Zebre - A worthy Heineken Cup contender! (including all-party face-saving compromise)

First topic message reminder :

After 21 losses out of 21 games, it has to be a no-brainer.

It's not as if there's no secondary European contest or anything...

[ed] Compromise

A hypothetical European seeding based on current league positions and current qualifying rules. Based on EuroTable rankings http://www.eurorugby.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=Rugger&file=latest

Don't knock me detail - just principle.
A European compromise without tears could be devised. Indeed all stakeholders could claim victory.

Let's assume 1. The Rabo want to hold what they have and 2. The franglos want to base entry more meritocratically.

Country, league pos/extra qualifiers, side, Eurotable ranking

Tier 1
Fra 1 Clermont Auvergne 100.00
Ire 2 Leinster 90.95
Fra 2 Toulon 86.13
Eng 1 Saracens 85.69
Ire 1 Ulster 83.51
Eng 2 Harlequins 82.38
Fra 5 Racing Metro 78.12
Fra 4 Castres 75.4

Tier 2
Fra 6 Montpellier 75.2
Eng 7 Leicester Tigers 74.66
Eng 8 Gloucester Rugby 72.14
Sco 3 Glasgow 72.14
Eng 4 Northampton Saints 71.79
Fra 3 Toulouse 71.75
Fra HEC+1 Perpignan 71.1
Wal 5 Ospreys 68.39

Tier 3
Ire 6 Munster 67.42
Eng 7 Exeter Chiefs 66.29
Wal 4 Scarlets 62.8
Ita 7 Benetton Treviso 50.98
Ire Amlin+1 Connacht 47.13
Wal 9 Cardiff Blues 40.57
Sco 10 Edinburgh 33.81
Ita 12 Zebre 18.55

Eight pools. Eight winners. Fewer games.
Possibility of H/A quarters and semis.

Plus the extra added unexpected bonus: as there are only three sides in each pool, additional domestic league fixtures can be arranged outside the International windows.

Except of course an Amlin winner should of course be capable of qualifying for an HEC start.

It keeps the leagues 'honest'.

Then they should drop the points to 75% for year 3, 50% for year 4, and even 25% for year 5

What currency has year 4 or 5?

I'd reluctantly accept 100% Y1, 50% Y2, 10% Y3 if pushed and threatened torture.

Ah feck it. I knew it looked wrong.

Ulster would be 6th and would drop out if Sarries or Biarritz.....

Munster or Toulon would go if both did it. And Munster would go unless they were in the final.

Sorry

greytiger wrote:Except of course an Amlin winner should of course be capable of qualifying for an HEC start.

It keeps the leagues 'honest'.

Then they should drop the points to 75% for year 3, 50% for year 4, and even 25% for year 5

What currency has year 4 or 5?

I'd reluctantly accept 100% Y1, 50% Y2, 10% Y3 if pushed and threatened torture.

That's just pure form though.

Take Leinster. Get a pool with Clermont and don't make the QFs by a whisker. Season's a write off from a HC perspective.

They then get 50% and 10% for their 2 x HC back to back wins?

I wouldn't have it going as far back as 5 years, it makes it very difficult for a team that has recently become very good, to raise in the rankings.

seeding should maybe tie in with where you finish in your Domestic league. So top seeds at present would be Ulster, Saracens and Clermont Auvergne the other 3 places the runners up Leinster Toulon
Leicester

Yes.

But at least the qualify if they are good enough.

I must confess I was confuffled when Leicester were hanging in to seeding rights after years of of wlderness following their back-to-back wins.

Current form has to be prioritised.

And I always called for a modified Eurotable. Included would be secondary leagues like the Championship, and other 6Ns second divisions plus other European premier leagues.

GunsGerms wrote:IMO the leagues and HCup should serve only to prop up the international game. By that logic Zebre are worthy of their inclusion given how well Italy have done this year in the 6N. There was a time when Treviso were scoffed at too.

They are mid table this year though so if we allow Zebre some time no doubt they will get better. They (Treviso) have only been in the Rabo for a couple of years so thats not bad.

How many losses is that now? 4?

Linebreaker wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:IMO the leagues and HCup should serve only to prop up the international game. By that logic Zebre are worthy of their inclusion given how well Italy have done this year in the 6N. There was a time when Treviso were scoffed at too.

They are mid table this year though so if we allow Zebre some time no doubt they will get better. They (Treviso) have only been in the Rabo for a couple of years so thats not bad.

How many losses is that now? 4?

Losses? Italy won their last match. What is you question?

Kingshu wrote:I wouldn't have it going as far back as 5 years, it makes it very difficult for a team that has recently become very good, to raise in the rankings.

seeding should maybe tie in with where you finish in your Domestic league. So top seeds at present would be Ulster, Saracens and Clermont Auvergne the other 3 places the runners up Leinster Toulon
Leicester

OK 100%, 100%, 65% 30% then?

GunsGerms wrote:

Linebreaker wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:IMO the leagues and HCup should serve only to prop up the international game. By that logic Zebre are worthy of their inclusion given how well Italy have done this year in the 6N. There was a time when Treviso were scoffed at too.

They are mid table this year though so if we allow Zebre some time no doubt they will get better. They (Treviso) have only been in the Rabo for a couple of years so thats not bad.

How many losses is that now? 4?

Losses? Italy won their last match. What is you question?

You might need to help me with your considerations regarding the correlation of European club performance and national 6Ns outcome.

If anything those two are becoming increasingly divergent.

Maybe a schism in European Cup competition for a couple of years is desirable.

It would help knock some heads together and bring some rationality rather than Accountants' bean counting perspective to the fore.

In the meantime there'd be a Rabo Cup and possibly a FranglocumSH one.

I can't think of anything more dire really.

greytiger wrote:Maybe a schism in European Cup competition for a couple of years is desirable.

It would help knock some heads together and bring some rationality rather than Accountants' bean counting perspective to the fore.

In the meantime there'd be a Rabo Cup and possibly a FranglocumSH one.

I can't think of anything more dire really.

What would be the 'dire' bit of that eventuality, grey?

Not saying I disagree, but we get to the nub of the whole debate when a scenario is actually painted just like you say. The French and English carry out the promise of dividing Europe if they don't get their way. And the Pro12 carries on on its own in some form.

So............. why would that be a dire outcome, from your English perspective?

Dire would be the loss of a competitive European club competition Fly.

Without doubt the HEC is based on a very(?) flawed premise.

But it's got to be revised.

However as I agree with none of the leagues in their proposals, I'll maintain my view that at present it preserves in aspic past glories (one which would e.g. conserve Edinburgh seedings for the next half decade despite form or achievement), creates and demands that qualifications are manipulated by leagues, guaranteed home ties, free entries and parachute second chances and the rest.

It's not an English perspective per se. It's a sporting one in my mind.

greytiger wrote:Dire would be the loss of a competitive European club competition Fly.

Without doubt the HEC is based on a very(?) flawed premise.

But it's got to be revised.

However as I agree with none of the leagues in their proposals, I'll maintain my view that at present it preserves in aspic past glories (one which would e.g. conserve Edinburgh seedings for the next half decade despite form or achievement), creates and demands that qualifications are manipulated by leagues, guaranteed home ties, free entries and parachute second chances and the rest.

It's not an English perspective per se. It's a sporting one in my mind.

So...you agree that having Pro12 sides IN a European competition is preferable to just going away and sharing a competition between French/English alone?

If the English clubs agree with that view (your stated view), then the wrong way to explain it is by threatening to leave if the 'conditions' aren't met. That was never a negotiating position any Pro12 side - or Nation - was ever going to warm to. It implied French and English clubs don't need Pro12 involvement and that having them involved is just ...well, it's charity. That's the implication of saying 'we'll walk away if we don't get our way.' So the 'so walk away' solution is put to them and straight away they're back saying they didn't mean it like that.

You also mention free entries as though the HC has always had the format it now has. It hasn't.

The HC has changed quite a bit over the years. And most in evidence during those changing years is the ever increasing (by competition structure) representation of English and French sides. It's now up to 6 automatic places each and yet they still claim to be the sides getting the rough end of the stick!

'Free entries' is a relative term that can mean different things to different people. The HC structure has been good to both English and French clubs - it has continually evolved to suit them more and more by giving them increasingly better odds of winning as the years went by - by right.
But now, it seems, the competition that is structurally weighed heavily in favour of either an English or French win is again not fit for purpose and needs to be revised to 'level the playing field' for English and French sides. The logic continues to evade reason.

By free entries SF I mean via crap like Amlin winners, even worse, LV Cup winners, extra league (even worse, country) entrants into the Heiny.

If the English clubs agree with that view (your stated view), then the
wrong way to explain it is by threatening to leave if the 'conditions'
aren't met. That was never a negotiating position any Pro12 side - or
Nation - was ever going to warm to. It implied French and English clubs
don't need Pro12 involvement and that having them involved is just
...well, it's charity. That's the implication of saying 'we'll walk
away if we don't get our way.' So the 'so walk away' solution is put to them and straight away they're back saying they didn't mean it like that.

Once again I stress I'm not arguing from an English perspective.
I'm putting my own opinion.

Not my club. Not my league. Not my country. Just me.

How about top 4 in each league qualify, and next 8 in each enter playoffs to make up the 8 places?

team places 8-12 play off to reduce to 4 teams, they join teams that finished 5-7 in the league and play off again untill there is only 8, sure even Spainish and Romanian team can join the first stage play offs, that way each team that make the H-cup will be there by either being in the play offs of thier league, or by beating other european teams.

France can change its league to top 4 play of instead of top 6, that wil create an extra date and improve the french league.

What's wrong with the HEC is that there are 2 "lucky losers" going to the QF and also the semi final "draw" is a joke of the highest proportion.
Seeding goes too far back so form of the moment can be overlooked.

Change this before looking at other's league.

I think everyone agrees the seedings are flawed. I've never read a single post here saying they aren't. What's wrong with an IRB style points exchange? It rewards good performances as they happen. It rewards away wins against highly ranked teams more than home wins against poor teams. A middling team in a group of death might not qualify but would be rightly rewarded if they pulled off some great results along the way.

I like Portnoys idea of splitting into tiers after the group stage. Give everyone a chance to go for the top prize, exclude no team, but let the cream rise to the top tier and the chaff drop to the bottom. This would also end English problems with the qualification. Because all teams from the three leagues would start in the same pool phase.

Then the next time the terms are up for negotiation the English can force the rabo's to bring in relegation to their league or they won't play anymore. And the time after that they can force the French to speak English or they're taking their ball home. (joke)

As a matter of mild interest, if only this years thusfar accumulated points plus last those last season,

The ERC table looks (current pos in col 1)

1	Leinster Rugby	33	4	11	15
4	ASM Clermont Auvergne	23	7	7	14
7	Ulster Rugby	20	5	8	13
5	Toulon	22	7	5	12
12	Saracens	13	7	5	12
6	Munster Rugby	22	6	5	11
3	Biarritz Olympique Pays Basque	24	4	6	10
2	Toulouse	26	3	5	8
9	Stade Francais Paris	18	4	4	8
10	Harlequins	15	5	3	8
15	Edinburgh Rugby	11	1	7	8
13	Leicester Tigers	13	5	2	7
11	Cardiff Cardiff Blues	15	2	4	6
8	Northampton Saints	18	3	2	5
20	Montpellier	7	4	1	5
14	Perpignan	13	4	0	4
16	London Wasps	11	2	2	4
17	Ospreys	10	2	2	4
18	Scarlets	9	1	3	4
19	Glasgow Warriors	8	1	3	4
22	Bath Rugby	7	2	2	4
23	Gloucester Rugby	7	2	2	4
24	Brive	7	0	4	4
21	Connacht Rugby	7	2	1	3

Incidentally (as the above includes only the top 24) the remainder of the list goes

28 Exeter Chiefs 4 2 2
25 Castres Olympique 3 2 1
26 Racing Métro 92 3 2 1
27 London Irish 2 0 2
29 Benetton Treviso 2 1 1
30 Sale Sharks 1 1 0
35 Zebre 1 1 -
36 Viadana 1 - -
31 Newport Gwent Dragons 0 0 0
32 Newcastle Falcons 0 - 0
33 La Rochelle 0 - -
34 Bourgoin 0 - -

Why do we even have seedings? Just do a completely random draw and you could throw up some hugely interesting pool games. The best teams would still prevail, even if you got a couple of unfamiliar faces in the quarter finals. And it's not like having a tough/weak pool would affect your seeding for next year, because there isn't any.

Shame that the pools are so mismatched.

Leinster (subjectively to me) look at least the second best team in Europe on yesterday's showing.

Who's the loser? Rugby and rugby fans imo.

robbo277 wrote:Why do we even have seedings? Just do a completely random draw and you could throw up some hugely interesting pool games. The best teams would still prevail, even if you got a couple of unfamiliar faces in the quarter finals. And it's not like having a tough/weak pool would affect your seeding for next year, because there isn't any.

Exactly we used to have open seedings up until not so long ago. There was nothing wrong with the Heineken Cup in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006 etc.

I'd think it runs the risk of reducing the amount of upsets - upsets which make the HEC what it is.

The only criteria should be that the teams from same nation are kept separate in the pool stage. Next season Munster know they will draw either Racing Metro or Montpellier in the pool stages. A shame to be able to predict that so far in advance.

red_stag wrote:

robbo277 wrote:Why do we even have seedings? Just do a completely random draw and you could throw up some hugely interesting pool games. The best teams would still prevail, even if you got a couple of unfamiliar faces in the quarter finals. And it's not like having a tough/weak pool would affect your seeding for next year, because there isn't any.

Exactly we used to have open seedings up until not so long ago. There was nothing wrong with the Heineken Cup in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006 etc.

I'd think it runs the risk of reducing the amount of upsets - upsets which make the HEC what it is.

The only criteria should be that the teams from same nation are kept separate in the pool stage. Next season Munster know they will draw either Racing Metro or Montpellier in the pool stages. A shame to be able to predict that so far in advance.

That's not true.
In fact, as the lowest ranking French side Racing will have to go into a pool that already contains a French team. So if Munster (or Leinster, or Ulster for that matter) get Racing they will already have drawn Montpelier (Or possibly Perpignan/Stade from tier 2) Leinster win the Amlin and Perp are in. They don't and Stade are in.

It would be possible for them to draw Perpignan, Embra and Gloucester for example.

greytiger wrote:I'll maintain my view that at present it preserves in aspic past glories (one which would e.g. conserve Edinburgh seedings for the next half decade despite form or achievement)

Edinburgh next year are in Tier 3- their seeding the year they made it to the semi-final? Tier 3.

I don't have any problem with the seedings I just feel like a system which takes league form into account as well would be good- the unofficial Eurorugby formula of going by each teams last 30 games is pretty good. Actually works very well in practice.

http://www.eurorugby.com/index.php

I think the best thing they've done in recent times is make the Amlin winner automatic qualifiers for next years Heineken Cup- it's really invigorated that competition in terms of some big French clubs now being desperate to win it to get a back door into the main show. And I feel like thats really lifted the intensity of the knockout stages of that competition.

Let's just take a peek at a hypothetical European seeding based on current league positions and current qualifying rules.

Don't knock me detail - just principle.

I believe that a European compromise without tears could be devised. Indeed all stakeholders could claim victory.

Let's assume 1. The Rabo want to hold what they have and 2. The franglos want to base entry more meritocratically.

Country, league pos, side, Eurotable ranking

Tier 1
Fra 1 Clermont Auvergne 100.00
Ire 2 Leinster 90.95
Fra 2 Toulon 86.13
Eng 1 Saracens 85.69
Ire 1 Ulster 83.51
Eng 2 Harlequins 82.38
Fra 5 Racing Metro 78.12
Fra 4 Castres 75.4

Tier 2
Fra 6 Montpellier 75.2
Eng 7 Leicester Tigers 74.66
Eng 8 Gloucester Rugby 72.14
Sco 3 Glasgow 72.14
Eng 4 Northampton Saints 71.79
Fra 3 Toulouse 71.75
Fra HEC+1 Perpignan 71.1
Wal 5 Ospreys 68.39

Tier 3
Ire 6 Munster 67.42
Eng 7 Exeter Chiefs 66.29
Wal 4 Scarlets 62.8
Ita 7 Benetton Treviso 50.98
Ire Amlin+1 Connacht 47.13
Wal 9 Cardiff Blues 40.57
Sco 10 Edinburgh 33.81
Ita 12 Zebre 18.55

Eight pools. Eight winners. Fewer games.
Possibility of H/A quarters and semis.

Plus the extra added unexpected bonus: as there are only three sides in each pool, additional domestic league fixtures can be arranged outside the International windows.

personally i think we should reduce the number of English teams as they have been pure pants over the last few years.

the weakness is not the structure but the english teams

Precisely the reason for thread GiTS.

OP updated.