New "Buddy" relationship with Championship clubs

[Old Hob]

The lead story in the Rugby Paper is about a proposal by Nigel Melville that Championship clubs who have no interest in promotion "buddy up" with a Premiership outfit to share players and give under used prem players game time. They could have up to 12 first teamers and as many acacdemy players as they wanted; the A league would go. Promotion and relegation would remain but, if a club declared itself interested in promotion (to be declared at the start of the season) then they would be allowed only 4 premiership players. Melville says it woud be a way of keeping under used players match fit and reduce the costs to struggling championship sides most of whom are effectively broke. He claims Premierdhip clubs have squads of 50 - 70. What do you think?

[Skin_and_Muscle]

The lead story in the Rugby Paper is about a proposal by Nigel Melville that Championship clubs who have no interest in promotion "buddy up" with a Premiership outfit to share players and give under used prem players game time. They could have up to 12 first teamers and as many acacdemy players as they wanted; the A league would go. Promotion and relegation would remain but, if a club declared itself interested in promotion (to be declared at the start of the season) then they would be allowed only 4 premiership players. Melville says it woud be a way of keeping under used players match fit and reduce the costs to struggling championship sides most of whom are effectively broke. He claims Premierdhip clubs have squads of 50 - 70. What do you think?

I see two principal positives in this proposal and a negative. You've mentioned the first positive; more game time for fringe players without having to rely on the LV and a rubbish A league. Second, teams will have to face tougher opposition in order to get promoted (with their own squads) so the premiership is less likely to host an exceptionally poor twelfth team.

Negatives: promotion and relegation will be less likely to occur, or you may get a lower placed team promoted if it is decided that the best placed 'promotable' side should go up (thus negating the second positive).

[Old Hob]

The play-offs would go and "ambitious" clubs would compete to be top and gain promotion and a smaller wage bill means they could improve facilities is the theory. I'm not wholly convinced; do you want your buddy club gaining promotion and challenging you? What happens when they come up having used four of your players and all your academy - will they need to expensively recruit? The RFU says there is no more money for the Championship so Melville is arguing that unless something like the buddy system is implemented the Championship will fold, which will be a huge embarrassment to the largest union in the world.

[TigerCam]

Tigers and Sarries have been putting players into Championship clubs like Bedford and Nottingham etc. The NHL have 'farm teams' to bring through young players with potential. A club like Bedford would probably not survive in the Prem even if they made it due to the fan base of Tigers and Saints? So, why not? I have seen first hand, at Cambridge, when a sugar-daddy withdraws his promises and cash-flow leaving the club in the mire both with the HMRC and a side devoid of its better players because there is no insurance and no payroll - relegation follows quickly.

[Noddy555]

Correct me please if I'm wrong but don't we already have this type of relationship
with Nottingham Rugby club?

[TigerCam]

Correct me please if I'm wrong but don't we already have this type of relationship
with Nottingham Rugby club?

I believe we do Noddy. But over the years that I have spent watching games at Bedford there have several Sarries players in Bedford shirts season upon season. Jackson Wray (to name one) came into Bedford as a raw talent he developed by playing week-in-week-out. Sarries obviously had a development plan for these players and look at him now. I not saying the Tigers don't but if you look at the team photos on the club wall you will see many faces playing Prem rugby - Dan Cole and Billy12T included. IMO doing away with the A league and having a farm team will serve both leagues well.

[RagingBull]

This season we have had out on loan
Doncaster Knights
Will Owen
Ben White
George Catchpole

Nottingham
Charlie Thacker
George Worth
Sam Yawayawa
Pat Cilliers

Coventry
Fred Tuilagi jnr

Loug students
Brugnara
Betts
Simmons
J. Olowofela

Lions
Mahoney
Lewis
R.Olowofela


I suppose the NHL and MLB route of feeder clubs could work but I don't get how promotion and relegation would work really.

[drc_007]

I suppose the NHL and MLB route of feeder clubs could work but I don't get how promotion and relegation would work really.

I suspect the only way it could work is if clubs aiming for promotion opt out of the buddy system and and have a squad of players solely registered to them.

[TigerCam]

I suppose the NHL and MLB route of feeder clubs could work but I don't get how promotion and relegation would work really.

I suspect the only way it could work is if clubs aiming for promotion opt out of the buddy system and and have a squad of players solely registered to them.

The article says that clubs that wish to go for the Prem have to declare it pre-season. I assume that would be an agreement over how many years etc?

[TigerCam]

This season we have had out on loan
Doncaster Knights
Will Owen
Ben White
George Catchpole

Nottingham
Charlie Thacker
George Worth
Sam Yawayawa
Pat Cilliers

Coventry
Fred Tuilagi jnr

Loug students
Brugnara
Betts
Simmons
J. Olowofela

Lions
Mahoney
Lewis
R.Olowofela


I suppose the NHL and MLB route of feeder clubs could work but I don't get how promotion and relegation would work really.

I can only guess that if a club not seeking promotion wins the league then the top club seeking Prem promotion would get a stab at it? IMO if that happened then maybe that club has to play-off against the Prem relegated side to show they are good enough to take their place?

Relegation would remain the same as it is now as it would not matter which club, as they will have ended up in the relegation zone anyway. It may actually encourage the Prem club to ensure that enough attention and support is given to the farm/feeder club to make sure they do not hit the relegation zone?

[WhitecapTiger]

I can only guess that if a club not seeking promotion wins the league then the top club seeking Prem promotion would get a stab at it? IMO if that happened then maybe that club has to play-off against the Prem relegated side to show they are good enough to take their place?

How long until a "We don't want Promotion" Club wins the Championship and then decides "We could be good enough after all" then launches a legal battle to claim their right to promotion?

It wouldn't be the first legal battle against a set of established rules/laws known to all at the beginning of a season....would it?

[BFG]

This player loaning is all well and good for those involved but it is destroying community spirit within the sport.
Loaning filters down from league to league squeezing out the amateur player.
If it continues for much longer rugby will shrink further, we have already seen a drop in playing numbers and this is one reason.
Rugby has always been very much a participation sport and if they aren't playing then they won't support either.
An A League expansion of some type is needed IMO.

[h's dad]

This player loaning is all well and good for those involved but it is destroying community spirit within the sport.
Loaning filters down from league to league squeezing out the amateur player.
If it continues for much longer rugby will shrink further, we have already seen a drop in playing numbers and this is one reason.
Rugby has always been very much a participation sport and if they aren't playing then they won't support either.
An A League expansion of some type is needed IMO.

If I understand your point I'm not sure that I agree with it. Are you saying that 'star' or 'superior' players loaned to lower league clubs is putting off the amateurs? If so, I really don't think this is the case.

1) Players should be loaned to a level commensurate with their ability and appropriate to their development. Anything else is counter productive.
2) Often the loaned players struggle to make the grade where they are placed - the challenge may be good for them but I don't think it causes teammates or opposition to give up.
3) If 2) is not the case, many players like the challenge of playing against such players, I remember H coming home at 15 buzzing becaose he had been playing against a team stuffed with England U18's
4) Similar to 3) but a bit of a thrill. I remember hosting a junior tour that had an accompanying vets team desperate for a game; or vets were on tour and the other seniors had fixtures so the the call went out and the visitors were made up when the found the opposition had a couple of Tuilagis on the teamsheet.
5) As you go down the tree you're going to get a wide range of abilities anyway.

Sorry if I've misunderstood your point. i agree about the A league but I understand the logistics enough to appreciate the problems and it simply doesn't pay its way so I don't think it will be consistent across the board unless it become compulsory and is accompanied by performance incentives for the clubs.

[BFG]

This player loaning is all well and good for those involved but it is destroying community spirit within the sport.
Loaning filters down from league to league squeezing out the amateur player.
If it continues for much longer rugby will shrink further, we have already seen a drop in playing numbers and this is one reason.
Rugby has always been very much a participation sport and if they aren't playing then they won't support either.
An A League expansion of some type is needed IMO.

If I understand your point I'm not sure that I agree with it. Are you saying that 'star' or 'superior' players loaned to lower league clubs is putting off the amateurs? If so, I really don't think this is the case.

1) Players should be loaned to a level commensurate with their ability and appropriate to their development. Anything else is counter productive.
2) Often the loaned players struggle to make the grade where they are placed - the challenge may be good for them but I don't think it causes teammates or opposition to give up.
3) If 2) is not the case, many players like the challenge of playing against such players, I remember H coming home at 15 buzzing becaose he had been playing against a team stuffed with England U18's
4) Similar to 3) but a bit of a thrill. I remember hosting a junior tour that had an accompanying vets team desperate for a game; or vets were on tour and the other seniors had fixtures so the the call went out and the visitors were made up when the found the opposition had a couple of Tuilagis on the teamsheet.
5) As you go down the tree you're going to get a wide range of abilities anyway.

Sorry if I've misunderstood your point. i agree about the A league but I understand the logistics enough to appreciate the problems and it simply doesn't pay its way so I don't think it will be consistent across the board unless it become compulsory and is accompanied by performance incentives for the clubs.

One club had three current Premiership senior academy and four current Championship players playing in National Two on Saturday and lost yet again so their superiority is debatable.
Meanwhile the locals didn't have a game, they have lost loads of local lads.
I watched them recently and one loan player apart they were all worse than the part time players.
The stands were as empty as I have ever witnessed, the bar was near empty, local membership is falling.
I spoke with some old boy who's son had been ousted from the 1st team by a loan player, been a member for many years but would not be returning next year, generations of playing members being affected.
It's changing the face of the game.
The Championship started the loan fashion several years ago, I believe some are now suffering a lack of growth as a result as their community links have been decimated by too much loaning, now they rely heavily upon it just to survive.
Nature should be allowed to take it's course especially in amateur rugby IMO, if a community club is relegated two or three times because the current level is so then that's how it should be rather than bringing a load of ringers in.
It's a bit like the Tigers versus Wasps business model, one self sustaining and the other not, just on a smaller scale.

[4071]

I can only guess that if a club not seeking promotion wins the league then the top club seeking Prem promotion would get a stab at it? IMO if that happened then maybe that club has to play-off against the Prem relegated side to show they are good enough to take their place?

It's more likely that no one would be promoted. It's already the case that if a club that is not eligible for promotion (too small a stadium, for example) wins the title then no one goes up. I wouldn't see that changing.

Especially not after Lon Welsh challenged it and saw the downside of being promoted when unprepared.