs being in a position to step up either based on-field and/or off-field and I can’t see too many of the lower league clubs wanting to allow new clubs into the fold when the TV negotiation is likely to see a smaller deal and therefore a smaller cut for the lower league sides, thus making their share even smaller. We’ve seen the fallout of not giving a side, Toronto, a share of the funding and I don’t think we should go down the road again. 

Can you bundle the expansion sides into their own much smaller league, made up of as few as three teams and as many as five or six, depending on your definition of expansion? You could, but what does that achieve? I’m not really sure or what the purpose of that would actually be. Can we make some form of development league so these clubs can play against the reserve/academy sides of Super League clubs? Maybe but is that the best move? I’m not sure. 

Do we align a handful of clubs, your expansion clubs, to an “outstanding” academy rated Super League club and ask the Super League club to offer help in terms of a friendly at the expansion sides home ground, pathway development, coaching and coaching development and letting them send their academy/reserve players to the expansion club to play games? Again, possibly but you’d need a plan behind it rather than it just being somewhere for clubs to send their players and it would need to benefit the smaller club, which it may not necessarily.

Do we go “Australian” and scrap the reserve grade for good and have Super League teams linking to a League One club, with investment, and have the League One club acting as a Super League clubs reserve grade? I can see a lot of opposition to that idea, understandably given how dual registration has worked over the years.

Forcing demotion on sides based upon nothing other than their postcode is completely wrong. They’ll then all be forced to lose their semi-professional status, due to a loss of funding, lower attendances etc and will be playing in an amateur league, with little to no hope of returning to the semi-professional leagues and effectively killing them as a club and killing them as an asset to their communities in one fell swoop. 

For what it’s worth, I think we need a third tier. What that looks like, I’m not sure, I don’t have the golden ticket but what I do think is we shouldn’t be looking at cutting any club. 

[Hela Wigmen]

22 minutes ago, Eddie said:

Expecting amateur or at best semi professional clubs to travel the length of the country for a league game in front of 200 fans isn’t sustainable. Football, a far richer sport, doesn’t do it below conference level, and I’d wager there’s considerably more money in the national leagues north and south than there in RL League One. 
 

So regionalisation seems sensible, but as someone said earlier, that would mean the Southern teams don’t get the benefit of playing heartlands teams. It’s a difficult one. 

Regionalisation in non-league football has its issues as well. I don’t particularly think travel is the main issue in League One. 

[gingerjon]

23 minutes ago, Eddie said:

Expecting amateur or at best semi professional clubs to travel the length of the country for a league game in front of 200 fans isn’t sustainable.

But ... crossing Europe on such terms is the future of the game?

[DavidM]

Ottawa , New York , Red Star Belgrade , French team etc ... this is league one we’re talking about with teams on very limited budgets and players playing on their day off ! Travel is an issue as it is

[Sir Kevin Sinfield]

12 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

But ... crossing Europe on such terms is the future of the game?

No. French teams should only be in Championship or Super League, Canadian teams should only be in Super League.

[gingerjon]

Just now, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

No. French teams should only be in Championship or Super League, Canadian teams should only be in Super League.

I was thinking more of the poster's ongoing support for EuroXIIIs.

[tms]

12 minutes ago, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

No. French teams should only be in Championship or Super League, Canadian teams should only be in Super League.

so you propose cats  dragons in the champs  then 

[wiganermike]

1 hour ago, Magic XIII said:

As far as I am aware, Medway Dragons have never played at any leading level of Open Age - NL3 and alike - so no idea why they would be approached.

I just mentioned them as a name plucked from memory rather than an expected future applicant. Around the time that Oxford, Hemel, Gloucestershire and later Coventry entered League 1 there were mentions in articles that the RFL were keen on Medway applying to enter. The Dragons themselves said they had no plans to enter League 1 as they were happy to continue as a community club when asked about it back then I believe.

[Toby Chopra]

2 hours ago, Hela Wigmen said:

No, you’re being parochial and nonsensical based off nothing other than location. 

There are more to the expansion clubs than just what you see on the back page of League Express on a Monday. They’re about more than results. To lose these sides to protect a handful of northern clubs who, realistically, offer the game very little is short-sighted and small time behaviour. These clubs are vital to the growth of the game and within their respective communities with West Wales, Coventry and London predominantly being made up of players from their local areas. 

There’s most definitely a place in the game for League One and for all of its clubs but much like Rugby League in the UK as a whole, it needs to be decided that what that looks like and a road map of how that is going to be achieved. But this is Rugby League and I won’t hold my breath on that happening. 

Does the game want League One to be a development league again? If so, how do you achieve that? I can’t see too many UK based clubs being in a position to step up either based on-field and/or off-field and I can’t see too many of the lower league clubs wanting to allow new clubs into the fold when the TV negotiation is likely to see a smaller deal and therefore a smaller cut for the lower league sides, thus making their share even smaller. We’ve seen the fallout of not giving a side, Toronto, a share of the funding and I don’t think we should go down the road again. 

Can you bundle the expansion sides into their own much smaller league, made up of as few as three teams and as many as five or six, depending on your definition of expansion? You could, but what does that achieve? I’m not really sure or what the purpose of that would actually be. Can we make some form of development league so these clubs can play against the reserve/academy sides of Super League clubs? Maybe but is that the best move? I’m not sure. 

Do we align a handful of clubs, your expansion clubs, to an “outstanding” academy rated Super League club and ask the Super League club to offer help in terms of a friendly at the expansion sides home ground, pathway development, coaching and coaching development and letting them send their academy/reserve players to the expansion club to play games? Again, possibly but you’d need a plan behind it rather than it just being somewhere for clubs to send their players and it would need to benefit the smaller club, which it may not necessarily.

Do we go “Australian” and scrap the reserve grade for good and have Super League teams linking to a League One club, with investment, and have the League One club acting as a Super League clubs reserve grade? I can see a lot of opposition to that idea, understandably given how dual registration has worked over the years.

Forcing demotion on sides based upon nothing other than their postcode is completely wrong. They’ll then all be forced to lose their semi-professional status, due to a loss of funding, lower attendances etc and will be playing in an amateur league, with little to no hope of returning to the semi-professional leagues and effectively killing them as a club and killing them as an asset to their communities in one fell swoop. 

For what it’s worth, I think we need a third tier. What that looks like, I’m not sure, I don’t have the golden ticket but what I do think is we shouldn’t be looking at cutting any club. 

I agree with much of what you say, and you yourself question whether a poorly funded nationwide 3rd tier is the best way to support the various clubs. I'd suggest it isn't. 

If also say that semi-pro status isn't the be all and end all for clubs to aim for, there's nothing sacred about it and we shouldn't be obsessed by it. It works in certain places, less so in others. In some places strong community clubs with development support is better for the game as a whole. We shouldn't see it as a step down at all.

It would arguably be better spending what money we have on regionalised development leagues, rather than making shoestring teams drive the length and breadth of the country to get battered each week. 

Basically, you ask all the right questions, but a nationwide L1 doesn't seem the right answer to any of them. I'm open to what is the right answer, but it has to fit with the realistic funding options available. 

[Hela Wigmen]

27 minutes ago, Toby Chopra said:

I agree with much of what you say, and you yourself question whether a poorly funded nationwide 3rd tier is the best way to support the various clubs. I'd suggest it isn't. 

If also say that semi-pro status isn't the be all and end all for clubs to aim for, there's nothing sacred about it and we shouldn't be obsessed by it. It works in certain places, less so in others. In some places strong community clubs with development support is better for the game as a whole. We shouldn't see it as a step down at all.

It would arguably be better spending what money we have on regionalised development leagues, rather than making shoestring teams drive the length and breadth of the country to get battered each week. 

Basically, you ask all the right questions, but a nationwide L1 doesn't seem the right answer to any of them. I'm open to what is the right answer, but it has to fit with the realistic funding options available. 

I’m not really sure that the main issue League One has is travel related, therefore, I don’t agree with your opinion. 

[OriginalMrC]

7 hours ago, Toby Chopra said:

It just seems perverse to me that shoestring teams in the third tier have far more travelling than teams in the top two tiers. L1 doesn't seem to serve either its heartland or developing clubs well. 

But as with most things the new TV contract is key. If the distribution drops, I cam see the heartland teams (plus Newcastle) being folded into an expanded Championship and the expansion teams joining the CLS. Which wouldn't be the worst outcome in my view. 

You want to stick the expansion teams in to a fledgling amateur league just on the basis they are expansion teams? You think it wouldn't be the worst outcome setting back 20 years or more of progress in Skolars, North Wales and Coventry? You think it's justified putting them into a league they are completely unsuited for because they are outside the heartlands? 

[Toby Chopra]

11 minutes ago, OriginalMrC said:

You want to stick the expansion teams in to a fledgling amateur league just on the basis they are expansion teams? You think it wouldn't be the worst outcome setting back 20 years or more of progress in Skolars, North Wales and Coventry? You think it's justified putting them into a league they are completely unsuited for because they are outside the heartlands? 

If their funding is reduced, those clubs themselves will be asking if a nationwide third tier is really the best place for them.

I don't see scrabbling around in the bottom reaches of L1 year after year much of a measure of progress. It's just a fact of life that heartland teams have access to more resources and more players than more distant teams, so the best form of competition might be different for both. 

A one size fits all model is rarely the best option. 

 

[RugbyLeagueGeek]

8 minutes ago, OriginalMrC said:

You want to stick the expansion teams in to a fledgling amateur league just on the basis they are expansion teams? You think it wouldn't be the worst outcome setting back 20 years or more of progress in Skolars, North Wales and Coventry? You think it's justified putting them into a league they are completely unsuited for because they are outside the heartlands? 

In reality, I'm not sure how unsuited these teams would be, if - as many people seem to expect - the funding dries up. Without wanting to sound too harsh, if you take away the 75k central funding from League 1 teams, what infrastructure would actually be left? Some of the teams might still have a substantial fanbase, facilities, and local player pathway, but others may be left with virtually nothing.

If we look at Oxford, Gloucestershire and Hemel, they had a combined 15 years of playing in League 1 between them. That's over £1m that's been spent with precious little to show for it. If the funding for League 1 disappeared tomorrow, then what realistically would be left to show for it in areas such as Coventry and West Wales that wasn't already there before these clubs turned pro? If you add in all of their funding then well over £2m quid has been spent on paying players in the south. That's a huge sum of money with precious little return on that investment. What else could that money have been spent on? Surely properly administered community and junior competitions, with development officers in place would have seen far more significant increases in participation numbers.

I find RL's obsession with drawing a distinction between 'professional' and 'amateur' competitions bizarre. I can't think of any other sport that does it. If League 1 disappeared tomorrow, then the RFL could quite easily promote the Conference competitions (NCL and SCL) in the same way that they currently promote League 1, and anybody from outside the game would be none the wiser that one of those competitions was 'pro' and one was 'amateur'. The sort of money being paid to players in League 1 would probably be comparable to football's Evo-Stick Regional Leagues, but you don't hear anyone in football banging on about clubs at that level being 'pro'. Any other sport just has open competition where clubs can pay players as they see fit.

[Robthegasman]

I think we will see the Championship and Championship 1 division come together and a new look Championship will be formed.I think it will be some sort of franchise system and there will be a certain strict criteria as to who gets in,whatever that might be.

As for the clubs that don’t make the grade and many won’t I think they will either fade away and sadly die or we will see some sort of Conference division(s) that will be regionalised.

One thing is I think certain change is coming and there will be some very unpopular and controversial changes and calls being made.

[GUBRATS]

7 hours ago, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

No. French teams should only be in Championship or Super League, Canadian teams should only be in Super League.

No , French teams should play in French leagues , similarily Canadian teams 

[EssexRL]

L1 was meant to be the “expansion” league bringing in Oxford, All Golds, Hemel and S Wales but it was never thought through properly (with a very limited player pool how were these teams ever going to be competitive) or supported. It then became the way into SL/Champ for TWP and Toulouse and way back for Bradford: none of which did much for the status of the league. 

I would make it a league for teams that have a genuine possibility at some point of progressing either due to their heritage and support or strategy/local impact. Not sure all the current clubs would meet the criteria and a few outside might. I wouldn’t use it as a fast track for clubs like TWP. Makes a mockery of the league. 

[DEANO]

The rfl have squandered so much money on expansion clubs that are here today and gone tomorrow. They would have been far better funding heartland teams   The northern teams have suffered with extra travel costs and reduced income from non attractive fixtures

[EssexRL]

10 minutes ago, DEANO said:

The rfl have squandered so much money on expansion clubs that are here today and gone tomorrow. They would have been far better funding heartland teams   The northern teams have suffered with extra travel costs and reduced income from non attractive fixtures

It’s not an either/or. How much did the RFL spend on All Golds or Oxford? 

[DEANO]

At least 75k per season