Premiership Rugby is to begin discussions next month about an alternative competition to the Heineken Cup that could include an element of southern hemisphere opposition.

First topic message reminder :

Could be interesting. Would be great for the continued development of Argentina.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/club/9741136/Premiership-Rugby-to-set-up-talks-to-break-deadlock-over-new-Heineken-Cup-competition.html

Premiership Rugby is to begin discussions next month about an alternative competition to the Heineken Cup that could include an element of southern hemisphere opposition.

By Gavin Mairs
11:00PM GMT 12 Dec 2012

The move comes after a fourth round of talks involving European stakeholders, held at a hotel near Heathrow Airport, failed to end the impasse over the future structure of the Heineken Cup from 2014.

Among proposals likely to come under consideration are an Anglo-French competition, while there is thought to be interest from Argentina to establish professional clubs below their national side that could be based in Spain.

While there is still hope that a deal can be done for English clubs to remain in the European tournament, one source said last night it was time for “big thinking”.

The English clubs’ position is strengthened by their new television deal with BT Vision from 2014 which would be lucrative enough to replace the income from both the Premiership and European competitions.

Divisions between the English and French clubs — who are demanding reform of the tournament, including a reduction of clubs from 24 to 20 — and their Rabodirect Pro 12 counterparts are thought to have widened.

While the proposal by the representatives of the Celtic and Italian clubs for an expanded tournament of 32 clubs is now thought to be off the table, their overriding preference is said to be to maintain the status quo.

Premiership Rugby had hoped that a breakthrough would have been possible after presenting details of a possible compromise over their demands that only the top six of the Pro 12 clubs qualify and financial guarantees over funding.

The English clubs’s suggestion was for the top four Pro 12 sides to automatically qualify, with the next two qualifiers based on geographical spread to ensure every country was represented in the tournament.

Sources say there was no give in the Pro 12 position, which currently guarantees two places for Scotland and Italy, during the three-hour meeting.

The English and French clubs however pointed out that as they had served the necessary two years’ notice on the current accord back in June, it was not realistic to expect them now to accept the status quo six months on.

It is understood that Premiership Rugby remains hopeful that an agreement can still be reached and are prepared to re-examine their own proposals over the festive period.

But this will also go hand-in-hand with exploratory talks about filling the nine European weekends with an alternative tournament.

While no date was set for another stakeholder meeting, the ERC board is scheduled to meet on Feb 6 next year, when a further review will take place.

Artful_Dodger

ok so what you're saying is that lets say ENG and FRA generate 80% of the revenue in the 6N but only get say 40% of it back.... that that is fair because without the participation of the other countries they wouldn't get their cut... because the competition wouldn't exist???

Please note the numbers are not even a guess its just an example and not to be taken seriously.

Where does this massive amounts of money come from that the 6N generates... are the matches in the UK all sold to the BBC still???

Like the RC, I don't prefer a split of the 6N but it still doesn't take away the point that money generated is probably unevenly split (true from the RC & SR... only an assumption for the HC & 6N based on the SH model).. and with teams like AUS regularly beating SA, teams like IRE regularly beating ENG... why shouldn't the cash cows of SA & ENG say... hang on, we're funding you to beat us.... thats not right.

broadlandboy wrote:Just asking if there was any interest
Hypotheticaly SA do not renew SR next time,do you think there would be interest in a Pro 14 team league with inter league comp with French/English clubs with each country keeping the money generated by them selves

For us to have a pro 14 equivalent is definitely possible (the Currie Cup had 14 teams a number of years back, but the argument was strength vs strength was an issue, again money to retain players was rhe cause)

Whether there will be a comp between the top teams of SA, France and England I really don't know, it will certainly be a hell of a lot more profitable for us.

Munster, like the other Irish provinces, get their money from IRFU, HEC and from fans/commercial interests.

IRFU organises the deals/income for 6 Nations.

ECR organises the deals/income for HEC and Amlin. The money is paid to IRFU, same as money is paid to PRL/RFU. They decide how the money is split across the clubs it supports.

Munster have some centrally-contracted players, similar to NZ model. How they play for other non-Irish players depends in part on their status. Are they a nominated Project Player (in Stander's case, I think yes), in which case IRFU may contribute something to the payment as well as from Munster's own coffers. If they're an out-and-out foreign purchase for a defined contract period, then the club pays for them. Presumably Bulls operate some kind of a salary limit across its players. you'd need to know what they put on the table, or what was the max allowed to be put on the table, to have some kind of idea of whether Munster paid outlandish money.

fa0019 wrote:Artful_Dodger

ok so what you're saying is that lets say ENG and FRA generate 80% of the revenue in the 6N but only get say 40% of it back.... that that is fair because without the participation of the other countries they wouldn't get their cut... because the competition wouldn't exist???

The 6N attracts a world wide audience at this stage, so even if the English and French generate more than the other 6N teams its nowhere near as simple as suggesting that the 6N is all about English and French TV audiences because it isn't. I know a Belgian guy who is a 6N fanatic he support France and Scotland because his mum is Scottish. The 6N should quite rightfully be split amongst the 6 participating countries because all have played a significant role in turning the 6N into the brand that it is.

FA

All the merchandise in the world isn't a particular money spinner, it's more of a brand builder. The WRU presently sells every peice of merchandise you could possibly imagine, is in a huge amount of stores Including their own and a very lucrative deal with Tesco and Asda, however pure profit is pretty minimal and it is more a case of building a brand than short term profits.

Also from what I hear I was told the Bulls get an average of closer to 25 than 30 through their gates, and when you take into consider price of ticket, R strength and average wage of Afrikaans it is an extremely cheap thing to do, and doesn't offer a huge profit margin for the Bulls (from my limited knowledge)

So highlighting 4.5M R is pretty misleading taking into account it's more like 2.5M R and that is the equivilant of £170k, I'd argue that compare to ticket prices at Thomond and average attendance it wouldn't be too disimilar, infact the average home attendance is 26? At an average cost of 20e? is what £450000, minus the much larger overheads in Ireland I'd prob say the matchday profit is similar!

Unless Ive got all my numbers confuddled and am totally wrong which I very well may be

broadlandboy

Hypothetically speaking I think it would be a massive opportunity for all 3 sides (but near impossible to achieve given all the issues it would have with the HC, SR and even the 6N & RC).

Take major SA companies like Investec.

What would be the interest of them marketing in rugby in AUS & NZ... perhaps but not massively. They used to sponsor WP but stopped a number of years back.
What would be the interest of them marketing in rugby in ENG & FRA? It would be huge and SA clubs would see sponsorship rise dramatically because of it.

Europe is a massive market for SA; AUS & NZ... only in the sports sections... a blip financially.

How many AUS & NZ companies have interest in SA... Macquarie...a couple of mining firms perhaps. Thats it. All small to medium.

How many UK companies have interest in SA.... shed loads. Barclays (Absa), Investec, Anglo-American, Vodacom, Old Mutual. These are UK-SA companies who are literally some of the biggest firms in SA.

But politics will win through no doubt... "AUS - we'll vouch for your RWC 2023 bid if you stay the course etc etc".

Surely the question though is would we want our saintly players, like the poetic Dylan Hartley, subjected to the hands of the Bok thugs on a weekly basis?

fa0019 wrote:Artful_Dodger

ok so what you're saying is that lets say ENG and FRA generate 80% of the revenue in the 6N but only get say 40% of it back.... that that is fair because without the participation of the other countries they wouldn't get their cut... because the competition wouldn't exist???

People watching TV and going to games generate revenue fa0019 - not the French and English clubs/unions. People who watch TV. Across Europe in the 6N countries, people watch TV - that's an audience, that's the audience the sponsors like as that's the bums on seats. That's a 6N audience, not an English audience forced to watch the French v Ireland game under duress by the RFU. It's not a French audience forced to watch the Italian v Wales games because their Union forces them to. Free thinkers making a choice to watch a Championship.

In that championship - all sides play each other, all sides therefore contribute to the competition equally. In HEC, Irish sides have been contributing more than others in recent years when it comes to keeping bums on seats to the very end of the HEC - and yet, we still hear English rugby, that hasn't had such great luck in recent years and therefore didn't contribute to the season longevity of that competition, claiming that they still want more money because it was English bums sitting on seats that were watching Irish sides provide the entertainment.................................................. It's not a discussion I'd be having with English rugby at all - I think SKY would have been more appropriate negotiators for revenues earned and distributed in recent years - not English rugby.

6N TV and collective sponsorship is pooled and split with 15% for prize money, 75% split equally and with 10% weighting to larger countries. (TV =74m Euros in 2009)

ERC (Heineken and Amlin) TV and collective sponsorship is pooled and split unequally. 15% in prize money, with the remainder split 24% each to English and French clubs, about 13% each to the other unions. So 12 English clubs get about 2% each, 4 Irish provinces get an average of about 3% each, before prize money. (TV = 30m Euros in 2009)

Pro12 TV and sponsorship is not pooled.

Peter I am not going to touch that ( & nor should anyone else)

Would those in ENG watch a competition without ENG in it? Would Sky in ENG be interested in a competition without ENG/ENG clubs in it in the first place?

They may watch a HC match because its got good quality rugby in it... but then why doesn't loads of people watch the Rabo? Assuming they don't... who networks the Rabo in the UK.... does it get good coverage on any main channels in England?

I often watch AUS matches in SR... half the time because they are on saturday morning, half because I'm a WP man and am interested in the competition.

If we weren't in the competition I doubt I'd bother. Perhaps some are different though.

Its fair to think Dubbelyew L Overate thank the H-cup money split was set up along the same lines as the H-cup.

meaning that if the SRU/IRFU/FIR and WRU give ground on thier share in H-cup that when 6 nations comes up, they may fear they will have to give ground in it as well.

I don't see the SRU/IRFU/FIR and WRU giving any ground on the finaceial side, for fear it will come into 6 nations (the real earner for them all).

fa0019 wrote:Would those in ENG watch a competition without ENG in it? Would Sky in ENG be interested in a competition without ENG/ENG clubs in it in the first place?

They may watch a HC match because its got good quality rugby in it... but then why doesn't loads of people watch the Rabo? Assuming they don't... who networks the Rabo in the UK.... does it get good coverage on any main channels in England?

The fact remains that the English clubs don't own the audiences in their country who decide to turn on a private TV when and where they like as free thinking individuals, buying whatever subscription they want to buy (regardless of RFU direction or advice). English clubs/Union don't own their audiences and therefore can't look for plum bonuses based on who sits on a chair at home or in a pub if some other external club/Union is playing on the screen providing the entertainment.

They sell their product to TV companies who then make the judgement of how much they are prepared to give for the privilege - the price will always be decide on when, where and who against the English sides play. If English sides only offered BT Vision their own domestic competition - I guarantee you, they wouldn't have got the supposed big deal they got. They got the deal on the promise that English sides would be involved with the cream of European rugby. Those are external forces at play. That's external forces and sides bringing value to the product English rugby tries to sell. That's mostly Irish sides in recent years who have made that HEC product, that BTVision want their hands on, so so attractive.

My point is that English rugby bring nothing but their own clubs whilst the English audiences want to watch more than English rugby and BTVisions deal proves it.

I agree but there is a difference between a european competition with English teams in them to a european compeitition with no English team in them.

Hence why the HC contract is so good and why (I assume) the Rabo gets next to nothing (I see online they show their games on BBC digital channels..as in not even BBC2).

Why will someone watch the HC of lets say the Ospreys vs. Leinster full strength in ENG but not watch the same match in the Rabo???

I have seen that argument before - about TV audiences in England watching rugby from other european countries and it does have some merit but..

I would also imagine that the audience for SH rugby is also pretty big in the UK as a whole and I am sure we have no input as to how they schedule or play their games.

All this because the Irish got good at winning in Europe.

Just pull your fingers out and try harder, i don't see the Welsh or Scottish who do pretty terrible in Europe trying to change it to their advantage.

Sour Sour Grapes for the old farts in control of English Prem.

England also talking about making the HC more of a quality comp, but happy to play Currie cup teams, who really only have three strong sides.

I reckon the English will go one season outside Europe.

if we got back the 100 players playing in the top tier of European rugby leagues we wouldn't have just 3 decent teams.... we'd have at least 6.

And thats 3 decent teams in relation to the teams we play at the moment. Count out the Cheetahs at your peril... they are with Goosen a very strong side.

Does make me laugh on here, some people seem happy with keeping the status quo (perhaps because it suits them better, which lets be honest, does!) yet when anyone says "hey look guys, lets try and improve the competition, bring more money in" everyone is up in arms.

Let's face it, some of the regions need the money. A few of you seem to think the current competition can't be improved, which honestly is a stupid way of thinking.

fa0019 wrote:I agree but there is a difference between a european competition with English teams in them to a european compeitition with no English team in them.

Hence why the HC contract is so good and why (I assume) the Rabo gets next to nothing (I see online they show their games on BBC digital channels..as in not even BBC2).

Why will someone watch the HC of lets say the Ospreys vs. Leinster full strength in ENG but not watch the same match in the Rabo???

I've always said English rugby fans love the idea of English rugby involvement in HEC. That's an emotional response - one that is shared for their own sides by French, Welsh, Scottish etc. We all get more kick out of the European competition when we have sides in it. It's a natural. I won't disagree with that point because it's the very point I always throw in when people here say WRU or IRFU should be prepared to give up 'guaranteed' places - for the betterment of the overall product - but English and French rugby will keep their 'guaranteed' 6 places each - no argument.

I say that is an argument okay, it a clear an cut argument for an Anglo/French competition!

But it isn't an argument for the betterment of the current 'European' Competition, as it guarantees the emotional involvement of English and French peoples each and every year but pushes back the rest into the area of hope and fear... and one of those nations that is to be pushed out and into this no-man's land of 'no guarantee' of HEC places (or certainly much fewer guarantees!) is a nation that has won as many HECs as England and one more than France.

The concept of 'guarantee' meets 'no guarantee' in European competition, and it gets to be called fair, just doesn't strike me as either fair or balanced. If the idea between France and England is that 'we provide most people because most people in our countries want to see us and therefore we should have more places and you guys shouldn't even have a guarantee on a national level of any places at all' - then I say let's call a spade a spade, that's the Anglo/French competition already. Just go off and create it.

viewtothegym wrote:England also talking about making the HC more of a quality comp, but happy to play Currie cup teams, who really only have three strong sides.

I reckon the English will go one season outside Europe.

let's be honest, 3 isn't that much less than all the strong sides in the Rabo.

In football Cardiff City and Swansea don't get into the CL because they are the highest ranked teams in Wales.... as they are not part of the highest welsh league even though they are better sides.

They entered the English tier system and the english tier system gets 4 teams in the CL each year irrespective of who gets the place or where the team is from.

The HC is not a domestic league like SR, its a qualification cup competition. Sport is unfair.... teams with the biggest pool of players to choose from, the biggest finances etc will generally prevail over the smaller sides.... but thats life/competition.
Anything else is just social engineering... why should a team that works hard at creating their brand, marketing/building/developing their team etc have others live off their hard work? If so then why bother marketing/building for the future.

Its half the reason I think my own original home union, Scotland have been in the dolldrums for so long.... why bother trying to spend money building our side our brand, developing youngsters etc.... because we are guaranteed revenue way above any work that we can do ourselves from other participants and if we're not developing good enough players... we'll just bring out some gifted players with Scottish grannies/residency qualifications.... i.e. recipe for disaster.

Thats why many of us are into sport, into competition... the best players just like the best teams are those who are talented yes but those who also work hardest at their craft, put in the hours when others have gone home, made the sacrifices. You eat what you kill so to speak.

If not why not just create a league where the winning team is decided before the season begins and make sure everyone gets a taste of victory at some point.

I do respect other people's opinion, they want to maintain their own strength and see a good competition.... I'm just of the other opinion where I believe merit walks... irrespective of whether it creates a Man United 10 titles in 15 years scenario.

Maybe bold but I would say the Cheetahs (SA's fourth side) full strength would beat everyone in the Rabo bar probably Leinster full strength... and it wouldn't be a walkover either... they took last years SR winners to within a few points last season and were beset by injuries all year.

They are the bedrock of forward play in SA and always have good players on their roster... only to be poached once their first contract is up or even whilst some guys are at school.

I wonder which club will be pushing hardest for this, any ideas Beshocked?

This is getting ridiculous now.

The only thing that really needs restructuring is the Aviva Premiership and everyone knows it. It isnt working and the players are all getting flogged to death. The Heineken cup works perfectly well so why change it? It gets huge viewership and generates plenty of money.

This all boils down to the English having a hissy fit because they havent won the tournament in a few years. This is the only reason they want it to be restructured so that the odds are back in their favour.

It all boils down to greed. The fundamental issue is that the RFU has no control over the AP. If they did there would be no problem what so ever. The RFU has already come out against the APs plans. The AP is a business and only care about themselves and therefore are throwing out a load of bluffs A because they can and B because they have nothing to lose because they know the Heineken Cup needs the English as much as it needs the French or the Rabo teams.

So if it's all down to 'the English' (boo-hiss), why did the French give notice as well?

The only solution is to hang tight and let the English whinge off for a year as they did in '99. In the mean time the HC should counter offer Argentinian sides their places on a trial basis for the year as a contingency plan and as a forewarning to the AP.

Let the English sit in the naughty corner. Might help focus the mind on the real issue; the AP.

Effervescing Elephant wrote:So if it's all down to 'the English' (boo-hiss), why did the French give notice as well?

Because they are upset that the fundamental failings in the Jeff are causing the Welsh regions to go bust obvioulsy. Durh.

So the English clubs aren't happy with the structure of the HC. They (in accordance with the rules) say that they aren't happy and give their notice, as obliged to do, that if they can't get changes to make it better suited to their needs they will quit the HC.
If the HC wasn't working for the IRFU and they gave notice to pull out (for whatever reason) unless there were changes made would they be villains for doing so?

The clubs in England and France have joined in a competition that has agreed rules that lapse every so often and allow for change. they want change and the other stakeholders said change would not happen so the clubs have said okay if we can;t get a compromise we'll leave
Why should they not be allowed to do so?
Why must they stay in a competition that has rules that as they see it disadvantage them. Surely they would be fools to do so?

I like the HC and would be entirely happy for it to stay as it is. However they aren't and it is a commercial negotiation process.

As much i might not like it, if a compromise cannot be reached then the English clubs should pull out (and if they did it seems entirely possible, not certian though) that the French clubs would to. Both of those leagues can survive on domestic comps.

Then after a year or two all parties could sit down to agree a format which they are all happy with (or at least the least unhappy with).

fa0019 wrote:In football Cardiff City and Swansea don't get into the CL because they are the highest ranked teams in Wales.... as they are not part of the highest welsh league even though they are better sides.

They entered the English tier system and the english tier system gets 4 teams in the CL each year irrespective of who gets the place or where the team is from.

The HC is not a domestic league like SR, its a qualification cup competition. Sport is unfair.... teams with the biggest pool of players to choose from, the biggest finances etc will generally prevail over the smaller sides.... but thats life/competition.
Anything else is just social engineering... why should a team that works hard at creating their brand, marketing/building/developing their team etc have others live off their hard work? If so then why bother marketing/building for the future.

Its half the reason I think my own original home union, Scotland have been in the dolldrums for so long.... why bother trying to spend money building our side our brand, developing youngsters etc.... because we are guaranteed revenue way above any work that we can do ourselves from other participants and if we're not developing good enough players... we'll just bring out some gifted players with Scottish grannies/residency qualifications.... i.e. recipe for disaster.

Thats why many of us are into sport, into competition... the best players just like the best teams are those who are talented yes but those who also work hardest at their craft, put in the hours when others have gone home, made the sacrifices. You eat what you kill so to speak.

If not why not just create a league where the winning team is decided before the season begins and make sure everyone gets a taste of victory at some point.

I do respect other people's opinion, they want to maintain their own strength and see a good competition.... I'm just of the other opinion where I believe merit walks... irrespective of whether it creates a Man United 10 titles in 15 years scenario.

What does this mean and where did you get that info?

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

Effervescing Elephant wrote:So if it's all down to 'the English' (boo-hiss), why did the French give notice as well?

Because they are upset that the fundamental failings in the Jeff are causing the Welsh regions to go bust obvioulsy. Durh.

AhhhhH! It all becomes clear! PSW for President of the World! Peace out.

fa0019 wrote:
I do respect other people's opinion, they want to maintain their own strength and see a good competition.... I'm just of the other opinion where I believe merit walks... irrespective of whether it creates a Man United 10 titles in 15 years scenario.

I don't quite see your point in your full post (this is only a snippet) there fa0019?

Fewer superclubs (inevitably big spending French and English ones) is the preference for Europe? They drain best players away from fringe European areas like Wales, Italy, Scotland and Ireland with big paychecks, the rest of us in time begin to think - "Them Harlequins have six Welsh players in their squad so I'll buy their shirt and support them in Europe - a Europe that Welsh sides were kicked out of years ago to improve the sport, competition and interest of the English and French pub drinkers?

That's merit walking?

That's daylight robbery in my eyes That's a few central English and French clubs carving out Europe between them and the rest of us going to pubs chanting Leicester songs with little smiles on our little faces, happy to be linked to the big lads across the water and back where we rightfully belong - passive observers rather than dominant participants.

Merit walking.... all over the rest of us.

Effervescing Elephant wrote:So if it's all down to 'the English' (boo-hiss), why did the French give notice as well?

The French showed some solidarity at the beginning but all the noises have been coming from the AP since.

The French havent signed illegitimate television deals nor have they been proposing ridiculous reforms.

I am much less worried about the Top14s demands because they have a much more symbiotic relationship with the FFR than the RFU has with the AP. The french teams therefore will be in favour of retaining a pan European competition that complements the 6N rather than branching out into a money spinning club comp.

The AP by contrast doesnt give a sh1t about that at all they just want a bigger bite of a bigger cherry for their own teams.

If Aviva reduced to being a 10 team league, you would find the quality of teams would improve, 60% of the would get H-cup rugby each season, less games means players are better rested.

If England are wanting to be regularry winning H-cup and having teams progress this is the best way to do it.

Oh look, bricks being thrown at the English again by Rabies posters. There's a surprise.

View: not sure what you mean by Currie Cup sides, but you're right that a good few English sides are not bringing quality to the HC, I'd personally be more than happy to see a drop in English sides to make the competition better. Could you say the same thing about a Welsh region?

Guns: I could say that the RABO needs re-structuring, let face it, it's been a turgid affair this year and getting worse, bring back some real competition to it by making clubs actually want to win as opposed to getting a free pass into the top flight.

None of you mention the FFR either, who also put in their notice. All those greedy, pesky, spoilt English. That's who! Rattle them pitchforks louder!

For the squillienth time, a lot of English want to see a genuine top flight 6N countries/EU contest, and that would mean reducing the teams, not handing out free passes in, and making the Amlin mean something.

Easier to just throw mud at the English though eh? Path of least resistance and all that.

I'm just of the other opinion where I believe merit walks... irrespective of whether it creates a Man United 10 titles in 15 years scenario

Problem with this, similar to all your argument FA is that you've tripped yourself up again, Leinster are certainly the closest to a dominant side europ has, therefore it and it's nation should benefit more every year by your reckoning???

Ok so: England = Booooooooo!

France = Yaaaaaaay!

Gotcha, just so i know.

Also FA if merit walks then how come England has so many clubs playing HC rugby when Ireland don't get as many despite 3 of their teams being far stronger than anything the jeff has?

SecretFly wrote:

fa0019 wrote:Would those in ENG watch a competition without ENG in it? Would Sky in ENG be interested in a competition without ENG/ENG clubs in it in the first place?

They may watch a HC match because its got good quality rugby in it... but then why doesn't loads of people watch the Rabo? Assuming they don't... who networks the Rabo in the UK.... does it get good coverage on any main channels in England?

The fact remains that the English clubs don't own the audiences in their country who decide to turn on a private TV when and where they like as free thinking individuals, buying whatever subscription they want to buy (regardless of RFU direction or advice). English clubs/Union don't own their audiences and therefore can't look for plum bonuses based on who sits on a chair at home or in a pub if some other external club/Union is playing on the screen providing the entertainment.

They sell their product to TV companies who then make the judgement of how much they are prepared to give for the privilege - the price will always be decide on when, where and who against the English sides play. If English sides only offered BT Vision their own domestic competition - I guarantee you, they wouldn't have got the supposed big deal they got. They got the deal on the promise that English sides would be involved with the cream of European rugby. Those are external forces at play. That's external forces and sides bringing value to the product English rugby tries to sell. That's mostly Irish sides in recent years who have made that HEC product, that BTVision want their hands on, so so attractive.

My point is that English rugby bring nothing but their own clubs whilst the English audiences want to watch more than English rugby and BTVisions deal proves it.

Soooo... you're saying that English clubs do not own English fans! That can't be true surely. Has anyone told their private owners yet?

Kingshu...shush now. Don't be naughty. The gig is they tell us how to run our shop - we don't reciprocate as it's considered bad manners

Alaistar

In that case how would you feel Ireland, Scotland and Wales forming their own leagues and arguing for the same amount of places England and France receive? All for it I should think? You know on the merit that welsh clubs will have earnt a place as much as any English club?

SecretFly wrote:

fa0019 wrote:
I do respect other people's opinion, they want to maintain their own strength and see a good competition.... I'm just of the other opinion where I believe merit walks... irrespective of whether it creates a Man United 10 titles in 15 years scenario.

I don't quite see your point in your full post (this is only a snippet) there fa0019?

Fewer superclubs (inevitably big spending French and English ones) is the preference for Europe? They drain best players away from fringe European areas like Wales, Italy, Scotland and Ireland with big paychecks, the rest of us in time begin to think - "Them Harlequins have six Welsh players in their squad so I'll buy their shirt and support them in Europe - a Europe that Welsh sides were kicked out of years ago to improve the sport, competition and interest of the English and French pub drinkers?

That's merit walking?

That's daylight robbery in my eyes That's a few central English and French clubs carving out Europe between them and the rest of us going to pubs chanting Leicester songs with little smiles on our little faces, happy to be linked to the big lads across the water and back where we rightfully belong - passive observers rather than dominant participants.

Merit walking.... all over the rest of us.

This is why in other posts, I have referred to what the PRL are trying to do as the footballization of European Rugby.

footballization of European Rugby

Isn't a million miles from the truth, the PRL would love a premier league style situation where they owned the UK and Ireland fan base.

Point of order : Rugby is football. Always has been, always will be.

The other game Is Association football, or socccer for short.

Dont let them take our name. Its Rugby Football.

ENG clubs are financially weaker than FRA clubs.... how do they keep their players bar Steffon Armitage???

If WAL want to keep their best players then just put in a rule stating that only home based players are chosen.

SA near almost enforce it, ENG enforce it and NZ & AUS certainly enforce it.

It may be hard at first but eventually it will work... why, because test rugby is king and always will be. Know who Antoine Claassen is, not many do???

He's probably one of the best backrow players from South Africa in the last 5 years.... the only thing is, he plys his trade in France and moved because no Franchise would have him.

Would Lydiate have got his chance in France if he played for newport only, especially for the big bucks... Claassen had to start from the bottom in France, thats where everyone else would do to.... want to play in the world cup??? Sign to our sides, if not goodbye.

You may lose the odd star but eventually players will see the merits of test rugby over financial gains.. at least until they've retired from test rugby.

Enforce it and Welsh rugby will improve, both test and domestic... put it in but don't enforce it and you might as welll not bother.

AlastairW wrote:

Guns: I could say that the RABO needs re-structuring, let face it, it's been a turgid affair this year and getting worse, bring back some real competition to it by making clubs actually want to win as opposed to getting a free pass into the top flight.

Maybe it does in some ways however, you dont see any Rabo teams whinging probably because the league continues to grow in every way year on year.

AlastairW wrote:
None of you mention the FFR either, who also put in their notice. All those greedy, pesky, spoilt English. That's who! Rattle them pitchforks louder!

I have mentioned the FFR earlier. They dont pose the same threat.

AlastairW wrote:
For the squillienth time, a lot of English want to see a genuine top flight 6N countries/EU contest, and that would mean reducing the teams, not handing out free passes in, and making the Amlin mean something.

Maybe they do but most of the AP proposals have been completly unreasonable because they are utterly greedy.

Effervescing Elephant wrote:Ok so: England = Booooooooo!

France = Yaaaaaaay!

Gotcha, just so i know.

I'd say it's more a case of:

England: "France agree with us!"

France: ............................................................................*crickets purring in the night*

I'd say be very careful of what France think and want - after all they rarely know themselves and have a tendancy to let England down off and on through history. I don't cheer France, I laugh at their propensity for straight face double and treble dealing.

thebluesmancometh wrote:Alaistar

In that case how would you feel Ireland, Scotland and Wales forming their own leagues and arguing for the same amount of places England and France receive? All for it I should think? You know on the merit that welsh clubs will have earnt a place as much as any English club?

Sorry Blues, I'm having more of a dim moment than usual. Not sure what you're getting at exactly.

Oddly yes, if each 6N country had their own league of roughly even team numbers and only the top X from each qualified I'd pay subscription to watch that for sure (I don't think I'm shooting myself in the foot there!). It makes domestic competition fiercer; good for the fans. Makes the HC fiercer; again, good for the fans. For me, if that means a reduction in English clubs in (can't speak for France, not got that mandate!) but ended up with a better competition so be it. It could only be good for the AP as well, making better competition for those hallowed slots.

This is all pie in the sky unfortunately, because they're not set up like that, and if the English proposal of 'merit alone' excluded any of the 6N sides alone then you're heading towards a full Euro-type competition, not a 6N competition. This would be detrimental to some countries, and that I'm certainly not game for.

Also, back to the flaming bean counters. That means viewing figures, etc, etc and that's been covered to death.