Yorkshire Rugby

Is the start of this statement accurate? Can anyone confirm?

Also asking if a club wishes join something that doesn't exist, is very different to asking if they want it to exist.

It seems some are intent on an outcome from the outset?


•   Lower XV's – A majority of clubs expressed a wish to consider entering a Lower XV into the League Pyramid. It is essential that we gather accurate information of which Clubs and how many Clubs wish to join the Pyramid. Beyond the current Promotion & Regulation rules no further changes will apply to existing Pyramid Clubs. In future it is proposed that a simple 2 up & 2 down system will operate across all leagues within the Pyramid and the lower leagues.  Lower XV Clubs entering the Pyramid will enter at a level deemed appropriate and with the knowledge of this information circulated in advance. Any lower League XV side entering the Pyramid will do so at least 2 leagues below their higher placed team (e.g. 1st XV). This would produce the inevitability of some 14 team Leagues so these 2 initiatives do go hand in hand. Proposal – Can each Club provide a simple "yes/no" answer about whether you wish your Lower League sides to enter the Pyramid

Cant reply to a simple yes/no on various accounts. Given the travel implications for some very long away trips for any club operating in the Yorkshire leagues. Depending on the geography of clubs if we democratically vote for such a dramatic change within our county, should we not have a collective meeting to discuss how it could be initially managed to minimise each clubs travel costs etc. I know this is a regular "Bitch" from me but there are plenty of "Outliers" who would welcome having their second XVs (Driff and Ionians for example, no offence meant) in the system but may not have considered the true cost implications. Being transferred to the North West this season has crippled us financially. Although we look like being champions again. Nobody can tell me if we can come back "East" when we could drastically reduce our travel costs which would, maybe, help us make a decision in our direction collectively as a community club. It is a dilemma for many with, imho, no correct answer.

Just as an aside I still am of the opinion that to let stronger clubs second XVs into the league system will be the death Knell for many struggling clubs with players migrating to so called stronger clubs.
If that is what the stronger clubs want then it must be on their conscience if I am proved correct in due course. I Sincerely hope not. As by then it will be too late for the aforementioned clubs.

The desire for 14 team leagues feels like it has been the biggest request from clubs represented on here for a number of years. Not sure anyone can deny that.

That is going to require an additional 6 teams into Y1 - Y3. Take the 6 teams out of Y4, and Yorkshire 4 becomes none existent, leaving only 9 sides who will have increased travel as no longer feasible to have a North & South league. So by not allowing 2nd XVs into the leagues and increasing league sizes to 14 it will be the death knell for many struggling clubs with players stopping playing due to lack of competitive games.

Agree with it or not, you cant have one without the other. So either accept 12 team leagues or accept lower XVs into the pyramid.

Walkovers

Y4 North
10 Walkovers

Y4 South
8 Walkovers  + how ever many Knottingley gave.

Some of these most certainly weren't due to travel distance, unless you consider 5 miles excessive.

And that's before the dreaded 2nd XVs are blamed for destroying the game in our region.

Quote from: Differ Lid on Mar 26, 2026, 12:45 PMThe desire for 14 team leagues feels like it has been the biggest request from clubs represented on here for a number of years. Not sure anyone can deny that.

That is going to require an additional 6 teams into Y1 - Y3. Take the 6 teams out of Y4, and Yorkshire 4 becomes none existent, leaving only 9 sides who will have increased travel as no longer feasible to have a North & South league. So by not allowing 2nd XVs into the leagues and increasing league sizes to 14 it will be the death knell for many struggling clubs with players stopping playing due to lack of competitive games.

Agree with it or not, you cant have one without the other. So either accept 12 team leagues or accept lower XVs into the pyramid.

I'm not sure there has ever been a desire for 14 team leagues below level 7.

7 and above then 100%

Im not commenting on whether 2nd teams I to leagues is acceptable or not. I'm simply saying it's a misleading question.

There should be two questions.

1) do you support 2nd teams into leagues.

and

2) if it happens would you enter a 2nd team (regardless of whether you support something or not)

What are the thoughts in Counties/Areas where 2nd teams are in the league system ?

Have Counties seen more clubs disappear since the introduction of 2nd teams ?

Differ
      no need for innuendos directed at "you know who" but I must say the letter from Yorkshire is as clear as mud as to how the no doubt ramrodding of you "Big Lads" getting your way on lower XVs teams entering the Pyramid.
I have a few questions that I know cannot be answered before the voting deadline.
1) Why was the letter only sent to club secretaries (all volunteers and unpaid, except for the "Big Lads" clubs) on the 25th March with a response deadline of eight days later.
2) Presume that most clubs with Boards/Committees (again unpaid volunteers, that help to keep Grassroots clubs going) may not have a meeting planned prior to next Thursday lunchtime, let alone perhaps being able to get to have face to face chats with playing personnel/team managers etc.
3) Who are the "committee" that will deem the entry level of lower XVs, and what is there knowledge of clubs relative strengths, and maybe more importantly their weaknesses.
4) Once this happens as it appears to me that it will, who will take responsibility for the demise of smaller clubs, many of whom are struggling to put one side out every week. Despite the county Chairmans letter stating that some clubs from the regional meetings would help such clubs. Why can those clubs not be named so that their statements can be evaluated in years to come. I think we all know what reality will be. Its just a political statement to try and lessen the hammer blow that is about to be delivered to the aforementioned clubs.
5) What if any financial support will be given to outlying clubs for extended travel requirements. At Ribb this year our total travel was almost identical to Yorkshire 1 but when I asked the powers that be how this years travel support was worked out. I simply could not get an answer (will provide names who I asked confidentially if required). Last season we were in Counties 1 and moving to a regional league this season I didnt think it unreasonable to assume that the travel support level kicking in would be lower in a counties than at a regional level. However that is not the fact. We have been given (Isle of Man excluded) £359 travel support this year but were told that we didnt qualify last year in Counties 1 for any support despite being at level 7. The lack of transparency and candidness from RFU and lack of candidness from the people running YRFU is disappointing to say the least and despite the corporate claptrap that they purport will I believe end in tears for many long established clubs who are struggling at the moment.
6) There are still too many reasonable questions that clubs have simply not had the time to ask, let alone get answers to, before being forced into voting for something that their clubs may or may not agree with.
It really stinks to me, and I think the people ramrodding it through should be ashamed at the lack discussion. Why can more discussions not take place with a view to collating clubs views and then implementing for the 2027/28 season. I dont think thats unreasonable.

That said we all know that we are generally losing players for various reasons and to do nothing will not sort the base problem out.

I look forward to seeing their proposal to grow the game and offer more competitive rugby across the region, our 2nd XV has had a reasonably successful season in the merit league but have had some significant winning margins (no disrespect against other clubs in the merit league) and games won by 50+ points do little to develop anyone.

In addition, the number of walkovers since Xmas has increased as clubs inevitably start to struggle toward the end of the season with injuries etc.

Seems logical to let the clubs with more competitive 2nd XVs enter the league and those with more of a Dev 2nd / 3rd XV continue with the merit league to develop players outside of the more serious side of stuff.

Continuing as we are risks sleep walking into more problems because in Yorkshire 'we don't like change'' however, it would be short sighted not to recognise the risks regularly highlighted and some more assurance than 'The more senior teams promise to play nicely'.

Hear what you say Flaggy and the Doc speaks the voice of reason. IMHO as long as putting 2nd XVs into the leagues remains discretionary and maybe having some sort of sustainability assessment criteria before admission, it should remain up to individual clubs to do what's best for themselves.

At one of the Yorkshire Webinars, One National club stated they were strongly for having 2nd XVs in the League Structure. when it was pointed out they don't have a 2nd XV, their Chairman said, "So, we'll just go and get one".

And people still think the biggr clubs have the interests of the County game at heart?

Heath want this as they're currently flying high but last year they could hardly ever raise a second team.

If they'd enter that year loads of clubs would have been left without games and lots of lost revenue.

It's fine when you're flying like Ribb and Heath are now but as soon as your first team start to struggle the second team will not become a priority and will inevitably concede fixtures.

Quote from: cynic on Mar 27, 2026, 05:01 PMHeath want this as they're currently flying high but last year they could hardly ever raise a second team.

If they'd enter that year loads of clubs would have been left without games and lots of lost revenue.

It's fine when you're flying like Ribb and Heath are now but as soon as your first team start to struggle the second team will not become a priority and will inevitably concede fixtures.

How about if you enter a 2nd XV in the leagues, any points deductions they get for not fulfilling a fixture, the 1st XV get the same punishment?

Quote from: gateprop on Mar 27, 2026, 11:52 PM

Quote from: cynic on Mar 27, 2026, 05:01 PMHeath want this as they're currently flying high but last year they could hardly ever raise a second team.

If they'd enter that year loads of clubs would have been left without games and lots of lost revenue.

It's fine when you're flying like Ribb and Heath are now but as soon as your first team start to struggle the second team will not become a priority and will inevitably concede fixtures.

How about if you enter a 2nd XV in the leagues, any points deductions they get for not fulfilling a fixture, the 1st XV get the same punishment?

And stand by for points deductions for none compliance with league rules and GMS issues.

Nobody will be forced to enter their lower XV into the league, however the fact is some clubs are not sustainable and will either cease to exist or amalgamate to keep going. That has always happened.

Many clubs have put decades of effort into developing players through mini and juniors, who then see them disappear to play league rugby at a lower level or even worse stop playing completely because Merit Tables have no structure and no penalty for failing to fulfil fixtures.

In the last decade the number of clubs fielding weekly 3XVs in Yorkshire has fallen tragically, we can probably number them on 2 hands.

We are Haemorrhaging players, when a club is down to 1 team they are in a death spiral. If they have a sugar daddy they may survive as long as he does.

Lower XVs in leagues works elsewhere Yorkshire is not that different that it couldn't here.

Alternatively  we could carry on doing what we are doing and losing more players each year until we are left with a panoramic view of a lot of Emu's A*ses