WRU Central Contracts

by wales606 Tue Apr 02, 2013 2:57 pm

The WRU want to meet regarding central contracts. The have been 2 reasons that the regions have rejected central contracts in the past.

- The WRU didn't bring more money to the table, instead they wanted to use the £6 millions in top ups to contract the players.

- The regions have a objection to complete WRU control of regional players, deciding which region they play for and what games they play.

The only way I can see this working is if the contracts are 50/50 (or perhaps a 75/25 slip for top players and 25/75 for borderline players) and the WRU bring about £1million more to the negotiating table. The WRU uses £3 million to 50% centrally contract the top 30 players in Wales (£100,000 average per player from the WRU would provide a lot extra for players like Adam Jones)

This leaves £4 million still to be split between the regions (a £500,000 decrease), which would probably only disadvantage the Dragons, but would help them keep Faletau.

Large Contracts (around 150,000/50,000 split)

Cardiff Blues
Alex Cuthbert
Leigh Halfpenny
Gethin Jenkins
Sam Warburton

Ospreys
Adam Jones
Alun Wyn Jones
Ian Evans
Ryan Jones
Dan Biggar
Justin Tipuric

Scarlets
Jonathan Davies
George North
Ken Owens

Dragons
Dan Lydiate (?)
Toby Faletau

Total Players : 15
Total WRU cost : £2.25 million

Medium Contract (say around 75,000/75,000 split)

Blues
Scott Andrews
Bradley Davies
Lloyd Williams

Ospreys
Ashley Beck
Rhys Webb
Richard Hibbard
Ryan Bevington

Scarlets
Aaron Shingler
Liam Williams
Rhys Preistland

Total Players : 10
Total WRU cost : £0.75 million

Small/Development Contracts (say 25,000/50,000 split)

Blues
Josh Navidi
Rhys Patchell

Scarlets
Adam Warren
Gareth Davies

Dragons
Andrew Coombes

Total players : 5
WRU cost : £150,000

Total Cost WRU : £3.15 millions
Money to the Blues : £875,000
Money to the Ospreys : £1,200,000
Money to the Scarlets : £725,000
Money to the Dragons : £325,000

by wales606 Tue Apr 02, 2013 3:17 pm

The contracts would have to be worked out on an individual basing.

For example, Dan Biggar has only just broken onto the international scene, however, he is worth a lot to the Ospreys and is recognised throughout Europe as a quality club flyhalf - therefore, he will require a large contract, but the WRU might want the Ospreys to finance a larger part of it, while making it feasible to keep him in Wales

by 123456789 Tue Apr 02, 2013 3:32 pm

I would suggest that they look at the maximum the region can pay compared to the French and make up the difference.

by doddieman Tue Apr 02, 2013 7:03 pm

Make academy players sign a 7 year contract when they turn 18 to stay in wales. Welsh academies have got them that far and are responsible for their development and ability to go on and negotiate a fat cat contract in france so they should repay the training and development put into them by the regions/wru with some years of servitude. I've no problem with players in the later years of their game going abroad and developing further but b4 25 I think they belong in wales.

by thebluesmancometh Tue Apr 02, 2013 7:30 pm

Youve hit the 2 big nails on the head Wales...

With regards to the financial arrangement, it was a feign by the WRU to restructure funding with the intention of signing the best players to the WRU. There is no incentive here for the regions to do so!!

Regarding player controll, I would have no problem with international players being placed where the governing body deems best, however I wouldn't trust the WRU as far as I could throw them, and the Scarlets and Dragons would be very wary if Lewis keeps eluding to reducing the regions to 2 or 3.

Central contracts are such an easy thing to impliment, and would do every aspect of Welsh rugby good IMHO, but the WRU find a way to botch even the easiest and most positive initiatives!!

by MonkeyOwain12 Tue Apr 02, 2013 9:07 pm

Doddieman, are you serious?!? How on earth can you "force"a player in to a 7year contract...talk about driving players away.

It's got to be about making it an attractive option to stay in Wales. Which will mean; a good wage (not the same as some of French contracts, nowhere near sustainable), good facilities to train in, good coaches, good players to play with, good competition and excellent medical support. Each Welsh player with a personalised pathway on how they could reach international level. On top of that the option of some benefits would be good.

I wonder if the WRU and regions have even asked the players and coaches what they want? What would they want to see changed in order to stay... Seems common sense to me to get their insight.

Some players will always go, for example, I don't see how anyone could begrudge Jamie Roberts a year or two in Paris. If I was offered a pay rise to live in Paris...I'd take it.

by formerly known as Sam Tue Apr 02, 2013 9:32 pm

You'd need a payrise to live in Paris.

Wouldn't an EPS style arrangement work best where the WRU announce an elite player squad and then pay the clubs for additional access to these players. English players in the EPS are worth 100k of compensation. Would that suit both parties on top of the current funding streams?

by maestegmafia Tue Apr 02, 2013 9:45 pm

doddieman wrote:Make academy players sign a 7 year contract when they turn 18 to stay in wales. Welsh academies have got them that far and are responsible for their development and ability to go on and negotiate a fat cat contract in france so they should repay the training and development put into them by the regions/wru with some years of servitude. I've no problem with players in the later years of their game going abroad and developing further but b4 25 I think they belong in wales.

I agree

by Cardiff Dave Tue Apr 02, 2013 11:06 pm

doddieman wrote:Make academy players sign a 7 year contract when they turn 18 to stay in wales. Welsh academies have got them that far and are responsible for their development and ability to go on and negotiate a fat cat contract in france so they should repay the training and development put into them by the regions/wru with some years of servitude. I've no problem with players in the later years of their game going abroad and developing further but b4 25 I think they belong in wales.

Crikey moses!

by doddieman Tue Apr 02, 2013 11:10 pm

Only semi serious really but its a good theory. Aside from the odd George north, at 18 a semi developed player can choose to receive the training and facilities on offer from the academies and wru to become potentially elite rugby players in return for their services should they be required for a period of time say until 25 perhaps. Otherwise they can return home to play for their local club with best wishes for the future. Fair deal I think.
If you look at young player development as an investment its not unfair to expect the player to offer a return on that investment otherwise the player can simply take that investment and leave for greener hills and the region is left with nothing. Is that fair?

by maestegmafia Tue Apr 02, 2013 11:12 pm

doddieman wrote:Only semi serious really but its a good theory. Aside from the odd George north, at 18 a semi developed player can choose to receive the training and facilities on offer from the academies and wru to become potentially elite rugby players in return for their services should they be required for a period of time say until 25 perhaps. Otherwise they can return home to play for their local club with best wishes for the future. Fair deal I think.
If you look at young player development as an investment its not unfair to expect the player to offer a return on that investment otherwise the player can simply take that investment and leave for greener hills and the region is left with nothing. Is that fair?

Doddie I said something similar on one of the other threads meandering around this debate. I think players should agree an academy contract that lasts until the season they turn 25.

by mikey_philVIII Tue Apr 02, 2013 11:29 pm

Obviously Wales606 you should take Roger Lewis' place. I can't see Hibbard being happy about that contract though, same with some others on and off your list. Hence more issues.

by Cardiff Dave Tue Apr 02, 2013 11:33 pm

maestegmafia wrote:
doddieman wrote:Only semi serious really but its a good theory. Aside from the odd George north, at 18 a semi developed player can choose to receive the training and facilities on offer from the academies and wru to become potentially elite rugby players in return for their services should they be required for a period of time say until 25 perhaps. Otherwise they can return home to play for their local club with best wishes for the future. Fair deal I think.
If you look at young player development as an investment its not unfair to expect the player to offer a return on that investment otherwise the player can simply take that investment and leave for greener hills and the region is left with nothing. Is that fair?

Doddie I said something similar on one of the other threads meandering around this debate. I think players should agree an academy contract that lasts until the season they turn 25.

Is 25 the magic number? For props and pretty backs?

by doddieman Tue Apr 02, 2013 11:38 pm

Then if 2 of us agree it must be an awesome plan!

by maestegmafia Tue Apr 02, 2013 11:40 pm

Cardiff Dave wrote:Is 25 the magic number? For props and pretty backs?

You would have a pretty good idea whether a prop is going to become established or not by 25. I think Dan Cole is around that age.

by Cardiff Dave Tue Apr 02, 2013 11:51 pm

maestegmafia wrote:
Cardiff Dave wrote:Is 25 the magic number? For props and pretty backs?
You would have a pretty good idea whether a prop is going to become established or not by 25. I think Dan Cole is around that age.

Yep, but how many others would fail well before the age of 25 who happened to be on generous 7 year contracts?

by maestegmafia Wed Apr 03, 2013 12:02 am

Cardiff Dave wrote:
maestegmafia wrote:
Cardiff Dave wrote:Is 25 the magic number? For props and pretty backs?
You would have a pretty good idea whether a prop is going to become established or not by 25. I think Dan Cole is around that age.

Yep, but how many others would fail well before the age of 25 who happened to be on generous 7 year contracts?

I guess a get out clause for both parties would be fair, the player may not want it, the Region may think the player doesn't have the right attitude. There are plenty of reasons I suppose. There are already contract cancelling agreements at regions over prolonged injury.

by Stone Motif Wed Apr 03, 2013 12:03 am

The whole issue is irrelevant a. Because what was revealed of the PWC report stated that central contracts were pie in the sky Roger bullshite and b. It condemns the regions forever to the role of battery hens. Nonsense. This needs to be about giving the regions the space and freedom to grow not about restricting them further.

by maestegmafia Wed Apr 03, 2013 12:26 am

Stone Motif wrote:The whole issue is irrelevant a. Because what was revealed of the PWC report stated that central contracts were pie in the sky Roger bullshite and b. It condemns the regions forever to the role of battery hens. Nonsense. This needs to be about giving the regions the space and freedom to grow not about restricting them further.

They have had that for a decade and they cocked it up, got themselves into huge debt and now they are constantly not only begging for money but trying to bite the hand that feeds them.

by Cardiff Dave Wed Apr 03, 2013 12:26 am

Release Cardiff from this regional charade and let them go on their way.
Let them be Cardiff FFS and let's stop the pretending regional rubbish.

by maestegmafia Wed Apr 03, 2013 12:28 am

Cardiff Dave wrote:Release Cardiff from this regional charade and let them go on their way.
Let them be Cardiff FFS and let's stop the pretending regional rubbish.

Would it make any difference.

by Cardiff Dave Wed Apr 03, 2013 12:40 am

maestegmafia wrote:
Cardiff Dave wrote:Release Cardiff from this regional charade and let them go on their way.
Let them be Cardiff FFS and let's stop the pretending regional rubbish.

Would it make any difference.

I reckon Yes and 10 years of pretend regionalism clearly haven't worked down our way.

by Stone Motif Wed Apr 03, 2013 1:34 am

maestegmafia wrote:
Stone Motif wrote:The whole issue is irrelevant a. Because what was revealed of the PWC report stated that central contracts were pie in the sky Roger bullshite and b. It condemns the regions forever to the role of battery hens. Nonsense. This needs to be about giving the regions the space and freedom to grow not about restricting them further.

They have had that for a decade and they cocked it up, got themselves into huge debt and now they are constantly not only begging for money but trying to bite the hand that feeds them.

laughable self delusion. Who negotiates the tv deals for starters, the one that gives blanket coverage of pro 12 rugby away for next to ffwc all to terrestrial tv, all the while claiming said pittance is some sort of gift to the pro teams that earn it? You take obtuse to a whole new level.

by maestegmafia Wed Apr 03, 2013 8:14 am

So your saying that if the Regions are given more money, so they can but more players they'll win more?

It won't.

It will just mean that France and England will raise the bar and pay more off players and we will have lost more money.

The TV deal is a very tricky area. The WRU agreed not to sell off Rugby to the satalite/cable companies. that was the wish of the welsh public who wanted their sport to be accessible.

Now that other countries are talking about massive TV deals everyone's changed their minds.

by doctornickolas Wed Apr 03, 2013 9:19 am

If the regions are handed more money they will just spend it on Italian scrum halves, fat Fijian props or useless SA rejects. I don't trust them at all.

Every time an agreement is signed for funding everyone is happy and then 5 minutes later the regions plead poverty because they have spent it all.

Usually on the regions side of the deal theya re supposed to reduce the numkber of foreign players but that never happens at all. By now we are supposed to be down to just a handful but they keep fudging the issue by signing average foreigners on 3 year deals who would "really love to qualify to play for Wales". It's nonsense, and then they let all our best players leave.

The regions are run by an amateur mindset, the same people who made a mess of club rugby through incompetence.

The Australians used to have a saying about NZ'ers. If you want to set a Kiwi up in a small business then set him up with a big one and just wait. The same applies to these idiots. They have had 10 years to get this right and all of them have failed.

Giving the regiosn more money is just throwing more good money after bad and I totally understand the WRU's reluctance to do so.

A new agreement is due in 2 years. I don't expect all the regiosn to still be around by then.

by doctornickolas Wed Apr 03, 2013 9:22 am

Stone Motif wrote:
maestegmafia wrote:
Stone Motif wrote:The whole issue is irrelevant a. Because what was revealed of the PWC report stated that central contracts were pie in the sky Roger bullshite and b. It condemns the regions forever to the role of battery hens. Nonsense. This needs to be about giving the regions the space and freedom to grow not about restricting them further.

They have had that for a decade and they cocked it up, got themselves into huge debt and now they are constantly not only begging for money but trying to bite the hand that feeds them.
laughable self delusion. Who negotiates the tv deals for starters, the one that gives blanket coverage of pro 12 rugby away for next to ffwc all to terrestrial tv, all the while claiming said pittance is some sort of gift to the pro teams that earn it? You take obtuse to a whole new level.

BBC wales and S4C are the only ones interested in showing it so how much of a deal do you think you can negotiate with one bidder, with a restricted budget for a viewing audience that will be in the tens of thousands not millions? The money negotiated is actually very good given the situation.

by Stone Motif Wed Apr 03, 2013 10:12 am

maestegmafia wrote:So your saying that if the Regions are given more money, so they can but more players they'll win more?

It won't.

It will just mean that France and England will raise the bar and pay more off players and we will have lost more money.

The TV deal is a very tricky area. The WRU agreed not to sell off Rugby to the satalite/cable companies. that was the wish of the welsh public who wanted their sport to be accessible.

Now that other countries are talking about massive TV deals everyone's changed their minds.

I'm not saying anything of the sort, but then I haven't got a willingness to swallow Chairman Wodge's lies like you have. The ones who are making this solely about player wages are the WRU. More money might allow the regions to operate sustainably as businesses by increasing the effectiveness of the academies the WRU currently grossly underfund and rely on private individuals to finance, for example. If you do want to paint it purely as competing with French wages, it would almost certainly have helped to keep George North and the like who refused to go to France.

What non-point you're trying to make about the Welsh rugby public having the sport be accessible is anybody's guess. It's now so accessible people don't bother to go to games anymore, yay Rog.

by Stone Motif Wed Apr 03, 2013 10:18 am

doctornickolas wrote:If the regions are handed more money they will just spend it on Italian scrum halves, fat Fijian props or useless SA rejects. I don't trust them at all.

Every time an agreement is signed for funding everyone is happy and then 5 minutes later the regions plead poverty because they have spent it all.

Usually on the regions side of the deal theya re supposed to reduce the numkber of foreign players but that never happens at all. By now we are supposed to be down to just a handful but they keep fudging the issue by signing average foreigners on 3 year deals who would "really love to qualify to play for Wales". It's nonsense, and then they let all our best players leave.

The regions are run by an amateur mindset, the same people who made a mess of club rugby through incompetence.

The Australians used to have a saying about NZ'ers. If you want to set a Kiwi up in a small business then set him up with a big one and just wait. The same applies to these idiots. They have had 10 years to get this right and all of them have failed.

Giving the regiosn more money is just throwing more good money after bad and I totally understand the WRU's reluctance to do so.

A new agreement is due in 2 years. I don't expect all the regiosn to still be around by then.

Said fat Fijians are almost certainly less of a liability than a Welsh player though. Even apart from the fact most regions have an all-Welsh qualified team out for most fixtures, the WRU don't fund the academies properly, created an artificial value hike on WQ players via the participation agreement (which I fully agree the regions were daft to sign up to, but maybe just desperate), and if they're any good they ransom them for a pittance and run them into the ground playing pointless internationals.

by Stone Motif Wed Apr 03, 2013 10:36 am

doctornickolas wrote:
BBC wales and S4C are the only ones interested in showing it so how much of a deal do you think you can negotiate with one bidder, with a restricted budget for a viewing audience that will be in the tens of thousands not millions? The money negotiated is actually very good given the situation.

How do you know no-one else would be interested? The point is the regions aren't able to try and negotiate a better deal, which is just one example among many of the regions not being allowed to grow as businesses. Admittedly the Poopie league doesn't help but it could be sold better. And regardless of what you think the product is worth, given that the WRU don't directly fund the regions a tuppence it is not enough and needs to increase just to put the pro teams on a level footing with their competitors. That's before we get into the effect of free wall to wall coverage free to potential customers free to watch at home, and the ridiculous kick-off times it helps generate.

by maestegmafia Wed Apr 03, 2013 1:05 pm

Stone motif your posts are full of supposition and gossip and no hard fact.

Find some adequate proof of your claims

1). That although the WRU fund the regions they are also being funded to a greater extent by private investors...?

2). Provide any evidence that a TV deal from a wealthy sports provider has shown any interest in covering Wales Regions in RP12 comps.

by HammerofThunor Wed Apr 03, 2013 1:33 pm

Wasn't there an article on here that Sky were looking a picking up the PRO12?

7 year contracts would be pretty harsh. Even now some players (Cuthbert and supposedly Lydiate) are on very small salaries due to longish contracts. Either you have get out clauses for both sides (what's the point then?) or you have graded salaries over time, which is still a problem...right? If it wasn't a large increase it would make those French contracts all the more enticing for the reasonbly experienced 25 year olds flooding the market.

Having central contracts AND keeping the £6M for player release was wishful thinking from the Regions. If Central contracts are an objective the whole funding structure needs to be reviewed. I don't think it's very clear (I'm not much of one for finances) in the WRU annual report, how much they get from TV and sponsorship for the Pro12 and ERC and how much this makes up the £9M they give the Regions (not including the £6M for additional player release).

by Stone Motif Wed Apr 03, 2013 1:46 pm

maestegmafia wrote:Stone motif your posts are full of supposition and gossip and no hard fact.

Find some adequate proof of your claims

1). That although the WRU fund the regions they are also being funded to a greater extent by private investors...?

2). Provide any evidence that a TV deal from a wealthy sports provider has shown any interest in covering Wales Regions in RP12 omps.

by Stone Motif Wed Apr 03, 2013 1:48 pm

maestegmafia wrote:Stone motif your posts are full of supposition and gossip and no hard fact.

Find some adequate proof of your claims

1). That although the WRU fund the regions they are also being funded to a greater extent by private investors...?

2). Provide any evidence that a TV deal from a wealthy sports provider has shown any interest in covering Wales Regions in RP12 comps.

by Stone Motif Wed Apr 03, 2013 1:50 pm

maestegmafia wrote:Stone motif your posts are full of supposition and gossip and no hard fact.

Find some adequate proof of your claims

1). That although the WRU fund the regions they are also being funded to a greater extent by private investors...?

2). Provide any evidence that a TV deal from a wealthy sports provider has shown any interest in covering Wales Regions in RP12 comps.

Your posts are little more than the usual pseudo-religious twaddle adhered to by Team Wales fetishists who refuse to countenance any criticism of the Church of Rog. 1. Documented in virtually every article on the subject, saliently the one's originating within your own region. The vast majority of the regional incomes are tv, benefactor and competition based, therefore generated directly from the investments of private individuals. 2. Spectacular missing of point which happens to be that they need the freedom to explore this given the WRU want to rip them off.

by maestegmafia Wed Apr 03, 2013 6:01 pm

Stone Motif wrote:
maestegmafia wrote:Stone motif your posts are full of supposition and gossip and no hard fact.

Find some adequate proof of your claims

1). That although the WRU fund the regions they are also being funded to a greater extent by private investors...?

2). Provide any evidence that a TV deal from a wealthy sports provider has shown any interest in covering Wales Regions in RP12 comps.
Your posts are little more than the usual pseudo-religious twaddle adhered to by Team Wales fetishists who refuse to countenance any criticism of the Church of Rog. 1. Documented in virtually every article on the subject, saliently the one's originating within your own region. The vast majority of the regional incomes are tv, benefactor and competition based, therefore generated directly from the investments of private individuals. 2. Spectacular missing of point which happens to be that they need the freedom to explore this given the WRU want to rip them off.

No links then?

Just insults

Patethic

by thebluesmancometh Wed Apr 03, 2013 7:31 pm

MM

Stone makes valid points though, you seem to think the WRU's funding is from the WRU's back pocket, where as in reality a large chunk of it is TV and particiapation money re distributed to the regions in the disguise of funding!!

Oh and can you please change your name to Stones comment below please...

'pseudo-religious twaddle adhered to by Team Wales fetishists who refuse to countenance any criticism of the Church of Rog'

by Scrumdown Thu Apr 04, 2013 1:20 am

Regarding the £15million WRU re directs to Regions each year, this money would be available whomever owns the regions i.e. bbc does not pay for tv rights to screen regional rugby because Peter Thomas owns Cardiff Blues. That money would be available if WRU owned the regions too.

They key point is that the WRU needs to direct the £15million towards the regions who have proven that they have the ability to make good decisions and achieve results. In this way, a poorly performing region is forced to improve and change as if it doesn't change then it will continue to receive less funding and the owner will have no choice but to sell up or continue to incurr losses.

Current owners have it too easy. P Thomas and co are being given £15million per year to spend as they wish with no questions asked.

And some fans are pleading with Roger Lewis to give these individuals and the regions they own even more money despite the criticism their management received in the PWC report.

by maestegmafia Thu Apr 04, 2013 8:07 am

thebluesmancometh wrote:MM

Stone makes valid points though, you seem to think the WRU's funding is from the WRU's back pocket, where as in reality a large chunk of it is TV and particiapation money re distributed to the regions in the disguise of funding!!

Not really.

The WRU give the regions what they are entitled to, on top of that is extra. The Regions are asking the WRU for more money because they don't have any, not for a larger share of an entitlement.

The regions aren't owed anything by the WRU.

What Stone wants is a mock version of the English system but it would be expensive to set up and will leave us in the same situation.

With the prospect of the English clubs becoming the wealthiest in the world by a country mile if this BT deal actually does pay out, France re-negotiating for more and a larger competition, none of us stand a chance, no matter what the WRU gives the Regions.

England's premiership and Frances Top 14 could well be the equivalent of the Spanish and English Soccer leagues in a year or two.

Consider the future a bit more. The WRU aren't the clowns you keep making out, the future could be bloody miserable for Wales if we don't make changes. The regions want to keep it how they have had it for the last ten years, spend spend spend and never be accountable.

by Stone Motif Thu Apr 04, 2013 10:26 am

You don't know what I want because you can't take your Team Wales daffodil hat out the way of your eyes for five minutes to read a post. It is only about money as long as the WRU politburo frame it in those terms. Were the regions allowed to run themselves as businesses they may be able to generate the funds required themselves. They aren't because of the governing body's meddling, so yes absolutely the WRU are the ones who should step in, as this broken system is so heavily weighted towards their success and that of the national team, at the expense of the regions own success and sustainability.

by Stone Motif Thu Apr 04, 2013 10:37 am

Scrumdown wrote:Regarding the £15million WRU re directs to Regions each year, this money would be available whomever owns the regions i.e. bbc does not pay for tv rights to screen regional rugby because Peter Thomas owns Cardiff Blues. That money would be available if WRU owned the regions too.

They key point is that the WRU needs to direct the £15million towards the regions who have proven that they have the ability to make good decisions and achieve results. In this way, a poorly performing region is forced to improve and change as if it doesn't change then it will continue to receive less funding and the owner will have no choice but to sell up or continue to incurr losses.

Current owners have it too easy. P Thomas and co are being given £15million per year to spend as they wish with no questions asked.

And some fans are pleading with Roger Lewis to give these individuals and the regions they own even more money despite the criticism their management received in the PWC report.

Wrong. The key point is that the money the regions are able to earn - again for the hard of thinking the WRU hardly contribute anything - is insufficient to generate any meaningful progress, so any 'performance' (i.e. how much of a shafting they get from the union) remains linked to how much benefactors are willing to throw down the black hole of no reward. You seem to have the usual chippy Welsh trait of automatically assuming anyone with money got it by being more of a fool than you appear to be. Imaginary premises like the WRU running the regions are nonsense, they can't afford it and we'd end up with four Newport Gwent Dragons run on a shoestring.

by wales606 Thu Apr 04, 2013 11:00 am

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/rugbynation/rugby-news/2013/04/04/analysis-stats-show-central-contracts-could-be-way-forward-for-welsh-rugby-91466-33112439/

Interesting stats

What a surprise, the 3 players who have played for Wales more times than their region are all from the Blues. No wonder PT gets so annoyed on the issue.

The Ospreys are very good at getting the most out of their internationals

by wales606 Thu Apr 04, 2013 11:03 am

"If they were on an annual salary of, say, £150,000 it would equate to Roberts being paid £20,000 per game, Halfpenny approximately £15,000 and Warburton about £13,000."

and i'm pretty sure Roberts is on more than £150k - no wonder no Blues supporter I have spoken to is disappointed he is leaving the region. 15 games in 2 years - and I remember him going off injured pretty early on in at least 3 of those games

by maestegmafia Thu Apr 04, 2013 12:56 pm

Did you know when there is a big news story in Wales, Grandslam or controversial Regional matters the sales figures for the Western Mail can almost double. THey more than Double if we win a Grandslam/Six Nations championship, and can increase by a quarter when a controversial debate is happening within the regions.

by Scrumdown Thu Apr 04, 2013 1:03 pm

Could WRU also sell naming rights to the millenium stadium in order to finance central contracts.

Could be worth at least £5million a year.

by Luckless Pedestrian Thu Apr 04, 2013 1:13 pm

'The Roger Lewis Megadrome.'

It has a ring to it.

by Cardiff Dave Thu Apr 04, 2013 1:17 pm

Another Rogering;

http://www.southwalesargus.co.uk/sport/10331321.CHRIS_KIRWAN_SAYS__Schism_between_WRU_and_regions_increasing/

by Stone Motif Thu Apr 04, 2013 1:35 pm

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:'The Roger Lewis Megadrome.'

It has a ring to it.

I heard he likes 'The Rogia Sophia'

by maestegmafia Thu Apr 04, 2013 7:15 pm

So what do you guys think about the rumours suggesting that the WRU are looking to contact National Academy players and Regional Coaches...???

by Luckless Pedestrian Thu Apr 04, 2013 9:04 pm

Contacting them with a view to what?

by maestegmafia Thu Apr 04, 2013 9:52 pm

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:Contacting them with a view to what?

Contracting them to the WRU.

I heard this earlier that apparently this is one of the proposals.

The WRU take all National Academy players and will contract some of the the Regional Coaches.

by Sponsored content