European Consistency League

Lord knows where the discussion would go, but I thought I would do something similar for the HC as I did for the Premiership in England.

There are 4 points for winning, 3 for losing final, 2 for losing semi and 1 for losing Q/F.

I chose to group the achievements of Cardiff, Scarlets and Ospreys with Cardiff, Llanelli and Swansea from the pre-regional days. Montferrand really just changed name.

In total 29 sides have qualified for the knockout stages of the HC. In the first year there were no Q/Fs (or english sides). So far 8 sides have made the Q/Fs on just a single occassion. The most successful of these was colomiers who went on to lose to ulster in the 99 final.

No surpise that the top 4 spots are taken by multiple winners of the tournament - though it was strange to see how little Wasps had achieved other than their two wins.

Team	Points
Toulouse	34
Munster	28
Leicester	23
Leinster**	21
biarritz	14
Stade	13
Saints	12
Cardiff	12
Wasps	10
Llanelli/Scarlets	10
Bath	9
Perpignan	9
Ulster**	7
Brive	7
Swansea/Ospreys	6
Clermont**	5
Gloucester	4
Edinburgh**	3
Pau	3
Colomier	3
Quins	3
Saracens	3
Castres	2
London Irish	2
Dax	1
Pontypridd	1
Newcastle	1
Sale	1
Toulon	1

** These teams can still add points if they win their semis.


By Country:

Country	Sides making KO stage	Points
France	11	92
England	10	68
Ireland	3	56
Wales	4	29
Scotland	1	3

If we look at the countries with comparable set-ups we see that English clubs have been less consistent than French (Yes English missed two years - but French clubs "only" got 9pts in those two years); while Irish teams have been vastly more successful than Welsh

Terribly skewed as Ireland, Wales and Scotland only have 4, 2 and 4 teams respectively.

It would be much fairer if you took the 2 best teams from each country, but this would make much less comfortable reading, n'est pas?

You cannot really compare by country - only compare France with England, And Ireland with Scotland and Wales. Even trying to compare teams from different countries is tricky as there are differnt qualification rules.

however if you remove the points when England were not playing and look at just the best 2 performances from each Country in each year you get:

France 66
England 59
Ireland 48
Wales 22
Scotland 3
Scotland 1

LT - its also hard to compare the Irish, Scots, and Welsh, because of how provinces/clubs/regions have been adjusted, rearranged etc over the years. Also your table doesn't really give a fair assessment of the situation without including the Parker Pen/Amlin (although how you would do that I really don't know).

Don't want to open a can of worms here but should the Welsh regions and the old clubs be treated as the same entity? I.e. Cardiff/ Blues, Llanelli/Scarlets and Swansea/Ospreys.

Rodders - to open a real can of worms the Blues should have Pontypridd's history added to theirs too.

[quote="LondonTiger"]Lord knows where the discussion would go, but I thought I would do something similar for the HC as I did for the Premiership in England.

There are 4 points for winning, 3 for losing final, 2 for losing semi and 1 for losing Q/F.

I chose to group the achievements of Cardiff, Scarlets and Ospreys with Cardiff, Llanelli and Swansea from the pre-regional days. Montferrand really just changed name.

In total 29 sides have qualified for the knockout stages of the HC. In the first year there were no Q/Fs (or english sides). So far 8 sides have made the Q/Fs on just a single occassion. The most successful of these was colomiers who went on to lose to ulster in the 99 final.

No surpise that the top 4 spots are taken by multiple winners of the tournament - though it was strange to see how little Wasps had achieved other than their two wins.

Team	Points
Toulouse	34
Munster	28
Leicester	23
Leinster**	21
biarritz	14
Stade	13
Saints	12
Cardiff	12
Wasps	10
Llanelli/Scarlets	10
Bath	9
Perpignan	9
Ulster**	7
Brive	7
Swansea/Ospreys	6
Clermont**	5
Gloucester	4
Edinburgh**	3
Pau	3
Colomier	3
Quins	3
Saracens	3
Castres	2
London Irish	2
Dax	1
Pontypridd	1
Newcastle	1
Sale	1
Toulon	1

** These teams can still add points if they win their semis.


By Country:

Country	Sides making KO stage	Points
France	11	92
England	10	68
Ireland	3	56
Wales	4	29
Scotland	1	3

This makes diabolical reading for us lot.

Disgraceful.

I think that it is what we all knew. There have been four consistent teams but only only raked up alot of points recently.

Then you have the always there but never make it and then you have the flash in the pans.

I don't think anyone is suprised and why the top teir so rarely changes.

Also you can't compare country as the top four team have been top in their repective leagues aswell over that time. The only team to be top and not in the top in Euro is the Os.

So only Four teams can do two fronts the rest switch between league and HC focus

ScarletSpiderman wrote:Rodders - to open a real can of worms the Blues should have Pontypridd's history added to theirs too.

Fair point. Either way I think there's something not right about appending the regions records to the old clubs as if they are one and the same.

Tattie Scones RRN wrote:

This makes diabolical reading for us lot.

Disgraceful.

As a wise man once said it is as important to know where you have come from as to where you are going.

At the start of the season the two italians were tier 4 and the two Scots Tier 3 so I figured if two groups had one of each they would be the two second places.

Can you imagine you would have been beaten up by Treviso and then the next week run raggid by Edin

They are heading in the right direction and they are nolonger selling but buying so I expect one scotish each year at worse one in the Amlin

I suppose it could be done from 2003 on but lets be honest it wont change anything it is much of a muchness

Brendan wrote:I suppose it could be done from 2003 on but lets be honest it wont change anything it is much of a muchness

It would make the Scalrets drop right down the list.

Clemont are highly respected throughout Europe but aside from finally winning a Top14 a few years back and winning the ACC they haven’t really done much have they…?

I think it is stupid to do it with at country to many factors.

Look at 6N and HC and I think you might see a similar story except Wales who are like a yoyo as they go up and down but the rest move slowly.

England 6N and HC dominatance tie in
After 2003 Irleand were second in Europe and tied in thw HC improvement

Italy and wales at bottom.

Also each teams changes for example when were the big moves to france form England and did that tie in with the year that the French got 5 and England 1

That is why there is only four teams the rest are up and down is this the first time that two of the top four haven't made the semis in six year or more that shows why they are top

Great work LT

I think you need to take the national results with a pinch of salt, but the club rating makes verey interesting reading. As you say, its very surprising based on that system that Wasps are so low.

HongKongCherry wrote:Great work LT

I think you need to take the national results with a pinch of salt, but the club rating makes verey interesting reading. As you say, its very surprising based on that system that Wasps are so low.

Wasps either fail to get out the group or go on to win don't they?

Remember this list is a bit skewed because English and French sides do not qualify for the HC every year.

E.g. my team Saracens have had 6 seasons in the HC. We have a pretty decent win % though.

You would expect that Edinburgh who have had 15 seasons in the HC should be higher.

When you compare overall win stats

Saracens - played 39 won 23, lost 16.

5 of those recent losses were of course Leinster x 2,Clermont x3.

Edinburgh - played 90, won 34 drawn 3, lost 53

Ulster - played 101, won 46, drawn 3, lost 52

London Wasps - played 78 won 51, drawn 1, lost 26

Cardiff - played 102 won 53, drawn 4, lost 45

Scarlets - played 105 won 56, drawn 1, lost 48

Bath - played 72 won 43, drawn 1, lost 28

Just a few more to compare.

I would love to know the big 3 of Muster Tigers and Toulouse

Leinster had a bad rate up until about five years ago when they realized you are allowed to win away from home

Tigers - Pl 110, W 73, D 4, L 33

Toulouse - Pl 125, W 88, D 4, L 33

Munster - Pl 124, W 87, D 1, L 36

Leinster - Pl 113, W 75, D3, L 35


So Tigers similar to Leinster but behind Munster/Toulouse in terms of Wins and ratios.

Leinster's record is improving however, while Tigers is worsening.

I think it is better to compare how each tier finsihed

From the quarters

Tier 1 = 4
Tier 2 = 1
Tier 3 = 3
Tier 4 = 0

I do think that being in the top tier is why those four have lower lost rates

Munster, Tigers and Toulouse have been top seed for years

Leinster's record is improving however, while Tigers is worsening.

Going to change next year LT. Cockerill has been ushering through some classy young talent that's going to come good having learnt some harsh lessons on the way (Leinster last year and Ulster this year). Add to that some additional fire power on the flanks (Benjamin and Thompstone = pace and power) and for the first time in a few years we'll actually have a proper specialist 10 of some class (rather than Staunton or a covering IC). If Deacon and Manu could remain fit and healthy for the whole campaign I think we could make the semis.

formerly known as Sam wrote:

Leinster's record is improving however, while Tigers is worsening.

Going to change next year LT. Cockerill has been ushering through some classy young talent that's going to come good having learnt some harsh lessons on the way (Leinster last year and Ulster this year). Add to that some additional fire power on the flanks (Benjamin and Thompstone = pace and power) and for the first time in a few years we'll actually have a proper specialist 10 of some class (rather than Staunton or a covering IC). If Deacon and Manu could remain fit and healthy for the whole campaign I think we could make the semis.

I sincerely hope so.

This Irish / French perennial tussle is getting boring...

This Irish / French perennial tussle is getting boring...

You're telling me. 2009 seems ages ago and even then we were paying the price for not having a good enough back up 10 (no pressure George!) so it would be nice to see us fire out the blocks and reassert Tigers reputation as one of the big guns in Europe. Don't mind if we don't win but I'd like to see us hand out a few reminders, especially in the forwards as the Irish have upped the physicality (if not their sure footedness) and we haven't risen to the challenge.

Based Peter's Euro table on their past thirty games played http://www.eurorugby.com/index.php

The ERC weights past performances ridiculously highly.

A twixt and tween formula would represent a far better recognition of NH seedings.

Why should past results more than two or three years old have any bearing?

Portnoy I remember a tread when the draw was made as to how unfair the points was and they did a few different weighted systems and it was more or less the same bar one or two.

Would Tigers not suffer from it after this year as they came third regardless of opposition

Personally I'm not sure I care how the rankings are set.

You can have a seeding system to keep the most obvious current top bods apart, but fundamentally that won't stop the randomness of the rest on next year's form from overturning the apple-cart.

Ulster have certainly done that this year.

I think the way to go is seeded and unseeded

You can seed according to either Euro History or country places

So top seeds would be top three of Aviva and T14

The Rabo you could divide the number entering by two so most years would be top 5 seeded and others not

That's fine by me Brendan.

A top four and then a total random draw. (which amounts to pretty much the same as is)

I think it would be good for the Rabo PRO12 if ERC seeding was based on league position each year. It would raise the importance and therefore the intensity of the league. Which might help boost attendances.

Feckless Rogue wrote:I think it would be good for the Rabo PRO12 if ERC seeding was based on league position each year. It would raise the importance and therefore the intensity of the league. Which might help boost attendances.

Outside Ireland FR, whichever way you slice and dice the figures it won't make a dang bit of difference to attendances overall.

I'd go a bit further. Irish fans are probably more connected to European success overall than any of the other five (possibly put together).

I don't think that is true Portnoy.

Others are interested in HC look at Tigers could finish top and win the playoffs but will be a bad season because they finished 3rd in HC

I think more care about the HC, they just don't get the chance to show it at the big stage

Portnoy wrote:
I'd go a bit further. Irish fans are probably more connected to European success overall than any of the other five (possibly put together).

Thats because we have so much success to be connected to.......

Do Tigers care about the HC less then Munster I think not

Do Tigers care about the HC less then Munster I think not

No but I think the key difference is that Tigers and the other English clubs care about the AP as much as the HEC where as the Rabo teams prioritise the HEC to the Rabo. Which is fair enough, if Tigers could get away with doing that I think might do but the AP is competitive and the placing within the league accounts for more in financial terms (only the top 6 get into the HEC, relegation etc).

I remember a story about a Dublin soccer team that won the FAI cup a lot in a few years and one year the cup was put in the boot after the game as it meant little.

With tigers being in so many finals now with the play offs (as I think tigers can and does beat any team in a one off and they will always finish in the Top 4) will they care less about the Prem.

I think that is the problem with Munster and Leinster that they are always there or there abouts in the league so the only way to challange is throught the HC

Toulouse are the same aswell

With tigers being in so many finals now with the play offs (as I think tigers can and does beat any team in a one off and they will always finish in the Top 4) will they care less about the Prem.

I think that is the problem with Munster and Leinster that they are always there or there abouts in the league so the only way to challange is throught the HC

Toulouse are the same aswell

No. Simply because the AP remains a real challenge to win, you only take a trophy for granted if there is little competition to win it. Tigers weren't massively fussed by the LV Cup despite being in the semis, they only started to care about what the result was when Saints turned up in the final (local rivalry) and even then there were a few youngsters on show.

Tolouse certainly don't take the French League for granted either, same reason as the Tigers. 1) the financial detriment if you mess up by not showing it enough respect and don't qualify for the HEC, 2) winning trophies is important a year without silverware is not a good year so putting all your eggs in one basket is very dangerous and 3) there is an expectation amongst the fans that the league should be taken seriously, too many inter office bragging rights for any game to be thrown away and the players need the league form in order to get national recognition.

The big Rabo teams know they'll be in the mix at the end of the season the big AP teams don't. Glaws, Bath and now likely the Saints will not be in the play offs. No HEC rugby for Bath and maybe not for Glaws if they lose on Saturday.

I don't think that Tigers would ever finish lower then fourth and Tolouse are not going to finish less then 6th.

Others I agree can't do it and one bad run of form or injures like Saints and they are out.

Tigers though know how to win when needed and have passed Sarries and could catch Quinns though unlikely.

I know some people don't like the playoffs but do want to win the playoffs or come top in the 22 matchs

Does the LV winners get a HC place

Brendan wrote:I don't think that Tigers would ever finish lower then fourth and Tolouse are not going to finish less then 6th.

Others I agree can't do it and one bad run of form or injures like Saints and they are out.

Tigers though know how to win when needed and have passed Sarries and could catch Quinns though unlikely.

I know some people don't like the playoffs but do want to win the playoffs or come top in the 22 matchs

Does the LV winners get a HC place

Unfortunately yes Brendan.

Although no-one in their right mind would consider it to be worth more than an automatic entry to the Amlin,

Brendan wrote:I don't think that Tigers would ever finish lower then fourth

2007/8 we finished 4th - but with 5 minutes of the regular season to go we were I think 7th.
2003/4 we finished 5th

We have tended to struggle in RWC seasons.