All grass roots clubs MUST vote against this. It will be the total death knell for any club in close proximity to a so called "Senior club" with only one team. Imagine if the likes of Knaresborough or Thirsk lost a few players to say Harrogate or Ripon, would they still be able to put any teams out. The same applies to teams like Knottingley Hemsworth and Castleford close to Pontefract. I could go on but the same applies to grass roots clubs in close proximity to Otley, Ionians, Hull Wharfedale, Sheffield and Ilkley. I urge all grass roots clubs to rally round and vote against it again as you did last time.
The four bullet points that the RFU are saying is the basis for this are the following.
1. Improved player Welfare
2. Reduce travel time/Distance
3. Improve the player experience/ Quality of competition
4. Support club sustainability
My views on the above are;
1. Player welfare will not be improved as there may be many mis-matches that actually reduce player welfare until several seasons have passed and things level out. The current competitions are now at some levels dangerously mis-matched just look at some of the 100+ points hammerings being handed out especially in the lower leagues, this will only increase with this proposal.
2. Absolute rubbish to say that travel distance will be reduced in Yorkshire. We are the largest county in the country. Imagine Scarborough 2s having to go to Ribb on the same day that their 1stXV were playing away at Brods. That would involve two coaches at a cost of approx £2000 (No longer any support from RFU for travel) a prohibitable amount for many clubs with two teams playing away at very different locations on the same day. This also strengthens my comments above about player welfare (1.) as I believe it is against duty of care for our players to be asked to drive 100 miles to play a game of rugby where you mat be overwhelmed by stronger opponents and then drive 100 miles home.
3. How is the player experience improved asking club second team players to travel between 4 - 6 hours round trip to play a league game. In no sane persons eyes can this improve the quality of the competition. This will only drive players away from the game not make it more attractive which is what we should be doing.
4. As to increasing club sustainability this is yet another Ill thought out comment from whoever invented it. In our county with many 150 mile round trips. How does this proposal increase club sustainability. In Yorkshire it will drastically increase the cost of sending teams to the far flung edges of our great county, and that in itself will in some cases drastically reduce some clubs sustainability. Not least those that have ceased to exist due to this "One cap fits all" imposition from the powers that be.
If we were Bedfordshire, Buckinghamshire, Durham, Hertfordshire, Rutland, Berkshire, to name just a few that come to mind where a maximum away trip of over Forty miles would be the only "Long" trip of the season then it is a different situation. But, until the RFU can reallocate support for long away trips for grass roots clubs such as us.
Look what has happened in Lancashire/Cheshire where over 30 clubs have formed their own three league alliance due to too much travel costs, still under the RFU umbrella but unable to be promoted/relegated out of it.
Clubs the choice is yours but if it comes to a vote PLEASE vote against it or the RFU will get their way and many clubs will "Wither on the vine" at the benefit of the larger clubs which is everything the RFU say they don't wish for but secretly I think they do.
Topic: Future Competition Structure (Read 1277 times)