The RFL have put forward proposals to restructure the championship and championship one. Article here: www.sportinglife.com/rugbyleague ... ml&BID=480 To me sounds good, moving South Wales, Doncaster etc up a grade and then giving clubs like Nottingham Outlaws and Valley Cougars a chance to play in Championship One. - The right type of expansion, from the grass roots up not top heavy like PSG etc..

The RFL have put forward proposals to restructure the championship and championship one. Article here: www.sportinglife.com/rugbyleague ... ml&BID=480 To me sounds good, moving South Wales, Doncaster etc up a grade and then giving clubs like Nottingham Outlaws and Valley Cougars a chance to play in Championship One. - The right type of expansion, from the grass roots up not top heavy like PSG etc..

The idea behind National League 3 was to always promote the winners in time, but only when the majority of clubs were ready. Its taken nearly ten years but that vision looks to become a reality. As for increasing the Championship, that's good news. If those 11 clubs really do get a pittance from Sky TV money then more home games will boost gate receipts.

Agree with everything you've said there. Also think incorporating the Nothern Rail Cup into the season more instead of a sort of "warm up" to the season is good idea too & may boost attendances in the long run.

"The RFL say that, although central funding will continue, under the new proposals the size of hand-outs will be more performance-related to factors such as a club's contribution to the sport and its business management."

Would be interesting to know which clubs would get less funding under this proposal. In the past, you had clubs like Huyton who took the central funding and used it to pay coach & players - and didn't have much other income, or much other activity. With Blackpool gone, it's not obvious that there are any other "non-contributing" clubs.

The proposed structure looks very sensible - provided they can find at least 4 current amateur clubs to make the step up.

Northern Rail Cup would presumably go to a straight knock-out format, if championship clubs get 6 extra league games.

therfl.co.uk/news/article/20862 the RFL statement

therfl.co.uk/news/article/20862 the RFL statement

On first viewing , this bit grabs my attention



I'd like a better defination of this , as for the rest lots of fancy words but little real explanations of what they actually intend

Not if they aren't competitive games they wont

Are there any NL 3 clubs anywhere near ready apart from Bramley ?

you never disappoint.

“It is right and proper that clubs which consistently make positive contributions to their communities, who have clearly defined and recognised player development pathways and are run on sound business principles are rewarded,” added Rimmer.

I'd say that the above quote from the paragraph below the one you quoted in the same article states what would be considered making a positive contribution to the sport.

Personally I think the proposed structure is a good idea as it allows the larger championship clubs to push ahead and increase their spending where possible to build towards SL applications (if they so wish) without being as constrained by smaller clubs with more limited ambitions who are desperately trying to keep up. The expansion clubs that already exist and any new entrants will also be in a competition where potentially half of the clubs (maybe slightly more than half) in it are in the same boat as them so will (likely) be facing fewer complete hidings and should have a better chance of competing than the likes of Skolars, Gateshead and Blackpool did. Also the minimum standards needed for promotion should hopefully stop as many clubs overspending on a one season shot at glory as Blackpool (and countless others) did as the clubs will have to have their house in order to go up even should they win the competition (Champ 1) so this should hopefully see clubs look to stabilise and improve the whole club rather than just the first 17 (just as Widnes have done in the last 3 years).

Which means what exactly ? , in English ?

In English, it means "consistently make positive contributions to their communities, who have clearly defined and recognised player development pathways"

So you dont know either ?

It means what it says. You asking what it means is like me asking what "So you dont know either ?" means.

Hemel Stags. Possibly Nottingham Outlaws and at a push Coventry Bears.

It is a meaningless statement , it could mean several different things , it doesn't explain anything , that's why you like me and everybody else doesn't know what it means , its like something out of the ' office ' TV show

That is extremely unfair, Starbug. "The Office" may be rubbish but it is nowhere near as farcical as the RFL.

Making a positive contribution to the community can mean engaging with locals through sending players to visit schools, youth groups etc. Holding open days and events at the club that allow locals to come down and get involved. Helping out with local kids competitions. Providing jobs and other opportunities to locals (e.g work experience placements). Promoting community spirit and getting locals to unite behind the club.

Player development pathways is giving opportunity for locals to play the game and play for the team, forging links with local amateur clubs to pick up some of their promising talent and getting one, two or maybe more players coming through your club and going on to sign for a club higher up the league structure.

I don't reckon that is an exhaustive list of the things that could be done to cover those areas but I expect that those are the sort of things that could be aspired to and that well run clubs could do on however modest a level they start out doing them.

I'm not sure yet another complete restructure is a good idea. It should be tweeked here and there maybe, but every few years it gets a complete overhaul and has since I have been watching RL. I agree that the NRC should be spread out over the season though.

So they will supply money to run academies ? , what if you run an academy and the players dont work their way through the system ? , they take the money away ?

So they will provide funding for Community depts ? , what if you already run community depts ? , will they still give you the money ?

How will the ' quantify ' what is successful and what isn't , and therefore give or withdraw financial support ?

So you mean it's ambiguous, rather than that you don't understand it. Why didn't you just say that then?
wiganermike expanded it well enough.

seems a great idea to me and simple enough to understand even to an ignorant froggie - hey Starbug,maybe they'll let in [ianother[/i french club ie FCL,Limoux or UTC (Catalans Reserves) ???
they all have great youth development schemes - the future's bright,the future is 'tricolore'

Look what the quote was "It is right and proper that clubs which consistently make positive contributions to their communities, who have clearly defined and recognised player development pathways and are run on sound business principles are rewarded,"

So, do those things and you'll get rewarded. If your clubs first option is to beg for money to run an academy, then I think your club is likely to get told to go f*** themselves.
Why woudl you think already running a community department would be a problem?

it is a press release.

i'm sure Leigh have the same access to RFL guidance and other documentation as any other club and they've all probably got a fair idea what it means. if there is a regular issue with certain clubs not being able to understand it all though then what can be done...