English clubs "grand standing" and cannot leave Heineken Cup until 2015 according to ex RFU Chairman.

by Artful_Dodger Fri 13 Sep 2013, 10:34 pm

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/24074931

The current two European competitions, the Heineken Cup and Amlin Challenge Cup, involve teams from England, France, Ireland, Italy, Scotland, Wales, Portugal and Romania.
However, the English and French argue their qualification criteria are much tougher and put them at a disadvantage in the competitions.
They served notice to quit the tournament in 2012, however, Thomas does not believe their proposed alternative can get off the ground.
"It's grandstanding," he said.
"The ERC (European Rugby Cup) agreement was signed, and it was signed subsequently to an agreement that the RFU and PRL [Premier Rugby Ltd] and each individual club entered into and that was in 2007.
"One of the terms of the agreement was that the Premiership clubs would remain playing in Europe until the end of that agreement with the RFU.
"The RFU have got to stand up and be counted, it's not a popularity competition being at the RFU."
RFU chief executive Ian Ritchie has since released a statement stating that his organisation is "supportive of the Premiership clubs seeking greater meritocracy," while stressing that rugby should "continue to thrive and grow" and urging "compromise on both sides".
Thomas also expects the French Rugby Federation and International Rugby Board to block any move to form a new tournament.
"The clubs in England require the consent of their union, the teams in France require the consent of their union," he said.
"Pierre Camou is probably one of the strongest presidents in world rugby - he is a tough guy.
"Also, because it's a cross border they require the consent of the IRB and they have a French chairman in Bernard Lapasset.
"There is no way that those two Frenchmen are going to give consent for this to occur."

by tigerleghorn Sat 14 Sep 2013, 7:36 am

Thomas has been out of the set up some several years, I would expect that Peter Wheeler and Co would have sought legal advice before now re their position. Just newspaper adding fuel.

by formerly known as Sam Sat 14 Sep 2013, 8:00 am

Thomas urges RFU to take hard line on clubs that helped force him out of a job shocker. The man is always good for a bitter ranting quote so the papers frequently give him a call. The RFU know they have to sit round the table with the clubs over a new EPS agreement in 2015 (I think) and they won't want to do so with the PRL feeling annoyed.

by Big Sat 14 Sep 2013, 12:34 pm

Funny that so much of the article is dedicated to the disgraced former chair, with only a couple of throw away lines to the stance from the current chief exec...

RFU chief executive Ian Ritchie has since released a statement stating that his organisation is "supportive of the Premiership clubs seeking greater meritocracy," while stressing that rugby should "continue to thrive and grow" and urging "compromise on both sides".

So contrary to Thomas's rant it appears the RFU is not completely opposed to PRL's move, nor indicating that they have any intention of blocking anything.

by DeludedOptimistorjustDave Sat 14 Sep 2013, 1:13 pm

Funny how Wheeler wanted to be the chair man of the ERC but since he loss he has championed the break away league.

by nathan Sat 14 Sep 2013, 1:27 pm

DeludedOptimistorjustDave wrote:Funny how Wheeler wanted to be the chair man of the ERC but since he loss he has championed the break away league.

by DeludedOptimistorjustDave Sat 14 Sep 2013, 1:29 pm

nathan wrote:
DeludedOptimistorjustDave wrote:Funny how Wheeler wanted to be the chair man of the ERC but since he loss he has championed the break away league.

my thoughts exactly

by **profitius** Sat 14 Sep 2013, 2:17 pm

The meritocracy word has been used a lot in these negotiations. Doesn't having wage caps go against that? Leicester Tigers for example are being held back by the other clubs. They have to share their monies to the weaker clubs. Is that meritocracy in action?!

by Knowsit17 Sat 14 Sep 2013, 2:32 pm

Does a meritocracy encompass two countries perpetually being able to enter at least two or three times as many clubs as most other contributing nations? And trying to make the margin greater still?

by Scrumdown Sat 14 Sep 2013, 4:17 pm

Interesting to read that the current split of heineken cup money is broadly speaking:

Scotland. €3m
Italy. €3m
Ireland. €4.5m
Wales. €4.5m
England. €10m
France. €10m

A further amount is then split based on performance in the heineken cup.

You wonder what kind of split these ignorant multimillionaire owners of french and english rugby would find fair.

by Cyril Sat 14 Sep 2013, 4:20 pm

Scrumdown wrote:Interesting to read that the current split of heineken cup money is broadly speaking:

Scotland. €3m
Italy. €3m
Ireland. €4.5m
Wales. €4.5m
England. €10m
France. €10m

A further amount is then split based on performance in the heineken cup.

You wonder what kind of split these ignorant multimillionaire owners of french and english rugby would find fair.

The Pro 12 is actually getting 15M there compared to the 10M of the Aviva Premiership and Top14. The split is currently unfair in favour of the Pro12.

Qualifying should be by league and not by nation.

It's quite simple really.

by timhen Sat 14 Sep 2013, 4:46 pm

Scrumdown wrote:Interesting to read that the current split of heineken cup money is broadly speaking:

Scotland. €3m
Italy. €3m
Ireland. €4.5m
Wales. €4.5m
England. €10m
France. €10m

A further amount is then split based on performance in the heineken cup.

You wonder what kind of split these ignorant multimillionaire owners of french and english rugby would find fair.

A split based on the number of sides that the unions are capable of sustaining and entering into the European competitions.

by Sin é Sat 14 Sep 2013, 4:49 pm

But how are the English clubs and the Biarritz's of this world going to qualify for the knock-outs if they don't have a Zebre or a Connacht in their group?

by ChequeredJersey Sat 14 Sep 2013, 5:03 pm

Sin é wrote:But how are the English clubs and the Biarritz's of this world going to qualify for the knock-outs if they don't have a Zebre or a Connacht in their group?

Can't help but feel that is directly attacking us...

by Sin é Sat 14 Sep 2013, 5:18 pm

You claiming that Quins were not happy to have Zebre in their pool? Whatever about qualifying, they might not have had a big earning home QF with Munster if they didn't have them in their group.

Good look with trying to fill twickers with the French club supporters.

by ChequeredJersey Sat 14 Sep 2013, 5:20 pm

No, I never made any claims like that, I just don't understand why you are being hostile? We aren't going to make te QFs this time anyway (and we'll sell out our home HEC games) so that's kind of a moot point

by Gibson Sat 14 Sep 2013, 5:59 pm

Sin é wrote:But how are the English clubs and the Biarritz's of this world going to qualify for the knock-outs if they don't have a Zebre or a Connacht in their group?

Naughty, but still brilliant.

by hawalsh Sat 14 Sep 2013, 6:29 pm

Sin é wrote:But how are the English clubs and the Biarritz's of this world going to qualify for the knock-outs if they don't have a Zebre or a Connacht in their group?

Or Munster with Edinburgh (the only team that failed to gain a single point) in their group, who only scraped through last season as a runner up due to scoring more tries than Leinster who they tied on points.

by Knowsit17 Sat 14 Sep 2013, 6:53 pm

Cyril wrote:
Scrumdown wrote:Interesting to read that the current split of heineken cup money is broadly speaking:

Scotland. €3m
Italy. €3m
Ireland. €4.5m
Wales. €4.5m
England. €10m
France. €10m

A further amount is then split based on performance in the heineken cup.

You wonder what kind of split these ignorant multimillionaire owners of french and english rugby would find fair.

The Pro 12 is actually getting 15M there compared to the 10M of the Aviva Premiership and Top14. The split is currently unfair in favour of the Pro12.

Qualifying should be by league and not by nation.

It's quite simple really.

Why? You've said this before without actually backing anything up by saying WHY it should be this way...

All nations currently involved contribute to the 6N and Euro rugby as a whole. Why shouldn't all nations be entitled to representation? The French and English will be regardless. Do you actually buy the facade put on by the Franglo clubs? Do you just absorb what they say at face value without reading between the lines?

How about this, the Rabo nations expand and get their own leagues individually while the English and French have to share a league. Qualification is therefore guaranteed for the Rabo sides while not so individually for the English and French. Something tells me you wouldn't be blandly repeating the moneymen if that were the case.

by Gibson Sat 14 Sep 2013, 7:12 pm

Knowsit17 wrote:
Cyril wrote:
Scrumdown wrote:Interesting to read that the current split of heineken cup money is broadly speaking:

Scotland. €3m
Italy. €3m
Ireland. €4.5m
Wales. €4.5m
England. €10m
France. €10m

A further amount is then split based on performance in the heineken cup.

You wonder what kind of split these ignorant multimillionaire owners of french and english rugby would find fair.

The Pro 12 is actually getting 15M there compared to the 10M of the Aviva Premiership and Top14. The split is currently unfair in favour of the Pro12.

Qualifying should be by league and not by nation.

It's quite simple really.
Why? You've said this before without actually backing anything up by saying WHY it should be this way...

All nations currently involved contribute to the 6N and Euro rugby as a whole. Why shouldn't all nations be entitled to representation? The French and English will be regardless. Do you actually buy the facade put on by the Franglo clubs? Do you just absorb what they say at face value without reading between the lines?

How about this, the Rabo nations expand and get their own leagues individually while the English and French have to share a league. Qualification is therefore guaranteed for the Rabo sides while not so individually for the English and French. Something tells me you wouldn't be blandly repeating the moneymen if that were the case.

Man, Id love to see that to happen. A Pan-European League that engenders all that is good about our game. A European League to help promote, rather than isolate rugby to the haves and the have-nots. As in sawkerball. Karma to come right back at them, Kick them right up their greedy, short-sighted, elitist, Wendyball-thinking, orses. They are attempting to kill the very soul of the game we all love. And for what? A fast buck. This happened somewhere before didnt it? Oh yeah, the Planet is phhoked on the back of it. Now I remember.

The basterds.

by **LondonTiger** Sat 14 Sep 2013, 7:38 pm

Martyn thomas is, from personal experience, a self-aggrandising, incompetent, malicious, devious liar. Everything Judge Blackett said about him is true.

He wants nothing more than for professional rugby to fail and return to it's "real amateur roots".

by hawalsh Sat 14 Sep 2013, 7:49 pm

Knowsit17 wrote:
Cyril wrote:
Scrumdown wrote:Interesting to read that the current split of heineken cup money is broadly speaking:

Scotland. €3m
Italy. €3m
Ireland. €4.5m
Wales. €4.5m
England. €10m
France. €10m

A further amount is then split based on performance in the heineken cup.

You wonder what kind of split these ignorant multimillionaire owners of french and english rugby would find fair.

The Pro 12 is actually getting 15M there compared to the 10M of the Aviva Premiership and Top14. The split is currently unfair in favour of the Pro12.

Qualifying should be by league and not by nation.

It's quite simple really.
Why? You've said this before without actually backing anything up by saying WHY it should be this way...

All nations currently involved contribute to the 6N and Euro rugby as a whole. Why shouldn't all nations be entitled to representation? The French and English will be regardless. Do you actually buy the facade put on by the Franglo clubs? Do you just absorb what they say at face value without reading between the lines?

How about this, the Rabo nations expand and get their own leagues individually while the English and French have to share a league. Qualification is therefore guaranteed for the Rabo sides while not so individually for the English and French. Something tells me you wouldn't be blandly repeating the moneymen if that were the case.

If you could, you should. The fact is however you can't. Each union has the number of clubs that they are capable of sustaining at that level.

All the nations would continue to have representation in Europe, it's just that if sides don't perform well enough it would be at the level they would be more capable at, the Amlin, where the other sides that don't make the cut also have to prove themselves. If they do they join the other best sides in Europe. The Amlin really isn't the death of a club that some of you are making out, if anything, for underperforming sides it acts as a better platform to build from than getting humped in the Heineken every year.

by broadlandboy Sat 14 Sep 2013, 8:06 pm

Knowsit17
If all Unions should have representation why should it be limited to only the 6 Nation unions & not all European Unions?
Also if they can't get into the top 6 of their "domestic" league what makes you think that they could win the top European competition?

by DeludedOptimistorjustDave Sat 14 Sep 2013, 8:34 pm

So then nice to see the English have sold out to BT, awful format also the footie scores banner was very off putting whilst the game was on.

by Guest Sat 14 Sep 2013, 9:02 pm

broadlandboy wrote:Knowsit17
If all Unions should have representation why should it be limited to only the 6 Nation unions & not all European Unions?
Also if they can't get into the top 6 of their "domestic" league what makes you think that they could win the top European competition?

by **Notch** Sat 14 Sep 2013, 9:07 pm

Cyril wrote:
Scrumdown wrote:Interesting to read that the current split of heineken cup money is broadly speaking:

Scotland. €3m
Italy. €3m
Ireland. €4.5m
Wales. €4.5m
England. €10m
France. €10m

A further amount is then split based on performance in the heineken cup.

You wonder what kind of split these ignorant multimillionaire owners of french and english rugby would find fair.

The Pro 12 is actually getting 15M there compared to the 10M of the Aviva Premiership and Top14. The split is currently unfair in favour of the Pro12.

Qualifying should be by league and not by nation.

It's as if somehow repeating this nonsense that the Pro12 is one block, not 4 independent nations, is going to make it any less of a risible pile of horsedung. It's not. That is not going to be accepted, ever, by the Chairmen of four Independent Unions and the fans of teams from across Europe outside your Anglo-French bubble.

Enough of the hypocrisy and spin. The Pro12 is no different to the Heineken Cup. It is a cross-border competition managed by an executive body of the participating unions and it's very easy to say qualifying should be by league and not by nation when your the ones cutting a disproportionately large slice of the pie for your nation steam

This willful ignorance about how professional rugby is organised in the rest of the world is the reason negotiations can't get past first base. How can we come to a compromise when you're not even trying to wrap your head around the very basic needs of the other four Unions at the table?

by **Notch** Sat 14 Sep 2013, 9:15 pm

We might as well say the Anglo-Welsh block are getting 20 million whilst The Celtic Nations are getting 12 million and the Italians are getting 3 million. It doesn't make sense.

We can throw the six nations into random blocks all night to make the sums add up the way we prefer, or we can admit there are six nations with their own needs at the table and if even that most basic of facts can't be comprehended it's no blydi wonder the talks are/were going around in circles.

by Knowsit17 Sat 14 Sep 2013, 9:20 pm

broadlandboy wrote:Knowsit17
If all Unions should have representation why should it be limited to only the 6 Nation unions & not all European Unions?
Also if they can't get into the top 6 of their "domestic" league what makes you think that they could win the top European competition?

I never said the same access shouldn't be extended to other unions at any such time that the format is revised to integrate more clubs. In the meantime why should the rules apply differently to English and French clubs just because they are able to have their own domestic leagues?

by Knowsit17 Sat 14 Sep 2013, 9:30 pm

Notch wrote:
Cyril wrote:
Scrumdown wrote:Interesting to read that the current split of heineken cup money is broadly speaking:

Scotland. €3m
Italy. €3m
Ireland. €4.5m
Wales. €4.5m
England. €10m
France. €10m

A further amount is then split based on performance in the heineken cup.

You wonder what kind of split these ignorant multimillionaire owners of french and english rugby would find fair.

The Pro 12 is actually getting 15M there compared to the 10M of the Aviva Premiership and Top14. The split is currently unfair in favour of the Pro12.

Qualifying should be by league and not by nation.
It's as if somehow repeating this nonsense that the Pro12 is one block, not 4 independent nations, is going to make it any less of a risible pile of horsedung. It's not. That is not going to be accepted, ever, by the Chairmen of four Independent Unions and the fans of teams from across Europe outside your Anglo-French bubble.

Enough of the hypocrisy and spin. The Pro12 is no different to the Heineken Cup. It is a cross-border competition managed by an executive body of the participating unions and it's very easy to say qualifying should be by league and not by nation when your the ones cutting a disproportionately large slice of the pie for your nation

This willful ignorance about how professional rugby is organised in the rest of the world is the reason negotiations can't get past first base. How can we come to a compromise when you're not even trying to wrap your head around the very basic needs of the other four Unions at the table?

+1
Might I add I just find it highly amusing whenever someone tries to act like they know the league I've followed for years and they barely keep up with better than I do. Anyone who calls the Pro12 domestic is talking from their backside. It incorporates four nations, not only the "home nations" anymore but Italy as well. It is therefore NOT domestic but also European/international. How is that so hard to understand?

by Gibson Sat 14 Sep 2013, 9:32 pm

Notch wrote:
Cyril wrote:
Scrumdown wrote:Interesting to read that the current split of heineken cup money is broadly speaking:

Scotland. €3m
Italy. €3m
Ireland. €4.5m
Wales. €4.5m
England. €10m
France. €10m

A further amount is then split based on performance in the heineken cup.

You wonder what kind of split these ignorant multimillionaire owners of french and english rugby would find fair.

The Pro 12 is actually getting 15M there compared to the 10M of the Aviva Premiership and Top14. The split is currently unfair in favour of the Pro12.

Qualifying should be by league and not by nation.
It's as if somehow repeating this nonsense that the Pro12 is one block, not 4 independent nations, is going to make it any less of a risible pile of horsedung. It's not. That is not going to be accepted, ever, by the Chairmen of four Independent Unions and the fans of teams from across Europe outside your Anglo-French bubble.

Enough of the hypocrisy and spin. The Pro12 is no different to the Heineken Cup. It is a cross-border competition managed by an executive body of the participating unions and it's very easy to say qualifying should be by league and not by nation when your the ones cutting a disproportionately large slice of the pie for your nation

This willful ignorance about how professional rugby is organised in the rest of the world is the reason negotiations can't get past first base. How can we come to a compromise when you're not even trying to wrap your head around the very basic needs of the other four Unions at the table?

Yup. That is just about the size of it. :DressedOrange:

by markb Sat 14 Sep 2013, 9:51 pm

Notch wrote:We might as well say the Anglo-Welsh block are getting 20 million whilst The Celtic Nations are getting 12 million and the Italians are getting 3 million. It doesn't make sense.

We can throw the six nations into random blocks all night to make the sums add up the way we prefer, or we can admit there are six nations with their own needs at the table and if even that most basic of facts can't be comprehended it's no blydi wonder the talks are/were going around in circles.

You're either missing or willfully ignoring the fact that the English & French clubs are getting paid almost half as much to play in Europe as the sides from the PRO12. The English clubs get paid more to play in the Anglo-Welsh Cup.

If the English sides in the HC were paid the same as the the PRO12 sides from the lump sum share the ERC give the English from both European competitons' revenues, there would be no money left for the sides competing in the Amlin.

Some have suggested the French & the English should enter less sides if they want similar money. That would effectively result in the end of the Amlin and the revenues it produces, which would mean less money for all nationas anyway as the total ERC pot is reduced (I would guess by somewhere around a third).

by Gibson Sat 14 Sep 2013, 9:52 pm

What really pishes me off, is not the attitude of the predictable English brigade, controlling their respective super-clubs.That's BAU. Its the French I have a problem with.

This kind of deal goes against their very sporting soul. Whilst the English - thinking they were above it all, would not play soccer against the Rest of the World until the 50's, the French were busy inventing the World Cup, The European Championships... and The European Cup. All ignored initially, by the country that supposedly invented the game - (they didnt, the Chinese did. And snooker. An tings. Shussh).

I reckon when push comes to shove, the French will capitulate, with a compatible offer to stay in and enhance the fold, as leaders. And the English will have to follow. Or stay isolated in the mire of the Jeff forever. Bit like a Munster/Tigers rugby-limbo. Nightmare.

They will grow up and will join (dragging and screaming) the European grown-ups in time. It always happens. They always wake up late. That's why I love em so.

Check your History.

The Frogs will sell the English out at the very last minute. And a Paddy will have set it all up.

Ive seen the movie a few times already. Trust me.

Believe.

by Knowsit17 Sat 14 Sep 2013, 9:59 pm

Well it wouldn't seem the Rabo or ERC have given any ground which is fine with me. I'd love to see how the Franglo businessmen react once their bluff is called and they're stuck playing just each other for an unspecified number of seasons. Could hardly be seriously qualified as a Euro tournament when there isn't that much of Europe playing it Whistle

by alcoombe Sat 14 Sep 2013, 10:08 pm

markb wrote:
Notch wrote:We might as well say the Anglo-Welsh block are getting 20 million whilst The Celtic Nations are getting 12 million and the Italians are getting 3 million. It doesn't make sense.

We can throw the six nations into random blocks all night to make the sums add up the way we prefer, or we can admit there are six nations with their own needs at the table and if even that most basic of facts can't be comprehended it's no blydi wonder the talks are/were going around in circles.
You're either missing or willfully ignoring the fact that the English & French clubs are getting paid almost half as much to play in Europe as the sides from the PRO12. The English clubs get paid more to play in the Anglo-Welsh Cup.

If the English sides in the HC were paid the same as the the PRO12 sides from the lump sum share the ERC give the English from both European competitons' revenues, there would be no money left for the sides competing in the Amlin.

Some have suggested the French & the English should enter less sides if they want similar money. That would effectively result in the end of the Amlin and the revenues it produces, which would mean less money for all nationas anyway as the total ERC pot is reduced (I would guess by somewhere around a third).

Don't be silly Markb, the PRO12 sides getting paid far more for each game they compete in is perfectly fair and the Franglo clubs seeking equal pay is a travesty of the game and pure money-grabbing. If the Welsh or Irish were getting paid half as much as each other they'd be perfectly fine with it.

by lostinwales Sat 14 Sep 2013, 10:14 pm

Remember, comrades, your resolution must never falter. No argument must lead you astray. Never listen when they tell you that Man and the animals have a common interest, that the prosperity of the one is the prosperity of the others. It is all lies. Man serves the interests of no creature except himself. And among us animals let there be perfect unity, perfect comradeship in the struggle. All men are enemies. All animals are comrades.

ALL ANIMALS ARE EQUAL
BUT SOME ANIMALS ARE MORE EQUAL THAN OTHERS.

by **Notch** Sun 15 Sep 2013, 9:26 am

markb wrote:You're either missing or willfully ignoring the fact that the English & French clubs are getting paid almost half as much to play in Europe as the sides from the PRO12.

No because that money doesn't go into the pockets of the teams that compete in the Heineken Cup. It goes to the IRFU who put it into investment in every level of the game from grassroots to international, from centrally contracted players to stadia upgrades, from the club game to the provinces. You think all the IRFUs share goes to Ulster, Munster, Leinster etc? Nonsense. None of the money goes directly to the teams. It goes into the main pot that the IRFU uses to pay for the game at every level.

Here's the way it is. The PRL gets 10 million, which is shared amongst 12 teams. The IRFU gets 4.5 million which is shared amongst an entire Union- hundreds of clubs, four provincial sides, loads of other expenses. I don't really care as much about what the Welsh, Scottish and Italians get because I'm not Welsh, Scottish and Italian- all I hope is that they get a fair share. I would be absolutely stunned if at the end of the day the provinces were getting more out of this than the PRL clubs. I would be utterly astonished.

You want a deal where the English will go from getting more than twice as much money as us, too many multiples more money than us despite the fact we (the IRFU) have provided the winners of one-third of European Cups and some of the most recognisable brands in European Rugby.

You can't just pretend the two completely different system are equivalent. And you really, really can't play the poormouth card and say you're getting a rough deal when you are getting more than twice as much money than any of the four Unions you want to take a massive haircut. To be quite frank, how the PRL divides its money is an internal issue that doesn't concern any of the other unions. If they are moaning about having to pay for 12 sides- no-one is making them have that many sides.

I, personally, am totally willing to see concessions made on the qualification issue. But no way should we crumble in the face of PRL demands to sign up to an unfair distribution of money. What we have now acknowledges the contribution made by the French and English by giving nearly half of the money to two out of six Unions, whilst still allowing rugby to grow across Europe.

by Artful_Dodger Sun 15 Sep 2013, 9:58 am

Same - I'd be happy to go with an 6-6-8 split with teams qualifying and I think the Rabo Unions would as well. I think no agreement is being made because the PRL are demanding more money for them and less money for the smaller countries. Thats the sticking point not how many Rabo teams qualify.

by trebellbobaggins Sun 15 Sep 2013, 10:32 am

DeludedOptimistorjustDave wrote:So then nice to see the English have sold out to BT, awful format also the footie scores banner was very off putting whilst the game was on.

Getting it free with my broadband made it easy to cancel sky and save a fortune so I reckon its ok.

by bedfordwelsh Sun 15 Sep 2013, 10:43 am

Asked this question on one of the other posts and cant seem to find a definitive answer, so here go again.

IF the French and English try to set up an alternative competition doesn't it need to be sanctioned by the IRB?

If it does are the IRB likely to sanction it, if they don't are broadcasters likely to plough money into a rogue competition?

by Guest Sun 15 Sep 2013, 11:19 am

The game tactic the IRB have to consider is that if they do not allow this competition and ban it. That would potentially mean England and France would lose those players - two years out from the RWC in England, which has to be a financially successful tournament for the IRB. The IRB will not contemplate any risks to their RWC income - in the same way the RFU have made conciliatory noises.

by Guest Sun 15 Sep 2013, 11:21 am

Thomas is an amateur throwback, pretty sure any junior lawyers could deal with any potential legal impasse when there is currently no european contract after this season.

by doctor_grey Sun 15 Sep 2013, 12:08 pm

I have avoided this subject because most of the discussions are extremely emotional, and seem to bring out the worst in some of us here. But the reality is both sides have merit and depends upon which side of the aisle one is on. These perspectives make it clear why negotiations have failed.

The European Cup started as a club competition (the Irish provincial teams excepted, but they have a long legacy). Later on it evolved to regions/franchises in Wales and Scotland, and the Celtic League formed. So the original baseline of the competition has changed amongst the Celts, but not the English and French. So the English and French clubs still view it though that lens. And as a club competition, their position makes perfect sense.

But the Celtic League teams are now mostly not clubs (though the Welsh regions seem to be financed as a matrix of club plus franchise). With regions/franchises tied closely to the National Unions, their best interests are seen through the lens of national unions, no longer as clubs. Makes their resistance to negotiate on the main English/French points logical.

The current financial model amongst each nation is still somewhat different. The Celtic League teams have different salary caps and wage scales. As do the English and the French. There are also different numbers of viewers on tv. This further unbalances the overall equation.

Unfortunately, the failure to compromise reflects equally and poorly on both sides. The English and French now see the evolution in the Celtic nations as tipping the scales. The Celtic League teams see the current situation as a better balance. In other words, The English and French see equal distribution of funds across all teams as appropriate. The Celts want more of an even distribution of funds across national unions.

This is the fundamental aspect of the situation. Both sides are at fault in the failure to compromise. Both sides need to find the right balance. Denying that most important point inflates the problem, and makes finding a solution more difficult. The question is whether we have big picture people on both sides involved. Signs so far say no.

by Sin é Sun 15 Sep 2013, 12:28 pm

doctor_grey wrote:

The European Cup started as a club competition (the Irish provincial teams excepted, but they have a long legacy). Later on it evolved to regions/franchises in Wales and Scotland, and the Celtic League formed. So the original baseline of the competition has changed amongst the Celts, but not the English and French. So the English and French clubs still view it though that lens. And as a club competition, their position makes perfect sense.

It was the Celt's idea in the first place. The driving force behind the setting up of the European Cup was Tom Kiernan (Ireland) first Chairman and Vernon Pugh (Wales) who I think was IRB Chair at the time.

The award [ERC Achievement Award - Kiernan was the inaugural winner) is in recognition of the key role Kiernan played in the early years of the then fledgling tournament and was presented to him by current ERC Chairman Jean-Pierre Lux.

"Tom did an outstanding job in helping launch the tournament at extremely short notice and then defending and championing the principles and objectives of the Heineken Cup," Lux said.
"The Heineken Cup has made enormous strides since 1995 and the groundwork done by Tom in those early seasons has proved to be the perfect and solid foundation for the continuing growth of the tournament."

by Big Sun 15 Sep 2013, 12:35 pm

bedfordwelsh wrote:Asked this question on one of the other posts and cant seem to find a definitive answer, so here go again.

IF the French and English try to set up an alternative competition doesn't it need to be sanctioned by the IRB?

If it does are the IRB likely to sanction it, if they don't are broadcasters likely to plough money into a rogue competition?

I think that's a question for a rugby lawyer...

According to the regulations they do need approval from the respective national unions, and the IRB. The regulations aren't (from what I can see) clear on what the criteria are for approving the tournament, though it does indicate that it shall not unreasonably be witheld. Who knows whether or not they will give approval, but if they don't there may be grounds for PRL and LNR to challenge legally, and even failing that I'm not sure what they could do to stop clubs running it outside the control of the IRB.

by Sin é Sun 15 Sep 2013, 12:37 pm

ChequeredJersey wrote:
Sin é wrote:But how are the English clubs and the Biarritz's of this world going to qualify for the knock-outs if they don't have a Zebre or a Connacht in their group?

Can't help but feel that is directly attacking us...

I had just been listening to Conor O'Shea speak about how unfair it was that Zebre got 1.2m and Quins only got 400K from the ERC. He failed to mention how much having a home QF was worth to Quins which was no doubt (aided by having Zebre in their group).

by Sin é Sun 15 Sep 2013, 12:41 pm

hawalsh wrote:
Sin é wrote:But how are the English clubs and the Biarritz's of this world going to qualify for the knock-outs if they don't have a Zebre or a Connacht in their group?

Or Munster with Edinburgh (the only team that failed to gain a single point) in their group, who only scraped through last season as a runner up due to scoring more tries than Leinster who they tied on points.

The fact that Munster made the semis illustrated how difficult a pool they were in Wink

Edinburgh had a semi final (beating Toulouse) the previous year.

by bedfordwelsh Sun 15 Sep 2013, 12:50 pm

Recwatcher wrote:The game tactic the IRB have to consider is that if they do not allow this competition and ban it. That would potentially mean England and France would lose those players - two years out from the RWC in England, which has to be a financially successful tournament for the IRB. The IRB will not contemplate any risks to their RWC income - in the same way the RFU have made conciliatory noises.

Rec,

When you say they would lose the players if it wasn't approved do you mean the respective French and English coaches couldn't or maybe wouldn't (by Unions) be allowed to pick players playing in a 'rogue' tournament.

Out of interest (can anyone recall) when Cardiff and Swansea RFCs decided to leave the Welsh league at the time and play friendlies againt the English clubs did the Welsh team still pick players from those to clubs?

by maestegmafia Sun 15 Sep 2013, 1:27 pm

bedfordwelsh wrote:
Recwatcher wrote:The game tactic the IRB have to consider is that if they do not allow this competition and ban it. That would potentially mean England and France would lose those players - two years out from the RWC in England, which has to be a financially successful tournament for the IRB. The IRB will not contemplate any risks to their RWC income - in the same way the RFU have made conciliatory noises.
Rec,

When you say they would lose the players if it wasn't approved do you mean the respective French and English coaches couldn't or maybe wouldn't (by Unions) be allowed to pick players playing in a 'rogue' tournament.

Out of interest (can anyone recall) when Cardiff and Swansea RFCs decided to leave the Welsh league at the time and play friendlies againt the English clubs did the Welsh team still pick players from those to clubs?

The WRU still selected Swansea and Cardiff players

by Cyril Sun 15 Sep 2013, 3:16 pm

It strikes me from reading the above that the HC qualifying arrangements from standalone 'national' leagues and hybrid 'multi-nation' leagues really are incompatible.

It probably best for them to go their separate ways.

by BigTrevsbigmac Sun 15 Sep 2013, 3:35 pm

Cyril wrote:It strikes me from reading the above that the HC qualifying arrangements from standalone 'national' leagues and hybrid 'multi-nation' leagues really are incompatible.

It probably best for them to go their separate ways.

Although interestingly Nigel Wray has just suggested that the Welsh Regions join the Amlin Premiership & to disband the LV cup....

http://www.espn.co.uk/blogs/rugby/story/198553.html

by Sponsored content