How to move to the next stage of Europe

Europe becasue of Money, area, population, country rivalry, and systems in place are the king makes of Rugby union and the 15 game taking off Globally as a more professional game in the bigger countries.

The Big 3 will always be there or there abouts but the rest of the world can't do it because of the following reasons.

No union or country has spare money that is putting money into it except SA the Union runs at a profit and Japan who puts millions into the club game.

The rest of the world is too spread out and/or does not have the money.

Aisa is the only place I know where there is a system in place where a new country or low country in 4 years can be playing at the top. I am sure if Japan were beaten by another team it would be invited to the Pacific cup in place of or with Japan.

I Europe we have it almost with the missing link between Div 1 - 6n and Div 2 b6n

On the domestic side there are only two viable top leagues outside europe the super 15 which is waiting for either an Eastern Fanchise to go bust, Sa to break away or all the top players leave. The other is Japan but they can't grow as they have no outside teams to compet and grow against.

So Europe is the only place where a vialbe league can be done and possibly SA if they broke and had Namibia and and Argie based team in it.

So to Europe

Italy could beat the PIs and the celts on thier day before joining the 6N but since joining the 6N they see Scotland and the PIs as their equal home or away and the others as on their day they can beat them.
If Italy lost to and PI team they would be disapointed.

The second improvement in Italy has come with their their whole squad and A team playing week in week out against the higher standards. The Argies have seen a simmilar inprovement with their players playing in th top14 and having very few ametures in the squad.

So the next step in European growth and development.

First on the domestic level.
In the Amlin you have a combine Rominan team. The Russians and Georgians have sustainable professional leagues but not at the higher standard as need probably around the top ten in Italy.

The ERC need to invite them to the Euro comps and but put stipulations in place.
1. That they form a Black sea league of 3 of Romania 3 Georgian and 3 Russian or four if they could. These could be done by each Union but must have finance in place for the duration of the ERC deal.
If there was political problems with Russia and Georgia you could just have the four Rom and Geor teams and the russians could go on their own our have a team from Ukraine (B6N) Poland and moldova(div lower)
2. You get the unions to get TV deals that would make it worth the ERCs time and also the clubs time

It will work for a few reasons.
The East has the money men and there is a real interest in Rugby growing and why not the big manly sport is right up their lane.

This would help the three countries develop week in week out and if Georgia could get the none top team players back to georgia they would be some hard teams to beat at home and they would test teams

In return the ERC would give them a HC place each and Amlin for the other teams up to four.
The HC would be 32 teams of 8 for the big two all the Rabo and the Amlin winners and the 3 Black sea teams. The winners of the Amlin would be given to one of the big two which ever got futher that didn't quailify.

1st in group to HC 2nd to Shield

The Amlin would then be 6 french & english (final two of Champ playoffs), rest of the Black Sea, The rest would stay as is ecept maybe the winners of the scottish, welsh and Irish club could enter. Have it as 24/ 32 and get 8 teams out of it.

For the country side you have 6N as 6N
ENC 1A as 6NB and 6NC (see below and the rest as is so ENC 1b becomes 6ND and so on

There are two options and problems with both.
a) you have the 6N A teams and ENC come together and become 6NB and 6NC
b) you have the 6N u20s and the ENC teams

a) problem is that wales and france don't have A teams but it would work with just 4 A teams
two reasons that they don't is that the A team comps are a joke and it would cause to many problems with the clubs and it isn't cost effective
Solution- Playing a full geogrian team in a compeditive game will show who is ready to step up not like it is now where it is just a get-together. The TV deal from the East would provide money

b)The u20s wouldn't be able to surive against the big boys. If they can surive against the NZ babies they will be fine. The money would be a bit extra but I am sure that my Irish and Scottish fellows will agree that it may speed up younger players getting into the first team.

So this is how it works

First of all the the six nations own the rights to the 6N and 6NB
All current six nations teams are seccured money for the first ten years

Teams ouside the now 6N get a pay as you play of what is left over.
For the first year you have the top three of the u20s and the top three of the ENC in the 6NB and you have other three and three in the 6NC if A team it would be 3 and 1

Each year the Bottem u20/A(only if 6) and bottem ENC team swap places so two up and two down.
Winners of 6NB plays bottem 6N only if a country in a once off in the AIs

Each under20/A would be only allowed to go down to the 6NC so lowest country in 6NC and top 6ND swap

You do it for 10 years and then you redo which hopefully would lead to the A/u20s being able to drop another div but only having at mopst three in any div and only up to 6NB

For any of Scotland and Italy will be killed Italy A beat Russia by 40 points and Eng u20/A would beat them too for the first three years

In am happy to hear critism but you have to back it up and none of it will never happen try or Italy will be relegarted next year not true they can outmuscle Georgia and Scotland can kick a win and in an AI you can sure it would be full strenght

Sorry its a bit long

I think Ireland would have better front rows if they had to compete against the Geogrians and Romanians and also Ireland would know how to play without a scrum and win

The best thing I took out of this is the creation of a Black Sea league, but distances are so big (Bucharest to Moscow is about 2K kms) and therefore finance..

yes that is a problem but you could do just the Georgians and Romanians as I think the Russians could last by themslves. The money is there but I has to be two fold and If the ERC offer the carrot they might do the league they won't by themselves. Ireland and others would still be in the league if we were top of the 6nations and couldn't go any higher with club or country

Flights would not be all that masive

Its the BigMac index they they have to charge less to fill seats

It is definitely the way to go to bring certain pockets of countries together to create different segments of not only domestic, inter countr domestic leagues and tournaments.

The way I see the future of rugby union from this development perspective is quite simple from a setup perspective.

You have the western European sector (England, France, Italy, Wales, Ireland and Scotland), between them they have three tiers, domestic competition between their local provinces/regions/clubs, an inter country top league (HC) and the six nations at test level.

You can break up the rest of europe in the same type of blocks.

The same principal applies in the SH, forget to call it tiers, just call it sectors.

I do like the different levels it means that there is always competition and a chance to say I am the best.

I think that if you get a multi nation league like the Rabo or Super 15 it helps countries to improve. The problem with Japan (and SA in isolation ) was that you can't improve as quickly if you can compare yourself to someone else.

Aslo if Georgia and Romania and Russia were put into three or four teams they would be stronger so the step up would not be as big and so a big improvement in the international stage. Also there is more money.

I think that the Argies have benefited from being in the Currie as would Nambia if their Country team (less the overseas players) were also in the Currie.

The thing that people forget is that the PIs aren't going to get better by much, Rugby is their sport they aren't going to find more players then second generation players from Auz and NZ

Brendan the Namibian team features in our Vodacom cup, they aren't competitive enough even for the Vodacom cup, so the Currie Cup is a bridge too far.

There are however many Namibians who come over to SA and get to play currie cup.

Argentina has had a representative side in our Vodacom cup for the past number of years, they won it last year.

How many namibians play in SA in the super 15 teams or are most of them in the lower leagues.

Do you think that South Africa could leave the Super 15 and go back to the Currie Cup. I know that they have higher Attendances then the Top 14 as it is. They also have the money men to keep the players. I also think that the ERC would bite the hand off to get the teams as it would then be the best Club Competition in the world.
Do you think they would get kicked out of SANZAR as in fairness SA has the highest attendances and the biggest contributors and IF they left would the Super 15 be viable.

Brendan firstly , as far as the namibians are concerned I can't thin of any in the super XV off hand, but i am sure there will be one or two, there are usually a handful or so in the Currie Cup.

As far as the SANZAR situation. It is a bit of a sore point for me in regards to how the television revenue is split, SA from memory vring in more than 60% of the revenue and yet have agreed at the last contract agreements to sahre it a third each. That is down to OZ and NZ administrators somehow convincing our peopple to do it.

Splitting away from the Super XV in its current format I would have no problem with as I just don't like the setup at all. I did a piece about it two months ago, will see if I can find it and post you a link.

If they bring Super rugby back to a smaller format of 3-4 teams each I would be happy to stay in the current arrangement.

Alternatively an agreement with France and england will most certainly work and be financially worthwhile for SA, in fact I think our players will be able to earn significantly more money as well.

But with those two countries' clubs I will definitely not want to get involved with, purely from the point of view that their is simply no collective goal, just a bunch of rich guys trying to manipulate a system becuase they can afford to do so.

My personal view is that the clubs in Engalnd and France is what makes them perfomr below par, nobody agrees with me on this, but that is my view.

If we do move away from the Super XV, I would rather us go on our own, I did a little research on the potential for it, and from a distance it seems financially possible.

I read the post

I would hate for SA Fra and Eng to go it alone as it would ruin it for the rest as you said the money men would destory it.

What I meant was Have the HC become 32 teams and add say 6 South African teams.
It would lift the Standard of the HC to possibly the best Club/Region competition as I don't think NZAR would be any good to watch.

Travel would be about the same but TV times would be so much better and there would be less bias against SA teams

Irish players play Fra and Eng players 1.5 times a year
SA play NZ and Aus 3.5 times a year and that is down from 4.5 times

Not wanting to be nasty in any way, but I don't like the HC format.

The Super rugby format is leaning too much in that direction already.

Your first problem is the season aren't the same.
32 teams in the heineken cup are too many in my opinion.

When you look at the HC and Super XV, they both have something in common, takes too long, is being split by other tours/competitions and in my opinion simply has no sense to it.

How can you in the same month have three different types of matches played, a player may play his last six nations match one week, a week later play in some domestic competition and in the next two weeks play HC.

The standards are varying, it seems like no competition really makes sense. In my view it is just very poorly planned by administrators.

I want a competition to be by the BEST team of each country, completed within a reasonable time.

Whether you talk Heineken cup or Super XV, there should not be more than 3 teams per country. No matter the size of the country.

So in a case where you already have 6 countries participating, to add SA will just create more of a lengthier competition.

There are already to many countries involved in the HC. It is supposed to be an elite competition, not a free for all.

Going to the calander issues is not going to get sorted as the NH will never go to the SH calander as that is "giving in" which the NH will never do
and having been in SA in the summer why would ye play rugby in your summer

I would like to see 3 Euro competitions of 2 Eng and Fra, 1 from each rabo country

A second one of 16 and a third for euro development.

The problem is that there would be so much fighting about it is so hard for the Eng and Fra and not for the Rabo

can you imagine

G1 G2
Tigers Sarries
Toulouse Cleamount
Leinster Ospreys
Glasgow Treviso

wont happen because of the money men wont allow it and as you and I know it is more likely to be Super20 then Super12 or even Super10

I just feel that NZSR are holding SA back as they would have more money as I think the Currie would go from 16k average to 20-25k average

What percent of SAFAs want to a) be in Super b)go back to Currie c)go in with the money of Europe

Most South African rugby supporters are not happy with the super rugby format, they do enjoy the games, but to prove that the currie Cup/local derbies are still the most popular the ticket prices in the super XV is 20% higher for local derbies than bisitng franchises.

We get and average of over 32 000 per super rugby match and the currie Cup is not far behind that. Even the Lions who has been very poor over the last decade got an average of 20 000 odd speactators in the Currie Cup last year.