What exactly is the point of the h cup?

I posted this question before on another thread but I think that it merits its own discussion.

The question that these debates around the h cup bring up is what exactly is the point of this competition?
People are coming at this debate from all sorts of angles, fair division of money, having a higher quality competition, having a European wide competition, survival of pro rugby etc. But for one argument to win out there needs to be agreement on why the competition exists at all.

So what is the main function of the h cup as you see it?
Is it: (see pole above)

If it is (a) then yes the competition should of course be reduced in size and the English and French are absolutely right on this point. Obviously there are many teams every year in the competition who haven't a hope of winning it. But if it is only acceptable to have teams compete in the h cup that have a shot at winning the competition then this reduction should be far greater than what they have suggested. In order to eliminate all the weaker sides, which must include the weaker English or French sides, there should really be eight teams as a maximum in the h cup.

If (b) is true, and I believe that this was the reasoning originally behind setting up the competition, then it's doing an okay job but may need to be changed to help the weaker nations become more competitive. In this case more money could be allocated to Italian and Scottish clubs on perhaps a temporary basis, to help rugby advance in their countries and in the long run to strengthen European rugby as a whole. There could also be a minimum number of native players in each team competing so that rugby in France for example doesn't get dominated by foreigners to the detriment of their national side. (They have introduced a quota that will gradually increase)

If you look at how the 6 nations may develop with fewer Italian and Scottish teams in the h cup would you really want to see that? Rugby decreasing in popularity and strength in these countries over time and the 6 nations going back to what it was in the 1940s, 4 nations alone, less income for the unions from matches, less competition and rugby decreasing in popularity in Europe as a whole.

If (c) is the main point of it then how do you decide which clubs get the biggest cut? Is it according to performance? Is it according to which country provides the most tv viewers? Is it according to which union has the most clout? Should the unions get to decide how the money gets divvied up in their country? Right now only in England (I could be wrong here) do the clubs themselves get to decide how their portion gets split.
Also if c is the main priority then the number of clubs should really be increased to provide more revenue and include other countries to capture a wider audience and revenue stream.

Yes the h cup has been trying to achieve all of the above but until it decides which of these is THE priority then nothing really can get decided and it cannot progress. For example if one country prioritizes (c) then argument a and b are irrelevant. If b then a and c have to take a back seat.

If everyone agrees on what the main function of the competition is then with this clarity progress can be achieved.

A and B, but without C they wont happen

The grandiose plan in the beginning was B

The greedy truth for most fans (me included, I readily confess) is A

The greedy truth for the business men club owners (who look for profit from investment rather than any purist idea of quality of rugby for viewer/on field) then it's C

HEC is a combination of all of them. Life is complex, not simple.

By the way its unfair to say this is all about greedy clubs, the Unions take a big share of the HC money and control the HC, which is why they are so much more keen on pushing it over the regular domestic club seasons or formerly succesful ones like the Anglo Welsh cup

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:By the way its unfair to say this is all about greedy clubs, the Unions take a big share of the HC money and control the HC, which is why they are so much more keen on pushing it over the regular domestic club seasons or formerly succesful ones like the Anglo Welsh cup

For my part, I didn't say it's all about greedy clubs. I said it was a combination of many things. But it's the clubs (English, French and even some Welsh ones) who are having the issues about profitable returns on investments. It's the privately owned clubs driving the demand for change.

And the greedy Welsh Union driving the demand for lack of change *shrug*

Well, I'm finally coming around to the belief that the Welsh can speak for themselves. They do anyway!!! - and sometimes speaking for them can be misread as being of them, or of being of each other.

No, I'll leave the Welsh to handle their own arguments Peter

a) is the case no matter what. If the competition is big the best teams will still make it to the latter stages. If it becomes based on making money for big clubs they'll obviously buy all the best players and be the best teams.

b) was what it was set up for. And I think it should stay that way for the good the 6 Nations.

c) is my nightmare scenario, but there are obviously some big clubs who this would suit just fine. But they should be stopped from taking rugby down this road.

Interestingly, UEFA after years of trying to promote and/or rebrand the "Europa League" are finally looking at throwing in the towel and scrapping it and enlarging the "Champions League" to let more teams to compete in the top tournament. Rugby should do the same.

Merge the HC and Amlin. This

1. Lets the weakest teams from all nations compete with the strongest and adheres to (b) in the OP
2. Ends the Franglo complaint about much tougher qualification for them
3. We'll still get to see the best teams clash in the knockouts
4. It could be played out in the same number of games
5. We avoid (c) and share the representation money equally between all teams

All of this would be so much simpler if the powers that be introduce a Glbal season.

Each country or group of countries have more than one tier of rugby, if I understand correctly in Europe you have

Top tier - HC
Second tier - Top 14, Rabo12,Aviva Premiership.
Third tier - Amlin? (is this played during the same time as the HC?)

Assuming I am correct with these tiers, then considering a global season.

There are usually 3 summer tour tests, 3 inbound autumn tests and 5 Six nations tests.

In the SH there are 3 inbound tests, 3 outgoing tests and 6 rugby championship tests.

If these tours or competitions ran concurrently with a 14 day preperation inbetween each series you would need 18 weeks to complete it, if the first weekend in December is the last test (providing a break for rugby players from then on into rhe first week of January of the following year it means the tests must complete in week 49 of the year, deduct 18 weeks for the whole test window then it means by week 31 of the year domestic club/franchise rugby must be complete.

If pre season (including warm up matches) take 6 -7 weeks it would give 24-25 weeks of club competitions.

If planned well Europe can have their tier 1 and tier 2 competitions completed during that time.

If there is still a need for a tier 3 competition it can run during the test windows (the top players won't be there, but it would be a development comp anyway)

Currently the HC runs for 6 weeks during the pools, plus another 3 weeks for the knock out rounds.

Thatis a total of 9 weeks for the HC which leaves 15-16 weeks for the Top 14, Aviva, Rabo.

Even if the HC format is changed to less teams and fewer pools (20 teams, 4 pools) it would only be 2 weeks longer, extending to 11 weeks and leave 13-14 weeks for the other domestic comps.

In my view this will add so much more organisational benefits and keep everything in its own box. clubs will know that they have no interruption or injury concerns to their top players as they have their players for the duration from January to September.

There after if they do have another tier of rugby, they won't need their top players as development becomes a priority.

Would this not also simplify contracts and player injury risk for clubs during the seasons?


There will also be continuation for both club and country.

C all the way, it's a pro sport!!!!

But you get to C through A, not through B. A fact which a lot of people choose to ignore or don't realise.

SecretFly wrote:The grandiose plan in the beginning was B

The greedy truth for most fans (me included, I readily confess) is A

The greedy truth for the business men club owners (who look for profit from investment rather than any purist idea of quality of rugby for viewer/on field) then it's C

HEC is a combination of all of them. Life is complex, not simple.

To be fair to the businessmen they are generally looking to reduce their losses rather than make large profits.

Exiledinborders wrote:

SecretFly wrote:The grandiose plan in the beginning was B

The greedy truth for most fans (me included, I readily confess) is A

The greedy truth for the business men club owners (who look for profit from investment rather than any purist idea of quality of rugby for viewer/on field) then it's C

HEC is a combination of all of them. Life is complex, not simple.

To be fair to the businessmen they are generally looking to reduce their losses rather than make large profits.

And the easiest way to do that is just not buy in the first place.

It seems that agreement is being reached:
6 England
6 France
1 Wales
1 Ireland
1 Scotland
1 Italy
HC winner
Amlin winner
2 highest placed Rabo sides not included above
Matter of debate whether HC and Amlin winners coming from the Rabo get an extra place for that country or the league.

Source: JL Pagano.

HammerofThunor wrote:

Exiledinborders wrote:

SecretFly wrote:The grandiose plan in the beginning was B

The greedy truth for most fans (me included, I readily confess) is A

The greedy truth for the business men club owners (who look for profit from investment rather than any purist idea of quality of rugby for viewer/on field) then it's C

HEC is a combination of all of them. Life is complex, not simple.

To be fair to the businessmen they are generally looking to reduce their losses rather than make large profits.

And the easiest way to do that is just not buy in the first place.

Certainly in England without businessmen backing clubs with their money we would not have professional clubs. We would probably have regional rugby which I would hate.

Glas a du wrote:It seems that agreement is being reached:
6 England
6 France
1 Wales
1 Ireland
1 Scotland
1 Italy
HC winner
Amlin winner
2 highest placed Rabo sides not included above
Matter of debate whether HC and Amlin winners coming from the Rabo get an extra place for that country or the league.

Source: JL Pagano.

That's what what's-his-face (Bath owner) was saying before the meeting. I'd be pretty surprised if that is the case as it seems the PRO12 unions have massively caved. However it'll also depends on all the other details, how the money is split, controlling stake etc.

Imagine the Rabo finished as it is now:

The Rabo table now:
1 Ulster
2 Scarlets
3 Leinster
4 Munster
5 Glasgow
6 Ospreys
7 Edinburgh
8 Treviso
9 Cardiff
10 Connacht
11 Dragons
12 Zebre

Status Quo:
Ulster or Leinster win HC
Ospreys win Amlin
all qualify.

Ulster or Leinster win HC
No Amlin
all but Dragons qualify

No HC or Amlin
all but Dragons and Connacht qualify

England and France proposal:
top 6 plus HC and Amlin winners
Ulster or Leinster win HC
Ospreys win Amlin
1 Ulster
2 Scarlets
3 Leinster
4 Munster
5 Glasgow
6 Ospreys
7 Edinburgh
8 Treviso
qualify

Ulster or Leinster win HC
no Amlin
Treviso drop out (no Italian presence)

No HC or Amlin
Treviso and Edinburgh drop out (no Italian presence)

Rabo proposal
1 each nation plus 2 highest placed in league plus HC and Amlin winners
Ulster wins HC
Ospreys win Amlin
1 Ireland - Ulster
1 Wales - Scarlets
1 Scotland - Glasgow
1 Italy - Treviso
League spot 1 - Leinster
League spot 2 - Munster
Amlin winners - Ospreys
HC winners - Ulster (alredy qualified) therefore either Connacht if country spot or Edinburgh if league spot.

Ulster win HC
no Amlin
1 Ireland - Ulster
1 Wales - Scarlets
1 Scotland - Glasgow
1 Italy - Treviso
League spot 1 - Leinster
League spot 2 - Munster
HC winners - Ulster (alredy qualified) therefore either Connacht if country spot or Ospreys if league spot.

no HC or Amlin
1 Ireland - Ulster
1 Wales - Scarlets
1 Scotland - Glasgow
1 Italy - Treviso
League spot 1 - Leinster
League spot 2 - Munster

Personally, if its going to be 20 teams I favour the Rabo proposal with the HC and Amlin places deferring to the league not the nation if those teams are already qualified. I think it will be a shot in the arm for the HC and the Rabo.

HammerofThunor wrote: I'd be pretty surprised if that is the case as it seems the PRO12 unions have massively caved.

You will have to explain that comment in a bit more depth.

maestegmafia wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote: I'd be pretty surprised if that is the case as it seems the PRO12 unions have massively caved.

You will have to explain that comment in a bit more depth.

"we arent negotiating our gauranteed spots or any additonal elementof peerformance based qualification"

"Heres a proposal that doe sa bit of both"

That cave? Massively an exageration, softenined their stance perhaps pretiier.

I would be happy with that system.

I am actually coming around to the concept that the Rabo needs something to spark it into life.

This has been the most boring Rabo season I can remember.

is it because Munster are 4th?

Would you prefer the meritocratic extra league spot if you have an already qualified HC and/or Amlin winner or the amateurish, parochial next highest team from the same country, Connacht sop approach?

I watch a lot of the neutral games Glas. It just doesn't have that type of spark.

We are away against Connacht next week. Honestly it feels like a footnote, a chance for the kids to get a go.

I want to see high quality games each week and Im willing to toy with the HEC to get that.

Honestly who gets the extra places if we win the HEC/Amlin isn't really a priority to me. I think the league but if they go per nation I wont kick up a fuss.

Thats the system. 6, 6, 6 and extra places up for grabs if you do well in Europe. Every nation is still represented. The Amlin gets strengthened as a competition. The Rabo improves as a tournament.

It looks a really good compromise.

I agree. I don't really mind until it will be the Scarlets in fourth going ahead to win the play offs but due to a freak set of circumstances not qualifying for Europe...

I think that in time it will be the case that we treat the Rabo as a league entity.

However fans aren't ready for that yet. It will take something like your situation to be the final step.

That is an important detail though, is it league placing before or after the play offs? After logically, then again do the 2 league placings automatically sort it out?

Scarlets getting into the playoffs would be the freak set of circumstances

Honestly who gets the extra places if we win the HEC/Amlin isn't really a priority to me. I think the league but if they go per nation I wont kick up a fuss.

Is a bit of a volte-face from Staggy on his way back from Damascus.

Before he left he used to be of the opinion that he'd rather hand the additional spot to a French or English side than a non-Irish Rabo one.

Credit where it's due though. It's easy to be of that opinion when you think your union will never concede the basic 20 club structure. Now that this is the framework which will be agreed, what is the point arguing the old line?

Grey,

Yes I have changed my mind on this.

I have been extremely dissatisfied with the quality of games on show this season in the Rabo.

The teams aren't looking interested. Ulster are doing well to be fair but overall its just not at the level I want it to be.

When I finish work for the week and decide I want to go and see Glasgow or Treviso or Cardiff play on Friday night, I want it to be worth the cash. Currently I dont think it is.

RABO is boring!
Regional Rugby is boring.
Prncipality Premiership with no promotion and relegation from Championship is boring.

Grass roots Rugby in Wales - that's where the real rugby is played! Derbies - real rivalries, relegation battles, promotion battles. Love it!

I would rather watch a local derby between Pontyberem and Tumble or Narberth and Whitland than pay to watch the Scarlets v Ospreys.

I'm sponsoring Llandeilo v Amman United over Christmas JSD if you want to come along.

Diolch am y cynnig Glas a Du!

I will be watching Narberth v EbbwVale on the 29th - my son plays for Narberth.

Are you an Amman or Llandeilo supporter?

maestegmafia wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote: I'd be pretty surprised if that is the case as it seems the PRO12 unions have massively caved.

You will have to explain that comment in a bit more depth.

Collectively they've gone from 10 teams to 6, so a 40% reduction. No doubt the Irish are confident at the moment they'll have their spots but could lose out in the future. but they're the only ones really. And this is based on the English and French not losing any spots or making any changes. That seems like a massive cave it to me.

Of course the telegraph article in another article suggests the current offer include financial protection for those losing places. If it's agreed I guess it shows it is just about the moment for these unions and not about playing at the highest level.

bear in mind that this proposal is really based on meeting the French demand to make the ECC a worthwhile comeptition, boosting its prestige, comeptiiveness, quality and cash trough.

HammerofThunor wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote: I'd be pretty surprised if that is the case as it seems the PRO12 unions have massively caved.

You will have to explain that comment in a bit more depth.

Collectively they've gone from 10 teams to 6, so a 40% reduction. No doubt the Irish are confident at the moment they'll have their spots but could lose out in the future. but they're the only ones really. And this is based on the English and French not losing any spots or making any changes. That seems like a massive cave it to me.

Of course the telegraph article in another article suggests the current offer include financial protection for those losing places. If it's agreed I guess it shows it is just about the moment for these unions and not about playing at the highest level.

After reading this mornings press on yesterdays meeting it seems the only thing that the RP12 nations have backed down on is the idea of a larger 32 team competition.

So 32 team comp off the table by general agreement.24 team comp off by French/English clubs not agreeing,sort of leaves 20 team comp or no comp

jeff stones dad wrote:Diolch am y cynnig Glas a Du!

I will be watching Narberth v EbbwVale on the 29th - my son plays for Narberth.

Are you an Amman or Llandeilo supporter?

Since i have offices in both areas I have to be neutral

(P.S. I played for Llandeilo...)

maestegmafia wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote: I'd be pretty surprised if that is the case as it seems the PRO12 unions have massively caved.

You will have to explain that comment in a bit more depth.

Collectively they've gone from 10 teams to 6, so a 40% reduction. No doubt the Irish are confident at the moment they'll have their spots but could lose out in the future. but they're the only ones really. And this is based on the English and French not losing any spots or making any changes. That seems like a massive cave it to me.

Of course the telegraph article in another article suggests the current offer include financial protection for those losing places. If it's agreed I guess it shows it is just about the moment for these unions and not about playing at the highest level.

After reading this mornings press on yesterdays meeting it seems the only thing that the RP12 nations have backed down on is the idea of a larger 32 team competition.

Which is why I said I'd be pretty surprised if that is the case

Glas a Du

Ah! I know Rhys "Moose" Williams very well! I used to teach him in Pibwrlwyd Tech years ago!

If it's agreed I guess it shows it is just about the moment for these unions and not about playing at the highest level.

Yes, that's one interpretation, or you might say they are looking at the long term future for their regions. Every Union can say to the teams that they can all get in if they are good enough. Just the sort of meritocracy the Imperialists wanted!

jeff stones dad wrote:Glas a Du

Ah! I know Rhys "Moose" Williams very well! I used to teach him in Pibwrlwyd Tech years ago!

You must have done something right then, he has his own electricians business now.


(Unless you taught pottery!)

The point of the HC is that you try to win it as many times as you can.............

before you're unceremoniously dumped out of it because you tried to win it once too often!

Ok, all joking aside, why are France and England getting a failure bonus/protection?

Keeping it at 20 teams but still guarenteeing 12 Anglo/French teams is insane. While there has been underperformance from Welsh sides, and Edinburgh's efforts last season notwithstanding, total non performance from Scotland, any 'top flight' European rugby competition that doesn't have a guarenteed 50% of Irish sides (ie 2 like England and 6 of 12) is a joke. 5 competition wins and we give up places?! And during that time, Irish sides have won 4 CL/Rabo titles.

I accept that the Rabo needs some reform but I do not accept that the consistant underacheivment by Franglo sides (with the execeptions of Toulouse & Leicester with Clermont, Northmapton being trying get be there. Quins have evolved to compete this year too) be rewarded with the status quo. That is a failure bonus.

No, scrapping it because sensible agreement can't be reached would be a joke and not a funny one. It's about earning not guaranteeing places.

6 places to English rugby regardless of where Leicester or Harlequins end up in their league - is guaranteed places not earned ones.

Welsh clubs sustaining a presence in HEC for 7 or 8 years as Irish sides languish at bottom,will not positively influence Irish rugby - not in the slightest. I won't care how well Welsh regions are doing. It'll have no bearing on the state of Irish rugby.

Having 6 places at HEC for English and French sides is continuity of positive influence on rugby in those countries, regardless of whether their 'better' sides are at the top or the bottom of their respective leagues.

It isn't rocket science. Club feeds funding, funding feeds player development, player development feeds International, International feeds clubs............ to be out of that loop when others are guaranteed the loop, that is not realistic negotiating if the proposals keep going down that route.

Yes, yes, yes, yesterday's arguments. Your Union have sold out. Don't get angry at me, have a word with them.

Glas a du wrote:Yes, yes, yes, yesterday's arguments. Your Union have sold out. Don't get angry at me, have a word with them.

How have they sold out, Glas? Has there been an agreement? Yesterdays argument - going strongly today? And arguments your arguments just can't flush . The truth is simple, I couldn't care less how well Italian, Welsh or Scottish sides are doing in HEC so the argument of HEC contribution based on merit doesn't wash.

OK that was a little too trite, one appologises . You have four first class sides, England have 12, France 14. How can you justify 75-100% representation when England and France will at best get 50-60%.

Glas a du wrote:OK that was a little too trite, one appologises . You have four first class sides, England have 12, France 14. How can you justify 75-100% representation when England and France will at best get 50-60%.

But Glas, what happened to wanting the best teams in the competition?? Why is the comprimise falling most heavily on the Irish teams? One winner in 7 years and desipte having at least 6 teams in any given year, the GP routinely fails to provide more than 2 quarter finalists. Failure bonus.

Could you include the following as an option;

d) Created as an initiative of the then Five Nations committee to provide a new level of professional cross-border competition.

I'd focus in on cross-border on this. It doesn't refer to inter-league competition, it was (and I believe still is) in place to give countries a better level of competition to ultimately provide better exposure and development of players which in turn improves the national sides.

debaters1 wrote:

Glas a du wrote:OK that was a little too trite, one appologises . You have four first class sides, England have 12, France 14. How can you justify 75-100% representation when England and France will at best get 50-60%.

But Glas, what happened to wanting the best teams in the competition?? Why is the comprimise falling most heavily on the Irish teams? One winner in 7 years and desipte having at least 6 teams in any given year, the GP routinely fails to provide more than 2 quarter finalists. Failure bonus.

That applies equally to Wales. Even in this system you could get four qualifiers. Why so pessimistic? Your record belies this...


...or are you concerned that the IRFU will protect the international players to the extent that you fail in the Rabo...or that you won't be able to win in the Rabo now that it means something...