The HC negotiations look to be going down to the wire.....

First topic message reminder :

http://m.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/dec/11/english-french-clubs-heineken-cup-talks

Little or no progress appears to have been made to date despite various deals being offered to the French clubs. Which side of the demands/debate is going to come up with an offer or conceed on individual issues??

I don't particularly like the idea of an Anglo French competition but is it any nearer?

Prepare for a bland media statement tomorrow.......

Or...

The English and French already have twice the number of teams as either the Irish or the Welsh and 3 times the number of the Scots or Italians and yet they still want more?

Just depends on your perspective.

Well we'll all look like idiots when the WRU , IRFU, SRU and SARU pump money into London (Whatever) and the Italians makes Dallaglio el Duce of London Vespe and Englands HC representation consists of BATH playing on a dissused recreation ground.

MrsP wrote:I'm confused.

Why is anyone talking about how many teams from the Rabo qualify for the HEC?

Qualifying places are allocated to the Unions.

England, France, Ireland, Wales, Scotland and Italy.

How each of those unions decide to use their allocation is entirely up to them.

The last 4 of those unions listed use the final position of their own teams in the Rabo to decide which teams to send to the HEC.

If the English and French feel that it is unfair for Italy and Scotland to have only 2 teams ever elligible and so no chance of failure to qualify then let them argue their case with the Scottish and Italian unions. Neither Ireland nor Wales have automatic qualification. It has to be earned just like those of the French and English teams.

If the French and English feel Ireland and Wales do not deserve to have 3 teams each while they have 6 each then they have to make their cases for that to those Unions.

The Rabo has no stake in this surely other than being the vehicle that 2 of the Unions use to allocate their places.

I think that is where the majority of the confusion arises. Remembering that the places are allocated to unions, not leagues!

+1 I agree with everything you've written there.

thebandwagonsociety wrote:

MrsP wrote:I'm confused.

Why is anyone talking about how many teams from the Rabo qualify for the HEC?

Qualifying places are allocated to the Unions.

England, France, Ireland, Wales, Scotland and Italy.

How each of those unions decide to use their allocation is entirely up to them.

The last 4 of those unions listed use the final position of their own teams in the Rabo to decide which teams to send to the HEC.

If the English and French feel that it is unfair for Italy and Scotland to have only 2 teams ever elligible and so no chance of failure to qualify then let them argue their case with the Scottish and Italian unions. Neither Ireland nor Wales have automatic qualification. It has to be earned just like those of the French and English teams.

If the French and English feel Ireland and Wales do not deserve to have 3 teams each while they have 6 each then they have to make their cases for that to those Unions.

The Rabo has no stake in this surely other than being the vehicle that 2 of the Unions use to allocate their places.

I think that is where the majority of the confusion arises. Remembering that the places are allocated to unions, not leagues!

+1 I agree with everything you've written there.

I agree too, though I don't have a problem with anyone getting tougher qualification for anyone involved.

thebandwagonsociety wrote:

MrsP wrote:I'm confused.

Why is anyone talking about how many teams from the Rabo qualify for the HEC?

Qualifying places are allocated to the Unions.

England, France, Ireland, Wales, Scotland and Italy.

How each of those unions decide to use their allocation is entirely up to them.

The last 4 of those unions listed use the final position of their own teams in the Rabo to decide which teams to send to the HEC.

If the English and French feel that it is unfair for Italy and Scotland to have only 2 teams ever elligible and so no chance of failure to qualify then let them argue their case with the Scottish and Italian unions. Neither Ireland nor Wales have automatic qualification. It has to be earned just like those of the French and English teams.

If the French and English feel Ireland and Wales do not deserve to have 3 teams each while they have 6 each then they have to make their cases for that to those Unions.

The Rabo has no stake in this surely other than being the vehicle that 2 of the Unions use to allocate their places.

I think that is where the majority of the confusion arises. Remembering that the places are allocated to unions, not leagues!

+1 I agree with everything you've written there.

The reason people are talking about it is because one of the proposals on the table shifts the balance from purely Union nominated qualification (a system that was agreed 20 years ago, before the Rabo existed, and that the Irish have moaned about several times) to bring in an element of league based qualification. It also recognises that an elite comeptition requires merit, and nominating on a purely nationalistic basis on numbers decided 2 decades ago is not working. Nor does it help the leagues themsleves be properly comeptitive. Nor does it provide an equal basis for qualification. Nor does it encourage all teams to treat the HC as an elite comeptition and the focus of its seaosn. It also leads to games with crowds of around 3000 which franklly is a joke for a suppossed to European cup, theres second tier domestic competiton crowds of that size.
The HC is failing in all of its aspirations except for making the Scotts and Italians feel wanted. Maybe just maybe flexing on that a little might help it meet the others?

The other option is to sit behind your fence seeing nothing but "ours" vs "yours" till we all have nothing left of worth.

Have to agree with everything that PSW has just said there.

Think I need to go for a lay down!!!

I still don't see how it's not working?

Why does the size of the crowd shleping up to Scotstown on a bitterly cold Friday night to watch Castres matter to a Quins supporter? (Other AP teams are available)

Crowd size is no issue for any of the Irish sides. Quality doesn't seem to be an issue either for any of the Irish sides but still we should take a disproptionate reduction in the number of teams we enter? Just because we play in the Rabo?

As I'm sure you know, it's not about making the Italians feel wanted but rather about allowing an enviroment in which the game can continue to grow there. And it is growing there.

I understand that it is right that the thing gets renegotiated if some unions are not happy but I still think there are a lot of people trying to dress up "We want more of the money" as "we want to improve the competition".

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

thebandwagonsociety wrote:

MrsP wrote:I'm confused.

Why is anyone talking about how many teams from the Rabo qualify for the HEC?

Qualifying places are allocated to the Unions.

England, France, Ireland, Wales, Scotland and Italy.

How each of those unions decide to use their allocation is entirely up to them.

The last 4 of those unions listed use the final position of their own teams in the Rabo to decide which teams to send to the HEC.

If the English and French feel that it is unfair for Italy and Scotland to have only 2 teams ever elligible and so no chance of failure to qualify then let them argue their case with the Scottish and Italian unions. Neither Ireland nor Wales have automatic qualification. It has to be earned just like those of the French and English teams.

If the French and English feel Ireland and Wales do not deserve to have 3 teams each while they have 6 each then they have to make their cases for that to those Unions.

The Rabo has no stake in this surely other than being the vehicle that 2 of the Unions use to allocate their places.

I think that is where the majority of the confusion arises. Remembering that the places are allocated to unions, not leagues!

+1 I agree with everything you've written there.

The reason people are talking about it is because one of the proposals on the table shifts the balance from purely Union nominated qualification (a system that was agreed 20 years ago, before the Rabo existed, and that the Irish have moaned about several times) to bring in an element of league based qualification. It also recognises that an elite comeptition requires merit, and nominating on a purely nationalistic basis on numbers decided 2 decades ago is not working. Nor does it help the leagues themsleves be properly comeptitive. Nor does it provide an equal basis for qualification. Nor does it encourage all teams to treat the HC as an elite comeptition and the focus of its seaosn. It also leads to games with crowds of around 3000 which franklly is a joke for a suppossed to European cup, theres second tier domestic competiton crowds of that size.
The HC is failing in all of its aspirations except for making the Scotts and Italians feel wanted. Maybe just maybe flexing on that a little might help it meet the others?

The other option is to sit behind your fence seeing nothing but "ours" vs "yours" till we all have nothing left of worth.

a for you sir.

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:
The reason people are talking about it is because one of the proposals on the table shifts the balance from purely Union nominated qualification (a system that was agreed 20 years ago, before the Rabo existed, and that the Irish have moaned about several times) to bring in an element of league based qualification. It also recognises that an elite comeptition requires merit, and nominating on a purely nationalistic basis on numbers decided 2 decades ago is not working. Nor does it help the leagues themsleves be properly comeptitive. Nor does it provide an equal basis for qualification. Nor does it encourage all teams to treat the HC as an elite comeptition and the focus of its seaosn. It also leads to games with crowds of around 3000 which franklly is a joke for a suppossed to European cup, theres second tier domestic competiton crowds of that size.
The HC is failing in all of its aspirations except for making the Scotts and Italians feel wanted. Maybe just maybe flexing on that a little might help it meet the others?

The other option is to sit behind your fence seeing nothing but "ours" vs "yours" till we all have nothing left of worth.

What has the rabo qualification got to do with the English and French? Its only become an issue now because they want to use it as an excuse to shape the tournament to maximise their own profits. If they are so concerned about Rabo teams then they wouldn't be looking to reduce their numbers.

Lads, who do you think caused the biggest split and instigated the "ours and yours" scenario?

It is difficult to hear lectures on the need for not fans not to take that attitude, from supporters of the party who went off and negotiated their own TV deal for European Competition.

That company that the nasty English arranged a deal with is the one which offers all the leagues more dosh Mrs P.

BT. You may recognise it from you team's shirts.

Here's more dosh...now shut up, stand in a corner, keep quiet, and make sure you's never attempt to get past the Pool stages ever again. We own this here show now and we'll be bloody winning it too.


I'm certainly seduced by the offer.........................hmmmmmmmmmmmm..............tough one....................... can I sleep on it?

SecretFly wrote:Here's more dosh...now shut up, stand in a corner, keep quiet, and make sure you's never attempt to get past the Pool stages ever again. We own this here show now and we'll be bloody winning it too.


I'm certainly seduced by the offer.........................hmmmmmmmmmmmm..............tough one....................... can I sleep on it?

No one said that. Nice theory though Agent Mulder.

oh a bonus too?! Patiently waiting for Foxy Scully to show up...........

You called?

SecretFly wrote:oh a bonus too?! Patiently waiting for Foxy Scully to show up...........

you rang?

Mmm, the team is complete again. Okay, we got a case Scully, it's a curious one of a guy who likes to eat his neighbours and then spreads dosh on their bones......

And as I said the PRL show they are not interested in negotiations as you can see by the "initiative" of looking for some other competition.

If the RFU do not get the PRL under control it will have big ramifications in the game in England.

TJ wrote:And as I said the PRL show they are not interested in negotiations as you can see by the "initiative" of looking for some other competition.

If the RFU do not get the PRL under control it will have big ramifications in the game in England.

You've got enough to talk about in your country before telling us the ramifications for the game in ours.

SecretFly wrote:Mmm, the team is complete again. Okay, we got a case Scully, it's a curious one of a guy who likes to eat his neighbours and then spreads dosh on their bones......

- 'Well Mulder, I'd say you've come up with yet another conspiracy theory pulled out of a hat where you seem to think it's all about you'

From what I've read the only side not negotiating is the Rabo representatives. Their counter proposal is an even more bloated HC of 32 teams; rather than help create three competitions where entry is on merit.

I have always enjoyed the HC, however I do feel that the Rabo would benefit from a more challenging qualification criteria than presently exists.

It's not for PRL or LNR to tell the unions in the Rabo how to run that league, but as things stand a reduced number of qualifiers from the Rabo to the HC can only add intensity to the league.

But with (pretty much) guaranteed HC qualification, would some of the SH players recruited in recent sessons even consider playing for certain Rabo teams?

I'm just chucking some thoughts out there tbh.

I just wish this was over now to be fair. Truth is no one here or on any paper etc actually knows what is going on so we are basing all of our arguments on stuff that might not even be true. Maybe 8 pro 12 teams would a be a compromise everyone could agree too that way they could have 1 rep from each of the 4 nations and 4 other qualifiers based on league. Satisfies the supposed English view on not having auto qualification and the supposed rabo view that everyone is represented.

Nobody seems to want to tell the Pro12 how to conduct its affairs (lest they get told how to then run theirs?) and yet, that's what's been happening since the whole debate began..from PRL, from media hounds, and from many contributors to this site - over and over and over again - how Pro12 could help itself create a better league by loosening its grip of a better competition (HEC).

These last few weeks haven't been a rehearsal. It's been real debate and the offence of suggesting to another league how it should conduct its affairs has already taken place. It's too late to suggest it's not for PRL or LNR to tell the Unions who make up Pro12 how to run that league. It has happened and it continues to happen. And it's pretty damned rich actually when you consider the League has given more winners to the HEC than France has, and more diversity of winners than France has. It's bloody rich that English and French leagues tells the Pro12 how to 'improve' its league, when it's their leagues that evidently need fixing.

The league is our business, but the common business of all Leagues and all Unions and all sides - is The Heineken Cup.

That's the only issue that should concern the English and French ..and their fans. To place emphasis on the Pro12 league is to detract attention away from the real jewel. But none of us are dumb in Europe and we all know what the real discussion is about. It's time wasting for outside concerns to be making statements and suggestions about a European League competitor - and that's what Pro12 is - a competitor in Europe for the other Leagues. It's not its 'weakness' that worries English and French clubs, they couldn't care less about 'weakness'. It's Pro12's still growing strength that concerns its competitors. They wish to muzzle that not assist it.

But the real deal is HEC. PRL know it and they're finding the rest of us know it too. It's not money offers, or promises of including more European sides - it's participation guaranteed for some at sustainable levels and it not being guaranteed for others at sustainable levels.

SecretFly wrote:Nobody seems to want to tell the Pro12 how to conduct its affairs (lest they get told how to then run theirs?) and yet, that's what's been happening since the whole debate began..from PRL, from media hounds, and from many contributors to this site - over and over and over again - how Pro12 could help itself create a better league by loosening its grip of a better competition (HEC).

These last few weeks haven't been a rehearsal. It's been real debate and the offence of suggesting to another league how it should conduct its affairs has already taken place. It's too late to suggest it's not for PRL or LNR to tell the Unions who make up Pro12 how to run that league. It has happened and it continues to happen. And it's pretty damned rich actually when you consider the League has given more winners to the HEC than France has, and more diversity of winners than France has. It's bloody rich that English and French leagues tells the Pro12 how to 'improve' its league, when it's their leagues that evidently need fixing.

The league is our business, but the common business of all Leagues and all Unions and all sides - is The Heineken Cup.

That's the only issue that should concern the English and French ..and their fans. To place emphasis on the Pro12 league is to detract attention away from the real jewel. But none of us are dumb in Europe and we all know what the real discussion is about. It's time wasting for outside concerns to be making statements and suggestions about a European League competitor - and that's what Pro12 is - a competitor in Europe for the other Leagues. It's not its 'weakness' that worries English and French clubs, they couldn't care less about 'weakness'. It's Pro12's still growing strength that concerns its competitors. They wish to muzzle that not assist it.

But the real deal is HEC. PRL know it and they're finding the rest of us know it too. It's not money offers, or promises of including more European sides - it's participation guaranteed for some at sustainable levels and it not being guaranteed for others at sustainable levels.

Your argument does not make sense. The PRL and LNR want the same participation guaranteed for all three leagues. If qualification is 'sustainable' for PRL and LNR why is it not 'sustainable' for Rabo teams. If Worcester for example have to manage each year in Amlin because they are not good enough for HC why does the same not apply to Glasgow? I can see no reason why team accross Europe should not be treated the same?

As for the Rabo providing winners of HC nobody is suggesting that potential winners will not qualify. The teams that would not qualify are the teams that have no chance if winning anyway. Personally I would be happy for the number qualifying from each league to be based on previous success in cup according to a set formula. The current system where Rabo teams get half the places and more than half the money guaranteed is ridiculous.

Exile,

At least you are being honest in pointing out that this is all about money. It would be good if others would stop trying to pretend that this is about improving the tournament.

However, you are still discussing the Rabo teams as an entity when the HEC has always been about the best teams from each of the unions.

And England and France still get twice the number of places as Ireland or Wales.

Mrs P, IT had always been about the money.

The PRL don't really care who is the successful term in the short term because the TV money keeps rolling in regardless, so long as there is a significant number if French and English team entered.

It is interesting that the R12 is a centralised top down approach and clubs have been excluded, but for the HC the argument has to be bottom up inclusion.

I have thought before that the fairer way is for each Union to put forward 50% of their top tier into HC and the other half into the Amblin with equal money between both tournaments paid per team. What that would mean is that the current generous terms for the R12 would suffer a little. Apparently the IRFU don't rely on HC money, so it wouldn't be a show stopper.

RW

thats not a bad suggestion, certainly something I would be happy with.

MM, An Amblin with Stade, Perpignan, Cardiff, Munster, Edinburgh, Gloucester, Bath & Wasps would probably create as many good games as the HC.....

Only Cardiff have more than a sprinkling of current internationals so the games should be pretty even.

The politics will get in the way of the logic though...

RW,

My main concerns about your suggestion would be,

(1) Would the sponsors accept it? Would they be happy to have their money split between the 2 tiers?

(2) Would the bigger Unions accept it?

(3) What would happen to the current Amlin teams who would not be included in the second tier? In pure rugby terms I think a third tier could be fantastic but would it attract any/enough sponsorship to continue to support those unions?

ExiledinBorders... there are three Leagues - correct. Those three Leagues are not duplicates. They guide themselves and are structured completely differently to each other.

English AP involves 12 clubs from one Nation and has 6 guarantees
Top14 involves 14 clubs from one Nation and has 6 guarantees
Pro12 involves 12 clubs from four nations and has 10 guarantees (spread out amongst the four nations competing in it)
Our League will never be like yours as you'd have to add 3 more Nations to the AP to have it so. Would English clubs then be calling for still only six guarantees for the AP, with the likelihood that they mightn't pick up any of them - ever?

The HEC is for European competition between 'best-of' clubs throughout the 6N Unions. England has its spots - can never lose them, even with a run of dreadful form that would have the current crop of top sides fall to the bottom. Even if the standard of rugby of the new top sides in AP was appalling in relation to the standard operating in Pro12 and Top14. We'd all still see six English sides show up with six rosey chances to win - not based on merit or being some of the best sides in Europe but simply because they had the right to show up.

So much for the idea that its about quality.

SecretFly wrote: England has its spots - can never lose them, even with a run of dreadful form that would have the current crop of top sides fall to the bottom. Even if the standard of rugby of the new top sides in AP was appalling in relation to the standard operating in Pro12 and Top14. We'd all still see six English sides show up with six rosey chances to win - not based on merit or being some of the best sides in Europe but simply because they had the right to show up.

So much for the idea that its about quality.

True but then the deal would be iopen the negotiation after a few years, at which time the various parties could make represetabntions for change.
Like the imbalance that means the IRFU gets less spots some years than the WRU currrently, based on the relative strength of their teams 20 years ago.
But then the proposals from the Franglos also try to do away with thinking about " Engluish vs elsh" and concentrate on league vs league ...assuming ( as is the acse) that each league is roughly equal and likely to stay so in the intermediate future. Its "you lot" that insist on seeing everything as a tribal stand off.
The other option is to have access to the HC based purely on results in previous European seasons. We all know how effective the European rankings are.

I wonder if the PRO 12 suggested that Terviso and Zebre join the Top 14, would the French be happy to still just have 6 places?

Terviso with the larger TV money they would get in Top 14 could be taking one of those spots within a few years and then we would be seeing only 5 French teams, it that were to happen you can bet that the French would be very quick at reneogrationg the qualifying critea

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

SecretFly wrote: England has its spots - can never lose them, even with a run of dreadful form that would have the current crop of top sides fall to the bottom. Even if the standard of rugby of the new top sides in AP was appalling in relation to the standard operating in Pro12 and Top14. We'd all still see six English sides show up with six rosey chances to win - not based on merit or being some of the best sides in Europe but simply because they had the right to show up.

So much for the idea that its about quality.

True but then the deal would be iopen the negotiation after a few years, at which time the various parties could make represetabntions for change.
Like the imbalance that means the IRFU gets less spots some years than the WRU currrently, based on the relative strength of their teams 20 years ago.
But then the proposals from the Franglos also try to do away with thinking about " Engluish vs elsh" and concentrate on league vs league ...assuming ( as is the acse) that each league is roughly equal and likely to stay so in the intermediate future. Its "you lot" that insist on seeing everything as a tribal stand off.
The other option is to have access to the HC based purely on results in previous European seasons. We all know how effective the European rankings are.

50% of 1 Euro is 50 cents
50% of 50 Euros is 25 Euros

Who gets to buy some groceries and who gets to starve?

Lets look on it more like dancing. Dancing can be a competition can't it? So, every country gets an equal number of contestants - meaning each male dancer is allowed a female partner! The competition is then balanced and we don't have the terrible sight of seeing an Italian dancer try to pick up marks dancing the tango on his own!

The Competition is limited to numbers, not percentages. Percentages don't play. 6 chances for English sides and 6 chances for French sides is more than enough in a six Nation competition of 24 places; more than enough to give them a chance of doing well. But greed doesn't do logic either.

Of cause it's about the money. It is a professional sport,doesn't mean the clubs want to make money out of rugby but less likey to lose with more money going into the sport.
Only one english team has been in every Hec that they were eligable.Since going to provinces 3 from Ireland,3 from Wales,2 from Both Scotland & Italy. Don't know about the French.
If you can't come in the top half of your league do you think you could do better in the top European comp?

RW
Very similar to a suggestion of mine on a previous thread, with a share of the money to support the 3rd tier

broadlandboy wrote:Of cause it's about the money. It is a professional sport,doesn't mean the clubs want to make money out of rugby but less likey to lose with more money going into the sport.
Only one english team has been in every Hec that they were eligable.Since going to provinces 3 from Ireland,3 from Wales,2 from Both Scotland & Italy. Don't know about the French.
If you can't come in the top half of your league do you think you could do better in the top European comp?

by that logic if you can't beat Northampton in the Aviva then you should not be allowed in Europe because you cannot beat them but Ulster destroyed them so therefore you can't beat Ulster? I am not arguing for or against the proposed changes I'm just pointing out your logic.

broadlandboy wrote:Of cause it's about the money. It is a professional sport,doesn't mean the clubs want to make money out of rugby but less likey to lose with more money going into the sport.
Only one english team has been in every Hec that they were eligable.Since going to provinces 3 from Ireland,3 from Wales,2 from Both Scotland & Italy. Don't know about the French.
If you can't come in the top half of your league do you think you could do better in the top European comp?

Edinburgh?

Second from bottom in the Rabo last season as well as HEC Semi Finalists.

And the converse of a team like Sale who qualified for the top European competition from your much vaunted total meritocracy and yet have been very poor in both HEC and AP this season.

MrsP wrote:

broadlandboy wrote:Of cause it's about the money. It is a professional sport,doesn't mean the clubs want to make money out of rugby but less likey to lose with more money going into the sport.
Only one english team has been in every Hec that they were eligable.Since going to provinces 3 from Ireland,3 from Wales,2 from Both Scotland & Italy. Don't know about the French.
If you can't come in the top half of your league do you think you could do better in the top European comp?

Edinburgh?

Second from bottom in the Rabo last season as well as HEC Semi Finalists.

And the converse of a team like Sale who qualified for the top European competition from your much vaunted total meritocracy and yet have been very poor in both HEC and AP this season.

You really are scrapping the bottom of the barrel - even more than you usually do. Edinburgh's blip of success was a long time ago in sporting terms now and they've been tonked by everyone this season. No one will argue with you about Sale, they've been rubbish. Still doesn't that point to the need for a reduction of teams? As per the Franglo negotiating position?

Alastair,

So, if last season's form is "a long time ago in sporting terms" just how do you plan to select which teams to enter into the HEC?

I certainly hope it is not on the team's performance last season.

Every argument for the PRL is hugely flawed, and I can't see past any issue other than greed!!

MrsP wrote: Alastair,

So, if last season's form is "a long time ago in sporting terms" just how do you plan to select which teams to enter into the HEC?

I certainly hope it is not on the team's performance last season.

It should be to a certain extent. Why should you get to stay in the HC if you're being cricket scored? Surely dropping down to the Challenge cup would be better for all concerned?

MrsP wrote: Alastair,

So, if last season's form is "a long time ago in sporting terms" just how do you plan to select which teams to enter into the HEC?

I certainly hope it is not on the team's performance last season.

No clealrly what you do is wait till after the competition is over then b1tch about it.


All of this is argument for a stand alone franchised euro elite super league of course.

Which would od the smaller Unions, and smaller clubs, no favours at all

But EMBRA weren't being cricket scored until now, last season they were the 4th best team??? Meaning they have the right to be there this season surely

That is why I said top half of the league & not specified a single team.Any team could win a one off game,heck England even beat the All Blacks.

yes it is about greed,the Rabo unions want to keep getting at least 50% more per team than the French/English clubs.

Alistair that was kind of uncalled for mate? For several reasons
1. MrsP has always been an insightful poster, just because she disagrees with you does not mean she is scraping the bottom of the barrel you are not the king of rugby pal
2. Edinburgh have a serious amount of injuries this season but that I guess would stand in your way so ignore that.
3. MrsP has already pointed out your logic is very flawed
4. If that points to a reduction of teams and Sale is also at fault surely England should be reducing their teams too?

thebluesmancometh wrote:But EMBRA weren't being cricket scored until now, last season they were the 4th best team??? Meaning they have the right to be there this season surely

So if they keep their currant form this season, after acting as a point dispenser, should they stay in the HC? Nope. They will though with the present set up - that's not top flight, that's getting a free pass, and it's detrimental to all.

Broadland boy

Tell me why exactly 4 of the 6N teams should get less than the other 2, by my reckoning the Rabo nations should get 66% of monetary gains from all comps, and 16% each to England and France!!1

Embra were 4th best team last year, infact 3 of 4 top teams last year were Rabo teams, after that performance should Rabo teams get less spots to make it fairer on the lowly French and English?