English clubs give 2 year notice to withdraw from Heineken European Cup

First topic message reminder :

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/18403809

The governing body of England's top rugby union clubs has given notice of its intention to pull out of the Heineken Cup and Amlin Challenge Cup.
The move comes amid disagreements over how the competitions are organised.
Recent Heineken Cup winners

French clubs have also threatened to withdraw, but as two years' notice has to be given the move is perceived as an attempt to force others to negotiate.
"We hope that there will now be an urgent dialogue," said Premiership Rugby chief executive Mark McCafferty.
In May, Leinster beat Ulster 42-14 in the Heineken Cup final to retain the trophy.
Premiership Rugby's intention to exit the competition will affect such top English sides as Northampton, Saracens, Gloucester, Bath, Harlequins, Leicester and London Irish, all of whom competed in the 2011-12 tournament.
McCafferty added that he hopes discussions can commence soon regarding "the future of European cup rugby, including qualification, competition formats and ambition to expand into new markets".
The governing body's notice period extends to the end of the 2013-14 event, at which point they say they will exit the competitions.

Artful_Dodger wrote: Ireland isn't just bringing in money from Irish TV viewers.

That's the point I was making. This notion that the Irish "take out" three times more than they "put in" is nonsense. As if they only deserve money for people who watch them while in Ireland, and not for people who watch them when in any other country.

The IRFU are not responsible for "putting in" any TV viewers. They enter 3 (or 4) teams as agreed. They've played great rugby and, going on how Sky tend to give Leinster and Munster top billing and huge amounts of hype, I assume they get large TV viewing figures across the UK. If they didn't they'd be a red button option for us Irish to watch while everyone else ignores us. That doesn't happen.

Feckless Rogue

Whilst I agree in part, I think much of it is also to do with it being actual HC rugby. If not so then why isn't a Munster vs. Leinster match watched with the same figures in the Rabo?

What's the issue with games being on the red button? If you're a subscriber you get access to them. The only people who don't are those that watch on illegal streams and I don't think Sky pander to them.

Only one thing really matters and that is TV subscriptions. The only thing Sky care about is increasing subscriptions (and advertising, which is linked to viewing numbers). Regardless of how many people watch the provinces play in England the key point is how many of them subscribe due to the provinces? If the provinces pulled out of Europe (or their games were not available) how many would cancel? If you think these numbers are anywhere near the numbers that would cancel if the English dropped out you're deluding yourself. I watch some football games if I'm bored. I would never get sky just for the football. There's a big difference there.

The value of the HC in terms of advertising and TV revenue would drop however.... in terms of population you'd lose 110MM people from a pool of maybe 125MM people... thats massive.

People wouldn't automatically stop watching I agree. Lots of armchair viewers out there but sky would question whether it should pay so much money for this and rather concentrate on the AP, Top14 or perhaps a ENG & FRA competition which replaces their HC involvement.

HammerofThunor wrote: If the provinces pulled out of Europe (or their games were not available) how many would cancel? If you think these numbers are anywhere near the numbers that would cancel if the English dropped out you're deluding yourself.

Nobody said that was the case, we simply pointed out the idea that the Irish provinces contribution is a mere 5million a year is laughable.

Well that depends doesn't it. The provinces may get viewers but are those subscribers due to the Provinces playing the HEC? I'd say probably not (except for the Irish living in Britain (not sure how the viewing rights works with NI)). That's based on nothing other than myself and people I know (as in only forking out money for something you have an emotional involvement in).

So the whole point is that if the English pulled out those subscribers will cancel, even though they may have watched Leinster/Munster/Ulster play before. That's certainly true for the French and I expect it's similar in England. So the idea of the provinces bringing in more money than pure Irish subscribers is based around English involved to provide the base interest in the first place.

In the end we don't actually know the details of who generates what money for whom. All we can do is make it up and argue over it

Artful_Dodger wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote: If the provinces pulled out of Europe (or their games were not available) how many would cancel? If you think these numbers are anywhere near the numbers that would cancel if the English dropped out you're deluding yourself.

Nobody said that was the case, we simply pointed out the idea that the Irish provinces contribution is a mere 5million a year is laughable.

Not sure what is laughable there. IRFU reckoned that their "contribution" in 2010 was about 2m euros, but they got about 5m euros. That would have been a bit more since then with provincial success and the prizemoney, but I still fail to see the humour in IRFU gaining 5m euros or more.

Dubbelyew L Overate wrote:

Artful_Dodger wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote: If the provinces pulled out of Europe (or their games were not available) how many would cancel? If you think these numbers are anywhere near the numbers that would cancel if the English dropped out you're deluding yourself.

Nobody said that was the case, we simply pointed out the idea that the Irish provinces contribution is a mere 5million a year is laughable.

Not sure what is laughable there. IRFU reckoned that their "contribution" in 2010 was about 2m euros, but they got about 5m euros. That would have been a bit more since then with provincial success and the prizemoney, but I still fail to see the humour in IRFU gaining 5m euros or more.

I was responding to the comment that the IRFU contributed 5m euro's to the pot, not took 5m euro's out. 5 of the last 7 HC winners are Irish provinces, we are central to what European club rugby has become - I'm happy that we are contribute a hell of a lot more to the HC than some people make out as without us the English and French wouldn't be bringing in the sort of revenue they are. Only one way to find out, let the English and French clubs leave and then we'll see who gets hurt the most.

formerly known as Sam wrote:

Not as bad as you think. More people around Europe might want to watch Leinster ahead of Exeter for example.

Profitius I don't think it's a popularity contest. Considering all the cash is put into a solitary pot and the Irish take out 3 times more than they put in (Dubbya provided those figures sometime ago) I don't think things would be as rosy for them. Particularly when they are so relient on the IRFU funded central contracts to maintain their best players.

It is a popularity contest in a way. More people want to watch the more popular teams and in many cases it doesn't matter what country they are from.

You English are saying its fair that Exeter would get more money than Leinster despite more people watching Leinster! That doesn't make much sense.

In monetary terms can we please remember that this is two bald men fighting over a comb - SKY quite like to have the rugby as it's a good space filler (e.g. the coverage of SH rugby - not a great viewer magnet I'd say), it ties in with the rights for international games and it probably sells a few dishes to rugby clubs, however in strategic terms SKY are not that bothered about the game per se.
The major driver for them is football - always has always will be and all other sports are ancilliary to that. They probably enjoy the advertising income that comes from getting your ABC1 audience watching football, cricket and golf but no executive at SKY would get sacked if they lost the contracts for any of these events.
If the HEC turned into a "Celtic nations + Italy and others" cup and the English/French teams set up a seperate competition it would not generate any extra income for the clubs from this source SKY would simply split the money currently spent in proportion to the number of games each had.
I think the powers that be are greatly overestimating the demand for live rugby on TV and the sort of revenue it's would generate from broadcasters. Just because SKY would probably bid more than terrestial boradcasters does not mean they would bid a lot more.
Also with the RWC coming to England and SKY having no coverage of that they may see their future as a rugby broadcaster as winding down after the Lions tour to Australia.
It may be worth looking at the paying subscribers to ESPN and the change when they no longer have the Premier League coverage by still have the Jeff/Top 14 to see the real extent of the numbers of people who would actually pay for rugby coverage alone.
Although I'm sure a compromise will be reached in the end - both sides need to be careful what they wish fror...

Indeed IL.

One thing is for sure is that each of the 'Celtic (rabo)' Unions, The RFU and FFR will cut a deal (which will be different from the current one).

EU law dictates that broadcasting sporting rights have to tendered. (anyone who cares to spend fifteen minutes of their life, like I have, reading http://www.ebu.ch/CMSimages/en/leg_p_sports_rights_wr_tcm6-4406.pdf from the European broadcasting commission) will find that it's a maelstrom of local variations leaving nowhere in particular) fundamentally points out the inevitable fact that commercial TV follows the market size.

Given that, I feel the HEC - given its posture as the rugby answer to footy's European Cup - will remain.

But the Rabo will have to slaughter some sacred cows.
The only Rabo countries with a bargaining chips are Wales and (especially) Ireland.

When push comes to shove will Scotland and Italy be sold down the river?

If the English and French leave, and there's a Rabo cup in its place I'd expect Sky to show about as much interest in televising that as they do in televising the Rabo itself. I think this competition would be worthless commercially, as it would just be another version of a competition that already exists.

They would then buy the English and French Cup, probably paying less for it than they do the HEC, but the money would be entirely focussed on English and French sides. That's assuming some South African sides aren't invited in. If Italy would produce 2 decent sides I could see them being invited to participate.

The celtic nations are going to be the bigger losers from any split, and I'd imagine that will threaten the future of professional rugby in Scotland and perhaps even Wales. Who would the Irish sides play then?

This will be sorted, as brinksmanship only works if you are both on the brink.

Logic and common sense:

Irish Londoner wrote:In monetary terms can we please remember that this is two bald men fighting over a comb..............I'm sure a compromise will be reached in the end - both sides need to be careful what they wish fror...

Portnoy wrote:One thing is for sure is that each of the 'Celtic (rabo)' Unions, The RFU and FFR will cut a deal (which will be different from the current one).

We are two years out and the first discussions are set for September. No need to panic and make accusations. After all we don't know whats been going on behind the scenes. So the truith is there is plenty of time to negotiate a deal and get it right as best as possible for all stakeholders. No need to get worked up.

Clearly, the Heineken Cup is not going away.
In the simplest terms it is too important for even the dunderheads to screw up.

DaveM wrote:If the English and French leave, and there's a Rabo cup in its place I'd expect Sky to show about as much interest in televising that as they do in televising the Rabo itself. I think this competition would be worthless commercially, as it would just be another version of a competition that already exists.

They would then buy the English and French Cup, probably paying less for it than they do the HEC, but the money would be entirely focussed on English and French sides. That's assuming some South African sides aren't invited in. If Italy would produce 2 decent sides I could see them being invited to participate.

The celtic nations are going to be the bigger losers from any split, and I'd imagine that will threaten the future of professional rugby in Scotland and perhaps even Wales. Who would the Irish sides play then?

This will be sorted, as brinksmanship only works if you are both on the brink.

I doubt any SA sides will be involved, anyway not their top sides, by the time this has run its course the Super XV will be up for renegotiation and SARU will have their sixth team in the Super Rugby tournamnet anyway.

The other SA teams firstly don't have any money to build quality sqauds and is the reason why so many South Africans play abroad, so if any of these poorer provinces are invited to join it will take them a number of years to build squads with the "new" money they will be making, why would the Premiership and Top 14 want that type of scenario anyway?

You English are saying its fair that Exeter would get more money than Leinster despite more people watching Leinster! That doesn't make much sense.

Exeter's nation generate more money.

I think I watched as many Exeter games as I did Leinster games in the HEC last year anyway. Also the AP fan base may choose to watch Exeter as they are everyones favourite team, that would be larger than Leinster's support.

I am in favour of improving the HC, the current system is flawed having 6 tables with the two "best" runners up going through to the QF. We all know this is daft as the runners up go through because they usually have an Italian team in their group, a much better system is to have 8 groups so that the winners go though or even better the winners take on the runners up of the next group. This will allow better team seeding to keep the big teams apart until the knockout and allow 8 more teams into the competition, possibly solving some of the issues with the English and French.

glamorganalun,
To play Devil's Advocate for a moment to your suggestion:
A competition with 8 pools would need more teams playing or would have pools with only 3 teams each (total 24 teams, as current).
A team which loses one or two matches will not be able to win the pool and go through to the knock-outs. They may, in that case, pull the plug and not be competitive afterwards.

But, I think you identified one of the problems at the moment which could be addressed. Right now the holes/opennings in the domestic league schedules only allow for 6 pool matches and three knock-out rounds. My preference is for 4 pools with first and second going through. But that would mean more pool matches and I don't think the timing works for that.

Doc:

I was thinking along the lines of more teams in the HC i.e., 32 so that more games are played on the existing weekend, this would allow an English and French team in every group plus an extra Irish and Welsh team and allow expansion for say Italy/Scotland/Spain and say Russia?

Sorry, mate. I misunderstood where you were going. Certainly an interesting approach - would you propose eliminating the Amlin altogether? Or would you take the second place finishers in each pool to form a second tier knock-out? I am a big proponent of expansion of Rugby. Finding some way to include teams from other nations is a good thing. The only concern is we would have to make sure the clubs brought in are not simply cannon fodder for the big boys.

So the inference SA will withdraw from the 4N`s and the Super League if they don`t get there way.England then maybe France withdraw from the Heineken and Amlin cups and form some sort of Super league elsewhere?Sanzar TV rights on Super rugby expire roughly the same time.SA.,France,and England don`t need the rest of the World do they?Who would turnup to see the AllBlacks play wales at the Millenium stadium any way.England have`n t been near the HC for years and there best players are in France now for cash.France have. I wonder how the France and English sides would get under Super Franchise set up for oversea. players One established[test or near test]One young hope ful.
Imagine Toulon with Jonny Wilkinson plus one academy figure from overseas,ditto Saracens or Leicester.Having to rely on there own resources to produce players.It would level the standard of the club sides and long term improve both the England and France test sides.

emack2 wrote:England have`n t been near the HC for years and there best players are in France now for cash.

Saints were in the final the season before last and were beaten by a brilliant Leinster comeback. That's pretty close.

I'd also argue that 'their' best players aren't in France either.

Tigers & Saracens have very strong academy set ups. Also which of England's best players play in France???

What an odd post (the bits I could read anyway).

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Tigers & Saracens have very strong academy set ups. Also which of England's best players play in France???

What an odd post (the bits I could read anyway).

Tigers do not have a particularly strong academy, certainly not compared to the top academies in Europe such as Toulouse and Leinster. This is evidenced by the huge number of foreign players at the club and the fact that Tigers have a lot of English players taken from other English clubs.

Artful_Dodger wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Tigers & Saracens have very strong academy set ups. Also which of England's best players play in France???

What an odd post (the bits I could read anyway).

Tigers do not have a particularly strong academy, certainly not compared to the top academies in Europe such as Toulouse and Leinster. This is evidenced by the huge number of foreign players at the club and the fact that Tigers have a lot of English players taken from other English clubs.

Produced over the last few years:

Ben Youngs, Manu Tuilagi, George Ford, Dan Cole (few years ago)......

Yea they have a terrible production line of talent.

Tigers' academy tend to beat most other club academies and the equivalent nation youth teams. They also tend to farm out players to other clubs (at all levels) who then return if they want. There are a lot of guys at other clubs that came through the Leicester academy.

I'd also argue that 'their' best players aren't in France either.

Jamie Noon...say no more.

sugarNspikes wrote:

emack2 wrote:England have`n t been near the HC for years and there best players are in France now for cash.

Saints were in the final the season before last and were beaten by a brilliant Leinster comeback. That's pretty close.

I'd also argue that 'their' best players aren't in France either.

And Tigers only lost the 2009 final by 3 points. Its only last year the English clubs really struggled to make an impact on the HC, even then only LIrish were more than a win away from the knockouts. The English clubs might not be champions, but they are generally competitive

If they cut down to 6 super clubs that just played in HC and took the best EQ players from the exiting squads and got back the players Scotland and Wales have poached then they could more tna get away with a similar nunmber of foreigners to the Magners folk.
Bear in mind Tigers senior squad for this season only has 3 more non Q'ed players than Leinsters does. LIrish, the team that did the worst of the English clubs last year, have the highest proportion on non qualified players of all the Jeff teams.

Instead of disenfranchising half the country by cutting down to just a handfull of super clubs and closing these off like most of Europe and the SANZARS have done the RFU has tried to retain as much of the traditional structure as they can at the eleite level. Dinosaurs maybe, but is that really a stick we must beat them with?

More comments about the club as the core of English Rugby?
The English club structure is certainly not the most efficient structure for building and managing the England narional squad. It is not the best way to optimize profits for the national union. And not the best way to manage the only true assests of value we have - our players.

But the clubs as the centre of English Rugby is not going away. The clubs are the beating heart and soul of Rugby in England. The clubs sustained Rugby since 1823, or what ever year that was, and continue to do so now.

The balance between England,the RFU and the clubs is not right and does need improvement. But seeing a franchise system as a solution simply because it may be better for other countries, is, I believe, a mistaken conclusion. The Southern Hemisphere teams have been beating Northern teams long before there was open professionalism, long before central contracts, and long before franchises. The solution is to get the balance, structures, and people right between the clubs and England.

Frankly, I have never seen a compelling arguement for England to go to a regional/franchise system.

doctor_grey wrote:

Frankly, I have never seen a compelling arguement for England to go to a regional/franchise system.

Aside from that it would keep LW out

LW?
You mean OW?

[quote="doctor_grey"]LW?
You mean OW?[/quote
Just like the ERFU then

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

sugarNspikes wrote:

emack2 wrote:England have`n t been near the HC for years and there best players are in France now for cash.

Saints were in the final the season before last and were beaten by a brilliant Leinster comeback. That's pretty close.

I'd also argue that 'their' best players aren't in France either.

And Tigers only lost the 2009 final by 3 points. Its only last year the English clubs really struggled to make an impact on the HC, even then only LIrish were more than a win away from the knockouts. The English clubs might not be champions, but they are generally competitive

If they cut down to 6 super clubs that just played in HC and took the best EQ players from the exiting squads and got back the players Scotland and Wales have poached then they could more tna get away with a similar nunmber of foreigners to the Magners folk.
Bear in mind Tigers senior squad for this season only has 3 more non Q'ed players than Leinsters does. LIrish, the team that did the worst of the English clubs last year, have the highest proportion on non qualified players of all the Jeff teams.

Instead of disenfranchising half the country by cutting down to just a handfull of super clubs and closing these off like most of Europe and the SANZARS have done the RFU has tried to retain as much of the traditional structure as they can at the eleite level. Dinosaurs maybe, but is that really a stick we must beat them with?

Not a student of logic? Over the last 4 years: S15 winners - all franchises, PRO12 winner - all franchises, HEC winner - 3 franchises, one club.

Ignoring the fact that only franchises take part in S15 and PRO12, and the fact the 3 franchise winners of the HEC are all Leinster, how can you ignore this clear data. Franchises win competitions (especially if only franchises take part).

HammerofThunor wrote:

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

sugarNspikes wrote:

emack2 wrote:England have`n t been near the HC for years and there best players are in France now for cash.

Saints were in the final the season before last and were beaten by a brilliant Leinster comeback. That's pretty close.

I'd also argue that 'their' best players aren't in France either.

And Tigers only lost the 2009 final by 3 points. Its only last year the English clubs really struggled to make an impact on the HC, even then only LIrish were more than a win away from the knockouts. The English clubs might not be champions, but they are generally competitive

If they cut down to 6 super clubs that just played in HC and took the best EQ players from the exiting squads and got back the players Scotland and Wales have poached then they could more tna get away with a similar nunmber of foreigners to the Magners folk.
Bear in mind Tigers senior squad for this season only has 3 more non Q'ed players than Leinsters does. LIrish, the team that did the worst of the English clubs last year, have the highest proportion on non qualified players of all the Jeff teams.

Instead of disenfranchising half the country by cutting down to just a handfull of super clubs and closing these off like most of Europe and the SANZARS have done the RFU has tried to retain as much of the traditional structure as they can at the eleite level. Dinosaurs maybe, but is that really a stick we must beat them with?

Not a student of logic? Over the last 4 years: S15 winners - all franchises, PRO12 winner - all franchises, HEC winner - 3 franchises, one club.

Ignoring the fact that only franchises take part in S15 and PRO12, and the fact the 3 franchise winners of the HEC are all Leinster, how can you ignore this clear data. Franchises win competitions (especially if only franchises take part).

is tht aimed at what I said or what he said ?
I never said that franchises wouldnt be more successful, what I challenged was the notion that English clubs were way off the boil, that they were over reliant on foriegn players, that they would do worse if they were forced down a franchise route, and that sacrificing the soul of club rugby for success isnt in all ways a good thing.

If youre going to start your posts with an insult please be clear in what you are having a go at, and read back to find the context of the comments.

I will admit that franchises do tend to win leagues which have only franchises competing.
I think we are all being a bit tongue in cheek here.

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

sugarNspikes wrote:

emack2 wrote:England have`n t been near the HC for years and there best players are in France now for cash.

Saints were in the final the season before last and were beaten by a brilliant Leinster comeback. That's pretty close.

I'd also argue that 'their' best players aren't in France either.

And Tigers only lost the 2009 final by 3 points. Its only last year the English clubs really struggled to make an impact on the HC, even then only LIrish were more than a win away from the knockouts. The English clubs might not be champions, but they are generally competitive

If they cut down to 6 super clubs that just played in HC and took the best EQ players from the exiting squads and got back the players Scotland and Wales have poached then they could more tna get away with a similar nunmber of foreigners to the Magners folk.
Bear in mind Tigers senior squad for this season only has 3 more non Q'ed players than Leinsters does. LIrish, the team that did the worst of the English clubs last year, have the highest proportion on non qualified players of all the Jeff teams.

Instead of disenfranchising half the country by cutting down to just a handfull of super clubs and closing these off like most of Europe and the SANZARS have done the RFU has tried to retain as much of the traditional structure as they can at the eleite level. Dinosaurs maybe, but is that really a stick we must beat them with?

Not a student of logic? Over the last 4 years: S15 winners - all franchises, PRO12 winner - all franchises, HEC winner - 3 franchises, one club.

Ignoring the fact that only franchises take part in S15 and PRO12, and the fact the 3 franchise winners of the HEC are all Leinster, how can you ignore this clear data. Franchises win competitions (especially if only franchises take part).

is tht aimed at what I said or what he said ?
I never said that franchises wouldnt be more successful, what I challenged was the notion that English clubs were way off the boil, that they were over reliant on foriegn players, that they would do worse if they were forced down a franchise route, and that sacrificing the soul of club rugby for success isnt in all ways a good thing.

If youre going to start your posts with an insult please be clear in what you are having a go at, and read back to find the context of the comments.

I disappointed. I tried to mimic your occasional posting style but obviously failed miserably. The logic is franchises with competitions that only franchises are in. Also Leinster are awesome at the moment and are a franchise. Therefore franchises are better. At least that passes for logic on here generally.

It certainly wasn't meant as an insult.

Artful_Dodger wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Tigers & Saracens have very strong academy set ups. Also which of England's best players play in France???

What an odd post (the bits I could read anyway).

Tigers do not have a particularly strong academy, certainly not compared to the top academies in Europe such as Toulouse and Leinster. This is evidenced by the huge number of foreign players at the club and the fact that Tigers have a lot of English players taken from other English clubs.

What a crock of Poopie. The reason why Leicester recruit foreign players is because they lose half of their squad due to international call ups. They want the best players at their club because they are ambitious. Leinster and Toulouse regularly take good players from other clubs as well.

If Leinster wasn't owned by the IRFU then you can bet your arse that they would buy more foreign players and more from Ulster and even more from other Irish franchises.

Whatever the outcome which frankly seems a Bluff Sky will still broadcast whatever is left.I have the Sports Channel only for Rugby Union frankly if I could get it .A dedicated rugby union channel such is available in NZ indeed THE NZ rugby channel would be my preferrred viewing

Tigers do not have a particularly strong academy, certainly not compared to the top academies in Europe such as Toulouse and Leinster. This is evidenced by the huge number of foreign players at the club and the fact that Tigers have a lot of English players taken from other English clubs.

Remember that Leinster and Tolouse have either first pick or a massive wad of cash to get young talent into their academies. Tigers can only afford to offer peanuts and have Nottingham, Northampton and Loughborough Uni all on their door step trying to do deals for the same players. Tigers also manage to provide 4 or 5 academy products to the England team (e.g. Cole, Deacon, Croft, Youngs, Manu) around 20% for a national team that draws on 12 different top flight teams.

Tigers academy may not provide nearly an entire team ala the Irish style but they still do very well with the Tigers scouts some of the best at bringing in talent that is under the radar. I think our last big name signing was Mauger after the 2007 RWC. The foreign players we have tend to have come from much more modest circumstances e.g. Ayerza was semi pro in Argentina, Castro was overweight and playing in Italy, Steve Mafi was in the Waratahs academy B side and Geordie was a student they took on trial etc.