The Cornwall RLFC Thread

[RugbyLeagueGeek]

1 minute ago, Damien said:

As far as I can see there is a very strong correlation between the people that supported Toronto also supporting Cornwall. Similarly there is a strong correlation between the people that are anti Cornwall that were also anti Toronto.

I suspect there's a significant proportion of posters on this thread (myself included) who are pro-Cornwall, but just can't see it working (based on all of the available evidence of all of the game's recent expansion attempts).

[Eddie]

1 hour ago, Kirmonds pouch said:

What would you know you’ve never left your bedroom.

Utterly needless, not sure what your problem is pal but leave me out of it. 

[Eddie]

10 minutes ago, steve oates said:

This is very poor form indeed.

Hunslet is an area where two of the finest Amateur clubs in the country, Hunslet Warriors and Hunslet Parkside play.

Indeed Leeds is steeped in RL history and has a strong schools, and junior/senior RL set ups.

Tremendous club Stanningley is in the west Leeds area, Rhinos are a top top club. Bramley survive....

If you feel people are not being supportive of Cornwall (and I certainly am and have noted their trials and also noted their first pro signing) then don't have a go at anyone in the "Heartlands"

Have it out with the individuals themselves.

I was talking about having somewhere nice to go and stay on an away trip, nothing to do with the RL there. 

[CornwallRL]

2 hours ago, glossop saint said:

How many players from Oldham or Hunslet are from those towns? I genuinely don't know the answer but I would imagine not a full squad. I do think that some people's obsession with local players at all pro/ semi pro levels does not help the game. 

Or even Salford?

[Guest]

23 minutes ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

I suspect there's a significant proportion of posters on this thread (myself included) who are pro-Cornwall, but just can't see it working (based on all of the available evidence of all of the game's recent expansion attempts).

But the reality is, most of the sceptics apply this doom laden scenario to each and every new club that appears. It doesn't matter if they are in Toronto, Wales, London or even as far afield as Sheffield - it's all a drain on resources that should be spent on Keighley instead. 

[glossop saint]

19 minutes ago, CornwallRL said:

Or even Salford?

I deliberately choose semi pro as opposed to pro as I think there is a difference.

[CornwallRL]

15 minutes ago, Johnoco said:

- it's all a drain on resources that should be spent on Keighley instead. 

What resources? Can we have some please?

[RugbyLeagueGeek]

1 minute ago, Johnoco said:

But the reality is, most of the sceptics apply this doom laden scenario to each and every new club that appears. It doesn't matter if they are in Toronto, Wales, London or even as far afield as Sheffield - it's all a drain on resources that should be spent on Keighley instead. 

I think you're describing one category of person.

I fall in to the category of expansionists who are fed up of a common theme of every expansion attempt in this country being under-resourced, under-funded and not properly considered as part of a wider strategy. When these poorly-resourced expansion attempts fail it then adds more fuel to the fire for that category of people that you describe, who then have yet more ammunition to claim that the South/Wales/Canada (delete as appropriate) aren't interested in RL and that it's all a waste of time and money.

[CornwallRL]

1 minute ago, glossop saint said:

I deliberately choose semi pro as opposed to pro as I think there is a difference.

What? Between Salford & semi pro?

[CornwallRL]

1 minute ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

I think you're describing one category of person.

I fall in to the category of expansionists who are fed up of a common theme of every expansion attempt in this country being under-resourced, under-funded and not properly considered as part of a wider strategy. When these poorly-resourced expansion attempts fail it then adds more fuel to the fire for that category of people that you describe, who then have yet more ammunition to claim that the South/Wales/Canada (delete as appropriate) aren't interested in RL and that it's all a waste of time and money.

If someone wants to scatter gun money at our wonderful game, eventually they will hit a target, like Coventry, or Skolars. West Wales are holding on, and North Wales, despite M62ers predictions. 

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

I think you're describing one category of person.

I fall in to the category of expansionists who are fed up of a common theme of every expansion attempt in this country being under-resourced, under-funded and not properly considered as part of a wider strategy. When these poorly-resourced expansion attempts fail it then adds more fuel to the fire for that category of people that you describe, who then have yet more ammunition to claim that the South/Wales/Canada (delete as appropriate) aren't interested in RL and that it's all a waste of time and money.

Mate, I've been on here long enough - and been into RL long enough- to know that there are simply loads of moaning gits who just don't want RL to actually get anywhere.

So whatever the reason for deriding something, it will be jumped on. All while ignoring the same things for established sides. 

[RugbyLeagueGeek]

6 minutes ago, Johnoco said:

Mate, I've been on here long enough - and been into RL long enough- to know that there are simply loads of moaning gits who just don't want RL to actually get anywhere.

So whatever the reason for deriding something, it will be jumped on. All while ignoring the same things for established sides. 

And that's fine. But not everyone falls in to that category. There is a big difference between scepticism versus not wanting it to work.

Edited December 10, 2021 by RugbyLeagueGeek

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

And that's fine. But not everyone falls in to that category. There is a big difference between scepticism versus not wanting it to work.

I'm sure you are sincere here but in the minority unfortunately. 

[Guest]

21 minutes ago, CornwallRL said:

What resources? Can we have some please?

Usually it's individuals money that they should spend on random northern clubs, for no logical reason. 

[RugbyLeagueGeek]

10 minutes ago, CornwallRL said:

If someone wants to scatter gun money at our wonderful game, eventually they will hit a target, like Coventry, or Skolars. West Wales are holding on, and North Wales, despite M62ers predictions. 

As we've seen with the recent cut to League 1 funding, the RFL doesn't have money to 'scatter gun'. Expansion attempts should have been part of a strategic plan, as opposed to a pins-in-map approach. The money 'scatter-gunned' on Hemel, All Golds and Oxford was completely wasted, with zero to show from those projects. That money could have been used far more wisely. I'm not sure they've 'hit the target' with Coventry either, given that the Bears have had to move to Birmingham and rebrand.

Cornwall and Toronto are different. Toronto had no central funding, so their money was coming from a benefactor. Cornwall have a token amount from the RFL, but most of their money will need to come from outside investment, so essentially these projects were/are less problematic for me with regard to 'scatter gunning' money (although I gather there are now lots of unpaid bills from the Toronto situation).

[RugbyLeagueGeek]

4 minutes ago, Johnoco said:

I'm sure you are sincere here but in the minority unfortunately. 

That's probably fair.

[CornwallRL]

1 hour ago, Eddie said:

I was talking about having somewhere nice to go and stay on an away trip, nothing to do with the RL there. 

Penryn is a lovely town, & there are plenty of nice places to stay within 20-30 miles.

[Eddie]

34 minutes ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

As we've seen with the recent cut to League 1 funding, the RFL doesn't have money to 'scatter gun'. Expansion attempts should have been part of a strategic plan, as opposed to a pins-in-map approach. The money 'scatter-gunned' on Hemel, All Golds and Oxford was completely wasted, with zero to show from those projects. That money could have been used far more wisely. I'm not sure they've 'hit the target' with Coventry either, given that the Bears have had to move to Birmingham and rebrand.

Cornwall and Toronto are different. Toronto had no central funding, so their money was coming from a benefactor. Cornwall have a token amount from the RFL, but most of their money will need to come from outside investment, so essentially these projects were/are less problematic for me with regard to 'scatter gunning' money (although I gather there are now lots of unpaid bills from the Toronto situation).

Did the RFL give much money to Hemel, Oxford or Gloucestershire? Other than the normal L1 funding? You can’t have a new club unless there are people in that location prepared to put the money and work in, so I don’t know how the RFL could have a strategy unless they’re going to set clubs up themselves, which isn’t their job. 

[RugbyLeagueGeek]

59 minutes ago, Eddie said:

Did the RFL give much money to Hemel, Oxford or Gloucestershire? Other than the normal L1 funding?

I was led to believe that the RFL central funding was approx £70k per club. Multiply that by the number of seasons they were in League 1 and you're talking over a million quid that went to those clubs, with nothing to show for it.

59 minutes ago, Eddie said:

so I don’t know how the RFL could have a strategy unless they’re going to set clubs up themselves, which isn’t their job. 

The RFL's strategy for developing the game doesn't have to be solely based on chucking money at League 1 clubs in new areas. They could have developed a strategy for grass roots development that would have seen that million quid go much further in my opinion.

59 minutes ago, Eddie said:

You can’t have a new club unless there are people in that location prepared to put the money and work in

This is the crux of the problem for me - at the time of the Championship 1 (as was) expansion, the RFL basically said "who wants to be in?" and then accepted clubs with very little underpinning them, other than some enthusiastic people who replied with a "yes" (Northampton Rebels as Exhibit A). There was no joined up thinking, and no long term plan for how to actually develop the game in those areas. And there still isn't. I'm seeing the same pattern with Cornwall now.

Edited December 10, 2021 by RugbyLeagueGeek

[Eddie]

48 minutes ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

I was led to believe that the RFL central funding was approx £70k per club. Multiply that by the number of seasons they were in League 1 and you're talking over a million quid that went to those clubs, with nothing to show for it.

The RFL's strategy for developing the game doesn't have to be solely based on chucking money at League 1 clubs in new areas. They could have developed a strategy for grass roots development that would have seen that million quid go much further in my opinion.

This is the crux of the problem for me - at the time of the Championship 1 (as was) expansion, the RFL basically said "who wants to be in?" and then accepted clubs with very little underpinning them, other than some enthusiastic people who replied with a "yes" (Northampton Rebels as Exhibit A). There was no joined up thinking, and no long term plan for how to actually develop the game in those areas. And there still isn't. I'm seeing the same pattern with Cornwall now.

Fair enough, I didn’t know about the last part, though once the teams were in of course they deserved the same central funding as anyone else. 
Cornwall however is different imho, Perez has the experience from Toronto and Ottawa, and while it remains to be seen I like the sound of what they’re saying, and the two appointments this week. They must have some money behind them. 

[Tommygilf]

Hummel making the kits for 3 years so they will at least look professional!

[David Dockhouse Host]

On 10/12/2021 at 12:13, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

I was led to believe that the RFL central funding was approx £70k per club. Multiply that by the number of seasons they were in League 1 and you're talking over a million quid that went to those clubs, with nothing to show for it.

The RFL's strategy for developing the game doesn't have to be solely based on chucking money at League 1 clubs in new areas. They could have developed a strategy for grass roots development that would have seen that million quid go much further in my opinion.

This is the crux of the problem for me - at the time of the Championship 1 (as was) expansion, the RFL basically said "who wants to be in?" and then accepted clubs with very little underpinning them, other than some enthusiastic people who replied with a "yes" (Northampton Rebels as Exhibit A). There was no joined up thinking, and no long term plan for how to actually develop the game in those areas. And there still isn't. I'm seeing the same pattern with Cornwall now.

Worth noting that all the other established clubs had the same money(central funding), we can ask the question what do they have to show for it, have they developed from before that funding? 

Lots of people mention wanting a strategy, what is that strategy though? £100,000 on grass roots wouldn't go that far and with no professional club how would it be sustainable?

The harsh reality is, to create a new club in an area requires lots of money over a sustained period of time with little to no chance of return for many years. This is also probably the case for many established clubs in L1 also. A solid strategy would be time consuming and costly to create and identify many things needed that we simply don't have or cannot create quickly and easily. The model I Iike is Newcastle and probably the best approach to expansion. 

We are highly unlikely to get anyone or enough money for this sustained investment so have to take the opportunities we get and try to make them work. More checks are made than people realise from the RFL but again you can have as many strategies as you like but without someone pumping in cash for decades we won't magically get any new club in SL and sustainable with a youth pathway anytime soon, regardless of the efforts from the RFL.

If the central funding hadn't gone to those clubs then which? Other new clubs somewhere else, or double money to the same clubs in the heartlands halving your expansion efforts? 

There is no perfect solution.

So Toronto, Cornwall, Wales Midlands etc. Do represent expansion and get my full support even if I accept they may not be around forever.

Edited December 12, 2021 by David Dockhouse Host

[RugbyLeagueGeek]

2 hours ago, David Dockhouse Host said:

Worth noting that all the other established clubs had the same money(central funding), we can ask the question what do they have to show for it, have they developed from before that funding? 

That is a fair question. But those other clubs are still going, whereas Hemel, All Golds and Oxford aren't. So there is zero tangible legacy from the financial outlay to those clubs.

2 hours ago, David Dockhouse Host said:

Lots of people mention wanting a strategy, what is that strategy though? £100,000 on grass roots wouldn't go that far and with no professional club how would it be sustainable?

There's loads of different things they could have done with the million quid that they spent on those 3 clubs. Even if they just focused on one of those areas and funded a development officer for 30 years with that money, it would have been far more effective for developing the game than what they actually did.

2 hours ago, David Dockhouse Host said:

More checks are made than people realise from the RFL

In the case of Northampton Rebels, those checks obviously were nowhere near enough.

2 hours ago, David Dockhouse Host said:

you can have as many strategies as you like but without someone pumping in cash for decades we won't magically get any new club in SL and sustainable with a youth pathway anytime soon, regardless of the efforts from the RFL.

And yet the money wasted on Hemel, All Golds and Oxford could have been used to fund a development officer for literally decades.

2 hours ago, David Dockhouse Host said:

If the central funding hadn't gone to those clubs then which? Other new clubs somewhere else, or double money to the same clubs in the heartlands halving your expansion efforts? 

Spend it on grass roots development instead. There was no requirement from Sky to spend that money on League 1 clubs - that was a strategic decision from the RFL. And in the cases of those clubs that have folded, it hasn't paid any dividends whatsoever.

[David Dockhouse Host]

19 minutes ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

That is a fair question. But those other clubs are still going, whereas Hemel, All Golds and Oxford aren't. So there is zero tangible legacy from the financial outlay to those clubs.

There's loads of different things they could have done with the million quid that they spent on those 3 clubs. Even if they just focused on one of those areas and funded a development officer for 30 years with that money, it would have been far more effective for developing the game than what they actually did.

In the case of Northampton Rebels, those checks obviously were nowhere near enough.

And yet the money wasted on Hemel, All Golds and Oxford could have been used to fund a development officer for literally decades.

Spend it on grass roots development instead. There was no requirement from Sky to spend that money on League 1 clubs - that was a strategic decision from the RFL. And in the cases of those clubs that have folded, it hasn't paid any dividends whatsoever.

1 development officer could do what without other funds?

Only so much one employed person can do. I fear people would ask the same question after 30 years, what do we have to show for that, throwing a development officer in without a clear strategy, youth set up or professional club was never going to work... Etc....etc....

[Ivarr the Boneless]

It's worth remembering Oxford etc joined a development league. Their financial and development plans were based around that. 

Then the RFL re-organised and the league ceased to be a development league. The money that had been intended to go on development was diverted to try and keep the first team afloat in a stronger league.

Suddenly the links with Oxford Cavaliers were useless - too big a step up. The short lived U21's went, too big a step up, there was less money to work with schools etc.

Yes the central grants at Oxford did leave depressingly little legacy but this was not just the club's fault. Why did the RFL promise Oxford RL a development officer would be employed for the area and fail to deliver? This offer was withdrawn literally days after Oxford RL went public as new entrants to the third tier.

The game totally failed to see the bigger picture.

I was an Oxford season ticket holder. When they folded a key man told me that if they'd known of the re-organisation of League One they would not have founded the club. They wanted to grow the sport at low professional levels, and below. That was impossible post the re-organisation.