Why make the European Cups so controversial...

...there are 24 Clubs in the HC tournament, and 3 "domestic" leagues feeding them.

So surely the selection for the HC (and subsequent European tournaments) should be...

Top 7 from Aviva Premiership
Top 7 from France's Top 14
Top 7 from Pro 12 (Irrespective of Nationality)
Previous years HC Winners and Runners-up
Amlin Winners.

(Where a league has a HC Winner or Runner-up, or Amlin Winner, if they are not in the Top 7 from their domestic league, they take their place on previous year's merit. If they are in the Top 7, then the next team in their league advances respectively.)

Total 24 clubs or 6 Groups of 4.

This way it gives extra emphasis on playing well in your domestic league, giving teams something to play for right to the last game.

Also, HALF the revenue should be divided evenly across the Unions, no one Unions getting more than the other.
The remaining HALF should then be divided EVENLY across the CLUBS competing in that year. This will give extra incentive again, to perform well in your domestic league.

No ONE country owns the game, and it wont be much of an European competition if you end up on your own, so lets start seeing some fair play, and let the cream of each league stand out, without any bias against one or the other.

There is a difference between Unions & clubs (effectively companies).

As Nigel Wray said,

The bottom line is that the English and French clubs effectively subsidise the other four countries in the Heineken Cup because we are the attraction for television companies, based on the number of chimney pots in our countries," he said. "It is only right that we are seeking a fairer deal to replace the current accord.

BigTrevsbigmac wrote:There is a difference between Unions & clubs (effectively companies).

As Nigel Wray said,

The bottom line is that the English and French clubs effectively subsidise the other four countries in the Heineken Cup because we are the attraction for television companies, based on the number of chimney pots in our countries," he said. "It is only right that we are seeking a fairer deal to replace the current accord.

And he's right. More chimney pots, more satellite dishes attached to them (or the walls). He's right. His bunch attract the television companies because they have more bums on seats watching the televisions.

So far so good. Now for the last half decade or so what were those people under the millions of chimney pots watching in European rugby terms? What sides? What names? Who was lasting longest so that the TV companies could keep those bums on their seats and looking at the advert breaks? Who were the sides giving the TV companies their European rugby profits? English sides? French sides?

So TV companies look for the English and French pub and home dwellers to watch their version of TV...but what was the product being sold to those very same people in the last six or so years to keep them in their seats?

French and English clubs played their part to be sure, but Pro12 played their part - and certainly Irish sides were the main selling feature. They were selling the profitable advertising slots. They were subsidising the growing success of the very competition itself. They by their exploits were adding value to the brand every year. They were the sides that perked BT's interests in the idea of owning such a plush and critically acclaimed rugby event; they were the ones who indirectly brought BT to the PRL for the now famous deal.

MajorRoadWorks wrote:...there are 24 Clubs in the HC tournament, and 3 "domestic"

You got that far before it got "Controversial"

No, there are 24 clubs and Six Nations.

The HC is an international competition in which six nations enter sides. The Pro12 is an international competition in which four sides.

This whole debate seems to be based on the fallacy that the Pro12 should be treated the same as the Top14 and Premiership. The format of the Pro12 is utterly different.

Shouldn't that be 6 Unions and 7 Nations, and shouldn't it be 24 clubs, superclubs, franchises, regions and provinces?

Or is it 4 nations, but is it actually 6 Nations? How is Nation defined - is it controversial?

But hold on, if Bucharest or Bizkaia Gernika win the Amlin this year, then will that be another Union and another Nation next year?

Then again if Jersey win promotion this year, then win the Amlin or finish in the top 6 of the AP or win the LV Cup the following year, will that be another Nation, but not another Union. I'm not going to start on the Cornish Pirates - I know that's controversial.

Blimey, it's confusing - but is it controversial?

SecretFly wrote:

BigTrevsbigmac wrote:There is a difference between Unions & clubs (effectively companies).

As Nigel Wray said,

The bottom line is that the English and French clubs effectively subsidise the other four countries in the Heineken Cup because we are the attraction for television companies, based on the number of chimney pots in our countries," he said. "It is only right that we are seeking a fairer deal to replace the current accord.

And he's right. More chimney pots, more satellite dishes attached to them (or the walls). He's right. His bunch attract the television companies because they have more bums on seats watching the televisions.

So far so good. Now for the last half decade or so what were those people under the millions of chimney pots watching in European rugby terms? What sides? What names? Who was lasting longest so that the TV companies could keep those bums on their seats and looking at the advert breaks? Who were the sides giving the TV companies their European rugby profits? English sides? French sides?

So TV companies look for the English and French pub and home dwellers to watch their version of TV...but what was the product being sold to those very same people in the last six or so years to keep them in their seats?

French and English clubs played their part to be sure, but Pro12 played their part - and certainly Irish sides were the main selling feature. They were selling the profitable advertising slots. They were subsidising the growing success of the very competition itself. They by their exploits were adding value to the brand every year. They were the sides that perked BT's interests in the idea of owning such a plush and critically acclaimed rugby event; they were the ones who indirectly brought BT to the PRL for the now famous deal.

Well the Sky contract like the BT one covers English Premiership games games.

Could their be a similar contract for Ireland or other Rabo countries of similar value?

Of course not & their is the rub.

Notch wrote:The HC is an international competition in which six nations enter sides. The Pro12 is an international competition in which four sides.

This whole debate seems to be based on the fallacy that the Pro12 should be treated the same as the Top14 and Premiership. The format of the Pro12 is utterly different.

+1 I'm going to have this tattooed somewhere.

Why make it controversial? Greed and an absurd sense of entitlement. That's why.

Currently the best teams from 6 unions compete home and away and we get some great rugby played. The quality and interest in the competition comes because it is inclusive and diverse, not because there are more bums on seats in England who can pay to watch it.

If every decision in sport comes down to television rights and revenue, sport becomes sterile. I hope all the unions resist the greed of the English and French clubs.

offload wrote:Why make it controversial? Greed and an absurd sense of entitlement. That's why.

Currently the best teams from 6 unions compete home and away and we get some great rugby played. The quality and interest in the competition comes because it is inclusive and diverse, not because there are more bums on seats in England who can pay to watch it.

If every decision in sport comes down to television rights and revenue, sport becomes sterile. I hope all the unions resist the greed of the English and French clubs.

The best sides of each union should be in the HC.

The likes of Connacht and Zebre are not the best sides from the 6 unions. The Amlin is the correct level for them till they prove otherwise. It is better for these sides to take on teams on their level (yes I know these small sides can occasionally get a lucky win against the bigger sides but they are one offs).

What happens if the Rabo sides reach an accomodation with the French but not the English? Could a Rabo+France HEC work, it would be beneficial to the English players in that they'd play less games so might have a benefit for the national side - but could the clubs cope with the losses ?

Irish Londoner wrote:What happens if the Rabo sides reach an accomodation with the French but not the English? Could a Rabo+France HEC work, it would be beneficial to the English players in that they'd play less games so might have a benefit for the national side - but could the clubs cope with the losses ?

The English clubs in that scenario could even look at doing something with the South Africans.

beshocked wrote:

offload wrote:Why make it controversial? Greed and an absurd sense of entitlement. That's why.

Currently the best teams from 6 unions compete home and away and we get some great rugby played. The quality and interest in the competition comes because it is inclusive and diverse, not because there are more bums on seats in England who can pay to watch it.

If every decision in sport comes down to television rights and revenue, sport becomes sterile. I hope all the unions resist the greed of the English and French clubs.

The best sides of each union should be in the HC.

The likes of Connacht and Zebre are not the best sides from the 6 unions. The Amlin is the correct level for them till they prove otherwise. It is better for these sides to take on teams on their level (yes I know these small sides can occasionally get a lucky win against the bigger sides but they are one offs).

Beshocked, Connacht if playing in the HC are one of the best three Irish teams. Zebre is one of the best two teams in Italy. Wasps aren't in the HC because they were not one of the best 6 teams in England. Either we want a Eurpean competition that is between a select number of "best" teams regardless of where they are from. OR a competition between the best teams representing all top tier nations. I think the later is a much richer competition.

offload wrote:

beshocked wrote:

offload wrote:Why make it controversial? Greed and an absurd sense of entitlement. That's why.

Currently the best teams from 6 unions compete home and away and we get some great rugby played. The quality and interest in the competition comes because it is inclusive and diverse, not because there are more bums on seats in England who can pay to watch it.

If every decision in sport comes down to television rights and revenue, sport becomes sterile. I hope all the unions resist the greed of the English and French clubs.

The best sides of each union should be in the HC.

The likes of Connacht and Zebre are not the best sides from the 6 unions. The Amlin is the correct level for them till they prove otherwise. It is better for these sides to take on teams on their level (yes I know these small sides can occasionally get a lucky win against the bigger sides but they are one offs).

Beshocked, Connacht if playing in the HC are one of the best three Irish teams. Zebre is one of the best two teams in Italy. Wasps aren't in the HC because they were not one of the best 6 teams in England. Either we want a Eurpean competition that is between a select number of "best" teams regardless of where they are from. OR a competition between the best teams representing all top tier nations. I think the later is a much richer competition.

Offload Connacht are the worst side in Ireland. Zebre is the 2nd out of two Italian sides so no they are not the best either. Neither of these sides are the best that Ireland and Italy offer. Both are two of the weakest sides in the Pro12 and the two weakest that will take part in the HC. Far from the best.

It's understandable Wasps aren't in the HC. They aren't one of the best sides in England at the moment.

beshocked wrote:

Irish Londoner wrote:What happens if the Rabo sides reach an accomodation with the French but not the English? Could a Rabo+France HEC work, it would be beneficial to the English players in that they'd play less games so might have a benefit for the national side - but could the clubs cope with the losses ?

The English clubs in that scenario could even look at doing something with the South Africans.

No no no. There is a lot of hawkish comments here about RABO, English, French countries going it alone or hooking up with SA, USA, Mongolians etc. This will not happen, all parties know they are better off together, that is a fact. They have differing opinions on how things should look like going forward, negotiation will eventually bring compromise and an agreeable settlement for all parties. Just the same way 99.5% of commercial contracts are negotiated in the real world.

beshocked wrote:

offload wrote:

beshocked wrote:

offload wrote:Why make it controversial? Greed and an absurd sense of entitlement. That's why.

Currently the best teams from 6 unions compete home and away and we get some great rugby played. The quality and interest in the competition comes because it is inclusive and diverse, not because there are more bums on seats in England who can pay to watch it.

If every decision in sport comes down to television rights and revenue, sport becomes sterile. I hope all the unions resist the greed of the English and French clubs.

The best sides of each union should be in the HC.

The likes of Connacht and Zebre are not the best sides from the 6 unions. The Amlin is the correct level for them till they prove otherwise. It is better for these sides to take on teams on their level (yes I know these small sides can occasionally get a lucky win against the bigger sides but they are one offs).

Beshocked, Connacht if playing in the HC are one of the best three Irish teams. Zebre is one of the best two teams in Italy. Wasps aren't in the HC because they were not one of the best 6 teams in England. Either we want a Eurpean competition that is between a select number of "best" teams regardless of where they are from. OR a competition between the best teams representing all top tier nations. I think the later is a much richer competition.

Offload Connacht are the worst side in Ireland. Zebre is the 2nd out of two Italian sides so no they are not the best either. Neither of these sides are the best that Ireland and Italy offer. Both are two of the weakest sides in the Pro12 and the two weakest that will take part in the HC. Far from the best.

It's understandable Wasps aren't in the HC. They aren't one of the best sides in England at the moment.

I notice you dont mention the Scottish. Is that because they are actually quite good teams now? I also notice you left out Treviso. I'm assuming that actually even you are excepting they are quite a descent team.

I certanly dont go along with that Connacht and Zebre will be the weakest teams in the HC. But given that the French/English interest goes out of the window if they have no chance of qualification by round 2 I would imagine Connacht will probably accumulate more points than a whole host of English and French clubs particpating.

The real issue is the European competition is treated as secondary by the French and at least 50% of English teams use it as a cash bonus to qualify for it with no ambition in the tournament. All of the Rabbo sides play their best teams regardless if they qualify or not as we actually treat it as the Premier tournament in Europe and not as a cash bonus.

I certanly dont think the English should as a result get even bigger cash shares (because that is what this is all about) based on the assumption they bring the most value to the tournament. I dont see Sky pulling out of the tournament regardless if the English sides are in it but granted their contribution may drop but after the PRL stunt maybe not as much as they would lead you to believe.

Islingtonv2 wrote:

beshocked wrote:

Irish Londoner wrote:What happens if the Rabo sides reach an accomodation with the French but not the English? Could a Rabo+France HEC work, it would be beneficial to the English players in that they'd play less games so might have a benefit for the national side - but could the clubs cope with the losses ?

The English clubs in that scenario could even look at doing something with the South Africans.

No no no. There is a lot of hawkish comments here about RABO, English, French countries going it alone or hooking up with SA, USA, Mongolians etc. This will not happen, all parties know they are better off together, that is a fact. They have differing opinions on how things should look like going forward, negotiation will eventually bring compromise and an agreeable settlement for all parties. Just the same way 99.5% of commercial contracts are negotiated in the real world.

Actually thats not true. The PRL have signed television rights for a new tourament. The HC will continue as this is the one Sky has signed up for. Most Unions are already saying the HC will continue. Therefore the English clubs are lining themselves against a wall. To be fair the ones with the real power are the French and as long as the Celts find middle ground with them I could see a very real possibilty of the English being excluded for a year or pay a significant fine (similar to what happened to the Welsh sides over the EDF in the Rabbo).

Welshmushroom wrote:

beshocked wrote:

offload wrote:

beshocked wrote:

offload wrote:Why make it controversial? Greed and an absurd sense of entitlement. That's why.

Currently the best teams from 6 unions compete home and away and we get some great rugby played. The quality and interest in the competition comes because it is inclusive and diverse, not because there are more bums on seats in England who can pay to watch it.

If every decision in sport comes down to television rights and revenue, sport becomes sterile. I hope all the unions resist the greed of the English and French clubs.

The best sides of each union should be in the HC.

The likes of Connacht and Zebre are not the best sides from the 6 unions. The Amlin is the correct level for them till they prove otherwise. It is better for these sides to take on teams on their level (yes I know these small sides can occasionally get a lucky win against the bigger sides but they are one offs).

Beshocked, Connacht if playing in the HC are one of the best three Irish teams. Zebre is one of the best two teams in Italy. Wasps aren't in the HC because they were not one of the best 6 teams in England. Either we want a Eurpean competition that is between a select number of "best" teams regardless of where they are from. OR a competition between the best teams representing all top tier nations. I think the later is a much richer competition.

Offload Connacht are the worst side in Ireland. Zebre is the 2nd out of two Italian sides so no they are not the best either. Neither of these sides are the best that Ireland and Italy offer. Both are two of the weakest sides in the Pro12 and the two weakest that will take part in the HC. Far from the best.

It's understandable Wasps aren't in the HC. They aren't one of the best sides in England at the moment.

I notice you dont mention the Scottish. Is that because they are actually quite good teams now? I also notice you left out Treviso. I'm assuming that actually even you are excepting they are quite a descent team.

I certanly dont go along with that Connacht and Zebre will be the weakest teams in the HC. But given that the French/English interest goes out of the window if they have no chance of qualification by round 2 I would imagine Connacht will probably accumulate more points than a whole host of English and French clubs particpating.

The real issue is the European competition is treated as secondary by the French and at least 50% of English teams use it as a cash bonus to qualify for it with no ambition in the tournament. All of the Rabbo sides play their best teams regardless if they qualify or not as we actually treat it as the Premier tournament in Europe and not as a cash bonus.

I certanly dont think the English should as a result get even bigger cash shares (because that is what this is all about) based on the assumption they bring the most value to the tournament. I dont see Sky pulling out of the tournament regardless if the English sides are in it but granted their contribution may drop but after the PRL stunt maybe not as much as they would lead you to believe.

Treviso are the top Italian side. They are better than both Connacht and Zebre.

I don't mention Edinburgh because even though they came 11th in the Pro12, HC semi is very good. I don't mention Glasgow because they made the playoffs in the Pro12.

Who would you say are the weakest sides?

I agree the HC is your bread and butter. The likes of Edinburgh and Leinster show this to be the case.

Most English sides do take the HC seriously.

Welshmushroom wrote:

Islingtonv2 wrote:

beshocked wrote:

Irish Londoner wrote:What happens if the Rabo sides reach an accomodation with the French but not the English? Could a Rabo+France HEC work, it would be beneficial to the English players in that they'd play less games so might have a benefit for the national side - but could the clubs cope with the losses ?

The English clubs in that scenario could even look at doing something with the South Africans.

No no no. There is a lot of hawkish comments here about RABO, English, French countries going it alone or hooking up with SA, USA, Mongolians etc. This will not happen, all parties know they are better off together, that is a fact. They have differing opinions on how things should look like going forward, negotiation will eventually bring compromise and an agreeable settlement for all parties. Just the same way 99.5% of commercial contracts are negotiated in the real world.

Actually thats not true. The PRL have signed television rights for a new tourament. The HC will continue as this is the one Sky has signed up for. Most Unions are already saying the HC will continue. Therefore the English clubs are lining themselves against a wall. To be fair the ones with the real power are the French and as long as the Celts find middle ground with them I could see a very real possibilty of the English being excluded for a year or pay a significant fine (similar to what happened to the Welsh sides over the EDF in the Rabbo).

What is not true? That all parties are better off togther? That an enhance RABO with USA is not a serious commercial prospect? That negotiations and compromise will not take place?

The PRL look isolated at the moment. But think about it, they do have some negotiating power. The BT deal is their best bargaining chip, you think that cash strapped Wales and Scotland are going to say thanks but no thanks to a big increase in revenue?

beshocked wrote:

Irish Londoner wrote:What happens if the Rabo sides reach an accomodation with the French but not the English? Could a Rabo+France HEC work, it would be beneficial to the English players in that they'd play less games so might have a benefit for the national side - but could the clubs cope with the losses ?

The English clubs in that scenario could even look at doing something with the South Africans.

*cough* I think they aleady are !!

Treviso are the top Italian side. They are better than both Connacht and Zebre.

And Exeter are better than neither and don't deserve to be in the HEC. They are an Amlin team at best. That is their level.

LONDON WELSH beat them for crying out loud !!!!!

Welshmushroom wrote:

Islingtonv2 wrote:

beshocked wrote:

Irish Londoner wrote:What happens if the Rabo sides reach an accomodation with the French but not the English? Could a Rabo+France HEC work, it would be beneficial to the English players in that they'd play less games so might have a benefit for the national side - but could the clubs cope with the losses ?

The English clubs in that scenario could even look at doing something with the South Africans.

No no no. There is a lot of hawkish comments here about RABO, English, French countries going it alone or hooking up with SA, USA, Mongolians etc. This will not happen, all parties know they are better off together, that is a fact. They have differing opinions on how things should look like going forward, negotiation will eventually bring compromise and an agreeable settlement for all parties. Just the same way 99.5% of commercial contracts are negotiated in the real world.

Actually thats not true. The PRL have signed television rights for a new tourament. The HC will continue as this is the one Sky has signed up for. Most Unions are already saying the HC will continue. Therefore the English clubs are lining themselves against a wall. To be fair the ones with the real power are the French and as long as the Celts find middle ground with them I could see a very real possibilty of the English being excluded for a year or pay a significant fine (similar to what happened to the Welsh sides over the EDF in the Rabbo).

No, the Participation agreement ends in 2014. Whatever comes next is a 'new' competition, even if it's sponsored by Heineken and has exactly the same format as now. It's still new. Either the RFU will grant the TV rights to the ERC (then the Sky deal is valid), or they grant them to the PRL (and then the BT deal is valid). As things stand the ERC doesn't have the right to sell any TV rights to anyone (post 2014).

Islingtonv2 wrote:

Welshmushroom wrote:

Islingtonv2 wrote:

beshocked wrote:

Irish Londoner wrote:What happens if the Rabo sides reach an accomodation with the French but not the English? Could a Rabo+France HEC work, it would be beneficial to the English players in that they'd play less games so might have a benefit for the national side - but could the clubs cope with the losses ?

The English clubs in that scenario could even look at doing something with the South Africans.

No no no. There is a lot of hawkish comments here about RABO, English, French countries going it alone or hooking up with SA, USA, Mongolians etc. This will not happen, all parties know they are better off together, that is a fact. They have differing opinions on how things should look like going forward, negotiation will eventually bring compromise and an agreeable settlement for all parties. Just the same way 99.5% of commercial contracts are negotiated in the real world.

Actually thats not true. The PRL have signed television rights for a new tourament. The HC will continue as this is the one Sky has signed up for. Most Unions are already saying the HC will continue. Therefore the English clubs are lining themselves against a wall. To be fair the ones with the real power are the French and as long as the Celts find middle ground with them I could see a very real possibilty of the English being excluded for a year or pay a significant fine (similar to what happened to the Welsh sides over the EDF in the Rabbo).

What is not true? That all parties are better off togther? That an enhance RABO with USA is not a serious commercial prospect? That negotiations and compromise will not take place?

The PRL look isolated at the moment. But think about it, they do have some negotiating power. The BT deal is their best bargaining chip, you think that cash strapped Wales and Scotland are going to say thanks but no thanks to a big increase in revenue?

Its not a question of money. Believe it or not the Unions (who essentially have the ultimate say) will look at the overall picture. To be honest the PRL didnt have to come out with the BT deal. They should have just kept this undisclosed. Personally I'm not entirly sure the RFU are happy about this and not informing them of it in advance was poor judgement. There are a lot of the Unions who will be unified on most of the common issues. France are already talking about minor tweaks. It leaves the English totally exposed at this point because they are committed to a television deal that essentially other Unions may renegade on leaving them totally isolated.

The aggreement to the current competition will be a new one but the actual competition wont change. There are more than just Sky to consider here as Heiniken Rugby has a lot of tie in sponsorship that cant just be relocated simply. Also why is it that the BT deal hasnt been broken down? Actually how much of this is for Sevens, League and European Rugby. 152 million (max) sounds like a lot but if say only 30 million (over 3/4 years is alloted to European Rugby) then actually by the time they split it between 20 odd teams there isnt a big income (7.5 million per year by 20 is about 375K per team). The fact the details of the deal are so limited makes me think its more a smoke screen so the Unions arrange their own TV deals. That is what I cant see Ireland,Wales,Scotland & Italy aggreeing to. In fairness not even the French are arguing money. I'm just saying this leaves the PRL seriously exposed and the RFU is concerned about this as well.

HammerofThunor wrote:

Welshmushroom wrote:

Islingtonv2 wrote:

beshocked wrote:

Irish Londoner wrote:What happens if the Rabo sides reach an accomodation with the French but not the English? Could a Rabo+France HEC work, it would be beneficial to the English players in that they'd play less games so might have a benefit for the national side - but could the clubs cope with the losses ?

The English clubs in that scenario could even look at doing something with the South Africans.

No no no. There is a lot of hawkish comments here about RABO, English, French countries going it alone or hooking up with SA, USA, Mongolians etc. This will not happen, all parties know they are better off together, that is a fact. They have differing opinions on how things should look like going forward, negotiation will eventually bring compromise and an agreeable settlement for all parties. Just the same way 99.5% of commercial contracts are negotiated in the real world.

Actually thats not true. The PRL have signed television rights for a new tourament. The HC will continue as this is the one Sky has signed up for. Most Unions are already saying the HC will continue. Therefore the English clubs are lining themselves against a wall. To be fair the ones with the real power are the French and as long as the Celts find middle ground with them I could see a very real possibilty of the English being excluded for a year or pay a significant fine (similar to what happened to the Welsh sides over the EDF in the Rabbo).

No, the Participation agreement ends in 2014. Whatever comes next is a 'new' competition, even if it's sponsored by Heineken and has exactly the same format as now. It's still new. Either the RFU will grant the TV rights to the ERC (then the Sky deal is valid), or they grant them to the PRL (and then the BT deal is valid). As things stand the ERC doesn't have the right to sell any TV rights to anyone (post 2014).

Yes but to much has gone into the current sponsors and TV deals. Sure the aggreement will change. The tournament is unlikly to be renamed though and continue with all the same backers. The best outcome is if they can convince the ERC they are allowed to negotiate independant TV deals. The problem is that they have already made this about money distribution and qualification spots. Given those points are already on the agenda I cant see the other Unions saying "Ok well we will do all that and additionally let you negotiate your own TV deals". Personally I cant see them coming to aggreement on this which could lead to an exclusion of English Clubs. I also think despite the fact that South Africa make noises about leaving the S15 I cant see them committing more resources to another single tournament against English club sides. Besides it would be a total massicre for English Club sides anyway.

BoyneRFC wrote:

Treviso are the top Italian side. They are better than both Connacht and Zebre.

And Exeter are better than neither and don't deserve to be in the HEC. They are an Amlin team at best. That is their level.

LONDON WELSH beat them for crying out loud !!!!!

What is "better"

BoyneRFC wrote:

Treviso are the top Italian side. They are better than both Connacht and Zebre.

And Exeter are better than neither and don't deserve to be in the HEC. They are an Amlin team at best. That is their level.

LONDON WELSH beat them for crying out loud !!!!!

Classic!

HERSH wrote:

BoyneRFC wrote:

Treviso are the top Italian side. They are better than both Connacht and Zebre.

And Exeter are better than neither and don't deserve to be in the HEC. They are an Amlin team at best. That is their level.

LONDON WELSH beat them for crying out loud !!!!!

I think you will find that Boyne was just throwing Beshocked's Connacht comments back at him, rather than putting down Exeter.

Welshmushroom wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:

Welshmushroom wrote:

Islingtonv2 wrote:

beshocked wrote:

Irish Londoner wrote:What happens if the Rabo sides reach an accomodation with the French but not the English? Could a Rabo+France HEC work, it would be beneficial to the English players in that they'd play less games so might have a benefit for the national side - but could the clubs cope with the losses ?

The English clubs in that scenario could even look at doing something with the South Africans.

No no no. There is a lot of hawkish comments here about RABO, English, French countries going it alone or hooking up with SA, USA, Mongolians etc. This will not happen, all parties know they are better off together, that is a fact. They have differing opinions on how things should look like going forward, negotiation will eventually bring compromise and an agreeable settlement for all parties. Just the same way 99.5% of commercial contracts are negotiated in the real world.

Actually thats not true. The PRL have signed television rights for a new tourament. The HC will continue as this is the one Sky has signed up for. Most Unions are already saying the HC will continue. Therefore the English clubs are lining themselves against a wall. To be fair the ones with the real power are the French and as long as the Celts find middle ground with them I could see a very real possibilty of the English being excluded for a year or pay a significant fine (similar to what happened to the Welsh sides over the EDF in the Rabbo).

No, the Participation agreement ends in 2014. Whatever comes next is a 'new' competition, even if it's sponsored by Heineken and has exactly the same format as now. It's still new. Either the RFU will grant the TV rights to the ERC (then the Sky deal is valid), or they grant them to the PRL (and then the BT deal is valid). As things stand the ERC doesn't have the right to sell any TV rights to anyone (post 2014).

Yes but to much has gone into the current sponsors and TV deals. Sure the aggreement will change. The tournament is unlikly to be renamed though and continue with all the same backers. The best outcome is if they can convince the ERC they are allowed to negotiate independant TV deals. The problem is that they have already made this about money distribution and qualification spots. Given those points are already on the agenda I cant see the other Unions saying "Ok well we will do all that and additionally let you negotiate your own TV deals". Personally I cant see them coming to aggreement on this which could lead to an exclusion of English Clubs. I also think despite the fact that South Africa make noises about leaving the S15 I cant see them committing more resources to another single tournament against English club sides. Besides it would be a total massicre for English Club sides anyway.

I don't get it! The unions are not concerned in principle about how TV deals are negotiated. If the PRL can demonstrate that individual negotiation yields larger revenue then they are going to be all for it. This is the PRL's trump card not the individual unions.

Welshmushroom
If it was the SA clubs rather than their S15 sides I dont know if it would be that one sided,any views from SA supporters

Welshmushroom wrote:

Islingtonv2 wrote:

Welshmushroom wrote:

Islingtonv2 wrote:

beshocked wrote:

Irish Londoner wrote:What happens if the Rabo sides reach an accomodation with the French but not the English? Could a Rabo+France HEC work, it would be beneficial to the English players in that they'd play less games so might have a benefit for the national side - but could the clubs cope with the losses ?

The English clubs in that scenario could even look at doing something with the South Africans.

No no no. There is a lot of hawkish comments here about RABO, English, French countries going it alone or hooking up with SA, USA, Mongolians etc. This will not happen, all parties know they are better off together, that is a fact. They have differing opinions on how things should look like going forward, negotiation will eventually bring compromise and an agreeable settlement for all parties. Just the same way 99.5% of commercial contracts are negotiated in the real world.

Actually thats not true. The PRL have signed television rights for a new tourament. The HC will continue as this is the one Sky has signed up for. Most Unions are already saying the HC will continue. Therefore the English clubs are lining themselves against a wall. To be fair the ones with the real power are the French and as long as the Celts find middle ground with them I could see a very real possibilty of the English being excluded for a year or pay a significant fine (similar to what happened to the Welsh sides over the EDF in the Rabbo).

What is not true? That all parties are better off togther? That an enhance RABO with USA is not a serious commercial prospect? That negotiations and compromise will not take place?

The PRL look isolated at the moment. But think about it, they do have some negotiating power. The BT deal is their best bargaining chip, you think that cash strapped Wales and Scotland are going to say thanks but no thanks to a big increase in revenue?

Its not a question of money. Believe it or not the Unions (who essentially have the ultimate say) will look at the overall picture. To be honest the PRL didnt have to come out with the BT deal. They should have just kept this undisclosed. Personally I'm not entirly sure the RFU are happy about this and not informing them of it in advance was poor judgement. There are a lot of the Unions who will be unified on most of the common issues. France are already talking about minor tweaks. It leaves the English totally exposed at this point because they are committed to a television deal that essentially other Unions may renegade on leaving them totally isolated.

The aggreement to the current competition will be a new one but the actual competition wont change. There are more than just Sky to consider here as Heiniken Rugby has a lot of tie in sponsorship that cant just be relocated simply. Also why is it that the BT deal hasnt been broken down? Actually how much of this is for Sevens, League and European Rugby. 152 million (max) sounds like a lot but if say only 30 million (over 3/4 years is alloted to European Rugby) then actually by the time they split it between 20 odd teams there isnt a big income (7.5 million per year by 20 is about 375K per team). The fact the details of the deal are so limited makes me think its more a smoke screen so the Unions arrange their own TV deals. That is what I cant see Ireland,Wales,Scotland & Italy aggreeing to. In fairness not even the French are arguing money. I'm just saying this leaves the PRL seriously exposed and the RFU is concerned about this as well.

Couple of points:-

The unions safeguard and adminster game within their respective countries. This is an expensive undertaking, European rugby is a large revenue stream. Therefore it is very much about the money.

I agree that the PRL should not have announced so publically the BT deal, they have been the most aggresive of all parties involved by a long way. Its not always the best move to p!ss the other parties off ahead of negotiations.

The RFU are probably not happy about the way the BT deal was done, but they are wary of confrontation with PRL again, i expect them to be conciliatory.

I'd expect a significant portion of the 152 million BT deal to be earmarked towards europe otherwise PRL would be in a hopelessly weak position.

Jenifer McLadyboy wrote:

HERSH wrote:

BoyneRFC wrote:

Treviso are the top Italian side. They are better than both Connacht and Zebre.

And Exeter are better than neither and don't deserve to be in the HEC. They are an Amlin team at best. That is their level.

LONDON WELSH beat them for crying out loud !!!!!

I think you will find that Boyne was just throwing Beshocked's Connacht comments back at him, rather than putting down Exeter.

Correct. I have nothing against Exeter and I wish them well. I was merely highlighting he ignorance of BS's comment. I think he has a very sophisticated mental arithmetic worked out in his head where every team gets points for their relative performances based on a metric only he understands or ever could.

BoyneRFC wrote:

Jenifer McLadyboy wrote:

HERSH wrote:

BoyneRFC wrote:

Treviso are the top Italian side. They are better than both Connacht and Zebre.

And Exeter are better than neither and don't deserve to be in the HEC. They are an Amlin team at best. That is their level.

LONDON WELSH beat them for crying out loud !!!!!

I think you will find that Boyne was just throwing Beshocked's Connacht comments back at him, rather than putting down Exeter.

Correct. I have nothing against Exeter and I wish them well. I was merely highlighting he ignorance of BS's comment. I think he has a very sophisticated mental arithmetic worked out in his head where every team gets points for their relative performances based on a metric only he understands or ever could.

otherwise known as playground logic.

Islingtonv2 wrote:

BoyneRFC wrote:

Jenifer McLadyboy wrote:

HERSH wrote:

BoyneRFC wrote:

Treviso are the top Italian side. They are better than both Connacht and Zebre.

And Exeter are better than neither and don't deserve to be in the HEC. They are an Amlin team at best. That is their level.

LONDON WELSH beat them for crying out loud !!!!!

I think you will find that Boyne was just throwing Beshocked's Connacht comments back at him, rather than putting down Exeter.

Correct. I have nothing against Exeter and I wish them well. I was merely highlighting he ignorance of BS's comment. I think he has a very sophisticated mental arithmetic worked out in his head where every team gets points for their relative performances based on a metric only he understands or ever could.

otherwise known as playground logic.

Also correct. You need to use all types of descriptive methods in order to make one see the flaw's in one's argument..

BoyneRFC wrote:

Islingtonv2 wrote:

BoyneRFC wrote:

Jenifer McLadyboy wrote:

HERSH wrote:

BoyneRFC wrote:

Treviso are the top Italian side. They are better than both Connacht and Zebre.

And Exeter are better than neither and don't deserve to be in the HEC. They are an Amlin team at best. That is their level.

LONDON WELSH beat them for crying out loud !!!!!

I think you will find that Boyne was just throwing Beshocked's Connacht comments back at him, rather than putting down Exeter.

Correct. I have nothing against Exeter and I wish them well. I was merely highlighting he ignorance of BS's comment. I think he has a very sophisticated mental arithmetic worked out in his head where every team gets points for their relative performances based on a metric only he understands or ever could.

otherwise known as playground logic.

Also correct. You need to use all types of descriptive methods in order to make one see the flaw's in one's argument..

Nothing against Exeter? Sure....

Connacht beat Quins as you and other die hard Pro12 fans keep saying. Occasionally a small side beats one of the bigger teams. Especially on their own patch. Upsets happen. They are called upsets for a reason.

By your logic if you lose to London Welsh you don't deserve to be in the HC? It's one match in a long season though I know how important one off victories are to you.
Exeter qualified to the HC on their own merits - coming 5th in the AP. They didn't get into the HC because of someone else's effort. Exeter also won a lot more matches during last season than Connacht.

Yes but the AP is not as strong a league as the RABO, as recent HEC results suggest....

Therefore, the weighting of a victory comes into play and it's completely at odds with your made up metric...

Capisci?

beshocked wrote:


Nothing against Exeter? Sure....

Connacht beat Quins as you and other die hard Pro12 fans keep saying. Occasionally a small side beats one of the bigger teams. Especially on their own patch. Upsets happen. They are called upsets for a reason.

By your logic if you lose to London Welsh you don't deserve to be in the HC? It's one match in a long season though I know how important one off victories are to you.
Exeter qualified to the HC on their own merits - coming 5th in the AP. They didn't get into the HC because of someone else's effort. Exeter also won a lot more matches during last season than Connacht.

That's just it. It's not his logic. It's yours.

He is making the point that what YOU say about Connacht makes about as much sense as what he just said about Exeter.

Get it now?

He's practically quoting you ffs.

beshocked wrote: Exeter also won a lot more matches during last season than Connacht.

And Connacht won one more game than Edinburgh in last season's Pro12. Edinburgh coming second last... and getting to the semi-final of the HEC!

Two things:
1. How bad do you have to be to pull one over the sides Edinburgh beat to get to that semi? - keeping in mind they were considered 2nd worst in the Pro12 league that year. If they were bad enough to be at the bottom of the Pro12 then they should never have been good enough to slide through Cardiff Blues, London Irish (twice), Racing Metro (twice) and Touloise. Just a stroke of lotsa luck? Maybe

2. Maybe we're all having problems with this one simply because we don't want to divide the issue and consider the idea that individual leagues are what they are (run independently of each other) and HEC is different - different quality, different intensity, different ability needed. We say one side 'deserves' to be at HEC because it's better in its league (PRL chooses for itself how it distributes HC spots). Some others say that HEC is a beast onto itself. If you're better than the cannon fodder (Connacht/Edinburgh) other unions send to the competition, then you'll beat them and progress.

Exeter came 5th in the AP. Hence they qualified to the HC by their own merit.

Connacht qualified for the HC because of the efforts of Leinster winning the HC. Is that so difficult for you Irish to understand?

Summary:Exeter earned their HC place by their own efforts, Connacht did not.

Look I understand you Irish guys love Connacht. It's your development side. It still doesn't change that Connacht hasn't actually ever come in the top half of the Pro12 - top 6 ever. Connacht have never qualified without help from Leinster.

I don't think it's right that they are given a HC place because they have not earned it from their own efforts. This is my opinion. You obviously don't agree. I have this opinion because I am English and our sides have to work hard for a HC place based on the merits of our own clubs' efforts. By the way I don't agree with the 7th placed concept.


Secretfly well you could argue Edinburgh don't deserve to be in the HC either. As you say they did come 11th in the Pro12. On the other hand as you say at least they got a HC semi. More than can you say about Connacht.

Secret fly the problem with fodder as you call it is that they imbalance pools.

Pool 3 is definitely the easiest pool because of Connacht and Zebre.

Easy pools skew the competition and make it a lot easier for sides to make the quarter finals and further.

E.g. Edinburgh last season benefitted from the easiest pool. When Saints reached the final etc.

How will they fare in a much tougher pool this time round.

beshocked wrote:Secret fly the problem with fodder as you call it is that they imbalance pools.

Pool 3 is definitely the easiest pool because of Connacht and Zebre.

Easy pools skew the competition and make it a lot easier for sides to make the quarter finals and further.

E.g. Edinburgh last season benefitted from the easiest pool. When Saints reached the final etc.

How will they fare in a much tougher pool this time round.

No pool should be easy for an Edinburgh holding onto the tail end of the Pro12. No pool should be easy to them. They should be the sides getting beat. AP and Top14 after all are the tough Leagues, the leagues you have to fight hard in, the leagues that you can't afford to rest up players in, the leagues where the men of rugby union go to war.

Balance - Imbalance - what difference does it make? Some years Leinster got easy draws, sometimes they were very much in Pools of Death. That's competition -

So teams 'deserve' to get easy runs through pools now, based on how good they are in their own leagues?
You get what you get and you'll still have to beat the best to get there. You'll have to confront them sometime - pools or play-off stages. So we should want to stage manage the entry of 'big' sides into the play-offs now? Better revenues as there'll be more guaranteed bums on seats for the TV folks? Is that what its all about? Edinburgh in a final is bad business as English and French people don't care?

Something that people aren't mentioning is that the six nations also comes into this. A seriously big money pot that the unions can use to bargain with if they want to. If certain unions are told that their h cup is finished and that a new competition will go ahead without them then the six nations is likely to end also.

Intouch, so if Scotland lose some money in the HEC they give up their only other significant cash stream? Highly unlikely. If they did pull out I'd hope some sort of relegation to the Nations Cup would start. Top one/two spots could take Scotland /Italy's spot(s) and then lowest spot is switched out (maybe on a two year cycle to match Nations Cup).

If it's one country alone probably not. But the pro 12 has four nations in it. They could run a tournament without the others.

Can't see it happening personally.