|
| IMPORTANT Remember to read the rules of the board and abide by them when posting. |
Longest journeys 25/26 |
Post Reply 
|
Page <1 345 |
| Author | |
Robb 
World Cup Winner 
Joined: 24 Jan 2017 Location: South East Status: Offline Points: 1692 |
 Post Options
 Thanks(0)
 Quote Reply
 Posted: Yesterday at 16:40 |
Interesting "Clup" placings there from the NCA and RFU.
  |
|
 |
|
|
Thatbloke
World Cup Winner
Joined: 02 Sep 2017 Location: Newport Status: Offline Points: 1855 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: Yesterday at 17:23 |
|
I'm sure Chester & Lymm will be delighted!
|
|
|
|
|
Bigmalc
Academy player 
Joined: 22 Apr 2024 Location: Bristol Status: Offline Points: 14 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: Yesterday at 18:05 |
|
I'm sure they will - together with Loughborough and Hinckley they'll.be covering huge distances. Personally I don't see any benefit but what do I know,?
|
|
|
Malc
|
|
|
|
|
cheshire exile
World Cup Winner
Joined: 05 Feb 2009 Status: Online Points: 2620 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: Yesterday at 18:14 |
At least they have the M56 derby to look forward to. TBH it makes much more sense for Macclesfield to be in N2N than in N2W, so it’s probably the best compromise. I’m sure Camborne and Redruth will be relishing three trips to Leicestershire.
|
|
|
|
|
Deva Delinquent
World Cup Winner
Joined: 24 May 2017 Location: Chester Status: Offline Points: 2149 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: Yesterday at 18:52 |
|
So, westward bound with our neighbours it is then.
At least we have one local game to look forward to I suppose.
|
|
|
|
|
SK 88
World Cup Winner
Joined: 08 Sep 2011 Location: Leicester Status: Offline Points: 618 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: Yesterday at 20:10 |
|
"so it has also been agreed that there should be a review of the league structure during the season, ensuring significant input from clubs, to explore other options that might minimise the travel burden for 2026/27.”"
From the release. Just looking at this, I can see two most easily implemented ideas. 1) Promote 6 sides and do 3 leagues of 16 or 4 of 12. 2) Promote 14 sides for 4 leagues of 14. The 6 extra sides presuming the 5 relegated were still relegated would be: Jersey, Letchworth, Stourbridge, Brixham, Hudderfield, Anselmians. The 3 leagues of 16 still has the same problem of too many northern teams so someone would have to go from Cheshire to Cornwall. 4 leagues of 12 obviously loses home games which is not to be discounted as a problem, but would leave: W: Camborne, Redruth, Brixham, Barnstaple, Exe Uni, Taunton, Hornets, Old Redcliffians, Cinderford, Oxford Quins, Henley, Havant E: Jersey, Guernsey, Dorking, Esher, London Welsh, Barnes, Westcombe Park, Sevenoaks, Canterbury, Bury St Edmonds, Letchworth, Old Albanians. N: Tynedale, Darlington MP, Billingham, Wharfedale, Otley, Fylde, Preston, Rossendale, Huddersfield, Hull, Hull Ionians, SKiwifruithorpe Midlands/North: Anselmians, Chester, Macclefield, Lymm, Sheffield, Sheffield Tigers, Syston, Loughborough Students, Hinckley, Stourbridge, Olney, Luctonians Which is a fairly acceptable level of travel I would say, considering the shape of the country and where the clubs are. Going to an extra 14 I've assumed no relegation for 5 clubs and the additional third places would be Manchester, Heath (Halifax), and Exmouth. That would give 14 team leagues: SW: Camborne, Redruth, Devonport Services, Brixham, Exemouth, Exe Uni, Barnstaple, Taunton, Hornets, Old Redcliffians, Cinderford, Luctonians, Oxford Quins, Henley N: Tynedale, Darlington MP, Billingham, Wharfedale, Otley, Fylde, Preston, Rossendale, Huddersfield, Hull, Hull Ionians, SKiwifruithorpe, Harrogate, Heath Mids: Anselmians, Chester, Lymm, Macclesfield, Manchester, Sheffield, Sheffield Tigers, Loughborough Students, Syston, Hinckley, Stourbridge, Bournville, Oundle, Letchworth SE: Old Albanians, Bury St Edmonds, Colchester, Canterbury, Jersey, Guernsey, Esher, London Welsh, Barnes, Dorking, Westcombe Park, Sevenoaks, Worthing, Havant. Going to 4 would basically solve the extreme swings of travel for the extremities, the only question is whether that compromise is worth the dilution of the level and/or the number of games being reduced.
|
|
|
|
|
Rabbie Burns
World Cup Winner
Joined: 18 Jul 2007 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 3420 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: Yesterday at 22:39 |
|
Does that mean you would want 4 down from N1, that’s pretty harsh as it’s currently the only league that normally loses 3 teams
|
|
|
So many Christians not enough Lions
|
|
|
|
|
PM009
First XV regular 
Joined: 07 Jan 2019 Location: Kent Status: Offline Points: 81 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 22 hours 54 minutes ago at 23:18 |
|
Would expect some kick back if clubs are expected to fund 2 trips to the Channel Islands at the extortionate cost of commuting to those games, especially if you want to reduce the division to 12 sides.
N2 has already suffered a significant drop in quality since going from 2 to 3 divisions, from the South perspective the loss of the West Country trips has been a great shame. They should have reduced the leagues to 14 teams and reduced the amount of games but kept the standard high, it’s a National League not a Regional comp, it doesn’t prepare clubs to compete when they go to Nat 1
|
|
|
|
|
SK 88
World Cup Winner
Joined: 08 Sep 2011 Location: Leicester Status: Offline Points: 618 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 14 hours 1 minutes ago at 08:11 |
Good question I'd not considered! It's a tough one to square, it depends just how bad people think the current set up is with travel. Especially as it could, relatively, sort itself out in a single year if the "right" teams went up/down.
|
|
|
|
|
Happy
British and Irish Lion 
Joined: 06 Sep 2019 Location: Sevenoaks Status: Offline Points: 266 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 13 hours 33 minutes ago at 08:39 |
|
If they address some of the financial burden that the the amount of travel causes that would go a long way
|
|
|
|
|
tigerburnie
World Cup Winner
Joined: 10 Jun 2012 Location: Scotland Status: Online Points: 4024 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 13 hours 14 minutes ago at 08:58 |
|
It was mentioned that there could be a Nat 1 north and south, but happily that seems to have gone away.
|
|
|
|
|
Camquin
World Cup Winner
Joined: 01 Jun 2007 Location: Cambridge Status: Offline Points: 12047 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 13 hours 9 minutes ago at 09:03 |
|
When the tripartite division was suggested, it was assumed the tri-point would be near Birmingham, not close to Chester. But each season, we have had "too many" Northern sides in this division. Driven by a steady decrease in the number of Northern teams in the three National leagues - it was over-represented, but is now underrepresented. The alternative to level transfer is to require teams to play in the division in which they are located, and adjust the number of teams promoted or relegated each year - something we do anyway when we reorganise - and was done before level transferes were introduced. The other big question is do we need National 1 - personally I think there is a good case for keeping it, but I can also see the case for getting rid of it. But if you do, you almost certainly need a play off tournament. However, whatever you do, please do not expand Chomp Rugby again - I think it needs a season with the threat of relegation. Even if my club is under threat. Another question is do we need as many levels in the pyramid. If you did slim the National Leagues down to one tier, could you reduce the regional leagues to one tier or 9 or 12 leagues. It would be one way to reduce travel for a lot of teams, but aside from trips to Cumberland - is travel at this level really an issue? And what do you do with second XVs? Can we fix the Pizza cup? Clubs said they wanted a cup, but the number of walkovers suggest that not this cup! Thee will be many different views - and I suspect that even within a club there will be different views. Whoever makes the decisions needs to listen carefully - not make a decision and look for evidence to back it. |
|
|
Sweeney Delenda Est
|
|
|
|
|
Mark W-J
Coaching staff
Joined: 22 May 2007 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 3752 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 12 hours 2 minutes ago at 10:10 |
|
I think the introduction of promotion play-offs will be the death knell for the cup. The draft I've seen for Regional 1 involves four rounds of fixtures; two to determine which one of the teams placed 2-5 progresses from each of the six leagues, a knockout between the six regional winners to produce three finalists, and then the big money showdown with the three 12th placed teams at Nat2.
|
|
|
|
|
Richard Lowther
Coaching staff
Moderator Joined: 19 May 2007 Location: England Status: Offline Points: 6638 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 7 hours 33 minutes ago at 14:39 |
|
I would suggest level three should be regionalised to a North and South structure.
Level 4 would then be North, Midlands, South, South West. Level 5 would be those four divisions split into 8. Level 6 16 areas Etc. |
|
|
|
|
Camquin
World Cup Winner
Joined: 01 Jun 2007 Location: Cambridge Status: Offline Points: 12047 |
Post Options
Thanks(1)
Quote Reply
Posted: 7 hours 11 minutes ago at 15:01 |
|
Which worked so well, the clubs in Lancashire left the structure and set up ttheir own league. |
|
|
Sweeney Delenda Est
|
|
|
|
|
Richard Lowther
Coaching staff
Moderator Joined: 19 May 2007 Location: England Status: Offline Points: 6638 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 4 hours 23 minutes ago at 17:49 |
And what is different about the current structure? Whatever the structure clubs at the same level have to travel. Be it North/South or East/West across any region. What you do is devise the borders of each region better to minimise journeys. As we are seeing with Penrith, they would rather travel East than South. You will never have a perfect structure because of the shape of the country but the more subdivision the easier it becomes. The current 3 way split is less practical than a 4 way split, then those 4 halved at every level.
|
|
|
|
|
Camquin
World Cup Winner
Joined: 01 Jun 2007 Location: Cambridge Status: Offline Points: 12047 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 1 hour 17 minutes ago at 20:55 |
|
While the old structure had its good points, but there were issues, and not just Lancashire. If you have the 1/2/4/8/16/32 structure you have 31 leagues, that is up to 434 teams playing out of county. Though, we did not have 32 leagues at County level. And you probably have Canterbury and Redruth in the same league. If you drop the 2 team level - it is still over 400 teams. If you have 1/3/9/27 you only have 13 leagues out of County, 182 teams. Compared to the 1/2/4/8 structure, there are only 14 teams at level 4 that have more travel - everyone else has less. If you lose the National league at level 3, no side has more travel. But if the current Nat 2 does not prepare teams for Nat 1, and Nat 1 only just prepares teams for the Championship - then playing in a regional league at level 3 really would not prepare a side for Chump Rugby. The current structure 1/3/6/12 is to m mind just chaotic, it has more sides travelling while not substantially reducing any one team's travel - in fact many teams ended up with more travel. And that was before you added the Pizza Cup. I am sure there are other options. Including half season leagues, with promotion and relegation at Christmas as well as Summer. Split seasons where you play local sides in the first half and then rearrange by results and have more travel in the second half. |
|
|
Sweeney Delenda Est
|
|
|
|
|
Post Reply
|
Page <1 345 |
Tweet
|
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
Topic Options
WILD BOAR 1 wrote: