Celtic nations come together to resist changes to Heineken Cup

First topic message reminder :

http://www.espnscrum.com/heineken-cup-2011-12/rugby/story/166705.html

Martyn Thomas says Ireland, Wales and Scotland have formed a pact not to give in to the English and French demands. Furthermore he thinks the English and French are going to be forced to back down and he describes English and French rugby as "power crazy".

Premiership Rugby's hopes of forcing a re-vamp of the Heineken Cup have been dealt a blow by reports that resistance to the proposed changes is growing.

"The Celtic Unions have made a pact that this time they will not roll over in the face of any threats," he told The Rugby Paper. "If they keep their nerve when the going gets tough, the French and English clubs will be forced to back down.

"The Welsh, Irish and Scottish Union are determined not to give in. If the English and French clubs don't back down and walk away from the tournament, the Celts will say: 'That's a shame but if you don't want to play in the Heineken Cup as we know it and love it, tough'.

"It's all about brinkmanship. The top English and French clubs are power crazy. They are driven by a join belief that they are the people who command the most money from television for live coverage. That rather flies in the face of the fact that five of the last six teams represented in the last three finals did not come from England. Despite that, they have no regard for the revenue generated by Welsh, Irish and Scottish teams."

He continued: "Like most things in professional sport, this is about money and the English and French teams want more. They may dress it up in all sorts of ways but that's the reality. There will be some tough times ahead."

Is there much interest in Sarries out there biltong? Or is beshocked believing Sarries propaganda?

So you're suggestion to the Rabo sides supply less sides, is to decrease the number of Rabo sides, and thus reducing their ability to negotiate with the French/English sides?

No SP, they supply next to no Amlin sides and so the idea is they take more Amlin places in order to make the competition open to more countries whilst reducing the size of the HEC. Come on stop being purposefully obtuse.

I don't think the number of teams effects the ability to vote against proposed changes as the Unions and League associations of each nation have I think 1 share each (some of the Celtic Unions have 2 shares each as they don't share them with the teams representitive body).

You were making a generic point on some teams being more worthy than others. If you didn't understand the point you were making I will say no more.

I think it's two votes for all the unions involved. The RFU gave one of theirs and half their shares to the PRL. Not sure if the French did the same. All the other unions keep their full shares/votes.

HammerofThunor wrote:Why would it result in the RABO side reducing their ability to negotiate with the clubs? All the unions have equal shares. The number of teams doesn't come into it.

And the guy above mention Bath because you were taking about teams with good records playing in the Amlin. Edinburgh got to the semi of the HEC but finish near the bottom of the league. How good are they? Doing ok in a cup suggests they're capable of the odd good performance, but the poor league performance suggests they can't sustain that.

I wasn't being disparaging to the Amlin, or the teams in it. I was pointing out that the English posters in here think it's fairer for the Irish/Welsh to reduce their representation by a third and the Scots/Italians to reduce by a half (or 100%) so that the 6th placed AV/Top14 (16?) team can be guarenteed HEC rugby.

I merely pointed out that Ulster/Muster and Edinburgh have a better recent record than the Exeter or Sale, not sure what's wrong with that?

I mentioned negotiating power in response to Sams comment about the Rabo supplying 'next to no sides' so have little power in selling TV rights/sponsorship - thus you lessen the amount of teams even more, and the French/English are going to demand even more in the future (as they'd make up around 3 quarters of the competition).

HammerofThunor wrote:Is there much interest in Sarries out there biltong? Or is beshocked believing Sarries propaganda?

Not more than any other team Hammer.

Most guys I speak to are interested in the knock out rounds. It is difficult to follow a specific team if you can't follow them throughout the tournament, as I said, Supersport doesn't show all the pool round matches, I suppose they pick what they believe are the major matches.

My motivation for watching European Club rugby is to see how the Saffers fair.

formerly known as Sam wrote:

So you're suggestion to the Rabo sides supply less sides, is to decrease the number of Rabo sides, and thus reducing their ability to negotiate with the French/English sides?

No SP, they supply next to no Amlin sides and so the idea is they take more Amlin places in order to make the competition open to more countries whilst reducing the size of the HEC. Come on stop being purposefully obtuse.

I don't think the number of teams effects the ability to vote against proposed changes as the Unions and League associations of each nation have I think 1 share each (some of the Celtic Unions have 2 shares each as they don't share them with the teams representitive body).

I'm not being deliberatly obtuse, we are talking about restructuring the HEC, and the influence of teams within it. If you further reduce the Welsh/Irish participation (from an extravegent 3 teams each) then obviously the influence, that you state, they have on selling TV/Sponsorship is going to be even further reduced.

Smirnoffpriest wrote:

beshocked wrote:Smirnoffpriest bit harsh to say Exeter has a worse HC track record when this is their first HC!!

I thought I would test your little theory.

Sale

Challenge Cup -43 wins,1 draw,17 losses
Heineken Cup - 17 wins, 20 losses

Edinburgh

Challenge Cup - 2 wins, 4 losses
Heineken Cup - 34 wins,3 draws, 53 losses

Glasgow

Challenge Cup -8 wins, 1 draw, 7 losses
Heineken Cup - 25 losses, 2 draws, 52 losses

Connacht

Challenge Cup -50 wins, 48 losses
Heineken Cup - 1 win, 5 losses

Dragons

Challenge Cup - 9 wins, 5 losses
Heineken Cup - 9 wins, 33 losses

From these stats look like these sides are more suited to the Challenge Cup.

Not sure why you're bringing Connacht and the Dragons into this as, like I previously stated, under the current system they only qualify for the Amlin, and don't compete in the HEC unless they finish higher up the table than the other Welsh/Irish teams, or an Welsh/Irish team win the HEC.

I was also talking about performance in recent seasons with regards to Exeter, Edinburgh & Sale - and I know it's Exeters 1st season, seems strange that a team that has only managed to qualify for the HEC for 1 season, and this is their 1st season, can automatically be assumed to be better than last seasons Semi finalists, and therefore have more right to a place than the semi-finalist.

All but Dragons are in the Heineken Cup. I also left out the 2 Italian sides.

Smirnoffpriest the records show that Exeter and Sale have better win % in European competitions than the likes of Edinburgh.

[quote]I merely pointed out that Ulster/Muster and Edinburgh have a better recent record than the Exeter or Sale, not sure what's wrong with that?[quote]

Nothing wrong with pointing it out. But it sounds like you're all for ring-fencing the HEC (which wouldn't make much different to the RABO teams). Otherwise all the RABO clubs will have a better recent record than new sides in it.

Sam's point was the European competitions as a whole. Regardless of whether the HEC is 24 teams or 20 teams it will still sell pretty much the same. However by strengthening the ACC you make it more marketable to TV and sponsorship.

And I'm not sure there have been many English fans who's said that the RABO side should lose places and the English shouldn't. They've said that the English contribute more financially and it's not unreasonable for them to ask for more money. They've said the ACC should be strengthened and a third tier introduced. They've said that RABO teams moving down would mean there would be more interest in those countries.

biltongbek wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:Is there much interest in Sarries out there biltong? Or is beshocked believing Sarries propaganda?

Not more than any other team Hammer.

Most guys I speak to are interested in the knock out rounds. It is difficult to follow a specific team if you can't follow them throughout the tournament, as I said, Supersport doesn't show all the pool round matches, I suppose they pick what they believe are the major matches.

My motivation for watching European Club rugby is to see how the Saffers fair.

Whereabouts in South Africa are you from?

Kind of contradicting yourself there. You say there is no more interest than any other team then at the end say your motivation is watching how the SA players fair in Europe.

God, some of the English posters on this thread are coming across as arogant so and so's. Just because you have the biggest population it does not mean you have the most veiwers. Most of the people in England will watch football, cricket, F1, then rugby, the North will mostly watch rugby league for a start. What England has got though is the most potential as there are more people living there, but there are a billion people living in China, if the started taking up rugby and were in a tournament should they automaticaly get the biggest slice of the pie because of their population ? What it boils down to is this, most people in England buy sky for the football, England has its rugby hotbeds but football is the main sport. Now, if the HC was stopped in two years time sky would not bat an eyelid as they only show the HC for about eight weekends in a year, they would more than likely fill that with extra football or golf or something else. In Wales if there is a Welsh side playing the majority of us will watch them on the tele, in England for the most part you will only watch your own club, I know were this is going, reduce the Rabbo sides in the HC give the English and French side more money, then with less sides the chance of an English or French side progressing further rises and more money can be earned, can you see where I am goin here ? Look, why should a team that contributes just as much as an English or French team get paid less than them for doing the same job ? If this goes down the road I think it is then nobody will come out of this smelling of roses and a lot of damge could be done, this is not about unions it is about individual teams, so why should team A get more money than team B for doing the same job, even though team A are not doing as good a job as team b, becuase if they were they would be getting out of their groups.

I am not cotradicitng myself, when there are two matches shown at the same time I follow the match that has South Africans playing in it, no matter the team.

I am from South of Jo'burg.

Kind of contradicting yourself there. You say there is no more interest than any other team then at the end say your motivation is watching how the SA players fair in Europe

Beschocked remember that some of the French teams and Ulster have a good number of SA in their foreign contingents.

[quote="HammerofThunor"][quote]I merely pointed out that Ulster/Muster and Edinburgh have a better recent record than the Exeter or Sale, not sure what's wrong with that?

Nothing wrong with pointing it out. But it sounds like you're all for ring-fencing the HEC (which wouldn't make much different to the RABO teams). Otherwise all the RABO clubs will have a better recent record than new sides in it.

Sam's point was the European competitions as a whole. Regardless of whether the HEC is 24 teams or 20 teams it will still sell pretty much the same. However by strengthening the ACC you make it more marketable to TV and sponsorship.

And I'm not sure there have been many English fans who's said that the RABO side should lose places and the English shouldn't. They've said that the English contribute more financially and it's not unreasonable for them to ask for more money. They've said the ACC should be strengthened and a third tier introduced. They've said that RABO teams moving down would mean there would be more interest in those countries.

That is not the English teams though is it ? Every side in the HC incurs the same costs for playing in it. So why should one team get more than another just because of the country they are from ?

Because more people will pay to watch them. The belief is that more people will subscribe to a sporting package to watch the English teams than will to watch the Irish or Scottish or Welsh teams. Once they have it they may well watch the others but they subscribe due to the English teams involvement. That's exactly how I am, how my friends are and, therefore, how I expect most other people are. Would celtic fans pay a subscription to watch the English premiership? not many I'd expect. How many watch it because they got it for the HEC?

What should really happen is every side sell the rights to their home games. As it is now they've all banded in together to share it out. If they split them up and sold them separately it would be much fairer (not better on the fans perhaps because there might be games on separate channels, but it certainly would be fairer.

biltongbek wrote:I am not cotradicitng myself, when there are two matches shown at the same time I follow the match that has South Africans playing in it, no matter the team.

I am from South of Jo'burg.

Interesting BB, when i watch SXV i couldn't give a monkies if there is an English player in there or not - admittedly there aren't many! - but watching the Highlanders the other day on Sky i was actually hoping the commentators would shut up with the phrase '...England international Haskell ...'

[quote="HammerofThunor"]Because more people will pay to watch them. The belief is that more people will subscribe to a sporting package to watch the English teams than will to watch the Irish or Scottish or Welsh teams. Once they have it they may well watch the others but they subscribe due to the English teams involvement. That's exactly how I am, how my friends are and, therefore, how I expect most other people are. Would celtic fans pay a subscription to watch the English premiership? not many I'd expect. How many watch it because they got it for the HEC?

What should really happen is every side sell the rights to their home games. As it is now they've all banded in together to share it out. If they split them up and sold them separately it would be much fairer (not better on the fans perhaps because there might be games on separate channels, but it certainly would be fairer.[/quote]

Yes but how much should the visiting side get, becuase obviously you would get a big audience from Wales if a Welsh team went to your place to play and it would be the same if an Irish side went there as regards to the Irish watching public.

Do the same as we do with internationals. Give them nothing. Same thing goes both ways.

HammerofThunor wrote:Do the same as we do with internationals. Give them nothing. Same thing goes both ways.

Ah, but it does not work like that with internationals, every country gets an equal share of the tele money. Thats what happened a few years ago when England sold their games to sky, they were nearly kicked out unless they shared their money out with everyone else. This is the road I do not want it to go down, as if the unions start negotiating the deals for individual clubs then where does it stop ?

The English and French are using the Rabo league and Amlin cup as their excuses.

Firstly the Rabo league has nothing to do with them. They should remember that. If they're so worried about qualifying spots then they should reduce their own numbers. Why should English and French teams get more places automatically? I've personally no problem with it but they should remember they've more teams than any country. Grouping the 4 countries together and saying they've too many teams is a very weak argument. Saying that teams don't take the Rabo seriously is also a weak argument to make. Just look at the Rabo final and the boost its given the Ospreys' season ticket sales. If their own leagues have relegation its no concern of the Rabo countries. They should get their own house in order first.

The Amlin cup argument is very ironic. People talk about possibly switching to an Anglo French cup but at the same time the French and English are complaining that the Amlin needs the Celts/Italians to become successful!! Believe me if there was a split there'd be as much interest in an Anglo French cup for the simple fact that it is not a European cup. The French would send out their C teams to play in that.

I think its fair to say that all sides want more money. The Rabo teams are voting in block it seems and the French and English are trying to throw their weight around. I can't see them being successful although I do think a third tier competition would be good.

HammerofThunor wrote:Define 'equal'. It's not about viewing figures as it's not Free-to-Air. It's about subscriptions. Out of the people who subscribe to sky for the HEC, how many do it because the English are involved? Have many the Welsh, Irish, Scottish? The English clubs believe that the majority of subscribers in England (which has the highest number of subscribers for rugby, remember we have 1,454,234,654,345 registered players) are there for English rugby. The French pretty much know that the involvement of the other nations doesn't mean squat to French rugby followers. So they both believe that their involvement is the major draw for TV packages. If this is the case what is equal? A direct split of the total pot? Is that fair? Probably depends on whether you think you're getting more or less than you deserve.
.

About the highligted part. The fans want to see English clubs alright because they're playing in the European cup - which involves the best teams from all countries. Do the English fans have the same interest for the LV cup? It largely depends on the opposition they're playing.

Btw, is it true that the HEC is on free to air TV in France?

[quote="HammerofThunor"][quote]I merely pointed out that Ulster/Muster and Edinburgh have a better recent record than the Exeter or Sale, not sure what's wrong with that?

Nothing wrong with pointing it out. But it sounds like you're all for ring-fencing the HEC (which wouldn't make much different to the RABO teams). Otherwise all the RABO clubs will have a better recent record than new sides in it.

And I'm not sure there have been many English fans who's said that the RABO side should lose places and the English shouldn't. They've said that the English contribute more financially and it's not unreasonable for them to ask for more money. They've said the ACC should be strengthened and a third tier introduced. They've said that RABO teams moving down would mean there would be more interest in those countries.

Point 1. I'm not for ring fencing the HEC, at the moment Welsh & Irish have to compete against themselves to qualify, If at some point in the future the Welsh get a 5th region (which I'd want to see) I wouldn't expect/want another HEC place, it would just mean more competition for within Wales. England/France would still have the same system of competition.

Point 2. The French and English want a reduction in teams in the HEC but want the reduction to come from the Rabo sides, while the English/French participation stays the same. That's what I don't agree with.

Indeed on this thread many posters have said that Rabo sides participation in the HEC should be decreased, and teams from Scotland, Italy and Connacht and Dragons (even though they are usually in the Amlin) should drop into the Amlin to 'make the Amlin more attractive/competitive while the AV/Top14 keeps it's 6 teams.

As I said above that's what I don't agree with - Red Stag (I believe) on other threads has put forward a great system where by the HEC gets decreased, and Amlin either grows or another 3rd tier comp gets put in place (can't remember) but every nation gets represented in the HEC.

Martyn Thomas.

A man who is to soft-spoken diplomacy what Gavin Henson is to lecturing in quantum physics.

Who's said the English should keep 6? I can't remember reading it on here.

The French/English proposal is the starting point. It was never going to met and is clearly unrealistic. Everyone knows that, no-one more than the French and English clubs. It's a negotiation starting point.

AlastairW wrote:

biltongbek wrote:I am not cotradicitng myself, when there are two matches shown at the same time I follow the match that has South Africans playing in it, no matter the team.

I am from South of Jo'burg.

Interesting BB, when i watch SXV i couldn't give a monkies if there is an English player in there or not - admittedly there aren't many! - but watching the Highlanders the other day on Sky i was actually hoping the commentators would shut up with the phrase '...England international Haskell ...'

Alastair, I suppose it gives me a reason to watch it.

I enjoyed the Six Nations this year, first time I ever watched all the games.

I find it diffidult to have interest in a comp when I can't watch the whole thing.

Like the French top 14, they only show us a higlights package once a week and then one or two games during the week, it is impossible to follow any team that way, so you don't feel "connected" to just one team.

Right, how can someone say Exeter cant be used as a good example of an English team in the HC as it was their first season (correctly) and then use them as an example themselves to say they have a better HC record than Edinburgh (who were last seasons semi-finalists)....?

Thats about the logic of most of the arguments going on in here, "you cant say potato, but I CAN say potarto".

The English/French clubs already get 6 teams each, between 2 unions, then theres another 12 teams between the remaining 4 unions. Even with the " us 2 are the bigger draw/we involve more money in the HC" argument, it still screams of "we want more money because we cant compete in the current HC/Jeff format" from the RFU whilst the French clubs will do anything they can at the moment to generate income with the state of the finances of a lot of the top14....

Connaught only qualify because Ireland are dominating the HC over the last few years and thus the IRFU get an extra HC place, thats not hard to understand.

The Dragons do not qualify.

There is only 2 pro scottish teams (of which 1 was a semi-finalist last time out).

Theres 2 Italians teams, Zebre could do with a season or 2 at least in the Amlin being a new quantity that look less than the sum of Aironi did, but Treviso's resultsts seem to be getting better year on year in Europe (Im sure a statmeister can prove me wrong/back me up there)....

Personally, I dont see this as good for anyone, and hopefully the HC continues in its current format, I would like to see it played in segments more akin to the Super 15 though, not on random weekends throughout the season.

Im hoping this is nothing more than a mating ritual of all these countires involved, acting like little birds, puffing out their colourful chests before everyone sits down and agrees to not change a lot.

biltongbek wrote:

AlastairW wrote:

biltongbek wrote:I am not cotradicitng myself, when there are two matches shown at the same time I follow the match that has South Africans playing in it, no matter the team.

I am from South of Jo'burg.

Interesting BB, when i watch SXV i couldn't give a monkies if there is an English player in there or not - admittedly there aren't many! - but watching the Highlanders the other day on Sky i was actually hoping the commentators would shut up with the phrase '...England international Haskell ...'

Alastair, I suppose it gives me a reason to watch it.

I enjoyed the Six Nations this year, first time I ever watched all the games.

I find it diffidult to have interest in a comp when I can't watch the whole thing.

Like the French top 14, they only show us a higlights package once a week and then one or two games during the week, it is impossible to follow any team that way, so you don't feel "connected" to just one team.

I really enjoyed this years six nations, although listening to too many old farts moaning you'd think it was worse than the shadows of the riders of the apocolypse cantering over the hill. Surprises, upsets, close games - and enough butter fingers to make me

I am massivley looking forward to the SH Championship since i've managed to keep up with SXV. It all seems to put it more in perspective - that and i get to have a laugh when the lady introducing the game at the the Reds forgot the name of the opposition and essentially said she was too old for this sh1t. Never get that in Britain!

P.S - sorry for the derail. HEC wasn't it?

Maybe the only fair way to do it would be to have the top 6 teams from each country? Oh wait, Wales and Ireland have only got 4 teams. Ok top 4 teams from each country? Oh hang on Scotland have only got 2 teams. Ok top 2 teams from each country. Total 12 teams. Not sure the broadcasters will be climbing over each other to pay top money for that. I'd watch it though.

As I said above that's what I don't agree with - Red Stag (I believe) on other threads has put forward a great system where by the HEC gets decreased, and Amlin either grows or another 3rd tier comp gets put in place (can't remember) but every nation gets represented in the HEC

It's a great system for the Rabo teams as it would maintain their easy qualifying criteria with only a minimal sacrifice. That could be accepted by the Anglo-French alliance but you'd expect them to demand a far bigger proportion of cash from the pot.

The French and English want more money, end of story. The Irish take out something like 3 times more than they put in and use most of that money to retain their best players in Ireland. Fari enough it's a good use of the cash. However, the English and French who generate the majority of the cash are looking at this and the inflation of wages in their clubs and thinking why is the money we raise through tv deals being used to maintain the strength of the Irish provinces? Fair question and so they want a readdressing of the balance. Minimising the number of HEC games their clubs get to partake in which effects crowd attendances is not going to be taken very well.

Yes but how much should the visiting side get, becuase obviously you would get a big audience from Wales if a Welsh team went to your place to play and it would be the same if an Irish side went there as regards to the Irish watching public

All teams keep their own ticket money. The idea about agreeing a fee for the home tv rights is just extending that to television coverage as well. It would be a pretty bad idea as Tigers, Munster, Leinster and Tolouse would get pretty huge sums of money as they are supported more than others and teams in their groups would get more with those big teams visiting. The likes of the Italian teams, Dragons, Connacht, Edinburgh etc would get far less than they do now though. That's why the pot was brought in initially to guarentee a stable funding stream for everyone. However, times have changed and the split of the pot that was agreed years ago isn't reflective of the situation as it was then (back then French and English teams dominated with the Welsh and Scots struggling financially).

formerly known as Sam wrote:

As I said above that's what I don't agree with - Red Stag (I believe) on other threads has put forward a great system where by the HEC gets decreased, and Amlin either grows or another 3rd tier comp gets put in place (can't remember) but every nation gets represented in the HEC

It's a great system for the Rabo teams as it would maintain their easy qualifying criteria with only a minimal sacrifice. That could be accepted by the Anglo-French alliance but you'd expect them to demand a far bigger proportion of cash from the pot.

The French and English want more money, end of story. The Irish take out something like 3 times more than they put in and use most of that money to retain their best players in Ireland. Fari enough it's a good use of the cash. However, the English and French who generate the majority of the cash are looking at this and the inflation of wages in their clubs and thinking why is the money we raise through tv deals being used to maintain the strength of the Irish provinces? Fair question and so they want a readdressing of the balance. Minimising the number of HEC games their clubs get to partake in which effects crowd attendances is not going to be taken very well.

Yes but how much should the visiting side get, becuase obviously you would get a big audience from Wales if a Welsh team went to your place to play and it would be the same if an Irish side went there as regards to the Irish watching public

All teams keep their own ticket money. The idea about agreeing a fee for the home tv rights is just extending that to television coverage as well. It would be a pretty bad idea as Tigers, Munster, Leinster and Tolouse would get pretty huge sums of money as they are supported more than others and teams in their groups would get more with those big teams visiting. The likes of the Italian teams, Dragons, Connacht, Edinburgh etc would get far less than they do now though. That's why the pot was brought in initially to guarentee a stable funding stream for everyone. However, times have changed and the split of the pot that was agreed years ago isn't reflective of the situation as it was then (back then French and English teams dominated with the Welsh and Scots struggling financially).

The English and French clubs only generate the most cash because there are more English and French teams involved. Do you honestly think that team for team that the English clubs contribute more money to the HC than any other ? All teams should have an equal share, as they all spend about the same money when they play the competition, weather it be travelling costs, ground costs or any other fees, so why is it that one team from one country should get more money for doing the same job just because of the country they come from ? The way I look at it is like this, we all need each other, otherwise there is no competition, if there is no competition there will be no money anyway, sky will not replace the HC which only takes up about 8 weekends a year with another below par competition when they can fill the gap with cricket or golf or sailing, or whatever, all sky care about is football, everything else are gap fillers. So it would be the best interest of everybody to leave it as it is, and if the French and English do not like it, then I guess they manage their own business better and improve their teams, as better teams mean further they get in the competition thus the more money they will make, and this is the crux of it all, they cannot manage their own business so they want to alter everyone else's so that they can have more.

formerly known as Sam wrote:

As I said above that's what I don't agree with - Red Stag (I believe) on other threads has put forward a great system where by the HEC gets decreased, and Amlin either grows or another 3rd tier comp gets put in place (can't remember) but every nation gets represented in the HEC

It's a great system for the Rabo teams as it would maintain their easy qualifying criteria with only a minimal sacrifice. That could be accepted by the Anglo-French alliance but you'd expect them to demand a far bigger proportion of cash from the pot.

The French and English want more money, end of story. The Irish take out something like 3 times more than they put in and use most of that money to retain their best players in Ireland. Fari enough it's a good use of the cash. However, the English and French who generate the majority of the cash are looking at this and the inflation of wages in their clubs and thinking why is the money we raise through tv deals being used to maintain the strength of the Irish provinces? Fair question and so they want a readdressing of the balance. Minimising the number of HEC games their clubs get to partake in which effects crowd attendances is not going to be taken very well.

The cash is generated by people wanting to watch the EUROPEAN cup ie Toulouse, Clermont, Leinster, Ospreys, Leicester etc. If English clubs want all the English money then they're profiting off other teams involvement in the cup.

In soccer Irish people watch the champions league even though no Irish team comes close to playing in it. Irish people also pay sky to watch premiership soccer and a lot more watch that then league of Ireland soccer. Its because people want to see the top teams playing.

The Irish soccer clubs can't turn around and say they should have all Irish people money.

LordDowlais wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:

As I said above that's what I don't agree with - Red Stag (I believe) on other threads has put forward a great system where by the HEC gets decreased, and Amlin either grows or another 3rd tier comp gets put in place (can't remember) but every nation gets represented in the HEC

It's a great system for the Rabo teams as it would maintain their easy qualifying criteria with only a minimal sacrifice. That could be accepted by the Anglo-French alliance but you'd expect them to demand a far bigger proportion of cash from the pot.

The French and English want more money, end of story. The Irish take out something like 3 times more than they put in and use most of that money to retain their best players in Ireland. Fari enough it's a good use of the cash. However, the English and French who generate the majority of the cash are looking at this and the inflation of wages in their clubs and thinking why is the money we raise through tv deals being used to maintain the strength of the Irish provinces? Fair question and so they want a readdressing of the balance. Minimising the number of HEC games their clubs get to partake in which effects crowd attendances is not going to be taken very well.

Yes but how much should the visiting side get, becuase obviously you would get a big audience from Wales if a Welsh team went to your place to play and it would be the same if an Irish side went there as regards to the Irish watching public

All teams keep their own ticket money. The idea about agreeing a fee for the home tv rights is just extending that to television coverage as well. It would be a pretty bad idea as Tigers, Munster, Leinster and Tolouse would get pretty huge sums of money as they are supported more than others and teams in their groups would get more with those big teams visiting. The likes of the Italian teams, Dragons, Connacht, Edinburgh etc would get far less than they do now though. That's why the pot was brought in initially to guarentee a stable funding stream for everyone. However, times have changed and the split of the pot that was agreed years ago isn't reflective of the situation as it was then (back then French and English teams dominated with the Welsh and Scots struggling financially).

The English and French clubs only generate the most cash because there are more English and French teams involved. Do you honestly think that team for team that the English clubs contribute more money to the HC than any other ? All teams should have an equal share, as they all spend about the same money when they play the competition, weather it be travelling costs, ground costs or any other fees, so why is it that one team from one country should get more money for doing the same job just because of the country they come from ? The way I look at it is like this, we all need each other, otherwise there is no competition, if there is no competition there will be no money anyway, sky will not replace the HC which only takes up about 8 weekends a year with another below par competition when they can fill the gap with cricket or golf or sailing, or whatever, all sky care about is football, everything else are gap fillers. So it would be the best interest of everybody to leave it as it is, and if the French and English do not like it, then I guess they manage their own business better and improve their teams, as better teams mean further they get in the competition thus the more money they will make, and this is the crux of it all, they cannot manage their own business so they want to alter everyone else's so that they can have more.

Equal shares for all teams that compete in Europe and have the similar competing expenses? That would suit the English and French - 12 and 14 equal shares respectively, 4 between them for each of the Irish and Welsh teams, 6 for the Italians, 2 for the Scots and 1 each for the Spanish champions and Bucuresti.

Toadfish wrote:Maybe the only fair way to do it would be to have the top 6 teams from each country? Oh wait, Wales and Ireland have only got 4 teams. Ok top 4 teams from each country? Oh hang on Scotland have only got 2 teams. Ok top 2 teams from each country. Total 12 teams. Not sure the broadcasters will be climbing over each other to pay top money for that. I'd watch it though.

In fact the more I think about this the more I think this is the way to go. Based on last years tables this would mean the qualifying teams would be:

Leinster
Munster

Ospreys
Scarlets

Glasgow
Edinburgh

Treviso
Aironi

Toulouse
Clermont

Harlequins
Leicester

All countries have equal participation & same number of games so should be free to negotiate their own broadcasting deals and keep the profits. From an England point of view I think this would mean less games (so better for player welfare), more prestige for qualifying (better for the domestic league) and I'd be pretty confident we could at least match what we are getting at the moment from broadcasting despite less teams involved. Bring it on.

Toadfish wrote:

Toadfish wrote:Maybe the only fair way to do it would be to have the top 6 teams from each country? Oh wait, Wales and Ireland have only got 4 teams. Ok top 4 teams from each country? Oh hang on Scotland have only got 2 teams. Ok top 2 teams from each country. Total 12 teams. Not sure the broadcasters will be climbing over each other to pay top money for that. I'd watch it though.

In fact the more I think about this the more I think this is the way to go. Based on last years tables this would mean the qualifying teams would be:

Leinster
Munster

Ospreys
Scarlets

Glasgow
Edinburgh

Treviso
Aironi

Toulouse
Clermont

Harlequins
Leicester

All countries have equal participation & same number of games so should be free to negotiate their own broadcasting deals and keep the profits. From an England point of view I think this would mean less games (so better for player welfare), more prestige for qualifying (better for the domestic league) and I'd be pretty confident we could at least match what we are getting at the moment from broadcasting despite less teams involved. Bring it on.

Probably the worst ever idea I have ever heard.

Leicester fan by any chance?

The English and French clubs only generate the most cash because there are more English and French teams involved. Do you honestly think that team for team that the English clubs contribute more money to the HC than any other ?

In terms of tv revenue then yes because tv deals are agreed per country and the deals the English and the French have with whomever is larger than the ones the different Rabo countries have with Sky/whomever. That is the money that is pooled and THAT is the reason the English and French was a larger proportion. It is not about who is most watchable or who draws the biggest crowds, it is purely about who has the best tv deal agreements and in that England and France are way ahead!

Equal shares for all teams that compete in Europe and have the similar competing expenses? That would suit the English and French - 12 and 14 equal shares respectively, 4 between them for each of the Irish and Welsh teams, 6 for the Italians, 2 for the Scots and 1 each for the Spanish champions and Bucuresti.

Lol very good Dubbya. That really would be a massive swing in terms of revenue distribution. Just a quick question, have you still got that link which shows the breakdown of the what the IRFU put into and then take out of the pot?

LordDowlais wrote:The English and French clubs only generate the most cash because there are more English and French teams involved. Do you honestly think that team for team that the English clubs contribute more money to the HC than any other ? All teams should have an equal share, as they all spend about the same money when they play the competition, weather it be travelling costs, ground costs or any other fees, so why is it that one team from one country should get more money for doing the same job just because of the country they come from ? The way I look at it is like this, we all need each other, otherwise there is no competition, if there is no competition there will be no money anyway, sky will not replace the HC which only takes up about 8 weekends a year with another below par competition when they can fill the gap with cricket or golf or sailing, or whatever, all sky care about is football, everything else are gap fillers. So it would be the best interest of everybody to leave it as it is, and if the French and English do not like it, then I guess they manage their own business better and improve their teams, as better teams mean further they get in the competition thus the more money they will make, and this is the crux of it all, they cannot manage their own business so they want to alter everyone else's so that they can have more.

I don't agree with that. They generate more money because there are more people in those countries interested in rugby involving their teams. That's the theory. There's no way to prove, without a Sky Exec coming out a saying how much they're willing to pay for each bit. I think the only answer is to split the HEC and see what happens.

God, some of the English posters on this thread are coming across as arogant so and so's. Just because you have the biggest population it does not mean you have the most veiwers. Most of the people in England will watch football, cricket, F1, then rugby, the North will mostly watch rugby league for a start.

Well some might come across as arrogant whilst you just come across as ignorant. What an absolute pile of dross you have just spouted.

And whilst we are discussing other sports, what about Swansea and Cardiff City football clubs, 19,946 and 22,100 average attendances last season so perhaps the rugby loving Welsh public may be watching other things other than rugby - if an average of over 42k welsh folk are attending football every week, how many are bothering to watch rugby?

Oh - I keep forgetting, the regions are brand new (only 9 years old) and havn't built up a proper crowd base yet...............

This argument can go on forever but as we now know it...

English clubs will pull out in 2 years,

Celtic nations are willing to wave them goodbye

=

Leverage France!

If France decide to join the English the Celtic nations will gulp, but I don't think they'll falter in what they perceive as the good fight.

If France however decide to renegotiate with the Celts, and settle, England will have no choice but to turn tail firmly between legs and apologise.

The RFU and PRL have put themselves in a very dangerous position here...

Trail

It's a bit rich to spout ignorance then come up with that!

Doesn't Yorkshire have the most rugby union clubs in any of the counties in the UK? They don't have many pro teams but they have loads of rugby fans. They just play for their own clubs rather than supporting a city one. That doesn't mean they're not interested in the top level of English domestic rugby, same as me.

thebluesmancometh, you do know that the French started this don't you? They put their notice in first and are the ones leading the charge. It's their proposal that the English support.

thebluesmancometh wrote:This argument can go on forever but as we now know it...

English clubs will pull out in 2 years,

Celtic nations are willing to wave them goodbye

=

Leverage France!

If France decide to join the English the Celtic nations will gulp, but I don't think they'll falter in what they perceive as the good fight.

If France however decide to renegotiate with the Celts, and settle, England will have no choice but to turn tail firmly between legs and apologise.

The RFU and PRL have put themselves in a very dangerous position here...

?

The French clubs have said they will pull out as well.

From what Ive heard though the French havn't cast iron stated that theyre out in 2 years. I thought they had given an ultimatum/threat.

France and England are using this to renegotiate, England have put themselves forward with their recent statements though.

You've heard wrong

Formerly Sam,

I don't have a link but a google of Save Irish Rugby should find it.

I've obviously been reading the wrong things...

I read an article in which the FFR stated that unless renegotiating started they would rethink signing a contract extension.

Then read articles on here regarding the English clubs officially giving notice.

Have the French actually given official notice to be released then?

Trail

It's a bit rich to spout ignorance then come up with that!.

Sorry bluesman, but sometimes something is written with such - well, let's so so far from the truth that it just sparks the odd rant.

And whilst I admit my 'editorial' comments about the split between football and Rugby support in Wales might have been OTT, at least I brought some facts to the discussion - and you must admit those footie attendances make the Regions attendances look pretty poor, so while the conclusion I came to might not be factual, at least there is something that might support it.

[quote="beshocked"]

Probably the worst ever idea I have ever heard.

Leicester fan by any chance?

Perhaps I was being too subtle for some here but what I was trying to highlight was that not even a completely 'fair' system would be good for everyone.

In principle though I am in favour of tougher qualification as you should have to fight for the right to play in this competition. Do you have that little faith in your Watford boys that they would never get in the top 2 again?

http://origin.irishrugby.ie/save/the_facts.php

Ta, Dubbya.

"1.2. The IRFU has, and continues to receive, very strong financial returns because of the arrangements put in place, centrally, by the Six Nations Council and European Rugby Cup Ltd for the exploitation of broadcasting rights to those events and the equitable distribution of the resulting revenues. Ireland is a small TV market compared to the UK and France. Fortunately for Ireland, however, the broadcasting revenues from Six Nations and ERC are split according to contribution on the pitch, not according to the size of each stakeholder's domestic TV market. Thus, although the Irish TV market contributes only €5 million pa to the central pot (c.€3m to the Six Nations pot and c.€2 million to the ERC pot), the other TV markets contribute much more, and the IRFU therefore receives €16 million each year from the central pot (c.€11m from Six Nations and c.€5m from ERC). This constitutes about 24% of the IRFU's total annual turnover."

Is the section I'll refer you guys to. It's all quite an interesting read though.

thebluesmancometh wrote:I've obviously been reading the wrong things...

I read an article in which the FFR stated that unless renegotiating started they would rethink signing a contract extension.

Then read articles on here regarding the English clubs officially giving notice.

Have the French actually given official notice to be released then?

I don't think have to give an official notice. The English clubs have probably done that to make a point. The French club organisations have verbally said they would though.

biltongbek wrote:Hypothetically if the english and frnech clubs walk away, by when should the other nations start looking at broadcasting agreeements if such a scenario is possible?

Surely they can't wait until the two years are up, it would be too late by then?

If I was them I would already sit around a table and look at a new format and contracts. Just incase it all goes south.

Seeing that nobody has answered my question I will ask again.

I thought you had to give an official notice of 2 years! And I have read the such from the RFU/EPL and not of the FFR.

Trail

Without getting into the same old tired argument once more...

You really have to look at the bigger picture. Using the argument of the 2 most cosmopolitan areas, the 2 most diverse areas, and the 2 areas in which football thrives.

Lets look at the international scene...

Then the elite leagues within wales...

Grass roots participation...

Junior participation...

Sport expenditure...

My point is, it's easy for 2 superclubs, originated over 100 years ago to monopolise fanbases, especially with the prize of playing in the most exciting football league in the world. 100's of millions of pounds thrown around like it's nothing and foregin billionaires attracted.

It'll be interesting to see how the rebrand of CCFC works, and how fanbase will be effected.

Football has much higher budgets, command more media attention, and monopolises interest throughout the UK, and partly Ireland. It's hard to escape national newspapers in Wales that treat football as the be all and end all!