Is the Heineken Cup unfairly weighted towards one nation or another...???

There has been a very interested thread running though several hundred posts debating the current format and possible future formats of the HEC.

Plenty of people have posted their theories on what could be done to improve the HEC, which is already a very difficult competition to win.

I would have thought that Leinster, the winners of the last three out of four competitions along with Munster, Toulouse, Bath, Leicester Tigers, Ulster, Wasps, Saints and Brive were all worthy winners of the previous competitions, also that 90% their adversaries were worthy competitors.

There has been a recent Irish dominance, 6 of the 17 HEC's went their way. The English have won 6 too, the French won the other five.

My view is that the Rabo teams have an advantage. But it is not an unfair advantage. Any nation could do the same.

red_stag wrote:My view is that the Rabo teams have an advantage. But it is not an unfair advantage. Any nation could do the same.

By the same do you mean move to regional/province franchise style rugby or do you mean that teams could protect their best players for the HEC and have a strong enough squad to play on two fronts of tough competition...?

The first one. Italy Wales Scotland and Ireland adapted their system to get this advantage. they have a continious conveyour belt of young players due to the rest given to internationals and they can keep fresh for big games. There is nothing to stop other countries doing the same. You cannot have a league you prioritise more than the Heineken Cup complete with relegation AND get the same benefits as the Rabo teams.

There are always pros and cons.

Likewise if the SRU, WRU or FIR could mount surmountable challenges for the title if they increased the level of financing for their entered teams so that they could afford the players that their competition do...!!

Yes exactly.

One change I think would benefit England and France which they haven't mentioned.

They should petition to have the 6 pool matches played over 6 consecutive weeks.

Just looking solely at performance, I think there is an argument that can be made for the Scots (my national bias aside for a mo) and the Italians perhaps having more places than the results of their teams would justify. I don't agree that efficient use of playing resources constitutes an unfair advantage tho - the league set-ups (Rabo vs AP &/or T14) are simply different and their differing objectives, structures, etc., are equally legitimate

To be honest the FRANGLO argument of Irish advantage is actually personified far better by edinburgh who sacked off the the rabbo for a greater HEC effort.. Leinster and Munster fought hard on two fronts, whether players were rested or not.

I don't think it's necessarily weighted towards anyone but some sides know how to structure their season better or have a set-up that suits winning it.

I think it will continue to be won by Irish, French or English sides for quite some time.

sugarNspikes wrote:I think it will continue to be won by Irish, French or English sides for quite some time.

+1

In fact it's amazing that French sides, given their budgets, have not been more successful imo

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:
In fact it's amazing that French sides, given their budgets, have not been more successful imo

The French looked pretty average considering their budgets last time round... I wasn't overly impressed.

Its unfairly weighted toward the Irish, they always seem to have the best teams.

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:Its unfairly weighted toward the Irish, they always seem to have the best teams.

Despite the amount of foreign talent afforded by other wealthier nations with a more competitive league...!

Yes. It's unfairly weighted towards England and France. They enter more teams than everyone else...

Clermont have been a bit unlucky. They've been knocked out three times in a row by Leinster. Two of them were very very very close knockout matches.

Biarritz have gone close but probably haven't ever deserved to win. But it's amazing that no French team apart from Toulouse have won the HC in a long long time. When was the last? Was it Brive in the 90's??

That's a very poor record for the richest teams. Maybe the money will start to tell in the next few years, especially when Leinster's standard slips a bit, which will inevitably happen at some point.

Having watched the French teams in both the Top 14 and HEC last season, I wasn't really that impressed by them. Apart from the occasional inspirational brilliance, no different to any other team, there was little reward for the large budgets.

Obviously big money doesn't buy success, it takes much more than that. French and English rugby may draw larger crowds, attract larger sponsors but it is also very expensive to run and for little rugby reward, not even much financial reward looking at the AP profit figures for 2011-12.

Streamlining the AP and Top 14 teams and agreeing on a wage armistice would solve a great deal of their own problems.

Implicit and subtextual in this article a the question, as I read it, is the question 'When do pre-season friendlies end? Rabo week 1 or Heino Cup round 1?'

Therein lies the very same question that the Rabo and the Franglos will begin to thrash out beginning next month.

The Franglos will enter their argument armed with some shared financial etc. knowledge whilst no doubt keeping some details to themselves (including any private hidden agendas and end-game minimum internal breaking point aspirations).

Converesly, the Rabo Unions will do exactly the same.

Yes - far too many mediocre English teams in it.

Yes, the Welsh are clearly disadvantaged by the HC as we've never done very well. How are we meant to do well in the HC when we play undercooked, star-less, development sides week in, week out in the Rabo? I mean, the intensity is just not there...

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:

sugarNspikes wrote:I think it will continue to be won by Irish, French or English sides for quite some time.

+1

In fact it's amazing that French sides, given their budgets, have not been more successful imo

Plus one my arse. Glossing over Squirrel's less than subtle wum, an English side hasn't won it for 7 years now. Won by Irish or French sides would be a fairer comment.

Risca Rev wrote:

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:

sugarNspikes wrote:I think it will continue to be won by Irish, French or English sides for quite some time.

+1

In fact it's amazing that French sides, given their budgets, have not been more successful imo

Plus one my arse. Glossing over Squirrel's less than subtle wum, an English side hasn't won it for 7 years now. Won by Irish or French sides would be a fairer comment.

Just for the sake of accurate statistics. There were 2 English teams in the final 5 years ago, and an English team in the final 3 years ago and 1 year ago.

Also when I was in schools 2007 + 7 = 2014. Its 2012 now Rev,

If there is any benefit for regional teams over English and French clubs then it isn't the fault of the Heineken Cup, Ireland, Wales and Scotland decided to go regional, English and French rugby doesn't want to go regional, hence it is their problem (if seen as a detriment to competitiveness in the HC)

Similarly if some clubs/regional teams decide to focus more on the Rabo/Aviva/Top 14 rather than the HC then again, not the fault of the HC.

I will say this though, you could put some blame of whether teams decide to focus on the one rather than the other at the feet of the structure of the season.

If you had RABO/AVIVA/TOP 14 and HC seperated into their own slots, you wouldn't have a stuation where clubs would rest players or combine them for only a specific competition.

Biltong wrote:If you had RABO/AVIVA/TOP 14 and HC seperated into their own slots, you wouldn't have a stuation where clubs would rest players or combine them for only a specific competition.

Thats what England and France should be pushing for.

red_stag wrote:

Biltong wrote:If you had RABO/AVIVA/TOP 14 and HC seperated into their own slots, you wouldn't have a stuation where clubs would rest players or combine them for only a specific competition.

Thats what England and France should be pushing for.

It would make sense if they did. Do you think the regional teams would prefer the season to remain the way it is, or would they not also prefer to complete one competition before they start another?

I think the resting players thing is a bit of a red herring, the top international guys play similar amounts of games. ROG played the same as Manu Tuilagi last year, both missed time out. The Aviva and Top 14 matches probably are more intense and that could be a factor but the players thing is a myth I think. NEQs and NIQs would paly similar amounts for both countries

Biltong wrote:

red_stag wrote:

Biltong wrote:If you had RABO/AVIVA/TOP 14 and HC seperated into their own slots, you wouldn't have a stuation where clubs would rest players or combine them for only a specific competition.

Thats what England and France should be pushing for.

It would make sense if they did. Do you think the regional teams would prefer the season to remain the way it is, or would they not also prefer to complete one competition before they start another?

An excellent point Biltong, something that many of us agree would make NH rugby as a whole more competitive on an international level.

The logical season of SH rugby makes so much more sense than the juxtaposed mess of a season we are used to up here.

Biltong wrote:

red_stag wrote:

Biltong wrote:If you had RABO/AVIVA/TOP 14 and HC seperated into their own slots, you wouldn't have a stuation where clubs would rest players or combine them for only a specific competition.

Thats what England and France should be pushing for.

It would make sense if they did. Do you think the regional teams would prefer the season to remain the way it is, or would they not also prefer to complete one competition before they start another?

I don't think they'd mind Biltong. I think its a reason that Ireland struggle badly internatioanlly. Our top players are simply not used to playing week in and week out at the highest level.

They tend to play in short burst of 1-3 matches which doesn't help when 6 Nations or RWC rolls around.

I can only re iterate my opinion that there must be a global season.

When ou look at the seasons in the NH and the SH.

We play rugby all the way from February to december, the NH plays from what, August through to June?

The IRB must find a middle ground that will suit both NH and SH.

I agree Biltong.

Southern France and Italy would have to play most of their games at night in the summer

Feckless Rogue wrote:Clermont have been a bit unlucky. They've been knocked out three times in a row by Leinster. Two of them were very very very close knockout matches.

Biarritz have gone close but probably haven't ever deserved to win. But it's amazing that no French team apart from Toulouse have won the HC in a long long time. When was the last? Was it Brive in the 90's??

That's a very poor record for the richest teams. Maybe the money will start to tell in the next few years, especially when Leinster's standard slips a bit, which will inevitably happen at some point.

It's amazing that no french team which didn't have Cedric Heymans in their squad has managed to lift the Heineken Cup trophy!

There is a valid point in here also. That the french teams have prioritised the top14 over the HCup on countless occasions, only sending the remnants of a squad to away fixtures once they feel that they are out of the competition. It could be argued those actions have a far worse impact on the HCup than other nations resting players in other league games and putting their best side out in the HCup.

Also, they must come a point where a professional rugby player reaches a maximum number of games that their body can properly recover from on an annual basis. After that, it could be argued that clubs might be willfully causing harm to their players for monetary gain? This line of thought defends the approach by some unions but also is a potential pandora's box for other unions!

An interesting question as to what the max number of games a pro player should play in a season, to an extent I guess its dependent on position, as a winger say has to take less hits in an average game than a forward. I'm not a sports scientist, so can't comment with any authority, but looking at some of the NH unions i think the English have a max of 32 for squad members, Ireland 30, Scotland impose what appear to be random rest periods, not sure about Wales or France.

Now look at the schedule 3/4 AIs, 5 6Ns, 3 summer tour. Add 22, 26 for France, league games, possibly a couple of play offs, 6 to 9 HC - let's say 40 to 45 games. So you would expect a top player to have to rest about 10 to 15 to deliver peak performance. The question then becomes when should those be? The Rabo countries have decided that player management makes more sense in the league. The English and French clubs want the maximum exposure for their top players in the league.

I know which approach makes most sense to me.

red_stag wrote:Also when I was in schools 2007 + 7 = 2014. Its 2012 now Rev,

Quite so, as the post above yours highlights thanks. I still stand by my comment that I consider French and Irish sides likely winners for the foreseeable future.

Risca Rev wrote:

red_stag wrote:Also when I was in schools 2007 + 7 = 2014. Its 2012 now Rev,

Quite so, as the post above yours highlights thanks. I still stand by my comment that I consider French and Irish sides likely winners for the foreseeable future.

Given that you're making up stats and you've got a problem with years I'd take your comments with a pinch of salt

Risca Rev wrote:

red_stag wrote:Also when I was in schools 2007 + 7 = 2014. Its 2012 now Rev,

Quite so, as the post above yours highlights thanks. I still stand by my comment that I consider French and Irish sides likely winners for the foreseeable future.

sugarNspikes wrote:

Risca Rev wrote:

red_stag wrote:Also when I was in schools 2007 + 7 = 2014. Its 2012 now Rev,

Quite so, as the post above yours highlights thanks. I still stand by my comment that I consider French and Irish sides likely winners for the foreseeable future.

Given that you're making up stats and you've got a problem with years I'd take your comments with a pinch of salt

Well it's only likely to be one or other isn't it Squirrel. I fail to see how I am making up stats and have a problem with years. I'd say it's one or other.

You'll take my comments with a pinch of salt, as despite my error in years I still managed to show you up as a weak wum. Irish and French sides are the likely winners for the foreseeable future. Your refusal to debate your point (if you were serious) shows that you were only on the windup.

You were the one who latched onto my post. I merely stated that I thought that the countries who had provided winners of the HEC so far would be the ones to provide them in the foreseeable future.

Hardly a crazy comment