No, really.

Yeah.

Yeah.

No!!

How were Barrow favoured???

Despite this subject being of interest to only you and I, I must comment on that. Why put the word 'pitch' in speech marks? Are neither of them pitches? I have been going to watch Batley for over 40 years and seen an awful lot more matches there than you have on the MP pitch. There is a myth about the slope that suggests it favours the downhill side more. First it really is equal for both sides as they get to play a full 40 minutes playing both ways. Secondly,it is common knowledge and opinion amongst players that playing downhill is much harder when defending, having to run backwards up the slope. Thirdly, this is one of the few seasons when Batley have managed to make MP a forbidding place to visit. Usually, the slope makes no difference at all to our performances. (And you still beat us here.)
All grounds have their quirks and peculiarities, even LSV, it's what makes each ground unique and individual, and MP does no more create farcical matches as does the Don Valley Stadium, The Shay, GIS or any other.

Mount Pleasant sells cheesy chips and a decent pint, so it gets a tick in the box from me.

Apart from the visits to the land of the pollutants it'll be the most missed away trip of the Championship.

By being granted promotion from NL2, when everybody (in Leigh, at any rate!) knows that there should be no promotion, or relegation in any of our leagues!!



Congratulations on a good season.

Gateshead get dispensation for this reason:

Clubs in the championship are semi-professional. They have the same legal obligations as a full time club, but without the revenue. It's extremely hard to find the money to get players to relocate on a part-time wage, so heartland clubs have the VERY distinct advantage of a bunch of top-line amateurs playing on their doorstep (literally, in the case of LSV/Easts).

Development area clubs don't have that. The dispensation on o/s players is to allow a levelling of the playing field... i.e. Gateshead can't just sign a Ridyard from the local amateur team, so it's fair to give them a broader criteria to widen their available talent base.

To answer Demon's question as to what Gateshead are doing for development, there is a substantial development team based at the Gateshead International Stadium, where the RFL's Regional Team work hand in hand with the Gateshead Thunder community development staff. In particular Andy Kelly has just been started in post Regional Talent Coach, implementing an extensive programme throughout the locality.

It is to be hoped that the NE RL Conference, within a decade or so, can produce senior teams of a comparable standard to Miners, Easts, Hunslet Parkside, Egremont, and all the other senior BARLA clubs that feed into the pro clubs in the heartlands. Until that long-term progamme comes to fruition, Gateshead 'deserve' their dispensation precisely to ensure the competition is fair.

It is to be hoped that the NE RL Conference, within a decade or so, can produce senior teams of a comparable standard to Miners, Easts, Hunslet Parkside, Egremont, and all the other senior BARLA clubs that feed into the pro clubs in the heartlands. Until that long-term progamme comes to fruition, Gateshead 'deserve' their dispensation precisely to ensure the competition is fair.

What have these clubs got to do with the RFL? These are BARLA clubs not pro/semi-pro RFL clubs...I don't understand what you mean.

So, the RFL run BARLA? Run you, Mr Chairman?

"Gateshead get dispensation for this reason:

Clubs in the championship are semi-professional. They have the same legal obligations as a full time club, but without the revenue. It's extremely hard to find the money to get players to relocate on a part-time wage, so heartland clubs have the VERY distinct advantage of a bunch of top-line amateurs playing on their doorstep (literally, in the case of LSV/Easts).

Development area clubs don't have that. The dispensation on o/s players is to allow a levelling of the playing field... i.e. Gateshead can't just sign a Ridyard from the local amateur team, so it's fair to give them a broader criteria to widen their available talent base.

To answer Demon's question as to what Gateshead are doing for development, there is a substantial development team based at the Gateshead International Stadium, where the RFL's Regional Team work hand in hand with the Gateshead Thunder community development staff. In particular Andy Kelly has just been started in post Regional Talent Coach, implementing an extensive programme throughout the locality.

It is to be hoped that the NE RL Conference, within a decade or so, can produce senior teams of a comparable standard to Miners, Easts, Hunslet Parkside, Egremont, and all the other senior BARLA clubs that feed into the pro clubs in the heartlands. Until that long-term progamme comes to fruition, Gateshead 'deserve' their dispensation precisely to ensure the competition is fair."

Well explained. The best explanation I have come across.

Well thank you for the answer, but I don't recall asking that or any other question

Sorry Demon, didn't do the quote thing properly.

to have a mostly home grown produced team

This I feel is a direct reponse to the criticism we recieved from the SL application we submitted last year

Unfortunatley we cannot afford all we are trying to do , our main focus should be to make the club successful/attractive on the pitch to try to become self financing as soon as we can

Only then should we look once again at junior development , no matter what we achieve below 1 st team level will we be a viable SL candidate until we are pulling 4,000 into the LSV on a regular basis

As you state , the N,East development dept is based at the Thunder , there will be funding given to them to do some of this work , it is the same model that Celtic have , this development will be accredited to them if they are ever in a position to apply to SL

This is a lop sided criteria

Is the reason for the quota rule relevant to clubs like ourselves? Is Quota rules relevant to clubs like Gateshead at the moment ? Thats it really.
I understand about one rule for one club and different rules to others, but IMO its not such a big deal - and seems like molehill becoming Mount Everest comes to mind. Its such a little point that RFL should just bin the quota rules.

Either I'm going mad (possibly) or I read something on a different thread and thought it was ( a) you and ( b) on this one.



Sorry

They come in 3,s Derek

And the salary cap.

But there's funding from the RFL for development in the Wigan and Leigh service area, too. Some of this is based at LSV (eg the new League for All officer, Phil Roberts, who's a top fella and one of the leading lights behind the England Wheelchair Rugby World Champs). That'll count towards our development (or at least, to the same degree that the NE RFL team's work is).

All in all, the heartlands get far more money and support from the RFL than development areas, simply because there's so much more there to support.

You honestly believe that

Not saying that money is not spent in the heartlands , just the way it is then presented and accredited

I think its unfair that Batley are allowed to play on an un-level playing field

Thanks, you have answered my question! Surely it's better for a team to have no advantage regarding the Pitch ( no speech marks)! playing with the elements has always been a feature of any field sport however, running uphill or, downhill should not be allowed hence, Level Playing Field!

Has anyone on here ever played on the pitch at Batley. Is the slope really that bad ? I would be interested to know. The results seem to show its a problem.......2004 anyone.