Can any country afford not to be at the top table

In the late 80s english clubs were banned from all European club competitions (rightly or wrongly). South Africa were excluded in the main from rugby.

It took south africa a few years to get back to where they should have been and some may arruge that they are still stuck in the 70s with their style of play as they haven't adapted to the modern game.

English clubs took about 5 years after the ban to get back to competitive level with teams like Blackburn finishing behind the Polish champions who walked their group. Arsenal were the only ones to make a final and that was in the lowest cup.
England's new players also struggled and did poor (by their standards after 1990) in Euro 92 and failed to quailify for USA94 (even though two teams from a group quailified)
Their league and National team also failed to adapt to the progress in european football that they struggled to catch up.
Arsenal though they were top two in England by far from 1998-2001 struggled in the Champions league against weaker teams because they could handle the change.

There is always talk of different countries going it alone or have less contact with other countries. Would that lead to a decline or is Rugby different.

Would Rabo teams be able to keep their high standards if it was just the 4 of them outside of Test teams. Could England and France go it alone in their domestic league as they have enough money to get in the required level of player.

It is probable that the Premership in 1998 was harder to win the the HC was without them in it.

Sarries though they won the Premership were made to look like boys in their First year in the HC. Does this palying different styles add more to people then just playing the same people even though the standard might be higher among the teams you know.

What are your thoughts does isolation enforced or by choice make a difference even if you can maintain the same level.

What's wendyball got to do with anything?

AlastairW wrote:What's wendyball got to do with anything?

Sport is sport and it is the same non skills required for all sports.

The english Soccer players found it hard outside their own league even though the League was propably in the top 7 in Europe.

Man Utd were walking the league and still not making any steps forward in Europe.

Tigers are rarely challanged in the League in more then 6 games. The HC give them 6 more games to play at higher standards.

We see how SA has struggled to get out of the style of play that was relevent way back. It is akin to England playing the long ball and getting really good at it and being stronger. But when they came back others were just as strong and had the skills.

I would suggest that Quinns style in in response to Leinster and other peoples runing games. In isolation one cans say oh they can only do all that becuse there are no big packs in their leagues or they can do all that defending because they have no good backs in their leagues

We have seen Ireland and Wales improve as they started playing games outside their fishbowls

Its a good point and a good comparison to a sport with enforced exclusion with plenty of evidence of how it affected playing style and competitiveness.

In rugby terms I think the over riding issue is if (for example) the Italians and Scottish got exluded from the HEC/and or any European competition would they survive? and how would their demise affect the national teams and as a knock on effect the 6Ns as a competitive competition?
Would the Pro12 playing on it's own manage to keep up the physicality or would it just rely on passing and flair?
Would the English teams become even more forward orientated?

And as such would they drop off in standard.

I believe all teams would drop off without European competition as their squads wouldn't need to be as competitive, they'd face a drop in income (even if the drop wasn't as substantial in France/England), and would therefore not have as many 'foreign star' players.

It's an apt comparison. Rugby is a game which needs to be spread, selflessly. Those who truly love the game will agree.

Those who only want to make money and care about nothing else do not love the game. They are only greedy people out to make money.

What European competition was there in the 80s or have I missed something?

As for could any Nation survive without the HC well even though it hurts to admit it I think the English and French could most probably do a deal together as they do attract the bigger money from Sky and I reckon the French could even go it alone at the Top14 draws very large gates and audiences.

If however I don't think anyone else could make it on their own without the HC

good article.

BAcks up my opinion that if any countries teams from the rabo failed to qualify for the HC it would have a severe detremental effect on the game in the country.

For argument sack. if no team from Ireland qualified for the HC (using ireland as an example as i am irish) there would be a decline in revenue, players salaries would have to be cut, top players leave the teams, crowds fall and with that interest in the game,

As a whole this would be hugely damaging not only for Irish rugby but for the game at large.

bedfordwelsh wrote:What European competition was there in the 80s or have I missed something?

As for could any Nation survive without the HC well even though it hurts to admit it I think the English and French could most probably do a deal together as they do attract the bigger money from Sky and I reckon the French could even go it alone at the Top14 draws very large gates and audiences.

If however I don't think anyone else could make it on their own without the HC

He's talking about in football, where the English clubs (or was it British?) were excluded from the European Cup because of football hooliganism and crowd trouble leading to the Heysel disaster.

GoodinTightSpaces wrote:good article.

BAcks up my opinion that if any countries teams from the rabo failed to qualify for the HC it would have a severe detremental effect on the game in the country.

For argument sack. if no team from Ireland qualified for the HC (using ireland as an example as i am irish) there would be a decline in revenue, players salaries would have to be cut, top players leave the teams, crowds fall and with that interest in the game,

As a whole this would be hugely damaging not only for Irish rugby but for the game at large.

Yup same for the Welsh clubs - and I think this is the problem with the English/French demands they want some of the Rabo clubs to drop down into the Amlin/2nd tier to 'strengthen it' (without any English/French clubs dropping down), namely at least 1 of the Scottish/Italian clubs - if 1 or both of the clubs in these countries drop down (particularly Scotland) then it could have a crippling effect on a very fragile, but growing, club game in that country - leading to an exodus of top players and weakening of ability to blood youngsters at a good level, in competitive teams (particularly with less money to develop them)

bedfordwelsh wrote:What European competition was there in the 80s or have I missed something?

As for could any Nation survive without the HC well even though it hurts to admit it I think the English and French could most probably do a deal together as they do attract the bigger money from Sky and I reckon the French could even go it alone at the Top14 draws very large gates and audiences.

If however I don't think anyone else could make it on their own without the HC

I was talking about the European cup in Soccer.

I am also talking about no cross boarder competition.

I think that by having lots of different styles, skills and Phisycallity it helps teams to really say how good/bad they are. The Hc can only be won by teams with a good pack and backs and kicker. I'm not sure the repective leagues can say the same

As for a cross border competition we still have the Rabo so our style could still be modern, but without the money generated by the HC and with that I do not mean the competition itself, as the HC generally gets bigger gates at the games as well, we could see a decline in the amount of quality players in our league, I do not think that the Celts and the Italians would go back to amateur though, what I do think we would see is all the better players playing abroad.

OP: no, you need several countries to be involved. The TV rights guys know this full well, as do the countries involved in 'european' earnings potential. So the talking continues in October in Rome.

This is more though about can a country go it alone or do we all need each other. If SA was to leave SANZAR and just have the currie cup would they struggle to compete as the newer players would get use to just playing As style

Brendan, yes you are right.
Countries need all the competitive exposure they can get, at club and national level, if they are to keep / improve playing standards.

I am not so sure that the Scottish in particular would remain pro, perhaps semi-pro, but I agree this is probably the way the game would evolve. The danger here comes as it concentrates too much power in the hands of a relatively few people. A few questions have to be asked
Would we see the Scottish and Italian players released for international matches like the islanders and eastern Europeans in the past?
-Possibly it will depend on their new standing in the game and will possibly effect others if the international game loses importance.
Will the club game become, especially in France and England, dominate the future of the sport?
-If they become more powerful than the international unions and can pay huge wages possibly. It will also affect the southern hemisphere as they rely on the money generated playing internationals so they would possibly lose more players than they do currently.
Will the 6 nations continue in the current format?
-I don’t think so sadly there has been a gap between Scotland, Italy and the rest for about a decade and just as we are looking to close it (I hope I am Scottish) it would end our competitiveness. It would open up the path for a European cup possibly but I would miss it even though it causes me misery year after year.
If you are in England or France do you care as you will see the best players in the flesh?
-I live in England so it would be good to see some great players but not worth it in my opinion.

I admit that I am possibly a bit pessimistic but all are possible. We would have even more in common with League where it is played at a very high level in a few places but no international game

I am convinced Scotland could not. One season out of the HC they might be able to manage but a second? They would lose so large a % of their income that they would not be able to have competitive squads and thus would never qualify again. Last year Edinburgh played some semi pro / amateur players in the rabo IIRC - not "resting" players but simply not enough depth in the squad.

Its a good point, in football England didn't take part in the first few World cups (the reason said they believed themselves to be to good for it, true or not)
When they did come back to international football in the 50's they were still playing 30's style formations, while italy had prefected the sweeper system, and it took them by surprise, an da while to catch up tactically.

I think that rugby is the same, to an extent, put the thing I find strange is that nobody has tried changing formations.

What about haveing one less center, and instead have 2 number 8's on the field? (not picking this exactly but you get what I mean). The closes rugby gets to in is by having more skilfull players in each position now.

Gone are the days when prop lumbered from one scrum to the next, now they are expected to be dynamic ball carries as well.

The development of the game, is partially having players bigger than ever before, but also having all the players on the pitch have a more rounded skill set than previous.

However, I don't think that you can say that since the best teams have one style the others will follow suit. I think rubgy is tactically beyond that, you play the style that suits the team and players you have.

If you have the exciting line break players, you play a quick passing game and try to creat gaps. If you have a very good forward pack, you keep the ball close and power your way up field.

To go back to the football terms (as tatically it is far more evolved) Bara play a brillent passing game built on ball rentention. Chelsea don't try to copy that, they have a physical team that can get close and out muscel teams (and play some nice football at times) if when they played Bara they tried to copy thier style they would have been hammered, they stuck to they own style, (as the old saying goes, exerted their gameplan on the game) and won.

Cross boarder games helps coaches learn different styles but its the coaches that decide what style best suits his team.

Ie we are seeing Munster's style change under a new coach, and you could say it has a Super XV feel to it.

so to conterdict my first comment, being isolated, wouldn't be to bad, if you could bring coaches over from other leagues, to develop the teams.

I think once a country isolates itself Kingshu they rarely bring in coaches and coachs come to other countries to show their own country they can make the step up ala Smit, Penny etc. Chekia is now S15 but would he have been if he hadn't come to Ireland. If Ireland was shut off from the rest of the world

Brendan wrote:In the late 80s english clubs were banned from all European club competitions (rightly or wrongly). South Africa were excluded in the main from rugby.

It took south africa a few years to get back to where they should have been and some may arruge that they are still stuck in the 70s with their style of play as they haven't adapted to the modern game.

English clubs took about 5 years after the ban to get back to competitive level with teams like Blackburn finishing behind the Polish champions who walked their group. Arsenal were the only ones to make a final and that was in the lowest cup.
England's new players also struggled and did poor (by their standards after 1990) in Euro 92 and failed to quailify for USA94 (even though two teams from a group quailified)
Their league and National team also failed to adapt to the progress in european football that they struggled to catch up.
Arsenal though they were top two in England by far from 1998-2001 struggled in the Champions league against weaker teams because they could handle the change.

There is always talk of different countries going it alone or have less contact with other countries. Would that lead to a decline or is Rugby different.

Would Rabo teams be able to keep their high standards if it was just the 4 of them outside of Test teams. Could England and France go it alone in their domestic league as they have enough money to get in the required level of player.

It is probable that the Premership in 1998 was harder to win the the HC was without them in it.

Sarries though they won the Premership were made to look like boys in their First year in the HC. Does this palying different styles add more to people then just playing the same people even though the standard might be higher among the teams you know.

What are your thoughts does isolation enforced or by choice make a difference even if you can maintain the same level.

Brendan, Saracens made to look like boys? That's rubbish. Saracens had arguably the two best sides in Europe in their pool. It's the equivalent of having to play Rafael Nadal then Roger Federer in tennis or like having to play Barcelona then Bayern Munich in football.

Saracens played well against Clermont in their first pool game but were unlucky to get nothing out of a hard fought game at Clermont away. Only just lost to Leinster at Wembley. Losing these two games with only 1 losing bonus point to show for it was scant reward for good effort.

1 apiece against Racing Metro by the time it was Leinster away and Clermont at home the focus was clearly on the Aviva Premiership which Saracens won. Not saying Saracens wanted to lose either of these last two games but it was clear that the fight had gone when a quarter final was no longer possible.

beshocked wrote:

Brendan, Saracens made to look like boys? That's rubbish. Saracens had arguably the two best sides in Europe in their pool. It's the equivalent of having to play Rafael Nadal then Roger Federer in tennis or like having to play Barcelona then Bayern Munich in football.

Saracens played well against Clermont in their first pool game but were unlucky to get nothing out of a hard fought game at Clermont away. Only just lost to Leinster at Wembley. Losing these two games with only 1 losing bonus point to show for it was scant reward for good effort.

1 apiece against Racing Metro by the time it was Leinster away and Clermont at home the focus was clearly on the Aviva Premiership which Saracens won. Not saying Saracens wanted to lose either of these last two games but it was clear that the fight had gone when a quarter final was no longer possible.

Its not a dig at Sarries but they should have done much better. It is true their group was hard but they were one of the best teams in Europe. It is more that they weren't use to playing and adapting to europe. They are all the better and strong as a team and individuals for it.

For all the stick they get they are in the top 8 in europe

English football in the late 80's early 90's experienced two forms of isolation 1) exclusion from european competition and 2) a lack of foreign players and coaches.

Were english rugby to isolate itself now i'd still expect a regular flow of international coaches and players through the league. This would mitigate somewhat the loss of competitiveness that English football suffered from during its isolation period.

However the overall quality would still drop to an extent as would all other leagues. Isolation is absolutely not the way forward and i hope all parties remember that when the ERC meetings restart next month.

Brendan fair points. I think us being top 8 in Europe is debatable but certainly close.


In regards to the Italian and Scots I think it would be good for 1 side of each to go into the Amlin.

The Amlin has to become a bigger draw for it to work.

Zebre getting smashed every week doesn't help their development anyway.

In the Amlin they would face sides they might stand a chance against.

beshocked wrote:Brendan fair points. I think us being top 8 in Europe is debatable but certainly close.


In regards to the Italian and Scots I think it would be good for 1 side of each to go into the Amlin.

The Amlin has to become a bigger draw for it to work.

Zebre getting smashed every week doesn't help their development anyway.

In the Amlin they would face sides they might stand a chance against.

You think it's good for them to lose a significant amount of their funding at a time when they are on very shaky financial ground - which could well result in their squads getting smaller and some of their best players leaving to play in England/France?

I don't think these clubs are doing enough in regards to marketing and trying to bring in the punters. By the way I think most clubs can do more. Particularly my own club.

Look at Exeter - they aren't a wealthy club by any means but they have built up their attendances and get over 9k now. They are on an upward curve.

The Italian and Scottish clubs need a kick up the backside. Riding the HC gravytrain for too long. Surely the reliance on the HC has to be weaned off.

If they want HC rugby they need to earn it IMO.

Edinburgh and Glasgow are capable of qualifying by merit for the HC. Treviso aren't far off.

Italy is not a poor country. Surely they can find the money to look after their two clubs.

beshocked wrote:I don't think these clubs are doing enough in regards to marketing and trying to bring in the punters. By the way I think most clubs can do more. Particularly my own club.

Look at Exeter - they aren't a wealthy club by any means but they have built up their attendances and get over 9k now. They are on an upward curve.

The Italian and Scottish clubs need a kick up the backside. Riding the HC gravytrain for too long. Surely the reliance on the HC has to be weaned off.

If they want HC rugby they need to earn it IMO.

Edinburgh and Glasgow are capable of qualifying by merit for the HC. Treviso aren't far off.

Italy is not a poor country. Surely they can find the money to look after their two clubs.

On the contrary, Italy is on the verge of bankruptcy..

beshocked wrote:I don't think these clubs are doing enough in regards to marketing and trying to bring in the punters. By the way I think most clubs can do more. Particularly my own club.

Look at Exeter - they aren't a wealthy club by any means but they have built up their attendances and get over 9k now. They are on an upward curve.

The Italian and Scottish clubs need a kick up the backside. Riding the HC gravytrain for too long. Surely the reliance on the HC has to be weaned off.

If they want HC rugby they need to earn it IMO.

Edinburgh and Glasgow are capable of qualifying by merit for the HC. Treviso aren't far off.

Italy is not a poor country. Surely they can find the money to look after their two clubs.

Yes I think Treviso could be fine in a few (or more) seasons, but Zebre is a brand new entity and needs time to build up support to the level of a club that has been around for 20 (or more) years.

And also it's not so much riding the HEC gravy train as it's the very best teams/players in Scotland/Ireland/Wales/Italy from an amalgamation of clubs throughout that nation. But what seems to be suggested is that Italy/Scotland aren't good enough for the top tier of rugby and that maybe only 2 (or less) areas/provinces of Ireland/Wales are good enough to compete in the HEC against France/England.

Jimpy wrote:

beshocked wrote:I don't think these clubs are doing enough in regards to marketing and trying to bring in the punters. By the way I think most clubs can do more. Particularly my own club.

Look at Exeter - they aren't a wealthy club by any means but they have built up their attendances and get over 9k now. They are on an upward curve.

The Italian and Scottish clubs need a kick up the backside. Riding the HC gravytrain for too long. Surely the reliance on the HC has to be weaned off.

If they want HC rugby they need to earn it IMO.

Edinburgh and Glasgow are capable of qualifying by merit for the HC. Treviso aren't far off.

Italy is not a poor country. Surely they can find the money to look after their two clubs.

On the contrary, Italy is on the verge of bankruptcy..

Italys government may be, but the north of Italy (where the rugby's played) is probably the richest part of Europe.

If you drew a line from Venice over to Genoa, that Northern Part (plainura di Padania) would be richer than Switzerland....

Besides, I don't think anyone is asking the Italian government to finance Italian rugby.

Smirnoffpriest it is the HC gravy train.

It's a big advantage for clubs to have HC rugby.

It's why the likes of Gray write into their clause that they will only move to a club if it is in the HC or why Barkley is thinking of leaving Bath for Racing Metro.

Zebre should really be picking up Aironi's support and looking to build new ties.

Ospreys is a young entity but it hasn't stopped them winning the Pro12 numerous times.

In theory with auto HC qualification and the best players compacted into only 2 clubs you would expect Italy and Scotland to be doing better.

The best of Ireland is compacted into 3 clubs with Connacht as the feeder.

E.g. if you combined Leicester/Saints or Saracens/Quins you would have two very strong sides.

So far don't know how the finances are proposed to be split. Given that both the English and the French want an improved Amlin (there are already 14? of their teams in it as things stand) I can see the funding being increased.

If we continue this argument you're basically saying that by the effective ring fencing of top European rugby we have now, we're hamstringing the development of rugby in other European nations. Not only at domestic level but internationally. Russian and Georgia have more professional sides than Wales, Scotland, (possible Ireland and Italy as I'm not sure on their next tiers). Shouldn't they be guaranteed HEC spots? If not why not. Because we've always done it this way (well 17 years anyway)?

You have to get into the whole debate about who 'deserves' to be propped up. Is it just established nations? How long do we keep propping them up? Forever? I say propping up as the argument is that if they aren't 'good enough' to 'earn' a spot at the top table we should just give them it as it would be bad for their rugby.

beshocked wrote:

In theory with auto HC qualification and the best players compacted into only 2 clubs you would expect Italy and Scotland to be doing better.

The best of Ireland is compacted into 3 clubs with Connacht as the feeder.

E.g. if you combined Leicester/Saints or Saracens/Quins you would have two very strong sides.

Em, I think if you put 50 million people on one side of a room and 4 million on the other you'd know instantly that talking about 'compaction' is a very relativistic subject indeed.

Munster - the compaction of a Province into one 'club' = an overall population base of about 280,000.
Leicester - on its own, as a true club = overal population base of about 330,000

To suggest Irish clubs, or Welsh ones even, or indeed Scottish ones (the real ones) would ever compete with English ones is like saying a fair war would be where one side had nuclear weapons and the other had spoons. The compaction of players into a Provinicial 'club' is for the very reason to be able to compete with large English and French clubs.

Size matters - it's size that influences who is currently demanding the changes. Had England the same population as Ireland or Wales, and decided they were going to demand changes to the HEC, well, they'd be laughed at. Size matters - some of us do stuff to try to compete with it

HammerofThunor wrote:So far don't know how the finances are proposed to be split. Given that both the English and the French want an improved Amlin (there are already 14? of their teams in it as things stand) I can see the funding being increased.

If we continue this argument you're basically saying that by the effective ring fencing of top European rugby we have now, we're hamstringing the development of rugby in other European nations. Not only at domestic level but internationally. Russian and Georgia have more professional sides than Wales, Scotland, (possible Ireland and Italy as I'm not sure on their next tiers). Shouldn't they be guaranteed HEC spots? If not why not. Because we've always done it this way (well 17 years anyway)?

You have to get into the whole debate about who 'deserves' to be propped up. Is it just established nations? How long do we keep propping them up? Forever? I say propping up as the argument is that if they aren't 'good enough' to 'earn' a spot at the top table we should just give them it as it would be bad for their rugby.

Hammer in a way you bring up something I hadn't really considered though you don't say it. we are restricting the developing countries in europe but with them we would all be stronger teams and players

beshocked wrote:Smirnoffpriest it is the HC gravy train.

It's a big advantage for clubs to have HC rugby.

It's why the likes of Gray write into their clause that they will only move to a club if it is in the HC or why Barkley is thinking of leaving Bath for Racing Metro.

Zebre should really be picking up Aironi's support and looking to build new ties.

Ospreys is a young entity but it hasn't stopped them winning the Pro12 numerous times.

In theory with auto HC qualification and the best players compacted into only 2 clubs you would expect Italy and Scotland to be doing better.

The best of Ireland is compacted into 3 clubs with Connacht as the feeder.

E.g. if you combined Leicester/Saints or Saracens/Quins you would have two very strong sides.

Why would you assume that Zebre would pick up Aironi's support automatically when their based in a totally different part of Italy - and Aironi were folded in part because of a lack of support. It would be like Bath being folded and a new club being started in Leeds from scratch but expecting the new club to be having 11k + fans from Bath (but probably with a greater distance to travel in Italy).

I assume that the Scottish and Italian clubs would be doing really really well if all of their best players were playing for the 2 clubs - but almost all of the best players are playing in England/France (recently the Scottish clubs have brought back a few exiles). If they lose more money then they will lose their top and quite a few medium class players - making them even more uncompetitive, while conversly increasing the strength of the English/French clubs who buy their players.

What has Ospreys winning a domestic league got to do with HEC? But yes they have won the Celtic/Pro12 a few times against other brand new identity clubs - not competing against clubs with decades of identity and fans. They did better than the Scottish (and recently the Italians) in part because the Ospreys had a far greater playing budget.

You know what would help Scotland and Italy to a certain extent?

If the SRU would get off their arses and actually try and develop rugby in Scotland. They can't rely on the 6 nations and HC forever. There are other European nations catching up quick.

England want to include clubs from Spain Russia and Portugal in the revamped Euro tiered format. The game is moving on beyond the traditional cartel.

But they don't want as many England teams in the top tier and strengthen the 2nd Tier with Rabo teams, and then create a third tier with those mentioned nations teams - correct me if I'm wrong but isn't there already a third tier European competition with these nations involved?

Nope

Spain and Romania play in the Amlin but that's it. I believe there's a North Sea cup between Germany, Netherlands and Belgium? But it's nothing noteworthy

can you imagine if Euro rugby had 10 strong teams at both club and test level. that would do more to close the gap on the top 3 then anything else.

Ahh apologies i thought id heard of a comp between georgia, germany, romania, spain and sumone else (holland,portugal?). But my memories not the best and i could well b thinkin of the comp under the 6ns by mistake!

gregortree wrote:England want to include clubs from Spain Russia and Portugal in the revamped Euro tiered format. The game is moving on beyond the traditional cartel.

The traditional cartel is England and France. They were only happy to have the rest of us in there (to make it look like a grand project, grand competition, big event) as long as we remained in the background, weak and not involving ourselves in the serious end of the competition when the two giants of Europe fought it out in their epic battles.
Now, that the minnows have had the temerity to set foot into the ornate drawing-room, and sit down in the goldleaf chair, and light a big cigar, and let the cheeky smoke waft into the eyes of the English and the French; now that they don't feel so big anymore, they bluff about wantin' a new age of loadsa rugby and dosh for everyone, see. Sky's (or I means BT's!) the limit, mate, with this new lot in. And we is being real respectful to them foreign types in Siberia areas and them chaps in Spain.

Pull the other one - it's a change of cartel that's the objective alright but as we all can see - same Dons wanting to be in charge of it. New teams for a new age, and hopefully the new token lot will know their place better and keep themselves below in the servant's lodgings this time.

SecretFly wrote:

gregortree wrote:England want to include clubs from Spain Russia and Portugal in the revamped Euro tiered format. The game is moving on beyond the traditional cartel.

The traditional cartel is England and France. They were only happy to have the rest of us in there (to make it look like a grand project, grand competition, big event) as long as we remained in the background, weak and not involving ourselves in the serious end of the competition when the two giants of Europe fought it out in their epic battles.
Now, that the minnows have had the temerity to set foot into the ornate drawing-room, and sit down in the goldleaf chair, and light a big cigar, and let the cheeky smoke waft into the eyes of the English and the French; now that they don't feel so big anymore, they bluff about wantin' a new age of loadsa rugby and dosh for everyone, see. Sky's (or I means BT's!) the limit, mate, with this new lot in. And we is being real respectful to them foreign types in Siberia areas and them chaps in Spain.

Pull the other one - it's a change of cartel that's the objective alright but as we all can see - same Dons wanting to be in charge of it. New teams for a new age, and hopefully the new token lot will know their place better and keep themselves below in the servant's lodgings this time.

Well that's one way of looking at it...

Brendan wrote:can you imagine if Euro rugby had 10 strong teams at both club and test level. that would do more to close the gap on the top 3 then anything else.

This myth persists that we all (in Europe) automatically want a European side to always get one over the Southern Hemisphere sides; that there is some kind of overall loyalty to the idea of France beating New Zealand, or Ireland beating South Africa or Wales beating Australia.

Many people might indeed have this Hemisherical loyalty but certainly we don't all share it.

I love seeing France beat New Zealand, Ireland beat South Africa and Scotland/England beat Australia.

Hemisherical? is that one of them there Freudyan slips? Apologies...

gowales wrote:I love seeing France beat New Zealand, Ireland beat South Africa and Scotland/England beat Australia.

There you go. I catered for you in my intitial comment. You prove part of my point... and I prove the other bit.

lostinwales wrote:Hemisherical? is that one of them there Freudyan slips? Apologies...

Could be, lost. But I'd have to think too hard about it to be certain. Better the idea that I bloody forgot me 'p'.

SecretFly wrote:

beshocked wrote:

In theory with auto HC qualification and the best players compacted into only 2 clubs you would expect Italy and Scotland to be doing better.

The best of Ireland is compacted into 3 clubs with Connacht as the feeder.

E.g. if you combined Leicester/Saints or Saracens/Quins you would have two very strong sides.

Em, I think if you put 50 million people on one side of a room and 4 million on the other you'd know instantly that talking about 'compaction' is a very relativistic subject indeed.

Munster - the compaction of a Province into one 'club' = an overall population base of about 280,000.Leicester - on its own, as a true club = overal population base of about 330,000

To suggest Irish clubs, or Welsh ones even, or indeed Scottish ones (the real ones) would ever compete with English ones is like saying a fair war would be where one side had nuclear weapons and the other had spoons. The compaction of players into a Provinicial 'club' is for the very reason to be able to compete with large English and French clubs.

Size matters - it's size that influences who is currently demanding the changes. Had England the same population as Ireland or Wales, and decided they were going to demand changes to the HEC, well, they'd be laughed at. Size matters - some of us do stuff to try to compete with it

I'm not smoking the right stuff to even try and understand this, but just out of curiosity, how did you come up with a 280,000 Munster population base?

We all want more nations to be competitive though

I'd be happy with just my Nation being more competitive right now, go. Why run before you can walk? Everyone for themselves.

SecretFly, is your nation a secret ?
I can see you are not English or French.
Are you worried about Spain & Russia clubs ?
I can see that some away matches might become a problem.

Dubbelyew L Overate wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

beshocked wrote:

In theory with auto HC qualification and the best players compacted into only 2 clubs you would expect Italy and Scotland to be doing better.

The best of Ireland is compacted into 3 clubs with Connacht as the feeder.

E.g. if you combined Leicester/Saints or Saracens/Quins you would have two very strong sides.

Em, I think if you put 50 million people on one side of a room and 4 million on the other you'd know instantly that talking about 'compaction' is a very relativistic subject indeed.

Munster - the compaction of a Province into one 'club' = an overall population base of about 280,000.Leicester - on its own, as a true club = overal population base of about 330,000

To suggest Irish clubs, or Welsh ones even, or indeed Scottish ones (the real ones) would ever compete with English ones is like saying a fair war would be where one side had nuclear weapons and the other had spoons. The compaction of players into a Provinicial 'club' is for the very reason to be able to compete with large English and French clubs.

Size matters - it's size that influences who is currently demanding the changes. Had England the same population as Ireland or Wales, and decided they were going to demand changes to the HEC, well, they'd be laughed at. Size matters - some of us do stuff to try to compete with it

I'm not smoking the right stuff to even try and understand this, but just out of curiosity, how did you come up with a 280,000 Munster population base?

Seems pretty straight forward to me - whats your problem with it?