Another SL restructure is being planned

[Harry Stottle]

21 minutes ago, RP London said:

Can we please all stop the "we have a pyramid that is sacristan" style rubbish.. 

We have a closed shop, there is no broadening of the base or anything simply because the "pyramid" lasts for all of 3 divisions and then it stops. You have to be invited or apply to enter league 1. There is no other route in, there is no route from the bottom to the top. What we are really arguing about is how we allow for teams to move around the closed shop we already have, and have always have.. all we have ever done is jigger about with the same closed shop, be it 1 division or 3 divisions its still a closed shop. Invite only does, and always has, applied to RL bizarrely. 

It is a very valid argument to have and closing off the top layer of it could be dangerous and IMHO should just be limited to drive standards up but still the argument we have this all singing all dancing football style pyramid is garbage. 

I had been long time involved with the amatuer/community game, I will put a question to both you and Mr Geek if he is reading this.

Quite correctly you say that to obtain membership of the 'Closed Shop' 3 division pro/semi-pro leagues it can only be acheived is by applying or by invitation to/from the RFL.

I honestly do not know the answer to this question so I would hope you can provide me with some information:-

How many community clubs who consider themselves capable of becoming a member of the 'Closed Shop' have had an application turned down by the RFL? 

[RugbyLeagueGeek]

6 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

How many community clubs who consider themselves capable of becoming a member of the 'Closed Shop' have had an application turned down by the RFL? 

I have no idea how many, but how many is enough? How many clubs in the pro structure have complained about not being able to be promoted to Super League? Even if it was every single club outside SL (which it isn't) it would still only be 24. 

It was well publicised that Manchester Rangers were denied the opportunity to apply for League 1, and have since folded because the owners saw no route to being able to fulfil their ambitions. I am aware of clubs in expansion areas that have also previously expressed interest in progressing in to the pro structure, but have not had any route to do so (Leicester previously, and currently All Golds have expressed interest in returning).

How does an ambitious owner of a club below League 1 progress to that pro structure? There is no route at present. Even if just 1 community club has aspirations to progress to pro level, then that is evidence that the current system is unequitable. Why are the likes of Leigh's/Featherstone's/Toulouse's (delete as appropriate) aspirations deemed more worthy than those of Manchester Rangers? Why were Rangers denied the opportunity to progress? The current system is not equitable.

For me, it's completely contradictory to have a partial pyramid - i.e. a closed shop below League 1 and then P&R from there upwards. It either needs to be a complete pyramid with full movement from top to bottom, or a standards-based competition that clubs need to apply to be in.

 

[Harry Stottle]

13 minutes ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

I have no idea how many, but how many is enough? How many clubs in the pro structure have complained about not being able to be promoted to Super League? Even if it was every single club outside SL (which it isn't) it would still only be 24. 

It was well publicised that Manchester Rangers were denied the opportunity to apply for League 1, and have since folded because the owners saw no route to being able to fulfil their ambitions. I am aware of clubs in expansion areas that have also previously expressed interest in progressing in to the pro structure, but have not had any route to do so (Leicester previously, and currently All Golds have expressed interest in returning).

How does an ambitious owner of a club below League 1 progress to that pro structure? There is no route at present. Even if just 1 community club has aspirations to progress to pro level, then that is evidence that the current system is unequitable. Why are the likes of Leigh's/Featherstone's/Toulouse's (delete as appropriate) aspirations deemed more worthy than those of Manchester Rangers? Why were Rangers denied the opportunity to progress? The current system is not equitable.

For me, it's completely contradictory to have a partial pyramid - i.e. a closed shop below League 1 and then P&R from there upwards. It either needs to be a complete pyramid with full movement from top to bottom, or a standards-based competition that clubs need to apply to be in.

 

Thank you for your reply Mr Geek, 

As for P&R yes I would retain it all costs across all the pro/semi pro leagues but that is my opinion, I do not know why Manchester Rangers were refused entry - perhaps someone in the know could enlighten us if the RFL actually gave reasons for their refusal - however as I said to yourself on this very same subject there should be financial and facility due dilligence done plus a minimum standard list of criteria that would have to be complied with which any 'amatuer' club could do a self audit before applying for the 'pro/semi-pro' competitions.

So, if it was a straightforward promotion to League 1 for being the best 'on the field' amatuer team, who would you nominate? Surely for me it would have to be the Champions of the strongest competition being in my opinion the NCL.

 

[RugbyLeagueGeek]

1 minute ago, Harry Stottle said:

Thank you for your reply Mr Geek, 

As for P&R yes I would retain it all costs across all the pro/semi pro leagues but that is my opinion, I do not know why Manchester Rangers were refused entry - perhaps someone in the know could enlighten us if the RFL actually gave reasons for their refusal - however as I said to yourself on this very same subject there should be financial and facility due dilligence done plus a minimum standard list of criteria that would have to be complied with which any 'amatuer' club could do a self audit before applying for the 'pro/semi-pro' competitions.

Another club subsequently sprung to mind in Bramley, who have expressed a desire to return to the pro leagues on numerous occasions since they were kicked out. I agree there should be some minimum standards in order to gain promotion. It's my understanding that this is how it works to progress to higher levels of the football pyramid.

3 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

So, if it was a straightforward promotion to League 1 for being the best 'on the field' amatuer team, who would you nominate? Surely for me it would have to be the Champions of the strongest competition being in my opinion the NCL.

Currently the NCL is an application only competition as well, so there are no on-field means to be promoted in to it or to be relegated out of it. If the game decides that P&R is the way forward, I think the whole game would need a restructure from top to bottom, starting on a regional level and progressing up to national level. And like in football, teams can refuse promotion if they don't want to go up. The whole pro/amateur distinction should be dropped - it's a hang-up from the game's origins around broken time payments IMO.

If the game believes in P&R, there has to be a clear route for any club - whether it be based in Manchester, Bramley or Devon - to progress from the lowest levels of the competition to the highest levels. Otherwise, the system is not equitable, and people are just picking and choosing elements of P&R that suit a specific/convenient scenario. Either the pyramid is open or it isn't. Do you view League 1 as "not sport" given that there is no relegation from it? Do you view NCL Premier as "not sport" even though there is not promotion out of it? Or is just a lack of P&R to and from Super League that would be "not sport"?

It's all sport to me, and I personally don't believe that P&R is an integral part of it (nor do I think RL has enough money in the game to do it). However, I completely get why many people do want P&R. So if we are going to do P&R, then for me it has to be done properly from top to bottom, as opposed to cherry-picking certain elements of it.

[Sports Prophet]

On 18/04/2021 at 19:33, ShropshireBull said:

I get the should be prize for being top but we cant have playoffs with second chances. For the good of the product, needs to be if you are out you are out.  

So unless top 5 is 2vs5 3vs4 then semi with winner of the league automatically at GF, I would go top six.

It’s funny that. Whilst I wholeheartedly accept your opinion and would happily argue in favour of it if it meant a free pint, I personally have no issue with the NRL format where a top 4 side of the qualifying top 8 finalists gets a second chance if losing in the first round.

I doubt you would find many detractors in Australia with the current NRL format. Yet in England, which is more akin to the knockout style of finals, I would suggest most people are in favour of your opinion.

Says a lot about what and where an individual is brought up on and in.

[RP London]

1 hour ago, Harry Stottle said:

I had been long time involved with the amatuer/community game, I will put a question to both you and Mr Geek if he is reading this.

Quite correctly you say that to obtain membership of the 'Closed Shop' 3 division pro/semi-pro leagues it can only be acheived is by applying or by invitation to/from the RFL.

I honestly do not know the answer to this question so I would hope you can provide me with some information:-

How many community clubs who consider themselves capable of becoming a member of the 'Closed Shop' have had an application turned down by the RFL? 

As i am not working at the RFL I don't know as we don't know how many have applied but not shouted about it etc. but its not really the point of what I was saying. 

My issues isn't that there is a closed shop at league 1 as, to an extent, there is sense there. It also isn't about "who wants into the closed shop" as again that doesn't matter. The point was that people are going on about the essence of sport being the pyramid but we do not have a pyramid in that way, is the NCL not sport because you don't get to the next step by winning the NCL, it is an end in itself? 

We have always had a closed shop. Clubs could not start "at the bottom and work their way up". For my part I know a fair bit around the inter war period due to my degree etc and there are plenty of examples of clubs having to beg to be a part of the closed shop (some accepted, some not) where as in other sports there would have been an entry point and work yourself up.. there isn't and there wasn't and that is ok it really is. I understand why this was the case and i understand why this is the case now, just don't butcher history or lie about how it is now.. it is a closed shop of 40 teams (or whatever it is now, or tomorrow or next Tuesday) and there is P&R within that (which we should strive to keep as much as possible, or at least as much as is good for the game) but it is still a closed shop and not a pyramid system in the way people would understand it when using football or what Pep is saying to justify keeping the small bit of P&R that we have.

Ironically it can easily be argued that actually what has hindered our expansion (and growth) the most is not the game, the professionalism or the RFU its the RFL administrators having a closed shop. Back in the 1920s and 30s when there was expansion of all sorts of sports they would not let clubs into the closed shop for reasons including the travel or the area they were in. Some clubs would get in but to start a club and have it competitive or making money straight off is difficult so they would fall by the wayside. Yet if there actually had been a pyramid then the growth of the game would have been easier to develop in new areas, with clubs developing (or not) at their own pace.. What people say we should hold on to IMHO is something we have never had and actually if we had we would be in a better situation.. 

Its semantics to an extent but I like this little bit of accuracy. Be emotionally attached to the P&R between the top 3 divisions, yes ok (though it is still relatively new and ever changing), but don't start saying we have a pyramid structure or compare us to football in the way that you can rise from obscurity to the top, thats just not true in the slightest.

[whatmichaelsays]

31 minutes ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

Another club subsequently sprung to mind in Bramley, who have expressed a desire to return to the pro leagues on numerous occasions since they were kicked out. I agree there should be some minimum standards in order to gain promotion. It's my understanding that this is how it works to progress to higher levels of the football pyramid.

 

Bramley came to my mind as well. 

Their initial application, which involved initially playing at Morley RUFC, was blocked very vocally by Hunslet (who presumably didn't want the competition) and after joining (and winning) the NCL, were prevented from joining whatever the equivalent of L1 was at the time. 

[RugbyLeagueGeek]

5 minutes ago, whatmichaelsays said:

Bramley came to my mind as well. 

Their initial application, which involved initially playing at Morley RUFC, was blocked very vocally by Hunslet (who presumably didn't want the competition) and after joining (and winning) the NCL, were prevented from joining whatever the equivalent of L1 was at the time. 

Thanks for that. If the competition structure was equitable, then it shouldn't be up to Hunslet as to whether Bramley have the opportunity to gain entry or not. Likewise if there were deemed to be too many clubs in the Manchester area for Rangers to be given an opportunity. I heard a similar story about Northampton who were admitted to League 1 (and never even made the start line) objecting to other Midlands clubs being allowed to enter. Surely P&R is about the opportunity for the cream to rise to the top, regardless of location.

[Spidey]

50 minutes ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

 

Currently the NCL is an application only competition as well, so there are no on-field means to be promoted in to it or to be relegated out of it. If the game decides that P&R is the way forward, I think the whole game would need a restructure from top to bottom, starting on a regional level and progressing up to national level. And like in football, teams can refuse promotion if they don't want to go up. The whole pro/amateur distinction should be dropped - it's a hang-up from the game's origins around broken time payments IMO.

 

That's not strictly true, if you finish in designated "relegation" positions in the bottom division you have to reapply for membership along with any new applicants so results on the field can lead to you falling out of the NCL.   The NCL hasn't been "full" so in practice its unlikely clubs get voted out - however there is a mechanism for them to

[RugbyLeagueGeek]

8 minutes ago, Spidey said:

That's not strictly true, if you finish in designated "relegation" positions in the bottom division you have to reapply for membership along with any new applicants so results on the field can lead to you falling out of the NCL.   The NCL hasn't been "full" so in practice its unlikely clubs get voted out - however there is a mechanism for them to

I thought that was only the case if they failed to fulfil fixtures? Happy to be corrected though.

[del capo]

2 minutes ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

I thought that was only the case if they failed to fulfil fixtures? Happy to be corrected though.

All clubs in the NCL technically need to apply for membership every year. Clubs at the bottom of the ladder need to seek re-election. Clubs come and go on a regular basis so there is an effective but friendly  'churn' and most importantly membership is open to any club with a good  enough on and off the park track record ( the standards criteria.)

On  rare occasion clubs have been expelled . The routes  between Tiers 4 and 5  are clear and unobstructed.

There is no mechanism between Tier 4 and Tier 3 ( league 1 ) . That is the choice of the RFL and its shareholders but many at Tier 4 level are comfortable with the protections that not having to be semi pro gives them.

In the past some NCL clubs courted a step up ( Rochdale Mayfield and i believe West Hull ) but were rebuffed largely because of 'local ' reactions. Manchester Rangers had a similar fate but were so far off the mark in playing standards that it was effectively a new application bypassing the playing results route. Bramley never won the NCL but faired ok in the RFL southern conference. Other League 1 entrants - ie Oxford , All Golds etc from that conference who got in struggled and then succumbed. 

 Years ago struggling semi pro clubs passed down from  what is now Tier 3 to the NCL invariably failed within a season or two as they could not cope either on or off the park without central funding support ( it disappeared after 12 months ).

The same would undoubtedly happen again. If League 1 clubs are cut adrift financially  ( as is likely following the TV deal ) then I fear for them. They would not live with an NCL competition all of whose clubs  self finance ( the RFL cut any direct finance support to the NCL members  this year ).

If there is to be a League 1 ( Tier 3 ) next year then I do wonder what it would look like. P and R between them and the Tier 4 NCL and its southern equivalent is certainly not a cure all.

So when 40/20 talk of  a new blueprint ' from top to bottom ' for the game it would perhaps be nice of its authors to share it more widely. I for one would welcome their solutions for the many problems facing  all of those below SL.

 

[RP London]

23 minutes ago, del capo said:

 

So when 40/20 talk of  a new blueprint ' from top to bottom ' for the game it would perhaps be nice of its authors to share it more widely. I for one would welcome their solutions for the many problems facing  all of those below SL.

 

I do wonder whether they mean League 1 as the bottom... that was my first thought when I read the comment. A restructure lower than that is going to be quite wide ranging and difficult... 

[RugbyLeagueGeek]

3 hours ago, del capo said:

All clubs in the NCL technically need to apply for membership every year. Clubs at the bottom of the ladder need to seek re-election. Clubs come and go on a regular basis so there is an effective but friendly  'churn' and most importantly membership is open to any club with a good  enough on and off the park track record ( the standards criteria.)

On  rare occasion clubs have been expelled . The routes  between Tiers 4 and 5  are clear and unobstructed.

There is no mechanism between Tier 4 and Tier 3 ( league 1 ) . That is the choice of the RFL and its shareholders but many at Tier 4 level are comfortable with the protections that not having to be semi pro gives them.

In the past some NCL clubs courted a step up ( Rochdale Mayfield and i believe West Hull ) but were rebuffed largely because of 'local ' reactions. Manchester Rangers had a similar fate but were so far off the mark in playing standards that it was effectively a new application bypassing the playing results route. Bramley never won the NCL but faired ok in the RFL southern conference. Other League 1 entrants - ie Oxford , All Golds etc from that conference who got in struggled and then succumbed. 

 Years ago struggling semi pro clubs passed down from  what is now Tier 3 to the NCL invariably failed within a season or two as they could not cope either on or off the park without central funding support ( it disappeared after 12 months ).

The same would undoubtedly happen again. If League 1 clubs are cut adrift financially  ( as is likely following the TV deal ) then I fear for them. They would not live with an NCL competition all of whose clubs  self finance ( the RFL cut any direct finance support to the NCL members  this year ).

If there is to be a League 1 ( Tier 3 ) next year then I do wonder what it would look like. P and R between them and the Tier 4 NCL and its southern equivalent is certainly not a cure all.

So when 40/20 talk of  a new blueprint ' from top to bottom ' for the game it would perhaps be nice of its authors to share it more widely. I for one would welcome their solutions for the many problems facing  all of those below SL.

 

Thanks for the detailed reply. I think this highlights perfectly the lack of joined up thinking regarding the whole structure of the game. As you say, pro teams dropping from League 1 to the NCL may struggle with some of the minimum standards. It's arguably therefore the same problem in reverse for clubs who have aspirations to compete at the highest tiers - i.e. clubs would have to demonstrate various criteria for the NCL that wouldn't be required for League 1, so the NCL isn't an obvious avenue for them to follow if they have aspirations to turn pro.

So what can clubs like Manchester Rangers and Bramley do? Applying to the NCL may allow them to demonstrate playing strength, but it would also require them to fulfil various criteria that wouldn't subsequently be needed if they wanted to turn pro. Plus, competing in the NCL gives them zero guarantee that they would even be considered for League 1 anyway. The structure is a mess and isn't equitable. The same criticisms being levelled at some super league clubs (i.e. being lucky to have a chair in super league when the music happened to stop) can arguably be made about some League 1 clubs. But there's no mechanism for any of them to be replaced.

 

[Spidey]

Just now, ShropshireBull said:

 NCL should go back to winter. 

There is little appetite in the NCL to play winter rugby

[GUBRATS]

8 hours ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

RL doesn't have a pyramid and does have a closed shop - the drawbridge is pulled up below League 1.

So which clubs in the division below League 1 have expressed a wish to join it ? , And have been refused ?

[GUBRATS]

6 hours ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

Another club subsequently sprung to mind in Bramley, who have expressed a desire to return to the pro leagues on numerous occasions since they were kicked out. I agree there should be some minimum standards in order to gain promotion. It's my understanding that this is how it works to progress to higher levels of the football pyramid.

Currently the NCL is an application only competition as well, so there are no on-field means to be promoted in to it or to be relegated out of it. If the game decides that P&R is the way forward, I think the whole game would need a restructure from top to bottom, starting on a regional level and progressing up to national level. And like in football, teams can refuse promotion if they don't want to go up. The whole pro/amateur distinction should be dropped - it's a hang-up from the game's origins around broken time payments IMO.

If the game believes in P&R, there has to be a clear route for any club - whether it be based in Manchester, Bramley or Devon - to progress from the lowest levels of the competition to the highest levels. Otherwise, the system is not equitable, and people are just picking and choosing elements of P&R that suit a specific/convenient scenario. Either the pyramid is open or it isn't. Do you view League 1 as "not sport" given that there is no relegation from it? Do you view NCL Premier as "not sport" even though there is not promotion out of it? Or is just a lack of P&R to and from Super League that would be "not sport"?

It's all sport to me, and I personally don't believe that P&R is an integral part of it (nor do I think RL has enough money in the game to do it). However, I completely get why many people do want P&R. So if we are going to do P&R, then for me it has to be done properly from top to bottom, as opposed to cherry-picking certain elements of it.

Has anybody disagreed with you over this ?

[GUBRATS]

14 minutes ago, ShropshireBull said:

Manchester Rangers. 

They weren't in the level below L1 

[wasginger]

21 hours ago, Manfred Mann said:

I am not trying to sing. I am playing piano, organ and keyboard. Your ignorance regarding my considerable musical talents is embarrassing.

Stick to defending the obscure, West Yorkshire backwater town of Featherstone. There are so few of you dinosaurs that the Post Office Road manager, security guard, and cleaner are grateful for everyone of you.

Oh you sad man. I don't have to defend my club to you. As they say ignorance is bliss.

[Chris Taylor]

21 hours ago, Manfred Mann said:

Stick to defending the obscure, West Yorkshire backwater town of Featherstone. There are so few of you dinosaurs that the Post Office Road manager, security guard, and cleaner are grateful for everyone of you.

Is this a serious post?

[egm]

I feel like the shenanigans in football over the last week have made me appreciate P&R more. Even if it’s , it’s a necessary evil.

All these comparisons to football are probably useless, but the Premier League didn’t (quite) sell its soul completely to be able to drive its revenue up and its stature worldwide. We are able to have traditional clubs and increase revenues/TV numbers simultaneously

[Gooleboy]

4 hours ago, Chris Taylor said:

Is this a serious post?

He is Blinded by the Light.

[Oldbear]

1 hour ago, Gooleboy said:

He is Blinded by the Light.

Wish he would join Davey, and get on the road again!

[Harry Stottle]

On 21/04/2021 at 11:36, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

Or is just a lack of P&R to and from Super League that would be "not sport"?

To be fair, if you look back at what I said in my interpretation of Mr Guardiola's 'not sport' comment I included my personal complete disrespect of the suggestion that certain clubs can play in the same competition and be ringfenced from relegation whilst others who could perform better on the League ladder would suffer relegation.

In that situation for any ringfenced nominated club "It is not sport, if it doesn't matter when you lose" 

[Tommygilf]

15 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

They weren't in the level below L1 

They were amateur, as all teams below L1 are, meaning that they are in essence equal versus the pro/semi pro game.

[sweaty craiq]

19 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

They were amateur, as all teams below L1 are, meaning that they are in essence equal versus the pro/semi pro game.

What was the league below L1 - and were they in it. If not they had various promotions to WIN to push for L1 from the league below it