Jump to content

Membership fees to play Community RL


Recommended Posts


It's not exactly going to be helpful when it comes to encouraging people, and in particular young players, to take up the game. It really will be the difference between some parents letting their kids play and not.

It just seems a way of raising revenue for the RFL but it really should be the last resort.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Damien said:

It's not exactly going to be helpful when it comes to encouraging people, and in particular young players, to take up the game. It really will be the difference between some parents letting their kids play and not.

It just seems a way of raising revenue for the RFL but it really should be the last resort.

I think its a big indicator of the expected TV revenue coming in, and that its not going to trickle down as far as previously

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Damien said:

It just seems a way of raising revenue for the RFL but it really should be the last resort.

I get why a cash-strapped sport and governing body thinks this is necessary and I don't have any immediate alternatives given that they clearly need the money but ... this is going to be disastrous. It's not like our volunteers (by and large) come from the kind of backgrounds who can easily just pay out here and there.

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So exactly the same as RU,cricket,hockey,tennis etc you mean.

As usual,people dont want to pay any money for anything and then claim there is no money in the game.

Too many rl 'clubs' come and go,chose which games they fancy playing and have barely any facilities.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, cookey said:

So exactly the same as RU,cricket,hockey,tennis etc you mean.

As usual,people dont want to pay any money for anything and then claim there is no money in the game.

Too many rl 'clubs' come and go,chose which games they fancy playing and have barely any facilities.

Those other sports might actually get something back from their governing bodies though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, cookey said:

So exactly the same as RU,cricket,hockey,tennis etc you mean.

Is it?

That's a genuine question. How does this compare?

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My rugby union club pays £500/yr,whilst my cricket club pays £300/yr.

The reaction here,is rather like a player who turns up,plays the game,goes home and complains about having to pay any subs. Certain players seem to believe that facilities are provided and maintained for free,the magic fairy maintains pitches,marks out pitches,washes kit,rates etc,etc.

General threads on here include,can I get in free,whats the discount code,I'd go if it was cheaper than that(no they wouldn't),I'm not paying extra for my 10 yo,usually followed by,why isn't there any money in the game.

  • Like 11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, cookey said:

My rugby union club pays £500/yr,whilst my cricket club pays £300/yr.

The reaction here,is rather like a player who turns up,plays the game,goes home and complains about having to pay any subs. Certain players seem to believe that facilities are provided and maintained for free,the magic fairy maintains pitches,marks out pitches,washes kit,rates etc,etc.

General threads on here include,can I get in free,whats the discount code,I'd go if it was cheaper than that(no they wouldn't),I'm not paying extra for my 10 yo,usually followed by,why isn't there any money in the game.

That’s not a million miles away from what clubs pay already. The change is charging my member not team, like you mention it can be a chore collecting subs, add in an additional “signing on fee” the existing volunteers who keep the community clubs going are the ones airing concern as they’re the ones with the stress. 
 

I think there’s a lack of money in the game as a whole, a lot are also cynically thinking this money will drip out of the community game and prop up the pro / semi pro game

Change is required and something sorted, but it’s not as simple as you make out

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, cookey said:

So exactly the same as RU,cricket,hockey,tennis etc you mean.

As usual,people dont want to pay any money for anything and then claim there is no money in the game.

Too many rl 'clubs' come and go,chose which games they fancy playing and have barely any facilities.

It's not up to kids, volunteers and coaches to subsidise the rest of the game. Players already pay subs, do fundraisers etc and already pay for all the stuff you allude to in your posts that you accuse them of shirking. They support the game they play.

This is money going to the RFL. For what? Why is it needed now? If it is ringfenced for good and for the development and support of the grassroots and amateur game then I can live with that. However nothing I have heard indicates that. If it is simply for supporting the RFL, and taking but not giving, then that is quite different. That's just a lazy way to raise revenue because of a complete failure to raise it from elsewhere. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, gingerjon said:

Is it?

That's a genuine question. How does this compare?

The majority of my running club membership ultimately goes to UK Athletics rather than to the club - I think it's £150 per club and £15 per member.  Don't remember having to pay anything to the ECB to play cricket.

Hockey had a big problem a couple of decades back where the level of fees demanded by the governing body reached a point where there was a revolt by many clubs and the governing body went bust and a new one had to be formed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, cookey said:

My rugby union club pays £500/yr,whilst my cricket club pays £300/yr.

The reaction here,is rather like a player who turns up,plays the game,goes home and complains 

This. 

In addition good clubs look at personal circumstances too. E.g. If someone loses their job then they get half rates or deferred payments etc

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember meeting Maurice Oldroyd and Tom Keaveney when we started Aberavon RLFC in the early eighties.

We were a rugby league island in the wilderness of RaRa, our nearest opposition was 200 miles away.

Maurice, congratulated my brother and I for having the gumption to get it going.

Then Tom (I believe he was BARLA's treasurer) said, by the way, its £50 to join BARLA. Lol. Those were the days.

Look fella's all this furore is pointless unless and until we know how much the proposed levy is going to be.

It might be insignificant, in the grand scheme of things, especially if enough clubs are involved in the membership scheme.

(Someone mentioned earlier about £40 a year which is a paltry sum).

It's churlish not to recognise and acknowledge that administering the game has cost implications.

It's also irresponsible not to accept a fair and reasonable levy, to cover those costs.

Let's wait and see what the proposed fee will be and then, (if it's reasonable and fair) man up. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Impartial Observer said:

The FA charge £10 for a DBS other sports charge more, it is free for RL. I assume some of the charge is to cover these costs and the clubs will save money as they will not have to pay insurance any more as it will come out of the subscription   

I'm sorry mate, (don't all shout?) what's a DBS?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Impartial Observer said:

The FA charge £10 for a DBS other sports charge more, it is free for RL. I assume some of the charge is to cover these costs and the clubs will save money as they will not have to pay insurance any more as it will come out of the subscription   

The devil is in the detail. I’m not surprised by it. Hopefully will be transparent enough to convince everybody

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

£1.75 per month for a child and £2.50 for an adult?

I know the game is fragile in some places, but to say we will lose droves of players because of this is surely an exaggeration.

RFL should adopt the slogan: damned if we do, damned if we don't.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, cookey said:

So exactly the same as RU,cricket,hockey,tennis etc you mean.

As usual,people dont want to pay any money for anything and then claim there is no money in the game.

Too many rl 'clubs' come and go,chose which games they fancy playing and have barely any facilities.

I have to agree.     There is no such thing as a free lunch.   The RFL get grants to disburse but it only goes so far and lots of sports are all anxious to get in first.

As I have said before, the game is run in an amateurish fashion.     I was in a bowls club that did not pay into Bowls England because we could not afford to get the grants back from the Association.  You had to pay a lot to get the benefits they would give...    We just play friendlies, they did pay all the insurances,  but we played very small time and amateurishly. 

This strikes me the same... if you want to be run on a wing and a prayer, in isolation, then you do.  But to be part of what is a properly organised supported and professional game then you must pay.

From what I have read of the criticisms, people want to be spoon fed.    But look....  and look hard...  our game is being hollowed out it's something of an empty shell.   It needs investmentt and it needs a flagship competition which can earn profits,  not just to survive itself, but to support the wider game.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, gingerjon said:

Is it?

That's a genuine question. How does this compare?

My lad plays soccer and we pay £150 a year.

He plays RL and we pay £75 no hidden costs. Even last year in covid-affected time, the RL averaged out at a few pence for than £2 per training session or game, including full kit, insurance, occasional minibus travel and RFL registration. The club also raised funds from sponsors/donors to subsidise the involvement of the most deprived children. 

I believe the soccer includes a registration fee. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The RFL fought for years to take control of the amateur game from BARLA finally succeeding in or around 2003/4.

Amateur clubs paid a nominal fee to BARLA and the game was ran pretty much in it’s entirety by volunteers.

For those of you who don’t know the background, BARLA was formed by what was left of the amateur game after years of neglect from the RFL and grew at an exponential rate in its first 20 years.

the sports council weren’t happy that the game had two governing bodies so BARLA was eventually absorbed by the RFL.

Along with other sports, rugby league participation has declined year on year since the RFL took over the running of the sport, despite millions in funding from Sky and Sport England.

most the of Regional Leagues are still ran by volunteers and those leagues in the heartland receive very little (if any) money from the RFL, unlike grassroots rugby Union clubs who all receive annual grants.

The argument here is that the community clubs haven’t had any consultation in regards to these fees, by all accounts the ‘consultation panel’ was 4 players !!

The community clubs have a right to know where their allocated money (sport England grants) is being spent, as most will argue that the RFL offers heartland clubs very little value for money, and the old guard would argue that they have a cheek asking payment for a service that was previously supplied free of charge by BARLA and the regional league management teams.

The RFL need to get their own house in order, get their Cup competitions sorted so people want to attend, reinvigorate the Tri Nations and expand the competition to include the pacific teams so that the Aussies and New Zealander’s only hit our shores every 2 or 3 years !!

in fact do anything but sit on your ***** like they have done for the last few years 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been involved in the Amateur game for 10 years now as a coach and volunteer, which makes me relatively new. But from my experience the RFL exists to pay good wages to a few people who constantly feel the need to make changes to prove their worth. Regardless of the damage it may do to the game.

 

I would really like to know what the RFL is going to do with the funds this generates, and what return the Amateur leagues will get from this. 

Because now when we sign new players they will not only need to pay a monthly fee for playing, which can cost in excess of £300 a year at some clubs.

But now we will also need to explain they have to set up another payment to the RFL, and we wont know why.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, tonyvikinggee said:

I would really like to know what the RFL is going to do with the funds this generates, and what return the Amateur leagues will get from this. 

 

This is the crux of the matter. The scope of the membership benefits is not well known and on that basis, it makes it a very hard sell. An even harder sell is to charge volunteers to offer their time free of charge! The devil is in the detail, which we have yet to see.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...