H-cup, changes. SRU and FIR likley losers?

First topic message reminder :

The best summary of the H-cup debate, I have found is here.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/sport/2012/0915/1224324046581.html

The H-cup Pot seams to be split into two seperate payments to the unions, one for performance (after group stages) and one for taking part.

I don't see the performance payments changing,

However the participation split, is the one the French and English wish changed. Currently

"The would leave about €40 million or thereabouts in basic distributions, of which the IRFU, along with their Welsh and Scottish counterparts, receive about 13 per cent. This equates to approximately €5.2 million each. The Italians are understood to receive marginally less, around 11-12 per cent , equating to roughly €4.4 million.

Roughly half of the basic distribution is divided between the French and English, amounting to approximately €10 million each. On the premise that might is right, as well as having 12 and 14 clubs to share, the English and French will argue for a bigger basic share."


breaking this pot down is appears that currently each Union recieves:
RFU = 25%
FRU = 25%
IRFU = 13%
WRU = 13%
SRU = 13%
FIR = 11%

The way I see it the French and English, will be wanting this changed from a Union based divide to a League based divide (6 teams from each league + H-cup and Almin winners). Currently the Pro 12 unions recieve 50% for the participation pot, I believe that the French and English will want to change this to approx 33.33%, whereby it is split (will change slightly to have H-cup and Almin winners league gain some extra);

RFU = 33%
FRU = 33%
IRFU/WRU/SRU/FIR = 33% (and leave it to the Unions to decide how to divide this between themselves)

I believe the Pro 12 will argue for a divide of 8 Pro 12 teams (some or all of qualification based on league position) 6 English and 6 French. For this the split would be;

FRU = 30%
RFU = 30%
IRFU/WRU/SRU/FIR = 40% (and leave it to the Unions to decide how to divide this between themselves)

I believe the second is what will be agreed as it see's the French and English share increase from 25% to 30% and a reduction in number of Pro 12 teams and tougher qualification, plus since with less teams a reduction in payments.

I believe this is what the French were wishing to discuss and threaten pulling out over (and nothing to do with TV deals), and the English TV deal has thrown a complete spanner in the works, for everyone involved and added a new dimension to the talks.

Personally I see that the 4 Pro 12 unions will guarentee one entry per union, with the other 4 being League based.
This means that each H-cup place will be worth 5% of the participation pot.
Meaning the split would be

IRFU and WRU would get between 5-20% each year (from 13% prevously)
SRU and FIR between 5-10% each year (from 13% and 11% prevously)

Think the WRU and IFRU will manage to get around the same money as prevously, maybe even slightly more some years, but will generally average the same.
French and English will both increase by 5%,
The losers are the SRU and FIR who will lose out by 3%-8% each year depending if they get one or two teams in the H-cup.

If all 8 H-cups places are league based it will see.

IRFU and WRU would get between 5-20% each year (from 13% prevously)
SRU and FIR between 0-10% each year (from 13% and 11% prevously)

The losers are (even more so) the SRU and FIR who will lose out by 3%-13% each year depending if they get one or two teams in the H-cup, and recieve 0% if no teams get in top 8.

I think this is the likely outcome of how the H-cup will be run. The TV rights part I have no idea yet and will treat it as a seperate issue.

What are your thoughts would the above be an agreeable solution to you? (TV rights can be discussed on a seperate thread).

TJ There are none so blind that dont want to see

- like the english posters?

All I'm saying TJ is that you have not thought it through.

IMO if there is a strengthened Amlin Cup why could they not sustain professional rugby.

You saw the list of teams who would be playing Amlin Cup - all top flight teams from Top 14, RaboDirect Pro 12 and the Premiership.

I find your "snowball effect" funny though I have to say. You've gone from a drop down to the Amlin resulting in half of European rugby players being out of work and the 6 Nations crashing and burning.

Above all else I suspect that we will see all nations represented as I alluded to earlier.

TJ Who do you think needs who the most?

How much money is given back by the ERC to said Scottish and Italian teams for their HC participation to start with? 25% of their funding seems disproportionate to me or they are really in dire straits.

Becuse the amlin does not bring in the money. its simply not there nor is the quality. the PRL proposals on this are utter nonsense. No chance at all of the amil in any formsustaining the number of pro clubs you suggest. tvr ights worth half of bugger all. attendances will not be there.

However it academic as the PRL proposals have no chance at all of being accepted in any form.

Whocares, I notice your location and was wondering if you know what the French view is?

TJ That is why the PRL/NLR want to increase its value

whocares wrote:How much money is given back by the ERC to said Scottish and Italian teams for their HC participation to start with? 25% of their funding seems disproportionate to me or they are really in dire straits.

yes they really are that marginal. The Scottish teams have just about been able to remain competitive with guaranteed HC participation. the EXTRA that Edinburgh earned from the cup run has meant a significant increase in funding this year.

the scottish teams have not been able to afford big enough squads to be competitive in both completions so once they have lost a couple of game sin one competition they have put all their energies into the other - hence glasgow in the league and Edinburgh in the HC last year. Both teams ended up playing semi pro players in some rabo games IIRC

theis year they might be able to compete in both as they have a chunk more funding

TJ wrote:Becuse the amlin does not bring in the money. its simply not there nor is the quality. the PRL proposals on this are utter nonsense. No chance at all of the amil in any formsustaining the number of pro clubs you suggest. tvr ights worth half of bugger all. attendances will not be there.

Yes in its current form because it includes Bucharest and Madrid and Prato and a heap of other poorish teams.

This is what I believe will happen:

Heineken Cup
5 x England: Harlequins, Saracens, Leicester Tigers, Northampton Saints
5 x France: Toulouse, Clermont, Castres, Toulon, Montpellier
1 x Ireland: Leinster
1 x Scotland: Glasgow
1 x Italy: Treviso
1 x Wales: Ospreys
4 x Rabo: Munster, Ulster, Scarlets, Cardiff
1 x HEC Winner: Connacht
1 x Amlin Winner: Biarritz

Do you feel that would honestly cripple European Rugby as much as you say.

broadlandboy wrote:TJ Who do you think needs who the most?

Togther we are stronger. any competition losing some members is diminished - however and HC without England would be much better than one without Scottish and Italians and with a token Irish and Welsh presence in my opinion.

So TJ its fine for the PRL to subsidise other clubs while their members lose money

red_stag wrote:

TJ wrote:Becuse the amlin does not bring in the money. its simply not there nor is the quality. the PRL proposals on this are utter nonsense. No chance at all of the amil in any formsustaining the number of pro clubs you suggest. tvr ights worth half of bugger all. attendances will not be there.

Yes in its current form because it includes Bucharest and Madrid and Prato and a heap of other poorish teams.

This is what I believe will happen:

Heineken Cup
5 x England: Harlequins, Saracens, Leicester Tigers, Northampton Saints
5 x France: Toulouse, Clermont, Castres, Toulon, Montpellier
1 x Ireland: Leinster
1 x Scotland: Glasgow
1 x Italy: Treviso
1 x Wales: Ospreys
4 x Rabo: Munster, Ulster, Scarlets, Cardiff
1 x HEC Winner: Connacht
1 x Amlin Winner: Biarritz

Do you feel that would honestly cripple European Rugby as much as you say.

yes - because in a few years it would change as the minnows (including Scotland) get less and less money each year leading to less and less competative clubs. tis is also nothing like the PRL proposals - under the PRL proposals there would be no scots and italian teams

broadlandboy wrote:So TJ its fine for the PRL to subsidise other clubs while their members lose money

FFS - they are not subsidising anyone. they are sharing a product and its revenues fairly. they only lose money because hey spend what they have not got - unlike the scottish clubs who cannot do this.

do you think its fair thsat the PRL clubsshould take a larger share of the revenue at the cost of pro rugby north of the border? do you really want o see Scotland with amateur rugby only?

TJ I ask again have you looked at tha NLR/PRL proposal?

broadlandboy wrote:Whocares, I notice your location and was wondering if you know what the French view is?

The official message from the LNR is "we want to play with the celts and the english" and that "the european cup is a nice product that needs to be strenghtened improved".

I know the official message was interested more in what the general supporter view is

broadlandboy wrote:TJ I ask again have you looked at tha NLR/PRL proposal?

I have read what the PRL and NLR have said do you have a link to a joint proposal?

Sorry TJ no link but IIRC(& am willing to be corrected) along the lines that the ERC are selling the TV rights short(which the BT deal seems to support),reduced elite comp to 20 teams(6 AP 6Top14 6 top Rabbo +hc & amlin winners with a third tier for devolping nations

As far as I am aware there is no joint proposal and the french have already slated the PRL for the TV deal.

Both want some similar things.

So, current breakdown going on the initial comment on this thread? :

RFU 25% of the current pot - 6 wins
FRU 25% of the current pot - 5 wins
IRFU 13% of the current pot - 6 wins

Which sides put most bums on seats over the last half decade (be they French or English or Italian or Scottish or Welsh bums)? Irish sides. Since 2006, there have been 6 Irish sides in the final, 4 for England and 4 for France; and 5 wins for Irish sides in that time. Let me rephrase it - Irish sides have been giving SKY and other sponsors of the current competition their profits because Irish sides have been the ones lasting longest in it, and going to the finals, and giving the journalists their ammunition to do the marketing on how brilliant a competition the HC is.

And now we're going to take lessons on income/outlays and profit margins from sides and Leagues that have struggled to enliven European competition in recent years, either amongst us outsiders or indeed amongst their own internal supporters? These Leagues, that have always stated the HC is less important to them than their great domestic leagues, are the ones who want to re-organise a great new European competition?

Will that change their lethargic opinions then? Will they eventually get round to saying winning your domestic league is fine but winning against the best in Europe is the cream? Will they truly say that - ever? Because many an Irish player or side have been criticised in the past for having that attitude - that HC is the greatest, the big target. So, I wonder just how much more enthusiastic the yawning French and English will be about a new competition. Will it still be beneath the great history of their domestic leagues? In short, will they truly honour the concept of Best in Europe in their new competition?

Maybe IRFU should be playing harder ball in its own right, even outside the umbrella of Pro12, if need be. They've shown themselves to be worthy of greater respect than they often get when muttered about in the seasoned context of unworthy 'Celts'.

broadlandboy wrote:I know the official message was interested more in what the general supporter view is

average french supporter is ignorant and doesnt understand why the celt teams dont have to qualify through their league to get to the HC etc etc... of course I dont belong to this category

to be honest this debate doesnt interest a lot of people here, they will just go with whatever is agreed and move on.

whocares So they have more of a life than us & just enjoy the end product

The topic only interests most of us for as long as working hours last

We ain't dumb, we just waffle more during work hours.

TJ what EXACTLY do you think the PRL are proposing? From what I've read they've backed French proposition to reduce PRO12 union qualification numbers and to base their qualification on league position. As has been said over and OVER again, this is a starting point for negotiation. There hasn't been a threat that if these demands aren't met they will pull out. A Franglo cup has been mooted as an opinion in exactly the same way the SA talk about getting involved in Europe when the SANZAR negotiation come up. Or all the 'rumours' of interested clubs when player contracts come up for negotiation.

The other thing they've done is sell TV rights to BT. Regardless of the situation with the RFU over this, the only issue for the ERC would be if the split resulted in less money in the coffers. From the some of the comments on here it seems BT have bought the rights to JUST the English games for MORE than all the games with Sky. This suggests a significant boost for the revenue and I wouldn't be surprised if there are numbers around for the remaining games.

So where have they shown they want control of the competition? You put a quote out before about the PRL wanting the competition run by the clubs. Well the IRFU and SRU own their 'clubs' and the FIR owns one of their 'clubs'. The FFR have already given 4 out of 5 votes to the clubs except for issues of national interest. Since the RFU has already given some control to the PRL then the one people really effected from this would be to give the RRW more control. So hardly the PRL gaining control. Unless you wish to believe when he said "clubs" he actually meant "only clubs, not provinces or regions". In which case I think you're wrong.

So basically you're raging about something the starting point of negotiations, made up claims regarding the PRL, without even knowing what the consequences are (regarding how finances will be distributed). Why don't you calm the hell down until you actually have to real information to base you rage on?

.. because then he wouldn't have an excuse to have a crack at us evil English type HoT! We are after all the root cause of all woes.

My god you guys are naive.

The quote from the PRL shows exactly what they want - control of the competition. the rest of the countries the unions run it not the clubs - and the rfu and prl are at loggerheads anyway.

The PRL have attempted to sell the rights to something that does not exist and even if it did they have no right to do so - and by doing so show their arrogance and scant regard fore the rest of the unions - as well as the French who clearly are dismayed and annoyed by their actions. remeber what happened when English rugby tied to sell the rights to all the 6N games to sky? forced to back down under threat of being thrown out.

there has been a clear threat to pull out if their demands hare not met. Its exactly what they have said. I have not made up anything about them at all - its all in their public statements.

You do not start a negotiation by putting a gun to someones head and demanding all their money. No0r do you sell attempt to sell something that belongs to 6 countires on yor own without consulting them - even if they had the power to do so. really - the arrogance and lack of regard for others will backfire on them. if they had been reasonable and shown some regard for others they might get somewhere. as it is they have alienated the irish, scottish and welsh unions, their erstwhile allies in France and the RFU.

All this talk about they generate the money so should get more of it - what is the european cup with only the PRL clubs in it? Nothing - they need the rest more than the rest need them.

The french clearly will not back the PRL on this - they are looking for compromise and are aware of the concerns of the other countries. the PRL are playing hardball and have alienated every other stakeholder making it less likely they get anything.

Its not about being anti English - its about wanting a fair deal for all not to concentrate power and wealth i the hands of a few english club owners. Its also about understanding how damaging these proposals are to Scottish and Itlain rugby - and thus to european rugby as a whole includingthe 6N.

Kingshu wrote:I think it was Red stag , brought up the point that under the new proposials that the 5% the SRU could get from H-cup may work out worth more than the 13% they currently get.

I perfer to stick to percentages, as if the WRU continue to get around 13% to the SRU 5% they will financally pull away over time.

If the SRU used to get 13%, they will only get 10% now if they qualify both teams meaning a 3% loss on the old deal and rivals over time.
What I think is more important is, is the more likley out come only one team gets into the H-cup and one team in the Almin. It means they get only 5% of the H-cup pot, but how much does the Almin make up for this, will is be the equalivent of 2/3% of H-cup pot? This will be important to the talks.

I can actually see the SRU rushing back the boarders or a 3rd team as soon as possible, to have 2 teams in the Almin, if the prize is increased in this, and to better challange for an extra h-cup place.

How hard is it going to be now to expand the Pro 12, I'd say that a 3rd Scottish or 5th Welsh team would have no chance of gaining entry. Would the other unions ever vote for an extra team from another Union to enter, making it harder on them to gain H-cup qualification??

This is why it's important that the 4 relevant unions involved in the ERC do not allow themselves to be cobbled into the collective PRO 12, nor should they allow leagues to be the controllers. This negotiation should ban the use of the term PRO 12 from discussions.

Its nothing to do with the pro 12 - although the PRL would like to make it so. the negotiation is between the unions. The PRL only have a say 'cos the RFU gave them a voice. the rest of the unions are quite entitled to ignore the PRL.

The ERC competitions also currently include Romanian and Spanish teams - should their Unions be included in the negotiations, and should they have equal weight?

Yes.

TJ wrote:My god you guys are naive.

The quote from the PRL shows exactly what they want - control of the competition. the rest of the countries the unions run it not the clubs - and the rfu and prl are at loggerheads anyway.

Loggerheads? Isn't that in Shropshire? Actually the PRL and RFU are getting on pretty well at the moment and the last minor spat was over the initial implementation of the EPS agreement in 2008. How does the quote say the PRL what control. They believe the competition should be run by the teams in it. Since a lot are already owned by their union and the FFR has ceded votes to the French clubs I fail to see you're point.

The PRL have attempted to sell the rights to something that does not exist and even if it did they have no right to do so - and by doing so show their arrogance and scant regard fore the rest of the unions - as well as the French who clearly are dismayed and annoyed by their actions.

What do you think do you think ERC did with it's Sky deal? Sold the rights to a competition that didn't exist and rights they didn't hold. Both equality guilty of the same thing.[/quote]

remeber what happened when English rugby tied to sell the rights to all the 6N games to sky? forced to back down under threat of being thrown out.

Yes, and do you know why they were threatened to be kicked out? Because the other nations want some of the money. They used their superior numbers to sponge money off the RFU.

there has been a clear threat to pull out if their demands hare not met. Its exactly what they have said. I have not made up anything about them at all - its all in their public statements.

No they didn't. They handed their notice in to force a renegotiation (following the French lead, who are apparently angels in all this). What this means is that the Participation Agreement won't be automatically renewed and will have to be renegotiated. Are you suggesting that the old agreement should be held forever?[/quote]

You do not start a negotiation by putting a gun to someones head and demanding all their money.

It depends how forcible you're negotiating.

No0r do you sell attempt to sell something that belongs to 6 countires on yor own without consulting them - even if they had the power to do so.

You mean like the ERC have done?

really - the arrogance and lack of regard for others will backfire on them. if they had been reasonable and shown some regard for others they might get somewhere. as it is they have alienated the irish, scottish and welsh unions, their erstwhile allies in France and the RFU.

If them selling their share of the TV rights makes more money for everyone why would anybody be alienated by this?

All this talk about they generate the money so should get more of it - what is the european cup with only the PRL clubs in it? Nothing - they need the rest more than the rest need them.

Yet you say Scottish and Italian rugby would completely collapse if the HEC moves on without them. Also the new Premiership deal is probably going to make more money for the clubs than they got previously from the league and HEC. Add in a decent English cup and they should be alright in the near term. It may result in a cup in some of the playing budgets but they won't need them as they won't be competing in Europe.

The french clearly will not back the PRL on this - they are looking for compromise and are aware of the concerns of the other countries. the PRL are playing hardball and have alienated every other stakeholder making it less likely they get anything.

The French were the ones that proposed the changes and PRL have just backed them. Where have you got this idea that the PRL won't compromise and the French will?

Its not about being anti English - its about wanting a fair deal for all not to concentrate power and wealth i the hands of a few english club owners. Its also about understanding how damaging these proposals are to Scottish and Itlain rugby - and thus to european rugby as a whole includingthe 6N.

Fairness is completely objective. There's no such thing in reality. I don't believe you are being anti-English but I do believe misinterpreted the whole situation. Not that losing money from scottish and Irish rugby would be damaging, just the circumstances that have unfolded.

If you can provide some quotes that justice your thought process I don't know how to understand it.

The French were the ones that proposed the changes and PRL have just backed them. Where have you got this idea that the PRL won't compromise and the French will?

from the public quotes.

If you can provide some quotes that justice your thought process I don't know how to understand it.

have done. read the three threads

Fairness is completely objective. There's no such thing in reality. I don't believe you are being anti-English but I do believe misinterpreted the whole situation. Not that losing money from scottish and Irish rugby would be damaging, just the circumstances that have unfolded.

I have not misinterpreteated anything. its absolutly clear from the various quotes.

Yes, and do you know why they were threatened to be kicked out? Because the other nations want some of the money. They used their superior numbers to sponge money off the RFU.

that shows exacxtly what is wrong here.

the more I debate with you guys the more I feel the best outcome here is a european cup without the english - give the PRL a take it or leave it option - as happened over the sky deal which incidently did not give any more money to the rest IIRC - but the english away games had to be availabel on terrestrial TV

TJ Do you think it fair that a club receive 3.5* as much as another?

broadlandboy wrote:TJ Do you think it fair that a club receive 3.5* as much as another?

don't understand? the unions get the money from the heieken cup and distribute as they feel fit. which clubs get 3.5 times as much as others?

Scotish clubs 13% /2 =6.5% French clubs25%/14=1.76%

only 6 of them play in the cup tho. so actually its 6.5% scots clubs and 4% french clubs.

However its actully 13% to the SRU, 25% to the french union.

Waht the unions do with it is up to them so the french get twice as much as the scots. Lies damn lies and statistics

whats that I hear? the sound of a barrel being scraped?

HammerofThunor wrote:

TJ wrote:
there has been a clear threat to pull out if their demands hare not met. Its exactly what they have said. I have not made up anything about them at all - its all in their public statements.

No they didn't. They handed their notice in to force a renegotiation (following the French lead, who are apparently angels in all this). What this means is that the Participation Agreement won't be automatically renewed and will have to be renegotiated. Are you suggesting that the old agreement should be held forever?

Premiership Rugby is adamant that English clubs will pull out of the Heineken Cup at the end of next season if their demands for change are not met and that they will be financially better off if they do so because of the £152m TV deal announced with BT Vision last week.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/sep/15/premiership-rugby-heineken-cup-television-rights

TJ wrote:only 6 of them play in the cup tho. so actually its 6.5% scots clubs and 4% french clubs.

However its actully 13% to the SRU, 25% to the french union.

Waht the unions do with it is up to them so the french get twice as much as the scots. Lies damn lies and statistics

whats that I hear? the sound of a barrel being scraped?

So if, IF, the French Union negotiated their own TV deal for their home euro club games, it's entirely up to them to do what they want with the money?

Dubb

Why would that be the case when the deal will involve the french fans interest in seeing them play home nation teams?

The idea that France and England subsidise europe is nuts, they put more into the pot because the celtic nations are an attractive product to compete against!!

Blues,
yes, absolutely - I'm challengng TJ's assertion of the Unions' freedom to distribute as they will.

I'm also wondering how the competitors in the Amlin get recompense for their travelling costs and playing efforts if the Unions don't pass on any of the collective income from both HC and Amlin to them.

thebluesmancometh wrote:Dubb

Why would that be the case when the deal will involve the french fans interest in seeing them play home nation teams?

The idea that France and England subsidise europe is nuts, they put more into the pot because the celtic nations are an attractive product to compete against!!

Indeed. I think a playng the likes of leinster is a big draw. the european cup is the product, it belongs to 6 unions nd they divide the profits between them with ffrance and england getting the lions share.

do you believe Engladn should get a bigger share of the WC tv rights than NZ - after all they have more people watching it.

TJ IIRC the French, like the English, split the money between all the clubs in the top league

Dubbelyew L Overate wrote:Blues,
yes, absolutely - I'm challengng TJ's assertion of the Unions' freedom to distribute as they will.

I'm also wondering how the competitors in the Amlin get recompense for their travelling costs and playing efforts if the Unions don't pass on any of the collective income from both HC and Amlin to them.

yes the unions get the share - wht they do with it is up to them.

Do they really broadlandboy???

I thought it was more of a pay as you play type deal in France?

broadlandboy wrote:TJ IIRC the French, like the English, split the money between all the clubs in the top league

tehir choice. its still only 6 teams that parcicipate so your point is even more daft. what the unions do with their share is up to them. this has no bearing at all on the amount they should get. I do not know how the SRU distribute it

So, if, IF, the English clubs negotiate their own TV deal, sanctioned by the RFU, you're quite happy that the RFU/clubs distribute that TV income as they wish?

No ,they split the money into the 2nd tier as well as the top,promoting more rugby clubs

TJ wrote:

broadlandboy wrote:TJ IIRC the French, like the English, split the money between all the clubs in the top league

tehir choice. its still only 6 teams that parcicipate so your point is even more daft. what the unions do with their share is up to them. this has no bearing at all on the amount they should get. I do not know how the SRU distribute it

You're forgetting the Amlin - 14 French clubs participate in the two ERC competitions, 12 English, 6 Italians, 4 each of Welsh and Irish, 2 Scottish and 1 each of Romanian and Spanish.

Why should clubs in the HC get more than those in the Amlin, just because they're a bigger draw? (and there'd be a debate whether Zebre are a bigger draw than Stade Francais).