Next Season

I guess it depends on how far you want to go back, looking at Nat 1, around half the clubs were "first class" sides that maybe come from a position of being in a stronger place both on and off the field. The other half have come from the lower ranks and are on the rise despite not having the history and previous resources behind them. Small town/village sides are doing very well in the modern game, some with huge Premiership sides just down the road taking pretty much all the fan base away. Leicester Lions and Hinckley are surrounded by Premiership and Championship sides, you could argue that London with it's millions of population and only one resident Premiership side should have far more sides higher up and better supported as they have the resources behind them.

CJB1 wrote: tigerburnie wrote: I guess it depends on how far you want to go back, looking at Nat 1, around half the clubs were "first class" sides that maybe come from a position of being in a stronger place both on and off the field. The other half have come from the lower ranks and are on the rise despite not having the history and previous resources behind them. Small town/village sides are doing very well in the modern game, some with huge Premiership sides just down the road taking pretty much all the fan base away. Leicester Lions and Hinckley are surrounded by Premiership and Championship sides, you could argue that London with it's millions of population and only one resident Premiership side should have far more sides higher up and better supported as they have the resources behind them. I presume by that you mean Quins.  I know Sarries are about to go down, but they've been a London side for much of their existence.  And London Irish (the clue is in the name) are soon to move back, aren't they?  Wasps are lost to the capital, of course ...

I didn't include the Not Nots, nor the Sorries nor the Pests as non have been in London for a long while, I know the Irish have moved back, but as itinerant clubs I did exclude them from my thoughts.

Leicester city have a very loyal following and have had for decades and to be fair most of the "northern footy clubs are well followed. The elephant in the room is Brum, they never have had a "big" rugby club, Moseley were the only first class side there and the City and the Villa are not really huge footy clubs either(now having opened a can of worms...……….I'm off lol).If(when) Coventry get back into the Premiership, the midlands will be dominating the league again.

cobbler wrote: Raider999 wrote: tigerburnie wrote: I guess it depends on how far you want to go back, looking at Nat 1, around half the clubs were "first class" sides that maybe come from a position of being in a stronger place both on and off the field. The other half have come from the lower ranks and are on the rise despite not having the history and previous resources behind them. Small town/village sides are doing very well in the modern game, some with huge Premiership sides just down the road taking pretty much all the fan base away. Leicester Lions and Hinckley are surrounded by Premiership and Championship sides, you could argue that London with it's millions of population and only one resident Premiership side should have far more sides higher up and better supported as they have the resources behind them. Trouble is there are lots of alternative attractions in the capital, such as football (or there used to be) unlike in the sticks where often the rugby club is at the heart of the community. I think your post should have said "alternative attractions in all big cities" (one of which is London). You are right that outside cities the rugby club is often at the heart of the community and hence able to attract much better support and sponsorship than city clubs. One only needs to look at the number of small town clubs (in all 4 regions) that dominate levels 3 to 5 to see that.

No I meant London, as London was specifically mentioned in TigerBurnies post.

I don't think you can compare the draw of Leicester City to the combined draw of Aresenal, Chelsea, Crystal Palace, Tottenham, West Ham not to mention the other Non-premier clubs.

tigerburnie wrote: CJB1 wrote: tigerburnie wrote: I guess it depends on how far you want to go back, looking at Nat 1, around half the clubs were "first class" sides that maybe come from a position of being in a stronger place both on and off the field. The other half have come from the lower ranks and are on the rise despite not having the history and previous resources behind them. Small town/village sides are doing very well in the modern game, some with huge Premiership sides just down the road taking pretty much all the fan base away. Leicester Lions and Hinckley are surrounded by Premiership and Championship sides, you could argue that London with it's millions of population and only one resident Premiership side should have far more sides higher up and better supported as they have the resources behind them. I presume by that you mean Quins.  I know Sarries are about to go down, but they've been a London side for much of their existence.  And London Irish (the clue is in the name) are soon to move back, aren't they?  Wasps are lost to the capital, of course ... I didn't include the Not Nots, nor the Sorries nor the Pests as non have been in London for a long while, I know the Irish have moved back, but as itinerant clubs I did exclude them from my thoughts.

A few years ago a former coach of the England national team once told me that in his opinion most of the best rugby  players in the country are playing in south Lancashire and West Yorkshire. And they are all playing rugby league.

I suspect that the point being made was that a significant no of skilled players in the N are playing RL and consequently the standard in the North is diluted.

Players move back and to between codes nowadays but I think that the point is a fair one.

Pappashanga wrote: I recall our promotion playoff to get into National One. Caldy fought us like tigers. We had an 18 year old Kyle Sinckler in the front row.