$txt['mentions'] = 'Mentions'; $txt['scheduled_task_removeMentions'] = 'Remove seen mentions'; $txt['scheduled_task_desc_removeMentions'] = 'Automatically removes seen mentions older than the specified days'; RFU North Review

Author Topic: RFU North Review  (Read 10597 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline davie

  • One of the boys
  • *
  • Posts: 122
    • View Profile
Re: RFU North Review
« Reply #75 on: January 11, 2019, 12:10:28 PM »
So five options on the table - six if you include maintaining the status quo. Once they've been discussed at various meetings around the North  how will it all be decided? No sign of a transparent vote from what I can see. So now that the waters are well and truly muddied the RFU will impose what it always wanted to get out of the problem they (and we) have been handed by Lancashire. They need to be careful though as other areas may see what Lancashire have done and decide to go their own way.
« Last Edit: January 11, 2019, 01:09:40 PM by davie »

Offline Dan Nulty

  • Forum old hand
  • **
  • Posts: 401
    • View Profile
Re: RFU North Review
« Reply #76 on: January 11, 2019, 07:01:15 PM »
http://lancashirerfu.pitchero.com/news/rfu-league-north-proposed-structures-25587/

Is it just my maths or for option A are there only 13 teams in Yorkshire 2 despite it saying 14?  Maybe I need to go to bed, it has been a long week.

Whatever they choose some won't be happy.

Offline Oldandslow

  • Paternal Voice of the Silent Majority
  • ****
  • Posts: 874
    • View Profile
Re: RFU North Review
« Reply #77 on: January 11, 2019, 08:36:18 PM »
Dan

13 in Yorkshire 3 as well, I need a drink.

Offline avinastella

  • A little respect please...
  • ******
  • Posts: 2896
    • View Profile
Re: RFU North Review
« Reply #78 on: January 11, 2019, 08:55:26 PM »
And no explanation of what happens at end of next season with promotion and relegation.

A far bigger worry is the detail they probably hope people will overlook.
At least one of the options has teams currently in Y4 being put into the same league as teams currently in promotion contention to Y1

Yer, that'll do a brilliant job in growing the game. Madness.
"Bother!" said Pooh, as he found his smack had talc in it.

Offline Dan Nulty

  • Forum old hand
  • **
  • Posts: 401
    • View Profile
Re: RFU North Review
« Reply #79 on: January 11, 2019, 09:59:49 PM »
I think that option is to highlight why there has to be an element of travel which seems to be one of the complaints given by players for not wanting to play. It is there to make a point and no other reason other than after thought to tag it on.

Offline avinastella

  • A little respect please...
  • ******
  • Posts: 2896
    • View Profile
Re: RFU North Review
« Reply #80 on: January 11, 2019, 10:16:28 PM »
I think that option is to highlight why there has to be an element of travel which seems to be one of the complaints given by players for not wanting to play. It is there to make a point and no other reason other than after thought to tag it on.
Not what they said in November. Yes, it would be folly, but.....  ::)
"Bother!" said Pooh, as he found his smack had talc in it.

Offline Harry Hotspur

  • Finding my feet
  • Posts: 60
    • View Profile
Re: RFU North Review
« Reply #81 on: January 15, 2019, 10:16:40 AM »
It's all gone a bit quiet about the review of the leagues. With meeting coming up over the next few weeks as far as L6 is concerned who is in favour of reducing team numbers i.e. Option A or adding another league Option B so L6 goes to 3 from 2 leagues. That would mean no play offs.

Less travelling for most clubs?

Offline avinastella

  • A little respect please...
  • ******
  • Posts: 2896
    • View Profile
Re: RFU North Review
« Reply #82 on: January 16, 2019, 12:40:00 PM »
For anyone at last nights meeting interested in the 1 hour travel time 'target' being put forward. the Map below might help clarify how this clearly isn't possible for many clubs.

https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?hl=en&mid=1tkEQbaJiNAQGG07gFZ-Yy7yqwlU&ll=54.13307106983169%2C-2.3523096000000123&z=8
« Last Edit: March 13, 2019, 08:26:44 PM by avinastella »
"Bother!" said Pooh, as he found his smack had talc in it.

Offline Fredsbar

  • Legend
  • ***
  • Posts: 556
    • View Profile
Re: RFU North Review
« Reply #83 on: January 16, 2019, 02:07:44 PM »
That’s a good map.

Offline avinastella

  • A little respect please...
  • ******
  • Posts: 2896
    • View Profile
Re: RFU North Review
« Reply #84 on: January 16, 2019, 02:28:49 PM »
That’s a good map.

Took some doing, but it's been up a while now.
Hence the frustration when clubs/people suggest, all with the best intentions, geographical options without looking at the fuller picture. Day/time of travel also needs to be taken into account. Google quite accurately gives the facility to check. Saturday lunchtime is busier than many people realise.
It also shows how some of the feedback 'received' is, at best, tenuous.
"Bother!" said Pooh, as he found his smack had talc in it.

Offline schming

  • One of the boys
  • *
  • Posts: 121
    • View Profile
Re: RFU North Review
« Reply #85 on: January 20, 2019, 04:02:40 PM »
After reading the possible league restructure options last week my thoughts are what do players want - 14  or 12 team leagues and possible cups/tours/friendlies/7s/10s as fillers and free weeks off to work/socialise etc.

It seems Y1 wants to remain at 14 (possibly due to finances) but lower leagues possibly want 12 team leagues?

Offline davie

  • One of the boys
  • *
  • Posts: 122
    • View Profile
Re: RFU North Review
« Reply #86 on: January 23, 2019, 12:23:54 PM »
So what's the feedback from the meetings? Which way are the RFU trying to steer us?

Offline avinastella

  • A little respect please...
  • ******
  • Posts: 2896
    • View Profile
Re: RFU North Review
« Reply #87 on: January 23, 2019, 01:43:51 PM »
So what's the feedback from the meetings? Which way are the RFU trying to steer us?
Have a guess.
The puzzle is why they aren't including the Lancashire clubs that left. They originally claimed they had to come up with a solution for that. It would appear they have - leave them alone.

It would appear another couple of clubs indicated they may join the new ADM leagues at the Lancashire meeting last week.
"Bother!" said Pooh, as he found his smack had talc in it.

Offline davie

  • One of the boys
  • *
  • Posts: 122
    • View Profile
Re: RFU North Review
« Reply #88 on: January 23, 2019, 01:51:50 PM »
Not option D or E but havent a clue as to which of A, B or C they favour as they said they wanted 12 team leagues but most of those are 14. My head hurts.

Offline avinastella

  • A little respect please...
  • ******
  • Posts: 2896
    • View Profile
Re: RFU North Review
« Reply #89 on: January 23, 2019, 02:44:34 PM »
Not option D or E but havent a clue as to which of A, B or C they favour as they said they wanted 12 team leagues but most of those are 14. My head hurts.
They are certainly fixated on 12 team leagues. Unfortunately they based their assumptions on 'feedback' and statistics they can't back up, or at the very least, appear unable to do so. Many at the meeting could provide evidence that stood up to scrutiny countering the panels 'view'.

Bottom line is, they've now created discord around the division whilst seemingly ignoring the original problem.
"Bother!" said Pooh, as he found his smack had talc in it.