League north structure

[201074016738]

For many years those people who run English mens lacrosse have striven to raise the sport's profile and make the game more accesible to new members and rightly so.

However, it seems to me that sometimes too much emphasis (and perhaps resources) is placed on the elite sections of the sport rather than where it really matters: - at ground level and in particular, providing more assistance to the smaller clubs. For me, the notion that we're going to compete with the likes of the USA & Canada any time soon are flawed... we don't have the number of players in this country to pick from, the coaches or the expertise. That's not to say that we shouldn'y try to improve (we should), but again referring to my earlier point merely putting the bulk of our resources into the elite isn't going to do it...

And this brings me to the main point of this missive... the league north structure. I'm sure the idea to group 1st teams together, A teams together etc etc was well meant, perhaps hoping this concept will drive standards up, BUT IT DOESN'T WORK...! The strong clubs such as Stockport & Cheadle will field A-teams capable of beating most first teams. having been relegated from the Premier League last season Rochdale 1st team now play teams who aren't as strong as those in North 1. on the flip side, Rochdale's A team are going to get stuffed by the likes of Stockport & Cheadle, and for what?

It really doesn't make sense to me, but if anyone can explain the logic behind it, fire away...!!

[whopead]

I have to say i agree to an extent. My view, as short sited and not forward thinking as it was, was that the top 10 teams played in the top division, the next ten best in the second and so on. I kn ow that sports like hockey have a similar sructure to what we have now with 1st team leagues, 2nd team leagues etc, however we in lacrosse just dont have enough clubs/teams to do that. I think Pom was right with his view that this wont work, but i dont have the answer to the problem. However there are some new proposals in the pipeline that may be of interest and will be aired at the next MPC i believe!

[Waggy]

It would be interesting to know what resources you think go into the elite end of the game?

The league restructure was to support the development of new clubs

If Rochdale don't win any games they'll go down a division until they find there level?

May be you would like to share you idea at the next players forum meeting in December?

[the pom]

I actual agree with funding the elite side of the sport and the amount the players who play for England have to pay is out of order whilst playing for England many players have been saddled with big debts to the ELA which they will be paying off years.

But just to point out

resource no.1

Elite Performance Director

Resource no 2
the majority most development news is target at elite e.g. academies university path ways etc. etc. This is obviously funded by the ela

resource 3 the web site is mostly geared towards the elite and no section or area for juniors.

I do think the la are target where they are getting the most players but I feel something should be done to help the established smaller clubs that are struggling such as Oldham.

For example an ldo could be taken on by the ELA and lent to clubs like Oldham to try and drum up some new players also help for the marketing side of the ela with advertising the club

but my opions are known on the current structure plaese see attched footer

[201074016738]

Waggy,

OK, taking your points in turn:

1. I'm obviously not privvy to where the ELA spends it's money but I'll be happy to go through the accounts if you want to send them on to me... However, I doubt very much that the ELA would put that kind of information in the public domain...! In any case, I'm not against the ELA providing employment for performance directors, admistrators and the like because we obviously need someone to run the show, but my personal view (and it is only my personal view) is that there isn't enough money spent on the lower end of lacrosse. Long established teams such as HMG, Ashton & Cheadle Hulme have been reduced to one senior team, and it appears that Oldham has now folded altogether. Clubs I speak to (particularly regarding junior sections) do the vast majority of the work and fundraising themselves (players, parents etc) without masses of ELA funding. It's true that some clubs receive assistance in the form of an LDO although the clubs have to find additional money for stuff like cars, fuel & accommodation which is an additional burden. However, unless someone at club level dedicates an enormous amount of time running round / speaking with local schools and getting the LDO's in to coach and recruit kids they just become an expensive 1st team player... (PS: I stand to be corrected if the ELA perform this function)

2. My point is that if the restructure was meant to support the development of the game, why can't I find anyone who agrees with it? What was the expected time frame for the smaller clubs to see a benefit following the league restructure, and if so, how long was it? It could conceivably take some clubs 3 or 4 years to find their levels (up or down), but I think in some cases players won't stick around that long...

3. I doubt very much that Rochdale would go down in that division, but look at a selection of results throughout the league:
Stockport 17-1 Sheffield University; Sheffield Steelers 23-1 Newcastle; Brooklands 26-1 Ashton; Hull 29-2 City of Stoke; Wilmslow A 22-0 Cheadle C; Timperly C 27-6 Brooklands B; Newcastle 0-16 Rochdale
I doubt that those players on the receiving end of a stuffing are having fun with the redevelopment of their club... There are always going to be some large wins / losses, particularly if a particular teram loses a couple of players through injury etc, but it seems to me that with the present system the gulf between clubs in certain divisions is worse than ever. You cannot tell me that it's right that any club's A team plays in a division where there are teams of a higher standard than the division their 1st team plays in...

4. I'm happy to come to the forum (let me know when)... I'm assuming that nowadays constructive comments / suggestions are acted upon, as my previous experiences weren't particularly fruitful and comments from the floor were viewed upon as being a nuisance (and yes, back in the day I did attend some of these forums...!)

Love & kisses

[webby]

I played in the Newcastle - Rochdale fixture and enjoyed myself. You only get better by playing better teams.

I dont agree with the current league structure but it's only been running for a couple years. Any changes they make will likely be met with resistance and hiccups.

At least since the restructure MOST teams are travelling to us...

[LivTeamJones26]

Pros for small teams in new league structure:

Teams will play you if you're based outside Manchester*
1.You don't get ringered against (i'm still haunted by being beaten by a B team 19-1 one week and then beating a completly different line up 10-3 two weeks later, when the the 1st/A team also had a game....)
2.You don't get stuck in leagues because clubs ringer you and warp the league standings
3.You learn a lot more playing tougher opposition

Cons:
1. There aren't enough 1st teams out there
2. *new/struggling clubs can't fulfill fixtures
3. the gap between prem 3 and 2 is very big

Does the league structure work? No, but given time and more clubs, it could. The old system was incredibly frustrating and in my opinion, allowed the spirit of the game (see pro 2) to be abused, and did not offer incentive to faraway clubs who never got to play a home game. The only way to make the divisional structure work would be to somehow regulate teams more effectivly and clamp down on conceding games, neither of which I can see being popular.

Prem2/3 may need to be tweaked to prevent Con3 becoming unworkable. But the best thing would be expansion of the game and getting 10 teams in each Prem division as soon as possible. If you can get stable growth of the game, it will filter down into more A teams etc over time.

[the pom]

I think the ringer issues is a false call.

the A and B sides of clubs change a lot over seasons as players are dropped or unavailable so you can play very different sides.

we have a c team that can have up to 20 odd players on the roster but by the time the first have nicked a couple from the A the a have nicked four from the B the b have nicked 8 from the C they can be struggling to get a side out but the week after be dropping players.

If a higher team is not playing they still have to select a team of players who are then not available to play on other teams.

basically I think the ringer issues is an excuse from teams that are not good enough to beat a stronger team.

There are not enough teams of a decent standard for the current structure.

But the current structure is forcing good players to move to bigger clubs for prem one or nelma 1 games

So smaller clubs are struggling to get good players or keep hold of them.

If a team is unhappy about the standard they are playing at they should get better and get promoted.

If teams do not turn up to play you will quickly get promoted to a league where they will as you will be winning games

[young_trig]

I think the ringer issues is a false call.

the A and B sides of clubs change a lot over seasons as players are dropped or unavailable so you can play very different sides.

we have a c team that can have up to 20 odd players on the roster but by the time the first have nicked a couple from the A the a have nicked four from the B the b have nicked 8 from the C they can be struggling to get a side out but the week after be dropping players.

If a higher team is not playing they still have to select a team of players who are then not available to play on other teams.

basically I think the ringer issues is an excuse from teams that are not good enough to beat a stronger team.

Couldn't disagree with you more.
I think a lot of things you say make sense but the issue on loaded teams does exist. Its very clear that clubs abuse the system and when higher teams don't have a match there are players that pick up games on lower teams.

There will always be excuses offered by the club as to why those particular players played on a lower squad that particluar weekend but if there had been a higher match take palce there is no dount the player would have played for the higher team.

I'm not saying the current structure resolves the issue, but it takes away the problem from the 1st teams. However there are plenty of A and B and C teams who now get the raw end of the deal when a higher team has a weekend off.

As I said, clubs will always be able to offer a reason or excuse to warrant their selection and this makes it almost impossible for NEMLA to enforce any rules. Clubs will abuse the system and we need to think of a way to make the system harder to abuse and make it fairer to all.

[UKLacrosse]

I think the ringer issues is a false call.

the A and B sides of clubs change a lot over seasons as players are dropped or unavailable so you can play very different sides.

we have a c team that can have up to 20 odd players on the roster but by the time the first have nicked a couple from the A the a have nicked four from the B the b have nicked 8 from the C they can be struggling to get a side out but the week after be dropping players.

If a higher team is not playing they still have to select a team of players who are then not available to play on other teams.

basically I think the ringer issues is an excuse from teams that are not good enough to beat a stronger team.

Couldn't disagree with you more.
I think a lot of things you say make sense but the issue on loaded teams does exist. Its very clear that clubs abuse the system and when higher teams don't have a match there are players that pick up games on lower teams.

There will always be excuses offered by the club as to why those particular players played on a lower squad that particluar weekend but if there had been a higher match take palce there is no dount the player would have played for the higher team.

I'm not saying the current structure resolves the issue, but it takes away the problem from the 1st teams. However there are plenty of A and B and C teams who now get the raw end of the deal when a higher team has a weekend off.

As I said, clubs will always be able to offer a reason or excuse to warrant their selection and this makes it almost impossible for NEMLA to enforce any rules. Clubs will abuse the system and we need to think of a way to make the system harder to abuse and make it fairer to all.

Absolutely correct Trig .... sorry Pom you are wrong and you know it!

[whopead]

Agree with you Trig...i have been in games against Certain teams where toward the end of the season the 1st team did not have a game. Therefore on the A team there were a couple of players who i new played regular 1st teamand would not have been playing otherwise. we lost the game by 3. one of the mentioned players scored 5 of the teams goal. frustrating and it almost sent us down.

[gazmanofhull]

Also pom, if we were still in the old 5 Division structure and your clubs C Team was stripped of its players that would leave them conceding the game and the new-start first team without a game.

The bigger issue with the structure is the gulf in class, but I agree with webby that yu only get better by playing better teams. The number of fixtures is an issue, but had Oldham & Chester not folded/withdrawn, then their would have been 9 teams in Premier 3.

Also the scoreline's stated by 201074016738, those scorelines existed in the old structure. We lost our first ever NEMLA game 25-3 at home to Leeds, it would be better to judge Stoke once the season is over - their 6-8 loss to HMG shows some promise IMHO.

If we are looking at more entrants then Moaning Git made a good point of ABC teams who could form new clubs, although criticised by some at the time I have been lead to believe that Timperley C are basically Manchester University. Surely they are a candidate for entry to Premier 3. Lancaster University have been mooted as a possible entrant.

Perhaps the ELA's INTO team could help find Universities with the potential to enter the league.

[dalglish]

I have to support Pom. We considered a C team this year, as we seem to do every year however the possibility of not fielding a team and subsequently being docked points from other teams made the decision quite easy.
There will always be changes in personnel from 1st, A and B teams simply because of injuries , loss of form, or quite simply wanting to give a player doing well on the lower team a chance to shine higher up. That decision has to be the clubs not the league, we are run as a club and as such have the right to pick the teams according to the needs of the club. I'm sure there will be times this season when you will see movement between all 3 teams for reasons already mentioned, but the changes will be done for solid reasons not just to "load" a team.
I don't see how the current structure has benefitted anyone, in the old league structure the strength was easily defined.
Out of interest how long does it take for someone to get better playing against better players and when would you notice the difference.

[young_trig]

I have to support Pom. We considered a C team this year, as we seem to do every year however the possibility of not fielding a team and subsequently being docked points from other teams made the decision quite easy.
There will always be changes in personnel from 1st, A and B teams simply because of injuries , loss of form, or quite simply wanting to give a player doing well on the lower team a chance to shine higher up. That decision has to be the clubs not the league, we are run as a club and as such have the right to pick the teams according to the needs of the club. I'm sure there will be times this season when you will see movement between all 3 teams for reasons already mentioned, but the changes will be done for solid reasons not just to "load" a team.
I don't see how the current structure has benefitted anyone, in the old league structure the strength was easily defined.
Out of interest how long does it take for someone to get better playing against better players and when would you notice the difference.

We're not saying that there isn't player movement for genuine reasons. Its just really annoying when teams load lower teams (and it does happen) and hide behind excuses such as players dropped, etc. NEMLA can't do anything for the reason you said, its up to the clubs to select their squads. However, loading DOES happen, and it isn't fair to anyone.

As for the league structure, there are many arguments to say it isn't working, but for gods sake can everyone stop keep piping on as if the old structure was the saint of all league structures. It didn't work and it made it almost impossible for new clubs to get going and develop.

[LivTeamJones26]

We're not saying that there isn't player movement for genuine reasons. Its just really annoying when teams load lower teams (and it does happen) and hide behind excuses such as players dropped, etc. NEMLA can't do anything for the reason you said, its up to the clubs to select their squads. However, loading DOES happen, and it isn't fair to anyone.

As for the league structure, there are many arguments to say it isn't working, but for gods sake can everyone stop keep piping on as if the old structure was the saint of all league structures. It didn't work and it made it almost impossible for new clubs to get going and develop.

Hallelujah!

[dalglish]

Set the leagues and the structure will follow. New teams will know where they start. Whats the difference between this and other sports. If they have any ambition then thats great. Getting new teams to compete against established clubs will never happen. Lacrosse is unlike football or cricket, I maintain my point which people disagree with, you will not get any new team to compete against the established clubs with years of experience unless you bring over american/canadian talent. The only way is to start them young ( we can all come up with the odd exception so please don't go there). Get a Junior programme going, that is where the future starts. New teams start at the bottom, coach juniors from the age of 6 and have a long term plan.

[Moaning Git]

The problem is D that you are speaking from the standpoint of a club that has , largely thanks to the efforts of one man, developed what was a very successful Junior development structure and is reaping the benefits of that success. However when that man stepped back the whole structure started to fall apart and the club did not commit resources to Juniors and so a gap appeared which still exists and is only now starting to be addressed.

Growth of the game needs to provide viable exit routes for players from Unis, if we don't then the game will start to visibly fail from a traditional club perspective. Overall this will mean in all likelyhood a marked decrease in the standard of play overall and a greater ability gap between the top clubs and the rest, but maybe there needs to be a shift in attitude from the elitist old school approach (the "real" lacrosse crowd) to the play for the sake of it, fun, and participation approach which is where the growth is.

Over a period of time I predict that the stranglehold on the Northern game of the big 3 clubs will be eroded. Timperley, Brooklands, Poynton all have some great young players coming through, while there is a logjam of opportunity at Stockport and cheadle where players have to fight for a space on the top teams, so their players with potential may well drift away, especially if the National squads opportunities arise through the Academy programme rather than via league performance.

And Pom, you know as well as I do that loading of teams has gone on right through the league including at your own club, so don't deny it. that just undermines your other comments. That said I know Stockport B were accused of loading their squad when they played someone who had featured in the first team, the previous year, but was returning from 3 months of injury. So not all the stories of cheating are automatically true.

[the pom]

And Pom, you know as well as I do that loading of teams has gone on right through the league including at your own club, so don't deny it. that just undermines your other comments. That said I know Stockport B were accused of loading their squad when they played someone who had featured in the first team, the previous year, but was returning from 3 months of injury. So not all the stories of cheating are automatically true.

I am not saying it does not happen but just not as much as people make out.

most teams are trying to win.

the effect you will see when a 1st team does not have a game is that players will not be poached up to fill sports rather than players dropped to load the team.

in fact over a season playing A-B and C teams you are more likley to come out on top as more often than not as these teams will have their best players poached up to fill spots on higher teams

so you are more likely to see a full strength team if a higher team is not playing rather than a loaded one.

also the number of times this situation happen in a normal season where the first do not have games but the lower teams do cannot be that common.

the most common ringing I know of is teams in prem 2 and the higher nemla leagues sending players to the nemla team as it is the tougher game that week.

we are only 3 games in to the season but have used 18 diffrent players on the first team I suppose now the 5 players who have played first and are no back on the A are all ringers depending on your point of veiw.

[Moaning Git]

You are probably right about how the ringing happens, and some of it is perfectly legit within the terms of the rules, but when you are on the receiving end of a drubbing because of it, which may impact on your promotion relegation chances then it is hard not to be bitter about it.

[the pom]

Stockport 17-1 Sheffield University; Sheffield Steelers 23-1 Newcastle; Brooklands 26-1 Ashton; Hull 29-2 City of Stoke; Wilmslow A 22-0 Cheadle C; Timperly C 27-6 Brooklands B; Newcastle 0-16 Rochdale

I think drubbings that may affect your promotion are very very common in the current structure. this is only a couple of weeks in.

please confirm you think results like this are

1 good for the game
2 fun for anyone to play in
3 going to convince new teams to keep going out and getting hammered week in week out instead of in the occasional games that could possibly have ringers in it.

the current structure would be the right way to go if we had possible double to 3 times the number of first teams but we dont so before more small more established teams are forced out of existence prem 3 folds so new teams only come up against large clubs with multiple teams with better players in prem 2 close any door on any chance of promotion for new clubs.

does any one know what the record score is for a uk domestic match will it get beaten this year is a 50-0 possible.