Gerrymandering

[avinastella]

Why? Question posed to all Yorkshire clubs. 66 answered result clear.

Democracy.

Maybe some people believe in autocracy.

You forget they had a vote last year with 73% + voted against. Same 2 years previous.

[Ribbflagman]

Guilder Man,
            what you say is factually correct, what you may or may not be aware of is that irrespective of how the "Vote" went on lower teams being admitted into the pyramid. It had already been agreed by chair Ian Connell and supported by Peter Morgan (I personally met them, and that is what they said) and no doubt others on our esteemed county board. To ensure transparency et al, will the voting forms be made available for clubs viewing. I suspect not. Probably yet another Bullshit excuse as to why we cannot see the forms, probably hiding behind some WOAK protection of data and is in direct conflict with all Yorkshire member clubs having a vote on a very sensitive subject.

I only have one simple question.

Will the voting forms be made available for voting clubs to view to ensure transparency or is it a cover up formulated and imposed on us all whist by-passing the correct process. Maybe our county Secretary Dawn Rathmell can enlighten us.
I would be very happy to be proven wrong. But I smell an undemocratic rat at work here of which we should all be aware.
If the voting forms cannot be made available to us all. Or even more truthfully, an admittance that the decision was made before the "Vote" then we are all complicit in standing by and letting "The lunatics run the asylum"
Apologies if this appears a bit strong but it is something I feel strongly about and I make no excuse for telling the truth unlike the people who appear to want to steamroll our clubs into something I believe they dont want. Despite the voting figures communicated. If the voting forms are made available for public viewing and are correct. Fair enough, as BRB said we have no problem with transparent votes by the majority, but this whole affair, I think, leaves a smear on our county administrators.

[backrowbandit]

I wonder why so many clubs didn't vote?

[Ribbflagman]

Apathy and a misunderstanding of the very ambiguous question on the "!Voting" slip.

[John Noakes Dog]

Has there been 3 votes in 3 years? If so why?

[backrowbandit]

I'm not too fussed either way regarding who voted each way....but I do think a list of all clubs who voted (regardless of how) should be published.

This will:

a) show the validity of the vote (i.e. if a club clearly voted and wasn't listed then it needs investigating)
and
b) all those clubs that didn't vote have relinquished their right to moan about whatever the outcome of all this!

[Ribbflagman]

BRB You have more chance of that happening than the current Artemis mission landing on Mars!!! That is unless it is all above board. I dont think so, but would be delighted to be proven wrong.

[cynic]

Top to bottom the RFU replicates the public sector and central government. Long term contracts, for useless people that have no idea about what they're controlling.

Greedy fat cats take positions of responsibility for their own rewards. It's broken especially at the very top and sadly that filters down.

RIP rugby below level 7

[PercyR]

I've always been against 2nd XVs in leagues, but equally clubs calling off merit games because they are short handed or won't travel does my head in. The county has always been soft on struggling sides; but 'one man's meat is another man's poison' - 'protecting' struggling sides might help them but it damages the clubs whose teams end up going weeks without a game. Perhaps 'survival of the fittest' is the way to go?

[backrowbandit]

Fair points Percy.

Although I'm slightly irritated by the somewhat amateurish way this has been conducted....I think we need to take the heat out of it.

Perhaps the offer of binding a vote in 3 years time to validate or reverse the situation might be fair.

This gives a chance for it to settle down and show that it can work or that the doubters are correct.

I actually think that massive restructuring of the leagues is needed to reflect that the game can only support about 15 professional sides. Therefore national leagues probably are unnecessary....but that's an argument for another day.

In the meantime let's remember, even when rubbish decisions are made, we are all rugby people and want the best for the game (in our own ways)

[John Noakes Dog]

How will league places be determined next year? Anybody know? How will the strength of 2xv's be determined?

[cynic]

How will league places be determined next year? Anybody know? How will the strength of 2xv's be determined?

You questioning the thought process of the Yorkshire RFU? How very dare you.

[backrowbandit]

It will be difficult for clubs to determine whether to enter and at what level to enter without knowing who else is entering. It will take a couple of years to settle down in think.

I'm just concerned that the integrity of the leagues could be compromised with a potential high number of walkovers due to the geographic area.

Also, I've been a massive advocate of 14 team leagues at level 7 upwards. However it could be ironic that they are introduced at level 7 and below just as 2nd teams are introduced. I'm not sure 2nd teams will want that number of league fixtures...but I may be wrong. I would think that 12 team leagues would be better for the lower divisions.

[Rob]

It will be difficult for clubs to determine whether to enter and at what level to enter without knowing who else is entering. It will take a couple of years to settle down in think.

I'm just concerned that the integrity of the leagues could be compromised with a potential high number of walkovers due to the geographic area.

Also, I've been a massive advocate of 14 team leagues at level 7 upwards. However it could be ironic that they are introduced at level 7 and below just as 2nd teams are introduced. I'm not sure 2nd teams will want that number of league fixtures...but I may be wrong. I would think that 12 team leagues would be better for the lower divisions.

Strange how level 3 & 4 will be 14, level 7 and below will be 14.

Only for level 5 & 6 to be 12.  Surely the reversal of play offs to a standard two up and two down with 14 across the board would be the way to go.

[Ribbflagman]

I can tell you that, after meeting with our esteemed county chairman that the bigger clubs 2nd teams entering the leagues will be based on this years "Yorkshire premiership" merit table. So the top two clubs (currently Sheffield and Ionians) will expand Y1 to 14 and so on. Assuming that all seven clubs currently in that table have voted for their "Lower XVs" to enter the pyramid (God only knows who the other 29 clubs are who allegedly voted for it are) means that Ilkley will be in an expanded Y4  and Wharfedale Foresters and Sandal will be in Y2. I note that yesterday Ionians Buccaneers gave a walkover to Sheff Tigers (Hardly an endorsement of their commitment to the pyramid. With Tigers twice (one against local rivals Sheffield), Ilkley twice. and Wharfedale also having given walkovers this season, I really do wonder where we will be in, say, five years time. Assuming that their is another 29 clubs wanting to enter the system at least a regionalised Y3 and Y4 and maybe Y5 will help reduce travel costs for clubs that may or may not be struggling finacially.
Watch this space.
As an aside I have asked if the voting slips on this subject are available for viewing ( to verify authenticity) but thus far have not received a response. I wonder why??