Trailfinders a sad indictment of rugby

[Tiglon]

Which I’m still waiting to see proof of, and no I’m really not that bothered to look into it further I’m basing it on what I see and 50 years of rugby experience, which may seem a strange concept to you

It does seem strange to me to outright refuse to look for something, but still be happy to loudly proclaim that it does not exist.

Looked on their website and your favourite google and nothing. But then I’m guessing you already knew that

You didn't find anything about their partnerships with local grassroots clubs? Partnerships with Aussie Shute Shield teams? Partnership with Brunel University? Their development of the women's game? Presentation of a phased development plan to support their Premiership application, rather than a short-termist ground share?

You didn't find any of that?

[Rugbygramps]

It does seem strange to me to outright refuse to look for something, but still be happy to loudly proclaim that it does not exist.

Looked on their website and your favourite google and nothing. But then I’m guessing you already knew that

You didn't find anything about their partnerships with local grassroots clubs? Partnerships with Aussie Shute Shield teams? Partnership with Brunel University? Their development of the women's game? Presentation of a phased development plan to support their Premiership application, rather than a short-termist ground share?

You didn't find any of that?

Yes but does that count as a long term strategy or current business arrangements. Where is the long term plan from the owner.
I remain to be convinced, you obviously don’t, and feel in their current guise the championship is the best place for them.
And yes they do have an academy pathway programme, but there wasn’t a lot of proof of that on Sunday, more short term signings for short term gain rather than player development

[Wayne Richardson Fan Club]

That will be the Womens game they started well before Tigers for instance...

For me Ealing might be the right set up in the wrong place to benefit English pro rugby.

[Rugbygramps]

That will be the Womens game they started well before Tigers for instance...

For me Ealing might be the right set up in the wrong place to benefit English pro rugby.

Difficult when you’re called Ealing .
As has been mentioned before the ideal area for growth is East of London up into East Anglia

[BengalTiger]

What would be sustainable is 6 regional pro teams supported by 2 leagues of semi pro teams, which Ealing would be ideal for, in a British mainland league.
Unfortunately the wrinklies would never buy it

So you now propose getting rid of the English clubs and having regional pro teams, so you want to get rid of Leicester Tigers then?

Depends if you want the game to survive as a professional entity. I think it’s worth exploring, but it won’t be.
I see no reason why the Midlands team couldn’t be based in Leicester and Tigers become one of the major feeder clubs.
In New Zealand the major cities Canterbury, Auckland all have super rugby sides based there plus they still have successful city sides

Why are you posting on the Tigers board if you want them to fail and become a semi pro feeder team? What kind of Tigers fan are you exactly? or have you already answered that, I shall use the ignore facility on this board as you clearly are not be going to post anything of much interest to a Tigers fan with more rugby years than you profess to have.

Another intemperate, ill-mannered and negative post, please feel free to use the ignore button, I am sure many of us will be reciprocating!

[Tiglon]

Looked on their website and your favourite google and nothing. But then I’m guessing you already knew that

You didn't find anything about their partnerships with local grassroots clubs? Partnerships with Aussie Shute Shield teams? Partnership with Brunel University? Their development of the women's game? Presentation of a phased development plan to support their Premiership application, rather than a short-termist ground share?

You didn't find any of that?

Yes but does that count as a long term strategy or current business arrangements. Where is the long term plan from the owner.
I remain to be convinced, you obviously don’t, and feel in their current guise the championship is the best place for them.
And yes they do have an academy pathway programme, but there wasn’t a lot of proof of that on Sunday, more short term signings for short term gain rather than player development

This may seem like a silly question, but do you realise that a long term strategy takes a long time to come to fruition?

A lot of the current Tigers "youngsters" who have made it to the first XV were either signed from other clubs or academies (it is, I would imagine, a bit easier to do that if you're Leicester Tigers rather than Ealing Trailfinders) or have been involved with the Tigers academy since around the time that Ealing became professional nearly 10 years ago.

That's how long it takes to bring players through.

When you consider how many players at each age group are with Premiership academies, it's really difficult to tempt promising youngsters to a Championship club. When 80% or whatever of those Prem academy youngsters don't get senior contracts, the Championship clubs can get hold of them. So they then have an opportunity to sign players at 21ish who are considered better than their own academy players.

Anyone promising and youthful at a Championship club invariably gets snapped up by a Prem club.

Consequently, the idea that you can build a successful Championship team at all, let alone in less than ten years, through your own academy products, is 99% wishful thinking.

Look at Exeter, their academy only started producing talent after promotion because, prior to that, all the talented youngsters chose to go to Bath, Bristol, Gloucester etc.

[mol2]

To an extent it is hard for Championship sides to expand their fan base when the product being offered is Championship rugby.

I suspect if Tigers were to drop down a division there may be many season ticket holders who might not attend matches as often as they do.

Facing Tigers may well not have been the big draw for the Ealing fans as we might think.
They probably don't realise the impact that international call ups and injuries have had on the strength of the team we put out and that they were in with a fighting chance.

[Tiglon]

To an extent it is hard for Championship sides to expand their fan base when the product being offered is Championship rugby.

I suspect if Tigers were to drop down a division there may be many season ticket holders who might not attend matches as often as they do.

Facing Tigers may well not have been the big draw for the Ealing fans as we might think.
They probably don't realise the impact that international call ups and injuries have had on the strength of the team we put out and that they were in with a fighting chance.

I would think maybe the opposite - if we'd have been able to send the internationals then there might have been more interest. Either way, I'd agree that the match was not the big draw that one would hope.

Exeter's average attendances increased by about 5,000 when they reached the Premiership. But, as pointed out, big rugby community down there with no other Prem club nearby to go and watch. Is there that much demand waiting for Ealing? Probably not, otherwise Quins and Sarries would be sellouts every week.

When Saints were relegated it looks like they only decreased by 1,000-2,000. However, they were pretty much a sellout before relegation so they might have been selling far fewer tickets than they could have if they had a bigger stadium before relegation - the actual drop in interest may have been larger.

[Jimmy Skitz]

What did Exeter do right? They got right to the top of Europe from that level.
Perhaps Ealing had no history?

shrewd signings and an incredible crop of players coming through at the same time

[Jimmy Skitz]

it was a game on TV against a mandated weaker side than we could put out even with the internationals away, I would imagine had they know the likes of Montoya, Pollard, Ben Youngs etc. been known to be playing they would have sold out, and from TV it looked pretty full to me.

Other than the pitch itself I see no reason why that ground couldn't be used weekly in the premiership, Tigers have the biggest ground and its not full every week either so forcing teams to have a certain size stadium seems counter productive, if demand proves the be there help them expand but why should Ealing be forced to expand to a 10k capacity when they know there isn't the demand?

[TigerFeetSteve]

There are IMO a lot of pro's and con's to Ealing

I think personally I'd like to know the strategy post their current owner. He's 86 or 87 I think now and what that future plan is for me more important than when will the pitch be replaced.

I think if the succession plan is good and there is enough cash around for a good transition, but if say he's leaving the club to family with no interest in rugby I don't think it is sustainable.

If given an opportunity in the prem for a couple of seasons I think that Ealing could start pulling in crowds.

[Ian Cant]

It doesn’t matter what we fans think unless the powers that be urgently look at the game from the top to the bottom!
Tigers despite not selling out now but do a have much larger seasonal average attendance than in the days of Johnno and Backy: Quins also now have a much better average attendance: Sarries much better than when they were in Watford(always went to Watford but glad they moved, ) Saints on the whole pretty good attendances, Bath often sold out,Bristol always had a great fan base, Gloucester again pretty decent and even Newcastle have a built a solid fan base due to sheer hard work from the club.
Sale and Ealing will always struggle due to the pull of all the professional football clubs!
I’d like Ealing to be in the Premiership and I’m sure they would get the same artificial pitch as Sarries, which despite some fans criticism really is excellent.
Hopefully both the Premiership and Championship clubs will support each other.
There is no quick fix and there are some positives: the safety aspect is really improving and the women’s game is growing.

[Hot_Charlie]

Council said No find out why and reapply with necessary amendments
If you’re serious long term you integrate the youngsters don’t sign Billy Twelvetrees and Lloyd Williams.
I agree with your point about the moneymen

Point is he appears to be looking for short term fixes not a long term strategy, you will no doubt disagree but that’s mine and it would appear other’s opinion

Yet we have Mike Brown in our squad...

I wonder if Mr "Ealing" isn't the "right" sort of person in some eyes.

What is obvious is a 10 club top division isn't sustainable.

It's pretty blatantly a case of "old money" looking down it's nose at "new money".

Typical rugby union blazer-wearing snobbery and short-sightedness.

I'm not sure many of the self made Premiership "owners" could look down at 87 year old Mike Gooley and say his was "new money"!

[Hot_Charlie]

It does seem strange to me to outright refuse to look for something, but still be happy to loudly proclaim that it does not exist.

Looked on their website and your favourite google and nothing. But then I’m guessing you already knew that

You didn't find anything about their partnerships with local grassroots clubs? Partnerships with Aussie Shute Shield teams? Partnership with Brunel University? Their development of the women's game? Presentation of a phased development plan to support their Premiership application, rather than a short-termist ground share?

You didn't find any of that?

Which they know doesn't fit the criteria required for entry to the Premiership. They can whine all they like but they aren't willing to bite the bullet.

[CrumblingTerrace]

The requirement for a 10,001 capacity stadium is the one criteria I feel lacks justification.

It's reasonable to demand that promotes clubs have good quality playing facilities, space for the media and the right governance. But why mandate that they must make a huge infrastructure investment to cater for a spectator demand that they can't forecast will be there? It seems to run counter to the 'good governance' criteria.