I think all the leagues should adopt a rule of max non-injury enforced changes in sequential games. Maybe 5 as a max...would allow for rotation etc but would stop these silly games occurring. They really do bring the game into disrepute.
I feel sorry for those fans who paid good money to watch that match. The fans deserve a better commitment from the management. Abuse your fans and you will loose them.
People keep comparing this to Newcaslte. But its a different situation. The falcons are basically underfunding the team as the owners don't want to invest/overpay. The Falcons squad is closer to Ealings than it is Gloucester's. I think, if we are honest, its clear Skirvington is just a bad DOR. That they rotated isn't an issue, that it was a shitshow was. That team wasn't even that bad. And there squad has some quality players.
I think I suggested this to you on your initial posting after the game. Gloucester certainly disrespected their supporters, to expect them to travel at cost and pay out for tickets just to watch a trouncing is unreasonable at best. I don’t think I’d continue supporting them. People go to a match to watch a game, not a complete trouncing. As to where respect may or may not be laid, that may not be the required question? Perhaps they might publicise their choice of their 2nd team ahead of time, prior to the booking of tickets. Looking overall at the Gallagher League, there seems to only be places for 6 or 7 competitive teams throughout the U.K. Newcastle only ever shows good at the time they had Johnny playing at No10, otherwise they have had nothing to compete with. Now that Gloucester have lost Luke to the US, they seem to have nothing to fight with either. I have been most surprised as to how Exeter have managed to remain competing at the top level, with their recent and massive change within their player portfolio. So what is the main question that needs to be addressed? England, based on population do have the largest potential of players to draw upon, so where are the developing players? Obviously finances are a major part of the jigsaw. I learned that by talking to a team manager at Launceston a few years back. Management has to be a main factor. The overall picture is obviously not helped by the selection of 57 old farts at the top, assuming they are still there. Are there too many competitions, which are just thrown in to keep ticket sales turning over? If so, that chucks it back to the player base. Does it mean employing 3 x 1st teams in each club, just like the football teams? Obviously not, the funds aren’t there, and no one would be happy anyway. A player wants to get as fit as he can, and play the best he can as often as he can. They would not remain at their top level if all they were expected to do was to keep turning up for a 10-20 burst at the end of the match. I think the core of the question lies elsewhere. Within a season there are X amount of playable weekends, and therefore a match of a certain level should be played. By fitting the clubs into limited leagues, it reduces potential opponents, therefore as a working model it doesn’t work. Daring to look back into history, regional development throughout clubs should be nurtured, from where players will show themselves as their skills develop. They could be pruned to play with a better level of contemporaries within the area to form a better overall player, and eventual national team. I am aware that this might be considered as a bit regressive, however we have seen quite a few failures within the rapid realisation of some of the country’s long lasting and well loved teams who have fallen into the hands of the financial graspers, due to the difficulties of professionalism, as it is being run currently. We have seen similar problems within in football since the outset of the Premier division, with a recent call for 6 only prime clubs to be left standing at the top in order to play internationally at a higher level. From what we have left standing at the end of each year, I can imagine the same call within the Gallagher teams. It is a complex situation which will not disappear as long as things remain as they are. As I say, I think the question needs to be different. And then it needs to be addressed with deep consideration to all sides of this great game we have supported for years. We all have opinions, and we can’t all be right, and indeed we can change our minds. It’s nice to think, that by airing our thoughts through the media, such as yours we might do more than just let off a bit of frustration. There seems to be such a lot of it around, all over the place. Sorry my rant was a bit long today, but as you seemed to pick up on the point I raised on Sunday, I sort of felt justified in thinking it through a bit. Regionalise the game with a planned structure of individual elevation through to a higher level as to where they live. North, South East and West to have there prime candidates contesting for a top league regional team, close to their home environment. This sounds like the old county system of old, I know, but if the good could be gleaned from it, there may well be some gold within the rough idea? All the best.
2:20 The Prem was the most successful league in the Championship until the final 2, eg Pool stage win%: Prem 59.4% - URC 46.9%. Round 2 win%: Prem 75% - URC 38%... And so on. It would be great if from time to time English people could back their leagues and international team and not be the first in line (its a long line) to shoot our teams down. Yours, Chris.
I think all the leagues should adopt a rule of max non-injury enforced changes in sequential games. Maybe 5 as a max...would allow for rotation etc but would stop these silly games occurring. They really do bring the game into disrepute.
I feel sorry for those fans who paid good money to watch that match. The fans deserve a better commitment from the management. Abuse your fans and you will loose them.
People keep comparing this to Newcaslte. But its a different situation. The falcons are basically underfunding the team as the owners don't want to invest/overpay. The Falcons squad is closer to Ealings than it is Gloucester's.
I think, if we are honest, its clear Skirvington is just a bad DOR. That they rotated isn't an issue, that it was a shitshow was. That team wasn't even that bad. And there squad has some quality players.
At least the Bulls score was not as bad as this, but they were crucified by the British Press.
*english
Heineken Cup Quarter Final is a bit different to a dead rubber league fixture, so I don't think they're quite comparable
Yes it was disrespect, for the top 8 teams handing Northants 5 free points when they are fighting for a top 4 place !!
I think I suggested this to you on your initial posting after the game.
Gloucester certainly disrespected their supporters, to expect them to travel at cost and pay out for tickets just to watch a trouncing is unreasonable at best.
I don’t think I’d continue supporting them.
People go to a match to watch a game, not a complete trouncing.
As to where respect may or may not be laid, that may not be the required question?
Perhaps they might publicise their choice of their 2nd team ahead of time, prior to the booking of tickets.
Looking overall at the Gallagher League, there seems to only be places for 6 or 7 competitive teams throughout the U.K.
Newcastle only ever shows good at the time they had Johnny playing at No10, otherwise they have had nothing to compete with. Now that Gloucester have lost Luke to the US, they seem to have nothing to fight with either.
I have been most surprised as to how Exeter have managed to remain competing at the top level, with their recent and massive change within their player portfolio.
So what is the main question that needs to be addressed?
England, based on population do have the largest potential of players to draw upon, so where are the developing players?
Obviously finances are a major part of the jigsaw. I learned that by talking to a team manager at Launceston a few years back.
Management has to be a main factor.
The overall picture is obviously not helped by the selection of 57 old farts at the top, assuming they are still there.
Are there too many competitions, which are just thrown in to keep ticket sales turning over? If so, that chucks it back to the player base. Does it mean employing 3 x 1st teams in each club, just like the football teams?
Obviously not, the funds aren’t there, and no one would be happy anyway. A player wants to get as fit as he can, and play the best he can as often as he can. They would not remain at their top level if all they were expected to do was to keep turning up for a 10-20 burst at the end of the match.
I think the core of the question lies elsewhere.
Within a season there are X amount of playable weekends, and therefore a match of a certain level should be played.
By fitting the clubs into limited leagues, it reduces potential opponents, therefore as a working model it doesn’t work.
Daring to look back into history, regional development throughout clubs should be nurtured, from where players will show themselves as their skills develop.
They could be pruned to play with a better level of contemporaries within the area to form a better overall player, and eventual national team.
I am aware that this might be considered as a bit regressive, however we have seen quite a few failures within the rapid realisation of some of the country’s long lasting and well loved teams who have fallen into the hands of the financial graspers, due to the difficulties of professionalism, as it is being run currently.
We have seen similar problems within in football since the outset of the Premier division, with a recent call for 6 only prime clubs to be left standing at the top in order to play internationally at a higher level. From what we have left standing at the end of each year, I can imagine the same call within the Gallagher teams.
It is a complex situation which will not disappear as long as things remain as they are. As I say, I think the question needs to be different.
And then it needs to be addressed with deep consideration to all sides of this great game we have supported for years.
We all have opinions, and we can’t all be right, and indeed we can change our minds. It’s nice to think, that by airing our thoughts through the media, such as yours we might do more than just let off a bit of frustration.
There seems to be such a lot of it around, all over the place.
Sorry my rant was a bit long today, but as you seemed to pick up on the point I raised on Sunday, I sort of felt justified in thinking it through a bit.
Regionalise the game with a planned structure of individual elevation through to a higher level as to where they live. North, South East and West to have there prime candidates contesting for a top league regional team, close to their home environment.
This sounds like the old county system of old, I know, but if the good could be gleaned from it, there may well be some gold within the rough idea?
All the best.
2:20 The Prem was the most successful league in the Championship until the final 2, eg Pool stage win%: Prem 59.4% - URC 46.9%. Round 2 win%: Prem 75% - URC 38%... And so on.
It would be great if from time to time English people could back their leagues and international team and not be the first in line (its a long line) to shoot our teams down.
Yours,
Chris.
If they did, they got their comeuppance.