HEC dead

First topic message reminder :

http://www.premiershiprugby.com/mobile/news/28786.php

At least until ERC and the IRB tell them they're ultra vires.

Interesting times.

Exiledinborders wrote:

butterfingers wrote:

Exiledinborders wrote:Whatever the rights and wrongs of the PRL/LNR proposals surely after eighteen months this response from the ERC is pathetic "a meeting focused solely on the negotiations will be convened by ERC as soon as practicable."  

Many on these forums complain of PRL/LNR threats but it seems only threats prompt the blazers into action (or should that be panic?).


It seems the unions have been hoping it will just go away but in business you must address problems face on. Uncertainty is in itself damaging.

The negotiations should include Sky and BT who are intimately involved in this. At least they are likely to be fairly businesslike.

Businesslike in the sense eithe BT or Sky will throw the game under the bus for the right financial result for themselves.

Someone mentioned the Rabo, the fact it has to stay because the nations in it can't afford to run their own leagues not being Englands problem, but ultimately what is not your problem is also not your concern. Surely if your worried about another scenario where Edinburgh finish low down the league yet make a HC semi final then recruit better quality players, if your worried that your league fatigues your players who then can't compete with Rabo teams then restructure your league!

The PRL is in danger of becoming this USA style nanny for european rugby, where control and wealth dominance is name of the game, disguised in the cloak of 'fairness'

Of course the TV companies are looking after their interests. However they are important players in this. It is up to the clubs to look after their interests and the unions theirs. That is the nature of negotiations.

I see no reason to end the Rabo. I just see no reason why some teams should get automatically into HC and some not.  Actually I think qualification would be good for the Pro12. If teams were competing for something it might attract more support. The AP and Top14 attract more support than the Pro12. This is not down to population. After all Leicester get crowds two or three time as big as Cardiff despite being a considerably smaller city.

Population of Leicester, 329,900

Population of Cardiff, 346,000.

English cities can be surprisingly sizable.

Butter
The PRL/LNR proposal is that each team gets roughly the same money for participation yet you seem to think that it is fair for some Unions to get IIRC 2.5 times as much per team as others

Poorfour wrote:

butterfingers wrote:

The deal put on the table enables the celtic clubs to receive more money correct? But to enable this the English clubs must receive obscene amounts, and be allowed to earn far more potentiall.

According to the amounts posted elsewhere in this thread (sorry, I am on a flaky connection and can't go back and find them), the Celtic unions would get a fairly paltry amount extra  - I think it was about £60,000 per team per year. The French and English would get around £800,000 per team per year (assuming we include all teams from each union, whether in HEC or Amlin that year). That would be enough to tip several more PRL teams into profit, so it means a lot.

What this really means is that every team gets about £2.5m per year (assuming the unions/leagues distribute the cash evenly among their own teams).

No-one loses out. Cash is shared evenly. None of the amounts being considered is obscene.

60k per club per year copared to 800k per club per year isn't obscene?

broadlandboy wrote:Butter
The PRL/LNR proposal is that each team gets roughly the same money for participation yet you seem to think that it is fair for some Unions to get IIRC 2.5 times as much per team as others

Once again, it isn't per team, it's per union, and yes equal is fair. How any of them choose to distribute that has nothing to do with anyone else!

Exiledinborders wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

Exiledinborders wrote:

butterfingers wrote:Sadly it appears to be going one of 2 ways;

The PRL get their way and dominate home nations rugby, which includes the downfall of the international game. The PRL won't stop at the HC negotiations, as soon as they bully their way into a position of power team England can forget being able to compete on a global stage with the PRL having them in their back pocket!

The other way is for the Celtic and Italian nations to pull away and allow the PRL to get on with fighting the RFU straight up. Which in turn will damage team England!

There is no comprimise with the proposals the PRL are claiming, a total restructure of the HC that kills competitive rugby outside of England and France, or no HC at all.

Personally I'd happily wave to my nose as it gets cut from my face, and if the 6 nations becomes a casualty of the PRL's crazy attitude well we all know where to lay the blame!

How do the PRL/LNR proposals kill competitive rugby outside England and France. The Pro12 regions/clubs will be in the same positionas the PRL/LNR clubs. They will be in a league of similar size to AP and Top14 and have the same chance of qualifying for HC i.e. 50%. If being in the same position as the English and French kill them then perhaps they can see why it is currently killing the English and French.

England six guaranteed teams from which they can plot and plan their International squads through hard edged HEC encounters.  
Scotland, maybe no team from which to select suitable players.  
Ireland, possibly no players.  
Wales, possibly no players.
Italy, quite possibly no players to select from that would have been tested against Europe's best.  
France, guaranteed six teams from which to cobble together something that might compete in 6N.

No - Amlin is not just as good a testing ground.  If it was, the arguments wouldn't be going on so long about HEC.  One is the best quality rugby, the other isn't.

England and France unfairly advantaged in choosing International players and then even moreso in honing the quality of those players in tough HEC battle - automatically - season in, season out.  Anyone who can't see that advantage clearly in PRL's proposals is in need of a trip to Specsavers.

How can Scotland, Wales, Ireland and Italy all have no teams in the HC? Between them they are guaranteed six teams. In addition the PRL/LNR have indicated that the are happy for each Rabo country to be guaranteed one team in HC.  

You of course purposely misread  

In - any - given - year , as France and England enjoy their customised and guaranteed 6 apiece entries into HEC (or future equivalent) - guaranteed to them.... (more than enough sides to select some tasty players to make up an English or French International squad)

.... in - any - given - year Ireland might have no players playing in HEC. In - any - given - year Wales might not have any players in HEC.... and so on and so on.  

I don't care whether Wales has a side in HEC - not my concern - I'm not Welsh, their business, their concern.  So when Wales have three Regions involved in HEC in - any - given - year, and Ireland find themselves with no teams involved, I'm not going to give a damn that Ospreys, Dragons and Blues are fighting for me in a Pro12 sense.  I don't care about Pro12, I care about Irish sides and I care because Irish sides lead on to Ireland International. Leigh Halfpenny won't be wearing no Irish shirt come the 6N. 

If England and France have a better quality of club competition in - any - given - year based not on merit but on a simple automatic number called 6, then I'm not going to be too happy about it - or think it a fair European system...... am I?

LeinsterFan4life wrote:How are rabo teams gettin twice as much? Where are your figures?

They get 52% of the money the English and French 24% each.

Exiledinborders wrote:

butterfingers wrote:

Exiledinborders wrote:

butterfingers wrote:Sadly it appears to be going one of 2 ways;

The PRL get their way and dominate home nations rugby, which includes the downfall of the international game. The PRL won't stop at the HC negotiations, as soon as they bully their way into a position of power team England can forget being able to compete on a global stage with the PRL having them in their back pocket!

The other way is for the Celtic and Italian nations to pull away and allow the PRL to get on with fighting the RFU straight up. Which in turn will damage team England!

There is no comprimise with the proposals the PRL are claiming, a total restructure of the HC that kills competitive rugby outside of England and France, or no HC at all.

Personally I'd happily wave to my nose as it gets cut from my face, and if the 6 nations becomes a casualty of the PRL's crazy attitude well we all know where to lay the blame!

How do the PRL/LNR proposals kill competitive rugby outside England and France. The Pro12 regions/clubs will be in the same position as the PRL/LNR clubs. They will be in a league of similar size to AP and Top14 and have the same chance of qualifying for HC i.e. 50%. If being in the same position as the English and French kill them then perhaps they can see why it is currently killing the English and French.

I'm not talking specifically LNR, my issue is solely with the PRL who are the spearhead of this.

The deal put on the table enables the celtic clubs to receive more money correct? But to enable this the English clubs must receive obscene amounts, and be allowed to earn far more potentiall.

We are all agreed the money grubbing highlights a dominance in France and England, which is all well and good, but there is only so much the others will put up with before starting to use their trump cards to stay afloat, and sadly for the RFU their trump cards are the exact same thing as their normal hand. The RFU cannot win this, when the 6N is threatened, and lets not kid ourselves, it will have to be for the celts and Italians to get a foothold in negotiations at some point, the international game in the NH is going to be headed football bound. England internationals are quite funny at present, they stand no hope of winning anything, or beating teams with a greater structure who are pulling together, yet they ride the coat tails of a generation who were brought up to see English football as the pinnacle of their careers, English rugby players are on the cusp of exactly the same thing!

What is money grubbing about asking for each team in a competition to have the same share of the money? Why should Rabo teams get twice as much as AP and Top14 teams? The way you talk you would think English teams are all swimming in money whereas in fact only Leicester and Gloucester are solvent.

In fact you are wrong, Exeter have also posted profits (albeit small)

Lets put it this way, if 2 employess worked at a bank, both the same level and both earned the exact same money...

Employee 1 has 2 children, both of which go to local school, eat dinner lunches and play in the street with their bikes. Both kids are trying to play pro rugby.

Employee 2 has 1 child, goes to private school, and has a rugby tuition/private lessons. He also wants to play pro rugby.

Does employee 1 have the right to go back to his employer (the bank) and demand double the wage because his children can't compete on a level playing field?

Casartelli wrote:

Exiledinborders wrote:After all Leicester get crowds two or three time as big as Cardiff despite being a considerably smaller city.

Population of Leicester, 329,900

Population of Cardiff, 346,000.

English cities can be surprisingly sizable.

Leicester have also been around for a lot longer, so are bound to have built up more of a fanbase, even before their big successes.

Exiledinborders wrote:

LeinsterFan4life wrote:How are rabo teams gettin twice as much? Where are your figures?

They get 52% of the money the English and French 24% each.

Yep, so that's France and England 24% each, Ireland, Italy, Scotland and Wales 13% each, when 'equal' would be 16.67% for each of the 6 unions. So England and France are already getting 7%+ in recognition of more mouths to feed and greater TV audience

Exiledinborders wrote:

LeinsterFan4life wrote:How are rabo teams gettin twice as much? Where are your figures?

They get 52% of the money the English and French 24% each.

Rabo is not an entity, it receives nothing! Now your just wumming for the sake of it!

LeinsterFan4life wrote:How are rabo teams gettin twice as much? Where are your figures?

12 x Rabo teams get 48% of the money today - I know there are differences in allocation but it's ~4% each
12 x AP teams get 24% = 2%
14 x Top 14 get 24% = 1.7%

Even if you go by HEC participation only:
10 x Rabo, 48% 4.8%
6 x AP, 24%, 4%
6 x Top 14, also 4%

But the revenues are shared out more evenly than that, at least in the AP, because they try to even out the teams' earnings to keep things competitive.

Casartelli wrote:

Exiledinborders wrote:

butterfingers wrote:

Exiledinborders wrote:Whatever the rights and wrongs of the PRL/LNR proposals surely after eighteen months this response from the ERC is pathetic "a meeting focused solely on the negotiations will be convened by ERC as soon as practicable."  

Many on these forums complain of PRL/LNR threats but it seems only threats prompt the blazers into action (or should that be panic?).


It seems the unions have been hoping it will just go away but in business you must address problems face on. Uncertainty is in itself damaging.

The negotiations should include Sky and BT who are intimately involved in this. At least they are likely to be fairly businesslike.

Businesslike in the sense eithe BT or Sky will throw the game under the bus for the right financial result for themselves.

Someone mentioned the Rabo, the fact it has to stay because the nations in it can't afford to run their own leagues not being Englands problem, but ultimately what is not your problem is also not your concern. Surely if your worried about another scenario where Edinburgh finish low down the league yet make a HC semi final then recruit better quality players, if your worried that your league fatigues your players who then can't compete with Rabo teams then restructure your league!

The PRL is in danger of becoming this USA style nanny for european rugby, where control and wealth dominance is name of the game, disguised in the cloak of 'fairness'

Of course the TV companies are looking after their interests. However they are important players in this. It is up to the clubs to look after their interests and the unions theirs. That is the nature of negotiations.

I see no reason to end the Rabo. I just see no reason why some teams should get automatically into HC and some not.  Actually I think qualification would be good for the Pro12. If teams were competing for something it might attract more support. The AP and Top14 attract more support than the Pro12. This is not down to population. After all Leicester get crowds two or three time as big as Cardiff despite being a considerably smaller city.

Population of Leicester, 329,900

Population of Cardiff, 346,000.

English cities can be surprisingly sizable.

The difference is that Leicester is in a rural area whilst Cardiff is at the centre of an urban area with a population of 841,000.

butterfingers wrote:Lets put it this way, if 2 employess worked at a bank, both the same level and both earned the exact same money...

Employee 1 has 2 children, both of which go to local school, eat dinner lunches and play in the street with their bikes. Both kids are trying to play pro rugby.

Employee 2 has 1 child, goes to private school, and has a rugby tuition/private lessons. He also wants to play pro rugby.

Does employee 1 have the right to go back to his employer (the bank) and demand double the wage because his children can't compete on a level playing field?

This is a classic example of a straw man argument, well done!

We're not arguing about salaries, perhaps a better metaphor would be shares in a company or slices of a pie? It would still serve the argument poorly when we don't need a metaphor to understand what's going on... but this is pretty inane stuff.

24% + 24% = 48%

So how do the IRFU, WRU and others divide out their 52% share? Given that they don't fund each other but must make do with their respective share?

If it's equal shares that's 13% each. Less than each individual English and French share?

We can all play with numbers to creative account our way out of trouble if need be, the recession has thought us a few handy tricks

So its fair that the RFU/FRU get more than the IRFU/WRU who get more than the SRU who get more than the FIR?
Although this means that the SRU gets most per team followed by the FIR followed by the IRFU/WRU then the RFU with the FRU getting least per team entered

butterfingers wrote:Lets put it this way, if 2 employess worked at a bank, both the same level and both earned the exact same money...

Employee 1 has 2 children, both of which go to local school, eat dinner lunches and play in the street with their bikes. Both kids are trying to play pro rugby.

Employee 2 has 1 child, goes to private school, and has a rugby tuition/private lessons. He also wants to play pro rugby.

Does employee 1 have the right to go back to his employer (the bank) and demand double the wage because his children can't compete on a level playing field?

What a daft analogy! Let's follow it thru for Poopie and grins - the 2 children of employee 1 both grow up but struggle to make ends meet, have to take multiple jobs and give up playing rugby. Nobody left for your other kid to play with

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:

Exiledinborders wrote:

LeinsterFan4life wrote:How are rabo teams gettin twice as much? Where are your figures?

They get 52% of the money the English and French 24% each.

 Yep, so that's France and England 24% each, Ireland, Italy, Scotland and Wales 13% each, when 'equal' would be 16.67% for each of the 6 unions.  So England and France are already getting 7%+ in recognition of more mouths to feed and greater TV audience

I dont see why a wider TV Audience is part of any negotiation. If you are holding a European championship, it is only such if the other European countries are playing in it. Without the smaller populated countries there is no competition to sell to any TV company.

The fact that you said the rabo gets 52% shows how clueless you are.

The fact that you said the rabo gets 52% shows how clueless you are.

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:

butterfingers wrote:Lets put it this way, if 2 employess worked at a bank, both the same level and both earned the exact same money...

Employee 1 has 2 children, both of which go to local school, eat dinner lunches and play in the street with their bikes. Both kids are trying to play pro rugby.

Employee 2 has 1 child, goes to private school, and has a rugby tuition/private lessons. He also wants to play pro rugby.

Does employee 1 have the right to go back to his employer (the bank) and demand double the wage because his children can't compete on a level playing field?

What a daft analogy!  Let's follow it thru for Poopie and grins - the 2 children of employee 1 both grow up but struggle to make ends meet, have to take multiple jobs and give up playing rugby.  Nobody left for your other kid to play with

When did I mention there were only 3 kids in the world, or that the kids had ever met?

I merely made an apt analogy of the situation, the employee's are the unions and the children the clubs. If Emplyee 1 (PRL) choose to have more children and therefore have to distribute the wealth between more that is not Employee 2's fault, or problem. Employee 1 would still not be eligible for a raise based on that reason alone.

unions/governing bodies/ umbrella organisations... You know what I meant!

butterfingers wrote:Lets put it this way, if 2 employess worked at a bank, both the same level and both earned the exact same money...

Employee 1 has 2 children, both of which go to local school, eat dinner lunches and play in the street with their bikes. Both kids are trying to play pro rugby.

Employee 2 has 1 child, goes to private school, and has a rugby tuition/private lessons. He also wants to play pro rugby.

Does employee 1 have the right to go back to his employer (the bank) and demand double the wage because his children can't compete on a level playing field?

No, because the bank has nothing to do with it. But the teams in the ERC aren't funded by banks. They are funded (partly) by an agreement that shares the cash between the unions (employees) in a way that gives more to some teams (children) than others. Employee 1, in you example, doesn't like this agreement and has served contractual notice to end it. Once it ends, Employee 1 is entitled to keep any money he can earn. He's also entitled to try to negotiate a sharing agreement with Employee 2 that's more to his liking.

Exiledinborders wrote:
The difference is that Leicester is in a rural area whilst Cardiff is at the centre of an urban area with a population of 841,000.

Budgets please.  Budgets for first teamers - comparisons.  Budgets for academies - comparisons.  Budgets for sponsorships - comparisons.  

And a picture of the electrified razor-wire fence that stops non-Leicester resident English folk (who might be working in all sorts of places throughout England) getting into the Leicester area for match day, having driven a car or taken a train to watch their side do business?

I know it's a struggle getting through 50 million people who are going the other way, but some of them must get through.

There is this fundamental misunderstanding that there are three parties in this; the English, the French and the dastardly Pro12 bloc.

Bollox, there are six sides. The two sides that get the largest share of everything (teams, money) are the French and English. The remaining four- Ireland, Wales, Scotland, Italy- divide whats left between them.

Once you understand that the other four parties around the negotiating table are sitting listening patiently to why the two nations who get more than twice as much as anyone else are the really hard done by ones here you'll understand the frustration this willful ignorance causes.

I just find it amazing that the PRL argue for more participation, and then base an argument for more money and power about participation numbers.

Why does noone else realise that when the PRL have finished what they started with the HC they will come after the international game, and my RFU don't stand a chance!

So please don't take my stance wrong, I am not anti English clubs, I am not pro celtic teams, I am pro international rugby, and extremely pro fair practice and competition!

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:

Exiledinborders wrote:

LeinsterFan4life wrote:How are rabo teams gettin twice as much? Where are your figures?

They get 52% of the money the English and French 24% each.

 Yep, so that's France and England 24% each, Ireland, Italy, Scotland and Wales 13% each, when 'equal' would be 16.67% for each of the 6 unions.  So England and France are already getting 7%+ in recognition of more mouths to feed and greater TV audience

The idea that in any organisation money is allocated irrespective of population is ludicrous. The fact is that Scottish Rugby only has to support two teams whereas England twelve and France fourteen. It is this sort of thinking that will eventually drive English and French out. The real danger if a sensible compromise is not reached is a split. That would result in all top players working in England and France and no internationals. I am sure on one wants that.

I am sure compromise is possible but after eighteen months no compromises have been offered by Rabo side. Indeed they do not seem to even want to talk. A meeting is only now being arranged by ERC "as soon as practicable".

How the English think they come across;

PRL wrote:"Well chaps, it's time for us to sort out this ERC mess chin-chin? I'm sure you'll agree it's sportsmanlike for us to get our fair share. After all, enlightened self-interest is the driver of economic success and even our harshest critics agree 1 out of 2 isn't bad."

How the English actually come across;

PRL wrote:"It's so unfair! We only have twice as many teams in the competition each year and get twice as much money when compared with Ireland or Wales... Why can't we have all the money and power and them nothing!"

...

Yes, thats right, top of the Sports Page. No, it has to be in tomorrow- we're meant to be sorting things out like adults the day after.

I give up  

Exiledinborders wrote:

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:

Exiledinborders wrote:

LeinsterFan4life wrote:How are rabo teams gettin twice as much? Where are your figures?

They get 52% of the money the English and French 24% each.

 Yep, so that's France and England 24% each, Ireland, Italy, Scotland and Wales 13% each, when 'equal' would be 16.67% for each of the 6 unions.  So England and France are already getting 7%+ in recognition of more mouths to feed and greater TV audience

The idea that in any organisation money is allocated irrespective of population is ludicrous. The fact is that Scottish Rugby only has to support two teams whereas England twelve and France fourteen. It is this sort of thinking that will eventually drive English and French out. The real danger if a sensible compromise is not reached is a split. That would result in all top players working in England and France and no internationals. I am sure on one wants that.

I am sure compromise is possible but after eighteen months no compromises have been offered by Rabo side. Indeed they do not seem to even want to talk. A meeting is only now being arranged by ERC "as soon as practicable".

England don't 'have' to support 12 teams though, they CHOOSE to! As they choose to push for 6 participating clubs in the HC, if they wanted to they could support 12 teams and only enter 1 club into the HC, and direct all funds to that 1 club, that would be up to them!

Sorry exiled but you are showing yourself very niaive or ignorant, I can't tell which.

SecretFly wrote:

Exiledinborders wrote:
The difference is that Leicester is in a rural area whilst Cardiff is at the centre of an urban area with a population of 841,000.

Budgets please.  Budgets for first teamers - comparisons.  Budgets for academies - comparisons.  Budgets for sponsorships - comparisons.  

And a picture of the electrified razor-wire fence that stops non-Leicester resident English folk (who might be working in all sorts of places throughout England) getting into the Leicester area for match day, having driven a car or taken a train to watch their side do business?

I know it's a struggle getting through 50 million people who are going the other way, but some of them must get through.

I am sure the budgets at Leicester are higher. That is because they are a well run club who make great efforts to attract support. The history of the Welsh regions managing to alienate Rugby supporters has been debated ad nauseum of 606. That is however the fault of no one but the WRU.

Notch wrote:How the English think they come across;

PRL wrote:"Well chaps, it's time for us to sort out this ERC mess chin-chin? I'm sure you'll agree it's sportsmanlike for us to get our fair share. After all, enlightened self-interest is the driver of economic success and even our harshest critics agree 1 out of 2 isn't bad."

How the English actually come across;

PRL wrote:"It's so unfair! We only have twice as many teams in the competition each year and get twice as much money when compared with Ireland or Wales...  Why can't we have all the money and power and them nothing!"

...

Yes, thats right, top of the Sports Page. No, it has to be in tomorrow- we're meant to be sorting things out like adults the day after.

I give up  

I think you meant the PRL, not English. We have done nothing as a nation, and the RFU has even defended the ERC against the PRL recently!!!

Indeed I do. Indeed I do...

Butter your analogy
6 workers 1 putting in 14 units of work,one 12,two 4 & two 2,yet the two putting in 2 units of work are getting paid over twice what the ones putting 14/12 units of work in.How do you think they would feel?

Here's something that I'd like to add. There is a proposal from the FFR to make a new euro comp with French regional teams.

I read somewhere yesterday along the lines of if the LNR start this franglo cup that the FFR will establish regional teams to play in a European comp with the pro 12 sides. This could be a bluff but I remember reading a few years ago that the FFR really wished that they had established professional rugby on a regional basis similar to the Irish model so this makes me think that they would have a go at doing this. I don't know how many sides they could start with but they certainly have enough French rugby players to make up the teams. Given regional pride in France this move could be a great success. Sorry I don't recall the source. I will post it when I find it again.

Your right intotouch they did say that

So the PRL are unfair because they share the money between all participating teams equal,yet the IRFU are when they give more to 3 teams than the 4th

broadlandboy wrote:Butter your analogy
6 workers 1 putting in 14 units of work,one 12,two 4 & two 2,yet the two putting in 2 units of work are getting paid over twice what the ones putting 14/12 units of work in.How do you think they would feel?

Each of those workers who are only allowed to put in their lesser units of work will gladly take the English and French units of HC work if they need help  

Moral of the story, don't fight for the work if your a lazy Barsteward!!!

butterfingers wrote:I just find it amazing that the PRL argue for more participation, and then base an argument for more money and power about participation numbers.

Why does noone else realise that when the PRL have finished what they started with the HC they will come after the international game, and my RFU don't stand a chance!

So please don't take my stance wrong, I am not anti English clubs, I am not pro celtic teams, I am pro international rugby, and extremely pro fair practice and competition!

Not a word to disagree with here.  Many of us here have a vested interest in HEC (as it now stands) because we have a vested interest in International rugby.

I don't want to impede Welsh or English International rugby progressing fairly into the future.... but neither do I want to see smart execs interested in an entirely different agenda endangering the International credentials of any one of the 6N participants.  

SH International sides keep each others quality up because they play each other regularly.  They continue that relationship into club and reap the benefits as their club performances against each other inform their International selections.  

It's symbiotic... and people like McCafferty, who is only interested in his slice, and indeed his career (hard-nailed deal making allows him a nice CV for the next position he might go to, which in his case might bear no relationship to rugby Union), don't care about that full picture.  

He can mimic caring as much as he likes, he can splutter about making the game better, bigger, more valuable.  He cares only about PRL and his performance as a career executive.  He'll probably have moved on in a few years and left the *yawn* rugby lads to get on with with whatever he's 'negotiated'.

butterfingers wrote:

Exiledinborders wrote:

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:

Exiledinborders wrote:

LeinsterFan4life wrote:How are rabo teams gettin twice as much? Where are your figures?

They get 52% of the money the English and French 24% each.

 Yep, so that's France and England 24% each, Ireland, Italy, Scotland and Wales 13% each, when 'equal' would be 16.67% for each of the 6 unions.  So England and France are already getting 7%+ in recognition of more mouths to feed and greater TV audience

The idea that in any organisation money is allocated irrespective of population is ludicrous. The fact is that Scottish Rugby only has to support two teams whereas England twelve and France fourteen. It is this sort of thinking that will eventually drive English and French out. The real danger if a sensible compromise is not reached is a split. That would result in all top players working in England and France and no internationals. I am sure on one wants that.

I am sure compromise is possible but after eighteen months no compromises have been offered by Rabo side. Indeed they do not seem to even want to talk. A meeting is only now being arranged by ERC "as soon as practicable".

England don't 'have' to support 12 teams though, they CHOOSE to! As they choose to push for 6 participating clubs in the HC, if they wanted to they could support 12 teams and only enter 1 club into the HC, and direct all funds to that 1 club, that would be up to them!

Sorry exiled but you are showing yourself very niaive or ignorant, I can't tell which.

This pretence that large countries such as England and France should get the same as small countries is ridiculous. England has one club for every 4.4 milion people. Wales one for every 775,000. On this basis England should have sixty eight clubs.

I suppose if San Marino join the competion you think they should get the same as France.

Intotouch
The players coming from where as this would be outside the International Windows with players contracted to their clubs ? So basically semi pros

Exiledinborders wrote:

butterfingers wrote:

Exiledinborders wrote:

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:

Exiledinborders wrote:

LeinsterFan4life wrote:How are rabo teams gettin twice as much? Where are your figures?

They get 52% of the money the English and French 24% each.

 Yep, so that's France and England 24% each, Ireland, Italy, Scotland and Wales 13% each, when 'equal' would be 16.67% for each of the 6 unions.  So England and France are already getting 7%+ in recognition of more mouths to feed and greater TV audience

The idea that in any organisation money is allocated irrespective of population is ludicrous. The fact is that Scottish Rugby only has to support two teams whereas England twelve and France fourteen. It is this sort of thinking that will eventually drive English and French out. The real danger if a sensible compromise is not reached is a split. That would result in all top players working in England and France and no internationals. I am sure on one wants that.

I am sure compromise is possible but after eighteen months no compromises have been offered by Rabo side. Indeed they do not seem to even want to talk. A meeting is only now being arranged by ERC "as soon as practicable".

England don't 'have' to support 12 teams though, they CHOOSE to! As they choose to push for 6 participating clubs in the HC, if they wanted to they could support 12 teams and only enter 1 club into the HC, and direct all funds to that 1 club, that would be up to them!

Sorry exiled but you are showing yourself very niaive or ignorant, I can't tell which.

This pretence that large countries such as England and France should get the same as small countries is ridiculous. England has one club for every 4.4 milion people. Wales one for every 775,000.  On this basis England should have sixty eight clubs.

I suppose if San Marino join the competion you think they should get the same as France.

Oh so now you want to base it on population? India and China must be given all our rugby money then?

At every point of argument you've fallen down, it's time to back away slowly... beep beep beep

Butter your analogy doesn't work as the split isn't equal between Unions now

Exiledinborders wrote:England has one club for every 4.4 milion people.

So, you've come clean - Leicester has 4.4 million fans??? Must be tough waiting in the toilet queue....

SecretFly wrote:

Exiledinborders wrote:England has one club for every 4.4 milion people.

So, you've come clean - Leicester has 4.4 million fans???  Must be tough waiting in the toilet queue....  

Especially at the Aviva!

Exiledinborders wrote:

Casartelli wrote:

Exiledinborders wrote:

butterfingers wrote:

Exiledinborders wrote:Whatever the rights and wrongs of the PRL/LNR proposals surely after eighteen months this response from the ERC is pathetic "a meeting focused solely on the negotiations will be convened by ERC as soon as practicable."  

Many on these forums complain of PRL/LNR threats but it seems only threats prompt the blazers into action (or should that be panic?).


It seems the unions have been hoping it will just go away but in business you must address problems face on. Uncertainty is in itself damaging.

The negotiations should include Sky and BT who are intimately involved in this. At least they are likely to be fairly businesslike.

Businesslike in the sense eithe BT or Sky will throw the game under the bus for the right financial result for themselves.

Someone mentioned the Rabo, the fact it has to stay because the nations in it can't afford to run their own leagues not being Englands problem, but ultimately what is not your problem is also not your concern. Surely if your worried about another scenario where Edinburgh finish low down the league yet make a HC semi final then recruit better quality players, if your worried that your league fatigues your players who then can't compete with Rabo teams then restructure your league!

The PRL is in danger of becoming this USA style nanny for european rugby, where control and wealth dominance is name of the game, disguised in the cloak of 'fairness'

Of course the TV companies are looking after their interests. However they are important players in this. It is up to the clubs to look after their interests and the unions theirs. That is the nature of negotiations.

I see no reason to end the Rabo. I just see no reason why some teams should get automatically into HC and some not.  Actually I think qualification would be good for the Pro12. If teams were competing for something it might attract more support. The AP and Top14 attract more support than the Pro12. This is not down to population. After all Leicester get crowds two or three time as big as Cardiff despite being a considerably smaller city.

Population of Leicester, 329,900

Population of Cardiff, 346,000.

English cities can be surprisingly sizable.

The difference is that Leicester is in a rural area whilst Cardiff is at the centre of an urban area with a population of 841,000.

They certainly missed a trick by not naming themselves "Cardiff & Surrounding Urban Area Blues".

That would 'build the brand' - and draw the big ticket attendances.

broadlandboy wrote:Intotouch
The players coming from where as this would be outside the International Windows with players contracted to their clubs ? So basically semi pros

They have choices. There are two levels of professional leagues in France below the top 14. There are academy players around France and there are French top 14 players reaching the end of contracts. It would cost the FFR a lot of money but to recruit enough players for say two regional sides in France is absolutely possible, even if it's made initially of younger, less experienced or less talented players.

The problem that I think they would be faced with is finding stadiums they could use.

Intotouch wrote:

broadlandboy wrote:Intotouch
The players coming from where as this would be outside the International Windows with players contracted to their clubs ? So basically semi pros

They have choices. There are two levels of professional leagues in France below the top 14. There are academy players around France and there are French top 14 players reaching the end of contracts. It would cost the FFR a lot of money but to recruit enough players for say two regional sides in France is absolutely possible, even if it's made initially of younger, less experienced or less talented players.

The problem that I think they would be faced with is finding stadiums they could use.

Or people to support the sides over the local ones they've supported all their lives.

LNR view http://www.planetrugby.com/story/0,25883,16024_8917259,00.html

Are people that surprised that the French & English clubs consider the current money sharing system unfair?  The clubs feel they are making a similar effort to compete as those from the other unions yet are getting paid less each for their endeavours.  If there was someone at my work doing the same job as me but getting paid more I wouldn't be too pleased either.

If the unions and fanbases in the other countries could support a similar number of teams at a high enough level it would be different, but they can't.

http://www.planetrugby.com/story/0,25883,16024_8917259,00.html

Wonder if some folks on here will now believe that the french are in this as much as the english are. You'll have to stop painting the english as pantomime villains now!