West Wales Raiders - laughing stock

[Tommygilf]

On 23/04/2022 at 19:24, gingerjon said:

Failure to fulfil a fixture in union at any level usually results in automatic demotion.

Any level apart from the Premiership?or are Worcester going down then? I must have missed that part of the panel's report...

I'm not convinced WWR or RL are an outlier. Getting RFL approved medical staff in must be a nightmare if your past 4th choice and the nearest Pro RL clubs are Cornwall or North Wales. 

If WWR were a school you'd put them in special measures and bring in experienced help and oversight to turn things around.

Edited April 25, 2022 by Tommygilf

[gingerjon]

1 hour ago, Tommygilf said:

Any level apart from the Premiership?or are Worcester going down then? I must have missed that part of the panel's report...

I'm not convinced WWR or RL are an outlier. Getting RFL approved medical staff in must be a nightmare if your past 4th choice and the nearest Pro RL clubs are Cornwall or North Wales. 

If WWR were a school you'd put them in special measures and bring in experienced help and oversight to turn things around.

I'm surprised by that but suspect it has a lot to do with it being Premier Rugby rather than the RFU.

[steve oates]

On 23/04/2022 at 19:33, theswanmcr said:

Indeed and it is a joke that couple times fulfill the fixture and no way for a ‘professional’ club to act.

My point was more that the media, thankfully, won’t really mention this as it is at the lowest level of our pro ranks. And that level is very much semi-pro… or amateur in terms of West Wales.

Not sure what the West Wales pay their players really does qualify them even as "semi pro" let alone the "Pro" label I think you give them in error. 

For me they just about do the job they and others like Cornwall and Skolars are given to do which is be the cannon fodder to make up a third league so long established clubs like Rochdale, Keighley, Swinton, Oldham and Hunslet can survive.. 

[Tommygilf]

On 26/04/2022 at 09:32, steve oates said:

Not sure what the West Wales pay their players really does qualify them even as "semi pro" let alone the "Pro" label I think you give them in error. 

For me they just about do the job they and others like Cornwall and Skolars are given to do which is be the cannon fodder to make up a third league so long established clubs like Rochdale, Keighley, Swinton, Oldham and Hunslet can survive.. 

Same could be said for so many League 1 clubs and even junior Super League players. 40 quid losing payment for an away day in Cumbria.

Hardly "professional".

[stevecl]

3 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

Same could be said for so many League 1 clubs and even junior Super League players. 40 quid losing payment for an away day in Cumbria.

Hardly "professional".

Shocked! I am not sure what I thought they got for playing but if that is truly all they get for getting a "kicking" then I admire their fortitude as players. There are probably RU clubs all around them who could afford the same amounts and they get a their lumps without the bonus of a long coach ride back....

That said, the club knows the geography and losing - ergo low payments - must sap morale and make it harder to recruit and retain and if they - the club - cannot deal with the geography they had no business trying.

[Tommygilf]

15 minutes ago, stevecl said:

Shocked! I am not sure what I thought they got for playing but if that is truly all they get for getting a "kicking" then I admire their fortitude as players. There are probably RU clubs all around them who could afford the same amounts and they get a their lumps without the bonus of a long coach ride back....

That said, the club knows the geography and losing - ergo low payments - must sap morale and make it harder to recruit and retain and if they - the club - cannot deal with the geography they had no business trying.

I know for a fact that Sandal RUFC in Wakefield (a relatively low paying 5th tier side playing in the highest level of regionalised leagues) pay virtually the same - and did so in the 6th tier too. And they are absolutely part time with evening training and no daytime commitments.

The lad I knew who typified the League experience was paid £250 a month at a Super League club as Full Time academy/fringe first team player and the League 1 wages at a current League 1 club. I know he played Championship too but not sure what he was on there. He's now an electrician.

[gingerjon]

14 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

The lad I knew who typified the League experience was paid £250 a month at a Super League club as Full Time academy/fringe first team player and the League 1 wages at a current League 1 club. I know he played Championship too but not sure what he was on there. He's now an electrician.

The amount we expect from our players and how little they are paid in their short careers should be a source of genuine embarrassment to the game.

[Toby Chopra]

23 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

I know for a fact that Sandal RUFC in Wakefield (a relatively low paying 5th tier side playing in the highest level of regionalised leagues) pay virtually the same - and did so in the 6th tier too. And they are absolutely part time with evening training and no daytime commitments.

The lad I knew who typified the League experience was paid £250 a month at a Super League club as Full Time academy/fringe first team player and the League 1 wages at a current League 1 club. I know he played Championship too but not sure what he was on there. He's now an electrician.

That's just awful. 

And such a shame. People love the sport, they play it through their formative years, they try to make a go of it, but when it gets to the crunch we can't afford to keep them in the game. I wonder how widespread this is? 

[Chronicler of Chiswick]

Back in the mid 1980s average losing pay across both divisions was around £25 (I know from an interview Kevin Ward gave Rugby League Week in Oz that Cas were paying that). The equivalent today would be £80.

[Toby Chopra]

I hate to say it, but if the pay really is that low for many of the part time teams, it does sort of justify limiting the number of times teams travel outside the heartland for away games. 

If it helped keep players in the sport, it's something to at least consider. 

[Jughead]

2 minutes ago, Toby Chopra said:

I hate to say it, but if the pay really is that low for many of the part time teams, it does sort of justify limiting the number of times teams travel outside the heartland for away games. 

If it helped keep players in the sport, it's something to at least consider. 

Little League thinking right there. 

 

[Impartial Observer]

I know when Hemel were in L1 they were paying £75 per game, £150 for a win Though they didn't have to worry to much about winning pay

[Toby Chopra]

35 minutes ago, Jughead said:

Little League thinking right there. 

 

If we're paying "professionals" £40 to spend a day on a bus travelling then we are a little league. 

The reality is that some clubs are trading on their players' love of the sport, not providing thrm professional opportunities. In those circumstances, doing things that make participation more enjoyable for the players is not unreasonable. 

I wish it wasn't so, but it is. 

[Jughead]

2 minutes ago, Toby Chopra said:

If we're paying "professionals" £40 to spend a day on a bus travelling then we are a little league. 

The reality is that some clubs are trading on their players' love of the sport, not providing thrm professional opportunities. In those circumstances, doing things that make participation more enjoyable for the players is not unreasonable. 

I wish it wasn't so, but it is. 

We’re not. We’re apparently paying part-time players to do so. There’s a difference and it should be recognised.  

Reducing the amount of times parochial clubs from the heartlands have to travel to far away places that they can’t get to within an hour or on a regional bus service, whilst we have teams in the third tier who have to do this up to ten times a year, is the very definition of little league. It’s a diminishing effect on the game and drives an even bigger wedge between some clubs and those from areas that aren’t traditional areas of the sport. 

[gingerjon]

7 minutes ago, Toby Chopra said:

If we're paying "professionals" £40 to spend a day on a bus travelling then we are a little league. 

The reality is that some clubs are trading on their players' love of the sport, not providing thrm professional opportunities. In those circumstances, doing things that make participation more enjoyable for the players is not unreasonable. 

I wish it wasn't so, but it is. 

By ending participation of half the teams in the league?

It's contraction and, as is always the way, will do absolutely nothing to either improve or expand the game in the heartlands.

Heartlands being a joke term anyway.

[Tommygilf]

10 minutes ago, Toby Chopra said:

That's just awful. 

And such a shame. People love the sport, they play it through their formative years, they try to make a go of it, but when it gets to the crunch we can't afford to keep them in the game. I wonder how widespread this is? 

I suspect very widespread.

This is at the core of why the RFL doesn't want to let any club run an "academy". The example player I said now doesn't play the game at all, at any level. His junior team was decimated when academies came knocking and as such that team fell apart. All the while he couldn't go to college as he was expected to train like a first team player whilst not being paid enough to run a car.

Cat3 academies are better, at least they guarantee some form of education alongside rugby. 

By the time you are in League 1 you really are at a level where comparisons of pay should be with 9th or 10th division football or 6th division RU. That is to say little more than amateur with a bit of cash as a thank you.

[RigbyLuger]

Where does to money to pay more come from?

[Tommygilf]

11 minutes ago, Jughead said:

We’re not. We’re apparently paying part-time players to do so. There’s a difference and it should be recognised.  

Reducing the amount of times parochial clubs from the heartlands have to travel to far away places that they can’t get to within an hour or on a regional bus service, whilst we have teams in the third tier who have to do this up to ten times a year, is the very definition of little league. It’s a diminishing effect on the game and drives an even bigger wedge between some clubs and those from areas that aren’t traditional areas of the sport. 

The problem is that those wages also stretch into SL with fringe/academy players.

[Tommygilf]

10 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

By ending participation of half the teams in the league?

It's contraction and, as is always the way, will do absolutely nothing to either improve or expand the game in the heartlands.

Heartlands being a joke term anyway.

I think this is worthy of a more in depth chat but League 1 needs looking at. It is currently trying to be all things to all clubs and not really working for many of them.

I think we might be stretching the capabilities of clubs to operate in the lowest national (non-regional) league atm, and looking at balancing that out might help. There isn't just one solution that stands out, but there needs to be some thought given to where League 1 can go and what the future holds. 

[Toby Chopra]

32 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

By ending participation of half the teams in the league?

It's contraction and, as is always the way, will do absolutely nothing to either improve or expand the game in the heartlands.

Heartlands being a joke term anyway.

Why is it a joke? It's just a fact that 90% (or more?) of league activity in England is in a narrow geographical area. 

But if we're losing players even there because our offer is so unappealing then we're already contracting.

And we're not alone in this. Union and lower league football have also increased regionalisation in recent time to support participation. 

To be clear, I'm not saying we should kick teams out immediately based on location, but our current structure doesn't serve best purpose. It seems crazy to me that our third tier - which is verging on amateur with some boot money - has much more travelling than our second tier.

I don't want to start another structure thread, bu to me spreading ourselves too thin in tier 3 potentially has significant downsides in terms of attracting and maintaining talent. 

I agree that if changes do come it'll probably be a crude contraction, because that's how we roll, but that still doesn't mean how we do things now is working. 

 

[gingerjon]

36 minutes ago, Toby Chopra said:

Why is it a joke? It's just a fact that 90% (or more?) of league activity in England is in a narrow geographical area. 

But if we're losing players even there because our offer is so unappealing then we're already contracting.

And we're not alone in this. Union and lower league football have also increased regionalisation in recent time to support participation. 

To be clear, I'm not saying we should kick teams out immediately based on location, but our current structure doesn't serve best purpose. It seems crazy to me that our third tier - which is verging on amateur with some boot money - has much more travelling than our second tier.

I don't want to start another structure thread, bu to me spreading ourselves too thin in tier 3 potentially has significant downsides in terms of attracting and maintaining talent. 

I agree that if changes do come it'll probably be a crude contraction, because that's how we roll, but that still doesn't mean how we do things now is working. 

 

It’s a joke because you have to drop down to ward level to find anything resembling an area where rugby league is dominant.

The heartlands don’t exist except as a fanciful notion.

[Jughead]

25 minutes ago, Toby Chopra said:

Why is it a joke? It's just a fact that 90% (or more?) of league activity in England is in a narrow geographical area. 

But if we're losing players even there because our offer is so unappealing then we're already contracting.

And we're not alone in this. Union and lower league football have also increased regionalisation in recent time to support participation. 

To be clear, I'm not saying we should kick teams out immediately based on location, but our current structure doesn't serve best purpose. It seems crazy to me that our third tier - which is verging on amateur with some boot money - has much more travelling than our second tier.

I don't want to start another structure thread, bu to me spreading ourselves too thin in tier 3 potentially has significant downsides in terms of attracting and maintaining talent. 

I agree that if changes do come it'll probably be a crude contraction, because that's how we roll, but that still doesn't mean how we do things now is working. 

 

I think it comes across as a bit dismissive of players and clubs not based across one stretch of motorway having to do something potentially up to ten times a year that you don’t appear to like certain players and clubs doing up to four times a year. I suppose the “fear” if you like is that clubs not from the heartlands would be cast off in their own league, as some people have suggested previously, which many think is tantamount to pulling the plug on them altogether, which is something many wouldn’t want to see and would see as the game shrinking.

I think there is some merit in what you say though. For Hunslet or Swinton, for example, paying out for three or four lengthy away trips a year, West Wales and Cornwall, for example, are paying out for ten length away trips a year. Given the reduction in funding for clubs, the way League One schedules it’s fixtures is worth a discussion but would certainly require losing the straight home and away scheduling. It may well also be something worth thinking about when the next TV deal is sorted for 2024 and beyond. It is very tough to implement though in an eleven team competition like League One and maybe Conferences may be something looked at in future. 

[Toby Chopra]

28 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

It’s a joke because you have to drop down to ward level to find anything resembling an area where rugby league is dominant.

The heartlands don’t exist except as a fanciful notion.

It's not about saying it's dominant - I agree that's the case almost nowhere - it's about saying there are concentrations of the game in certain places that give it critical mass and depth - and the agglomeration effect which means the total is often more than the sum of its parts. 

It is, possibly, arguable that a pound spent in the "heartland" might go further for those reasons than elsewhere. I didn't used to think this, and I don't think it's an excuse to cut an run from everywhere outside the M62. But we should take the low hanging fruit where we can.

As someone also based in the south [waves from other end of Sussex] surely you can see that in some places you could promote league with twice the effort but see no return. The UK is a mature sporting market. I've changed my mind in recent time and feel that outside the heartland, league should focus on amateur and youth participation and some major events. Pro and semi pro (and barely pro) southern clubs in the RFL tiers are less crucial for the health of the game to me, as they have almost no impact on public consciousness. 

[gingerjon]

6 minutes ago, Toby Chopra said:

It's not about saying it's dominant - I agree that's the case almost nowhere - it's about saying there are concentrations of the game in certain places that give it critical mass and depth - and the agglomeration effect which means the total is often more than the sum of its parts. 

It is, possibly, arguable that a pound spent in the "heartland" might go further for those reasons than elsewhere. I didn't used to think this, and I don't think it's an excuse to cut an run from everywhere outside the M62. But we should take the low hanging fruit where we can.

As someone also based in the south [waves from other end of Sussex] surely you can see that in some places you could promote league with twice the effort but see no return. The UK is a mature sporting market. I've changed my mind in recent time and feel that outside the heartland, league should focus on amateur and youth participation and some major events. Pro and semi pro (and barely pro) southern clubs in the RFL tiers are less crucial for the health of the game to me, as they have almost no impact on public consciousness. 

Thing is, though, and I take on board a lot of that, but we were so so close with the RL Conference. Genuinely. That showed what can be done with some direction, not a huge amount of money, and a structure that works.

I'm not sure we'll get it back. Ever.

But, equally, I'm not sure that it's really so easy in the 'heartlands' either. In many cases it seems they've had money, and it would be hard to argue that most of the RFL's focus this past decade has been anything other than a heartland focus, and yet ... here we are.

And, to put it back on topic: WWR are an embarrassment.

So there. Something to offend everyone. 

[sgorpioncaerdyddrob]

On 23/04/2022 at 19:34, theswanmcr said:

We should have the same - shame we don’t have a national pyramid below League One level.

Absolutely. This is something the Southern Conference can aspire to given time and the resources mentioned previously, places like Bath, Worcester, Torfaen, Swindon, Bristol all currently involved.

84-4 in the Welsh derby. Better than expected to be fair, was easily expecting the ton the way Crusaders have started the season. 

Edited May 4, 2022 by sgorpioncaerdyddrob