Is the HEC bulls**t crusade going to kill Scottish and Italian rugby?

First topic message reminder :

If they get their way and marginalise the smaller nations, surely players will leave, fans will stop going and rugby will (comparatively) die in those countries

Glad we got that sorted. Are you aware that all the negotiations are to try and keep them involved?

Bluesman, yes that would be nice.

No it is not, it is negotiations to see how much the PRL get their own way.

Don't have this idea we are all trying to keep the PRL at the table, the PRL havn't gotten their own way and havn't walked, the big bluster of the BT deal has been condemned by all including their own GB.

The PRL have a griphold on that table and they do not want to leave it.

thebluesmancometh wrote:No it is not, it is negotiations to see how much the PRL get their own way.

Don't have this idea we are all trying to keep the PRL at the table, the PRL havn't gotten their own way and havn't walked, the big bluster of the BT deal has been condemned by all including their own GB.

The PRL have a griphold on that table and they do not want to leave it.

We? I'm not talking about you. I'm talking about your unions. They do want to keep the English involved even if you want to pretend otherwise. Otherwise there would be no negotiations. There don't HAVE to be.

It's going to be fascinating to see what actually happens.

Of course everyone wants the AP clubs involved, not the English as you claim.

Everyone wants to be involved, and everyone wants everyone to be involved, unless you like giving notice every opportunity and throwing the biggest hissy fit possible to get your own way, and lets be clear this is exactly what this is!

You do know that the reason notice was given was because the unions refused to negotiate don't you?

Of course they did, they amended their houses to become competitive, the Rabo teams then dominated the HC, why should they negotiate? They madwe changes to suit the last hissy fit, to their own houses!!!

Why should the PRL have any say in what happens with any other GB???

thebluesmancometh wrote:Of course they did, they amended their houses to become competitive, the Rabo teams then dominated the HC, why should they negotiate? They madwe changes to suit the last hissy fit, to their own houses!!!

Why should the PRL have any say in what happens with any other GB???

The European competition is what is being negotiated. This includes qualification.

No it doesn't, it shouldve been brought up when the Celt nations decided to go to regions to better aid the spots they were allocated, thats right the unions are allocated spots, not told how they should qualify!!!

Does any English fan seriously think the French will take a new Elle-Vie Cup seriously?

The Great Aukster wrote:Does any English fan seriously think the French will take a new Elle-Vie Cup seriously?

The English don't take the LV cup seriously Auk.

HammerofThunor wrote:

thebluesmancometh wrote:Of course they did, they amended their houses to become competitive, the Rabo teams then dominated the HC, why should they negotiate? They madwe changes to suit the last hissy fit, to their own houses!!!

Why should the PRL have any say in what happens with any other GB???

The European competition is what is being negotiated. This includes qualification.

No it doesn't unions have allocated places - why should one union have any say in how another union selects its representatives

greytiger wrote:

The Great Aukster wrote:Does any English fan seriously think the French will take a new Elle-Vie Cup seriously?

The English don't take the LV cup seriously Auk.

GT - that's kinda my point!

thebluesmancometh wrote:PSW

Exactly!! We did it to best suit ourselves, we asked nothing of the HC, Amlin, PRL or FFR, we did what we thought would suit our game the best, however the PRL is doing what they feel is best for English clubs, by forcing change to others!!

Quick question, have the PRL or their supporters wondered how this will effect the game in England, how the national team will be effected, or how English support will be effected?

ah this explains it then, the PRL are trying to do what's best for the HC and the Rabo folks are doing what's best for themselves....

TJ wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:

thebluesmancometh wrote:Of course they did, they amended their houses to become competitive, the Rabo teams then dominated the HC, why should they negotiate? They madwe changes to suit the last hissy fit, to their own houses!!!

Why should the PRL have any say in what happens with any other GB???

The European competition is what is being negotiated. This includes qualification.

No it doesn't unions have allocated places - why should one union have any say in how another union selects its representatives

christ, where's that wall so i bang my head against it. Qualification including how that works IS being discussed. This includes the allocated places.

I've given up. No more comments from me on this issue (until it's done).

Qualification may be being discussed by the PRL but its none of their business at all and has rightly been dismissed as such. Same as its none of the SRUs business how the RFU allocate their places. This is a different issue to the number of teams.

Until the PRL get real and realise that they cannot bully their way into power and domination they wil continue to get short shrift - and when there is a new European competition without them they will feel very foolish indeed. They are completely isolated even from the RFU.

The rest of the unions cannot accept anywhere near the demands from the PRL and no one is able to make any coherent logical case for

1) any reduction in teams in the HC all being from the smaller nations

2) the PRLs insistance on altering the way other countries run tehir rugby

It looks increasingly like the PRL are not actually interested in reaching a solution. What they seem to want is to dismantle the HEC as it currently exists so that they can create an alternative on their terms. It is a fair enough strategy for a shareholder with a minority holding but their gain will be at everyone else's expense (including the RFU).

The Great Aukster wrote:It looks increasingly like the PRL are not actually interested in reaching a solution. What they seem to want is to dismantle the HEC as it currently exists so that they can create an alternative on their terms. It is a fair enough strategy for a shareholder with a minority holding but their gain will be at everyone else's expense (including the RFU).

I will bet you a beer you are 100% wrong.

grey

He does say it is what they seem to want, I think thats a fair statement. If he had said what will happen I'd agree with you.

A comment on the title of the thread, rather than fair-ness/number of places etc.

If Scottish/Italian rugby were to be paid the same amount each year, but 1 of their teams were in the Amlin, would rugby be killed off? I'd say the answer is no. On current form the 2 teams would be Zebre and Edinburgh and I would have thought both would have a pretty good chance at winning some silverware in that competion, Edinburgh in particular. Wouldn't that be a good thing long term for the club, if the income was going to be the same? Surely more fans would come to a European Amlin semi final or whatever rather than turn up the week after being nilled at home?

Also the proposed changes would have the advantage of keeping teams like Bucharesti invovled in European competition, surely Italian sides more than anyone must know that competition should be spread outside the old 5 nations?

Doing well in the Amlin has stood a lot of sides in good stead. In recent years teams like Clermont, Quins, Saints & Toulon have progressed through the Amlin pool stages, got to or won the final and then gone on to make headway in the Heineken. Approached in the right way it can definitely be used as a springboard.

thebluesmancometh wrote:grey

He does say it is what they seem to want, I think thats a fair statement. If he had said what will happen I'd agree with you.

OK, I stand (or actually sit) corrected. My point is that I do not believe this is what they want. These guys aren't radicals. I don't believe they want to tear anything down, nor do I believe they don't want a solution.

And my offer for a beer stands. When all parties finally agree to a new contract, it will be worth celebrating with a few pints.

Depends on the outcome, if certain parties get there way celt and Italian rugby could suffer massively, then it's time to drown the sorrows.

In reality Scot and Italian rugby will just be the first to be killed, the Irish and Welsh will soon follow.

Still Sale covered the PRL with Heino glory didn't they ?

Grey

You have to forgive anyone who thinks the PRL want to rip the HC apart and start a tourney on their terms, they have gone and sourced an alternate TV deal, worked out who deserves what and decided to make the negotiations untennable for all parties.

Blues,
I didn't say the PRL are politic. Their PR is bumbling, at best. That BT deal is still simply another tool in negotiations. And, as such, I don't think it is something to be emotional about. Instead it shows that our product - European Rugby - has been undervalued and there is more money to be made by all of us. Like any other contract which depends upon a different contract not signed/agreed (the European Cup deal) it would have to be re-negotiated once the final broad based European Cup deal comes together.

Don't get me wrong, if there is a better deal to be had it has to be considered, but the BT deal is far from open, it is clouded in AP cover, was used by the PRL as a negotiation tool for their demands, and behind the back of the governing body of europe and their own nation.

This is why the demands are so extravegant, and from Rabo nations POV outrageous. Why would anyone trust this BT deal when...

A) It is linked clearly to the AP?
B) Has been brought in under the table behind everyones backs?
C) Is an inferior product to the viewer as a unit?
D) It will clearly have stipulations on how the tournament is structured?

21st Century Schizoid Man wrote:Still Sale covered the PRL with Heino glory didn't they ?

Sale aren't playing rugby worthy of a top-flight European competition. Which really doesn't say much for the 6 Rabo sides with even less points and wins in the competition than the Premiership's bottom ranked side. There are teams in the Amlin who are better and would add more to what is meant to be Europe's pinnacle. Better to cut all the 2nd tier teams to the Amlin though where they can be competitive and look to progress from (3rd tier likewise in a new competition), let the Heineken have more competitive games between teams that can more consistently play to a better standard.

markb

How do you jusge that? Where are Embra the HC semi finalists of last season in your reasoning?

thebluesmancometh wrote:markb

How do you jusge that? Where are Embra the HC semi finalists of last season in your reasoning?

Bringing in crowds smaller than you get at a tea party. Artifically supporting these clubs may enable them to once in a blue moon (eg cardiffs near miss on a HC final) failure to totaly disgrace the competition doesnt really do much to drag up the overall standing of the cup, or encourage the French to think of it a suborniate to their own domestic league.

But then the propossed changes from the Frangles dont really go that far either. If we really want the HC to be top dog it has to be ran as a tier above domestic clubs, and with sides who can support big crowds and draw big TV and employ the best players. More like the S15 model.
Noone is willing to put that on the table though.

So basically only teams that are within huge regions with nations who can boast double figure millions of potential supporters??

So essentially only England and France deserve HC rugby as they have more people and more fans, they command the big money from TV and therefore noone else is worthy? Lets so how that works shall we?

Oh and PS Ulsters crowds aren't spectacular, The Blues managed 4 seasons of QF/SF and Amlin winning rugby.

You have tried so much harder in the past

thebluesmancometh wrote:markb

How do you jusge that? Where are Embra the HC semi finalists of last season in your reasoning?

Not qualified because they finished 2nd from bottom in the league last year. That and their lower mid-table positioning this year look more indicative of their true standard.

Teams that consistently play well will reach the top of their league. The true best from each league facing each other leads to more competitive and interesting matches, as does the next level of more comparable teams from each league facing each other.

In my opinion there are too many teams from each league in the Heineken & the Amlin. Three competitions each with less teams than the two current ones each feature will raise the standard of matches and the competitions.

So in your opinion the O's deserve to be HC players, along with Glasgow, Scarlets and Munster, but Ulster who didn't finish top 4 do not? Despite them being the form team in europe this season?

The issue I have with league formatting is...

1) Focus of club. If the previous season champs attempt to win the HC they will suffer in the league and risk not qualifying next season. We will see teams such as Ospreys and Quins who may reach the top tier, struggle to compete with the best, fall early and focus on the league weeks beore the better opposition are able to. Anyone who claims that Leinsters HC run didn't effect the playoff final is lying!

2) The Rabo league currently has 3 of last seasons semi finalists and 2 teams who have won the cup multiple times in the last 6/7 years, how do teams like Scarlets and Glasgow compete despite being arguably the strongest Welsh or Scottish region?

3) The Rabo unions have restructured their club game in order to be competitive with the tournament system that is now under review, why should they be handicapped for putting in place a better (arguably) infrastructure and winning euro comps regularly since doing so?

I am all for merit based competitiions, but if 4 nations of the 6 are in the same league it leads to non representation, or a case of all eggs in one basket. If this goes ahead the Rabo nations will have to consider another restructure to enable them to be competitive.

Bathman_in_London wrote:A comment on the title of the thread, rather than fair-ness/number of places etc.

If Scottish/Italian rugby were to be paid the same amount each year, but 1 of their teams were in the Amlin, would rugby be killed off? I'd say the answer is no. On current form the 2 teams would be Zebre and Edinburgh and I would have thought both would have a pretty good chance at winning some silverware in that competion, Edinburgh in particular. Wouldn't that be a good thing long term for the club, if the income was going to be the same? Surely more fans would come to a European Amlin semi final or whatever rather than turn up the week after being nilled at home?

Also the proposed changes would have the advantage of keeping teams like Bucharesti invovled in European competition, surely Italian sides more than anyone must know that competition should be spread outside the old 5 nations?

The income would not be the same tho would it. No 40 000 gates which made last year so lucrative for Edinburgh.

markb wrote:

thebluesmancometh wrote:markb

How do you jusge that? Where are Embra the HC semi finalists of last season in your reasoning?

Not qualified because they finished 2nd from bottom in the league last year. That and their lower mid-table positioning this year look more indicative of their true standard.

Teams that consistently play well will reach the top of their league. The true best from each league facing each other leads to more competitive and interesting matches, as does the next level of more comparable teams from each league facing each other.

In my opinion there are too many teams from each league in the Heineken & the Amlin. Three competitions each with less teams than the two current ones each feature will raise the standard of matches and the competitions.

If the4 prl will accept a lower number of teams in the top tier then others would be able to do so as well

thebluesmancometh wrote:So in your opinion the O's deserve to be HC players, along with Glasgow, Scarlets and Munster, but Ulster who didn't finish top 4 do not? Despite them being the form team in europe this season?

The issue I have with league formatting is...

1) Focus of club. If the previous season champs attempt to win the HC they will suffer in the league and risk not qualifying next season. We will see teams such as Ospreys and Quins who may reach the top tier, struggle to compete with the best, fall early and focus on the league weeks beore the better opposition are able to. Anyone who claims that Leinsters HC run didn't effect the playoff final is lying!

2) The Rabo league currently has 3 of last seasons semi finalists and 2 teams who have won the cup multiple times in the last 6/7 years, how do teams like Scarlets and Glasgow compete despite being arguably the strongest Welsh or Scottish region?

3) The Rabo unions have restructured their club game in order to be competitive with the tournament system that is now under review, why should they be handicapped for putting in place a better (arguably) infrastructure and winning euro comps regularly since doing so?

I am all for merit based competitiions, but if 4 nations of the 6 are in the same league it leads to non representation, or a case of all eggs in one basket. If this goes ahead the Rabo nations will have to consider another restructure to enable them to be competitive.

I didn't specify top 4 from the leagues, that would result in too many in the Amlin. I'd have the top 6 from the Rabo and top 5 from each of the English & French leagues.

Speculating over who would or wouldn't have qualified when the possibility of not qualifying wasn't a threat of that positioning is artificial. But yes, sometimes good teams miss out. Ulster finished 6th last year, so would have qualified, had they not it would have been because they weren't the team last season that they are this and you'd be awarding positions on promise rather than delivery. Gloucester just missed out on qualification last season and are markedly improved this, they would have surely made better competitors in the HC this year than Sale, but thats the way the chips can fall when you're building and not quite there. They might have missed out this year, but if they really have built to something they won't miss out over the next few.

It's certainly true that it's incredibly difficult to win Europe and domestically, but that is the case whichever system you have. As far as I'm aware no team that has won domestically and gone all out to win in Europe the next year, getting to the business end of things, has finished domestically that year in a position that didn't or wouldn't have seen them qualify for Europe the following year. The scenario is possible but unlikely given what those achievements would take.

Teams like Scarlets & Glasgow compete to the best of their abilities. They would have qualified last season and on current position would qualify this. If they can't beat the sides above them domestically then they won't be good enough to beat them and another two sets of sides as good in Europe. They'll have to keep on developing until they are good enough.

The competitive Rabo sides wouldn't be handicapped, those that aren't competitve at the top level would be playing in a competition that better suits their level, that they can show their best in and that would have increased worth because of their inclusion.

What it comes down to is that the European competitions as they are are uneven in the quality of their participants. More competitive groupings with the raising of the Amlin to something more worthy and a third competition for lower level teams will make for an all-round improved spectacle, benefit more sides and I feel provide a context that teams can better develop in.

The competitive Rabo sides wouldn't be handicapped, those that aren't competitve at the top level would be playing in a competition that better suits their level, that they can show their best in and that would have increased worth because of their inclusion.

Yes they would be. Last seasons semi finalists Edinburgh would not have qualified for the HC under your proposals

What it comes down to is that the European competitions as they are are uneven in the quality of their participants.

Indeed - all those middle ranked English teams playing dull rugby take up a lot of valuable places without getting to the latter stages very often

TJ wrote:

Bathman_in_London wrote:A comment on the title of the thread, rather than fair-ness/number of places etc.

If Scottish/Italian rugby were to be paid the same amount each year, but 1 of their teams were in the Amlin, would rugby be killed off? I'd say the answer is no. On current form the 2 teams would be Zebre and Edinburgh and I would have thought both would have a pretty good chance at winning some silverware in that competion, Edinburgh in particular. Wouldn't that be a good thing long term for the club, if the income was going to be the same? Surely more fans would come to a European Amlin semi final or whatever rather than turn up the week after being nilled at home?

Also the proposed changes would have the advantage of keeping teams like Bucharesti invovled in European competition, surely Italian sides more than anyone must know that competition should be spread outside the old 5 nations?

The income would not be the same tho would it. No 40 000 gates which made last year so lucrative for Edinburgh.

But if they were in the Amlin semi why couldn't they have the same number turning up? I don't think indivdual clubs ticketing issues should be a problem for every other club in Europe. Also seeing as that was a one off attendance, that can't have been planned for in the business plan, so not having it next season shouldn't make the club bankrupt, which is the question the thread began with.

Bathman - merely pointing out that a drop to the amlin would mean a drop in income more than likely. I very much doubt the rather fragile level of support for Edinburgh would turn out for a second rank competition. I wouln't go probably. I don't want to watch dull second rate teams - I want to watch the giants play. For example the only (football) Raith rovers game I have been to is when they played Bayern Munich.

Just that point alone refuting the idea that a drop to the amlin would not have financial consequences.

But doesnt the proposal include compensation to offset any drop in income anyway?

I wouldve thought the Scotts were more concenrned about rugby than money anyway, after all its only the privately owned clubs that that matters to right.

TJ I take your point, fans want to see the biggest teams. Still, the Amlin this year will have Stade Francais and Perpingan in the QFs, plus the teams which drop down for example quite possibly one of Ospreys and Toulouse. So its not as if Doncaster would be turning up.

Anyway my point is that assuming some sort of compromise is reached, I don't think Scottish/Italian rugby will be as adversely affected as the title of the thread suggests. Clearly it is easier for long term planning if you are guarenteed H-cup rugby every year, but personally I don't believe that rugby will vanish simply because 1 team may play 3 home games against weaker opposition.

Bathman_in_London wrote:TJ I take your point, fans want to see the biggest teams. Still, the Amlin this year will have Stade Francais and Perpingan in the QFs, plus the teams which drop down for example quite possibly one of Ospreys and Toulouse. So its not as if Doncaster would be turning up.

Anyway my point is that assuming some sort of compromise is reached, I don't think Scottish/Italian rugby will be as adversely affected as the title of the thread suggests. Clearly it is easier for long term planning if you are guarenteed H-cup rugby every year, but personally I don't believe that rugby will vanish simply because 1 team may play 3 home games against weaker opposition.

The PRL proposals would increase the divide and make it harder to climb back into top tier for particularly the Italians and Scots. It would not kill it at a stroke but longer term would be catastrophic and within ten years scots rugby would be semi pro at best.

Well its true. I mean look what happened to them in the soccer when they were denied automatic entry to the Champions League or whatever its called this week.

Youd see Celtic even qualify now let alone make the knockouts.

Oh.

TJ wrote:

The competitive Rabo sides wouldn't be handicapped, those that aren't competitve at the top level would be playing in a competition that better suits their level, that they can show their best in and that would have increased worth because of their inclusion.

Yes they would be. Last seasons semi finalists Edinburgh would not have qualified for the HC under your proposals

The key word is competitive. Edinburgh haven't won a single game, scored a try or even managed a losing bonus point this season, as well as being handed a 0-45 drubbing at home by Saracens and 33-0 away to Munster. The semi-final appearance last season looks increasingly like a blip compared to their previous and ongoing form. If they were a truly competitve side they'd have done and would be doing better in the Rabo. The English, French & Rabo sides that aren't competitive at Heineken levels, aren't the best in their league, should be in the Amlin.

TJ wrote:

What it comes down to is that the European competitions as they are are uneven in the quality of their participants.

Indeed - all those middle ranked English teams playing dull rugby take up a lot of valuable places without getting to the latter stages very often

Glad you agree. Like I've said, the lesser teams from each league shouldn't be there. In terms of getting to the latter stages, although some are competitive, most teams don't, with 24 entering and 8 spots in the knock-out stages, just a third do. With England entering 6 sides most years they should be getting 2 teams to the knock-out stages each year. In the history of England entering the HC they have failed to achieve or exceed that twice.

so if the numbers need to be reduced then why do the english teams deserve to be protected but not the irish. scots, italians or welsh?

I would settle for 5/5/8 plus hc and amlin winners

So would I TJ, assuming it was a 1 for each nation and the rest on league position. Or 2 for Wales/Ireland and the remainder on league position. Then hc/amilin winners country gets an extra if they have already qualified through league position.

Right so thats that sorted. Public finances up next?

Bathman_in_London wrote:So would I TJ, assuming it was a 1 for each nation and the rest on league position. Or 2 for Wales/Ireland and the remainder on league position. Then hc/amilin winners country gets an extra if they have already qualified through league position.

Right so thats that sorted. Public finances up next?

Bloody hell - a reasonable englishman

TJ wrote:

Bathman_in_London wrote:So would I TJ, assuming it was a 1 for each nation and the rest on league position. Or 2 for Wales/Ireland and the remainder on league position. Then hc/amilin winners country gets an extra if they have already qualified through league position.

Right so thats that sorted. Public finances up next?

Bloody hell - a reasonable englishman

You've changed your tune. You were arguing against that vehemently a little while ago.

Well an agreement like that would involve all sides giving ground and I would like to think that most people would be on board with that.

The split of finances ie to union or for teams entered would be harder to sort out, although obviously hard to do without knowing all the facts (i'm presuming none of the posters work for the ERC).