West Wales Raiders - laughing stock

[Eddie]

1 hour ago, Jughead said:

Where does the money and where does the extra three clubs come from?

Other than the three extra clubs, what extra money would be needed to have four leagues of ten? 
 

Who do you support btw, if you don’t mind me asking? 

[Josef K]

It looks as if it could be another Barnestoneworth United season for the WWR. 

[devonhawk]

1 hour ago, Jughead said:

Where does the money and where does the extra three clubs come from?

The clubs fund themselves. There’s always been this theory that the RFL fund these clubs, maybe they did at one point. But right now, the clubs in the south don’t get a bean. 

[Jughead]

48 minutes ago, Eddie said:

Other than the three extra clubs, what extra money would be needed to have four leagues of ten? 
 

Who do you support btw, if you don’t mind me asking? 

That’s an extra £60,000-£75,000 as League One clubs currently get £20,000 or £25,000, I can’t remember what figure it is. That’s still a pretty large amount of money to find in the first place but what is that £60,000-£75,000 really achieving? I’m well aware you can ask that now of League One clubs and even in the Championship and Super League, comparative to the values distributed there. 

If you’re bringing in Division 4, should there be more money on offer for teams in the existing (League One) third tier as they’d naturally be at a higher level than rung four of the ladder? Is the prize of promotion from rung four to three but your central funding staying at the current level of £20,000-£25,000 enough to appease clubs? 

A fourth division, what we do with League One and restructuring as a whole, which has been a constant in the sport for years, is something I’ve naturally thought of and I can’t see any perfect way that suits clubs at all levels, so I’m interested in what others think.

28 minutes ago, devonhawk said:

The clubs fund themselves. There’s always been this theory that the RFL fund these clubs, maybe they did at one point. But right now, the clubs in the south don’t get a bean. 

The clubs in the south, much like all clubs, get central funding from The RFL. In League One it is either £20,000 or £25,000, I can’t remember. Any new clubs would require central funding unless you think they should get nothing. 

[devonhawk]

5 minutes ago, Jughead said:

That’s an extra £60,000-£75,000 as League One clubs currently get £20,000 or £25,000, I can’t remember what figure it is. That’s still a pretty large amount of money to find in the first place but what is that £60,000-£75,000 really achieving? I’m well aware you can ask that now of League One clubs and even in the Championship and Super League, comparative to the values distributed there. 

If you’re bringing in Division 4, should there be more money on offer for teams in the existing (League One) third tier as they’d naturally be at a higher level than rung four of the ladder? Is the prize of promotion from rung four to three but your central funding staying at the current level of £20,000-£25,000 enough to appease clubs? 

A fourth division, what we do with League One and restructuring as a whole, which has been a constant in the sport for years, is something I’ve naturally thought of and I can’t see any perfect way that suits clubs at all levels, so I’m interested in what others think.

The clubs in the south, much like all clubs, get central funding from The RFL. In League One it is either £20,000 or £25,000, I can’t remember. Any new clubs would require central funding unless you think they should get nothing. 

West Wales, certainly didn’t get any money before joining League 1. So they must have had a good amount to get to a stage where they could get in. I say bring back Mansfield Marksmen, Trafford Borough and Southend Invicta.

[bentleyman]

And Scarborough Pirates

[Sir Kevin Sinfield]

8 hours ago, Eddie said:

Other than the three extra clubs, what extra money would be needed to have four leagues of ten? 
 

Who do you support btw, if you don’t mind me asking? 

Cutting Super League and the Championship to 10 would be a big mistake imo, SL 12, CH 12, L1N 10, L1S 10 would be ideal 

[Death to the Rah Rah's]

I think the terminology used in the  title of this thread is bang out of order.

Do we as a sport ever learn from previous mistakes?

How many clubs have been set up in development areas, and how many have managed to establish themselves and survive beyond 5 seasons?

Surely by now the RFL would look at their record of developing new clubs and accept responsibility that simply allowing new sides to enter a professional league structure with little to no support damages the sport.

I would estimate that it would take a minimum of 10 years to establish a new club, and those initial 10 years would be a real roller coaster ride. Surely by now any new club should have some sort of permanent link up with a Superleague club, where they can be given guidance on marketing, player development etc. for a minimum or 2 years, then they go to another Superleague club for further experience.

I would also say initially they need a full time RL funded development officer with cash/sponsorship incentives to help get new community clubs started in their immediate area, with emphasis on coach to coach development to improve the quality of coaching for new teams.

Add in unlimited duel reg/loan players for the first two seasons, then gradually start to wean them off loans season by season until they fall in line with the other clubs. 

[Harry Stottle]

11 hours ago, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

Leigh got an additional £400k as a Super League parachute payment, that money, or at least half of it would be better spent on a development league imo 

Totally agree, and if we really want to improve development and ensure the grassroots of our game will still be around and capable of producing player's long term and of improved quality, reduce SL funding to £1M per club and put the difference into ensuring there is still a professional sport of Rugby League there for future generations to enjoy.

[Jughead]

9 hours ago, devonhawk said:

West Wales, certainly didn’t get any money before joining League 1. So they must have had a good amount to get to a stage where they could get in. I say bring back Mansfield Marksmen, Trafford Borough and Southend Invicta.

West Wales have had central funding across their various guises since joining the game. 

 

[devonhawk]

33 minutes ago, Jughead said:

West Wales have had central funding across their various guises since joining the game. 

 

How did they get it? No Devon clubs got any funding… 

[theswanmcr]

1 hour ago, Death to the Rah Rah's said:

I think the terminology used in the  title of this thread is bang out of order.

Do we as a sport ever learn from previous mistakes?

How many clubs have been set up in development areas, and how many have managed to establish themselves and survive beyond 5 seasons?

Surely by now the RFL would look at their record of developing new clubs and accept responsibility that simply allowing new sides to enter a professional league structure with little to no support damages the sport.

I would estimate that it would take a minimum of 10 years to establish a new club, and those initial 10 years would be a real roller coaster ride. Surely by now any new club should have some sort of permanent link up with a Superleague club, where they can be given guidance on marketing, player development etc. for a minimum or 2 years, then they go to another Superleague club for further experience.

I would also say initially they need a full time RL funded development officer with cash/sponsorship incentives to help get new community clubs started in their immediate area, with emphasis on coach to coach development to improve the quality of coaching for new teams.

Add in unlimited duel reg/loan players for the first two seasons, then gradually start to wean them off loans season by season until they fall in line with the other clubs. 

Some interesting points there and fair enough on the thread title - simply West Wales Raiders would be better.

I think most people realise the difficulties WWR and other ‘outpost’ professional clubs face. And most expansionists on here are desperate for them to succeed. It’s the appalling way the club is seemingly being run - from the shoddy website to the lack of head coach to this weekend’s latest drubbing - that causes huge concern and there’s no excuse for some it from a supposedly professional club.

[Jughead]

5 minutes ago, devonhawk said:

How did they get it? No Devon clubs got any funding… 

What Devon clubs? There aren’t any Devon clubs in Super League, Championship or League One, therefore, they don’t receive central funding. 

[devonhawk]

5 minutes ago, Jughead said:

What Devon clubs? There aren’t any Devon clubs in Super League, Championship or League One, therefore, they don’t receive central funding. 

You said WW had, had funding since they joined the game. They played Southern Conference for a few years before joining League 1. 

[Dallas Mead]

11 hours ago, Josef K said:

It looks as if it could be another Barnestoneworth United season for the WWR. 

Quality Ripping Yarns reference Sir

[Jughead]

12 minutes ago, devonhawk said:

You said WW had, had funding since they joined the game. They played Southern Conference for a few years before joining League 1. 

They’ve had funding since they joined the professional game in the many guises that’s led to West Wales. 

[steve oates]

25 minutes ago, theswanmcr said:

Some interesting points there and fair enough on the thread title - simply West Wales Raiders would be better.

I think most people realise the difficulties WWR and other ‘outpost’ professional clubs face. And most expansionists on here are desperate for them to succeed. It’s the appalling way the club is seemingly being run - from the shoddy website to the lack of head coach to this weekend’s latest drubbing - that causes huge concern and there’s no excuse for some it from a supposedly professional club.

They are not really a "professional club".  There is an excuse for it.

It's worth reminding people that League one clubs who have little money had a 74% cut to their central funding for this season. I don't think people actually "realise" this yet.

So that is the biggest problem and "appalling" and "shoddy" is not fair given that massive cut in funding. That the League One clubs all took the field this season is a credit to them. As it stands League one is not "expansion" any more and I don't think it ever was on the basis that participation in Rugby League in the heartlands and beyond  has gone through the floor since the third tier and "expansion" was introduced. 

[OriginalMrC]

12 hours ago, devonhawk said:

The clubs fund themselves. There’s always been this theory that the RFL fund these clubs, maybe they did at one point. But right now, the clubs in the south don’t get a bean. 

It's not a theory. League 1 clubs up until last season got £60-70k each. It's being cut to around £14k each this year. 

[OriginalMrC]

11 minutes ago, steve oates said:

They are not really a "professional club".  There is an excuse for it.

It's worth reminding people that League one clubs who have little money had a 74% cut to their central funding for this season. I don't think people actually "realise" this yet.

So that is the biggest problem and "appalling" and "shoddy" is not fair given that massive cut in funding. That the League One clubs all took the field this season is a credit to them. As it stands League one is not "expansion" any more and I don't think it ever was on the basis that participation in Rugby League in the heartlands and beyond  has gone through the floor since the third tier and "expansion" was introduced. 

The cuts to central funding in the championship and league 1 has been widely documented and discussed in depth on this forum. So yes people do 'realise' it. 

I don't know why you keep referring to league 1 as expansion. There are 11 clubs in league 1 and five of them are from non traditional areas. It's not an expansion league and all clubs receive the same funding (subject to ROI and prize money). 

[theswanmcr]

12 minutes ago, steve oates said:

They are not really a "professional club".  There is an excuse for it.

It's worth reminding people that League one clubs who have little money had a 74% cut to their central funding for this season. I don't think people actually "realise" this yet.

So that is the biggest problem and "appalling" and "shoddy" is not fair given that massive cut in funding. That the League One clubs all took the field this season is a credit to them. As it stands League one is not "expansion" any more and I don't think it ever was on the basis that participation in Rugby League in the heartlands and beyond  has gone through the floor since the third tier and "expansion" was introduced. 

Well we need to change when we use the word ‘professional’ then. The club use that term and so does the RFL for League 1. So any professional club in any sport shouldn’t have a shoddy (and it is shoddy) website. 

Agree though that in reality - and with these huge funding cuts - that they are far from a professional outfit as we historically know the term. 

We need a big rethink and more of a link/pyramid between the so called professional leagues and community game to allow WWR and others to find their appropriate level within a national structure.

[Hopping Mad]

43 minutes ago, Dallas Mead said:

Quality Ripping Yarns reference Sir

WWR dream of losing eight-nil...

[theswanmcr]

8 minutes ago, Hopping Mad said:

WWR dream of losing eight-nil...

WWR dream of losing eighty-nil…

[ATLANTISMAN]

There used to be an RFL task force (10 years + ago) that was on standby to assist clubs that had problems with advice on financials players coaching etc.

To be fair it worked very well just wondering if it still operates nowadays as I have no idea.

 

Paul

[RigbyLuger]

1 hour ago, theswanmcr said:

Well we need to change when we use the word ‘professional’ then. The club use that term and so does the RFL for League 1. So any professional club in any sport shouldn’t have a shoddy (and it is shoddy) website. 

I can't find player profiles on the Wakefield website, and that's a Super League club. Not to defend WWR's site, but even our "top" clubs can be shoddy to an extent.

[theswanmcr]

20 minutes ago, RigbyLuger said:

I can't find player profiles on the Wakefield website, and that's a Super League club. Not to defend WWR's site, but even our "top" clubs can be shoddy to an extent.

That’s more of a content issue really, the website itself is fine. But I take your point and SL should really be like NRL with standardised websites and pooled marketing for me.