I can undertand that for clubs with SL aspirations that this may seem like the light going out at the end of the tunnel but it doesn't have to be. Here clubs in the NSW cup, Q'land cup linked with NRL teams attract better players as the youngsters want to play for teams that put them in the shop window for top teams. A team performing well in the championship with a strong team of youngsters and SL team reserve/returning players has just as good a chance when franchise time comes around.

I am hoping the WA Reds can form a partnership next season with a NRL team to strengthen our club, allow us to move up a level and put us in a stronger position come expansion time. I see no reason why the same can't happen in the championships.

Read what you have just posted again , especially the bottom bit

Are the WA reds in the heartlands of Australian RL ?

Nope but the same could apply to any Q'land or NZ team with aspirations to move up to the NRL when opportunity arises

How about a Sydney team ?

Rugby League started in Huddersfield in 1895.


In 2009, the RFL is finally giving support to clubs outside of Yorkshire and Lancashire.....and you idiots are whinging about it!

I wouldn't expect dual registration will see lots of players moving clubs every two weeks on a regular basis. The main aim for SL clubs will be to give younger players not yet in the first team to get some serious open age experience.

As LF says, it happens all the time with the Qld Cup here - have a look at the lineups of most Qld Cup teams and you'll see the reserve sides of the Broncos and Cowboys, plus a large number of solid pros (solid enough in the sense that they have played a couple of NRL games). It's a damn good competition in its own right - and to be frank the level a lot of these sides play would put many SL sides to shame.

Playing against solid pros will do juniors immeasurable good. There is virtually no value in the best teenagers playing junior rugby for too long - they can coast and take the p*ss as much as they want because they can get away with it.

One big issue is that Championship clubs with SL aspirations don't want to be seen as feeder clubs. So maybe SL clubs could make short term loan agreements with:
1) Championship 1/NL2 clubs OR
2) expansion clubs in NL1 (e.g. Gateshead, Sheffield, Doncaster)

This would mean that traditional Lancashire or Yorkshire clubs challenging for future SL status, like Widnes, Leigh, Featherstone and Whitehaven, would maintain their individuality and not become feeder clubs to SL clubs. If M62 Championship clubs get relegated to C1, then they could reevaluate and receive SL squad members on loan. If they get promoted, then cease those loans and work with their squad.

English RL has the potential to have a more effective system for promoting/relegating players AND clubs than Australian RL.

Would you mind it if your club got to sign a SL quality/thereabouts player on-loan from a SL club for a year, at low rates? Would you mind signing a player from another team?
Either your club is entirely run from locals or at some point you accept signing players from afar, on loan or on permanent contracts. There is little/no difference between that and dual registration.

Yes, I expect this will not interest the top clubs in the Championship, biut the lower/middle clubs would be happy to take the help and compete on field, even if it made them less likely to get a franchise spot - that they are unlikely to get anyway.

Arguably this is going to even up the Championship if those clubs who would otherwise struggle can bring in 3-4 young players from the fringes of SL.

Im failing to see how agreeing to this would in effect make the clubs 'feeder clubs', especially if the numbers were possibly capped.
On the other hand i am starting to agree with a few that stated this time last year that the RFL's desire was feeder clubs, I wonder how far away that may be.
The championship as a comp is building nicely, crowds seem to be doing well barr one or two and interest is definately building. I personally think Toulouse have had a positive impact yet I think eventually the Super League will finish up as two conferences and the Championship will be stripped of its best teams and left as a feeder league.
Just my opinion

OOMPA LOOMPA DOOMPADEE DOO
I'VE GOT A PERFECT PUZZLE FOR YOU
OOMPA LOOMPA, DOOMPADAH DEE
IF YOU ARE WISE YOU'LL LISTEN ME
WHAT DO YOU GET WHEN YOU GUZZLE DOWN SWEETS
EATING AS MUCH AS AN ELEPHANT EATS
WHAT ARE YOU AT GETTING TERRIBLY FAT
WHAT DO YOU THINK WILL COME OF THAT
I DON'T LIKE THE LOOK OF IT
OOMPA LOOMPA DOOMPADEE DAH
IF YOU'RE NOT GREEDY YOU WILL GO FAR
YOU WILL LIVE IN HAPPINESS TOO
LIKE THE OOMPA LOOMPA DOOMPADEE DO
DOOMPADEE DOO
OOMPA LOOMPA DOOMPADEE DOOL
HE'S SHORT AND FAT AND CANNOT PLAY POOL

If they merged SL and the Championship into a two tier league then a feeder club league would be a step up from C1.

if there wasn't already an over supply in Sydney then yep Sydney too. As it is there are already too many teams in one place (would be like having 4 teams in Leeds) so nope there is no hope of a Sydney NSW cup team moving up (but don't tell Bears fans that!!). Less to do with the model and more to do with the over supply of clubs in one city.

So how does the above fit in with the highlighted bit below ?


JB down under wrote


So which is it ?

We are talking about different models. in NRL there is no time limited liscence so existing teams are in no danger ofdfropping out. That is not the case, in theory, in SL. That means there will always be the existing 9 teams in Sydney therefore virtually impossible they will ADD another. In Sl it is feasible a Yorkshire team could be replaced by another Yorkshire team if they provided a better bid, in theory!

Therefore a Yorkshire team being strengthend by reserve players from Leeds, for example, could be a stronger position to apply for a license.

Comprehenda?

Aye aw rite , if tha sez so

yeh I share you sceptiscm!

Reality is getting fringe players from Sl clubs can benefit both leagues so i don't see it as a bad thing, especially for clubs that have virtually zero chance of ever being a SL club. i would love to see my club link up with York to expand our jnr area and give York some experienced players to see them strengthend

Short term until they are called back

If we are talking about season long loans then fine , limited to say 2/3 players at a club , but this is something different , this is dual registration were a SL club will shove it's reserves into a lower league clubs 1 st team until they need them

Very different scenario

Actually the licences are time bound, offered , but the NRL rubberstamp all the clubs reentering each time.



The NRL can choose to not offer clubs a licence. Thisw as done to Souths, and after Souths won an appeal, the NRL/News Ltd again appealed to the High Court and won, giving them the mandate. In theory, a struggling club like Cronulla could be omitted if they go broke, but the political pressure from other clubs and from fans will encourage NRL to do everything possible to save the club.



The reason is that areas outside Sydney (WA, CC, Central Qld, to a lesser extent PNG) want a licence and are making detailed bids, and the NRL is keen to expand to new markets. The only Sydney team that is making a bid is the Bears, and interestingly part of their pitch is to play some games at North Sydney Oval and some in Central Coast, a la the Dragons. This would be a sensible model.



Yes, because English sport has a tradition/culture/history of P&R. As I said in my post above, having that tradition of P&R could potentially give English RL a more effective system for promoting/relegating players AND clubs than Australian RL.



This is a potential flaw of this dual registration proposal, it is ripe for manipulation by SL and certain Championship clubs, it could give some Championship clubs an unfair legup over others, allow SL clubs to parachute clubs in over their choosing, and create a two tier SL. In trying to end annual relegation and give SL clubs some stability of tenure, I think the RFL have swung too far away from P&R towards the NRL model, which has sometimes seen club management grow complacent. A 3 up/3 down P&R system between SL & Championship every four years (subject to meeting minimum criteria) would give SL clubs stability of tenure, but give Championship clubs a definite pathway into SL.

What did you think of my loan proposal above?

Sorry but no. The whole point of franchising is to define the criteria by which clubs can stay in SL. If they fail to meet them then kick them out by all means, but there should definitely not be automatic loss of a franchise after X years.

My problem with dual registration is the fact that clubs can 'borrow' superleague players for just the odd game, as and when they want. So, for example, a club can suddenly find itself playing an important game against a team which has, effectively, a load of ringers in it, who are only there for the one game.
That is WAY different from an on-loan player, who will no doubt play for a number of games and be, genuinely, a part of that team's set-up for a while.

this doesn't happen though. usually fringe players stay fringe players unless there is an injury and they need to move up to fill it.

Lets say a SL has a squad of 25. they have 19 players that are first team squad and the remaining get loaned out to a championship team (personally I'd like to see them be loaned to a lower championship team to bring the leve of the comp up). Anyone of those 6 players may be recalled to the 1st team squad if form or injury dictates it. Of the remaining 19 players in teh Champoionship team they are getting better coaching and training (if the Sl team invests in teh championshiop club) and they are in the shop window to win a Sl contract if they perform well in the team. It gives kids a better opportunity to get in SL, it gives the championship club resources and quality players and gives the kids a more direct route to SL. Everyones a wiinner.

Oi get a real buzz seeing WA players in the NRL even though they are not in a WA team.

So you want to punish clubs that are trying to build a team by having feeder clubs bringing in ' ringers ' , yes that will just about kill any support the ' honest ' club has

We already have fans walking away from the club at lower level because of franchising

Having clubs using SL surplus to climb higher you will just alienate another load of fans

Damn' right, Starbug! It stinks! I want to see the Cougars do well as the COUGARS, not as a feeder club for some SL side (which presumably means that my club will be forever consigned to the lower leagues, as any decent players they get will automatically get poached), or by borrowing SL players for the odd game.