Is Dallaglio Right?

Laurence Dallaglio has said if the Heineken Cup is saved, a NH side is more likely to win the 2015 RWC.

Personally I feel the HC actually operates against international representative rugby, and its best boon to NH chances is by sucking international players from contention in their home country, putting excessive demands on players and increasing injury rates.

A reformed season without the HC is better for international rugby in general and NH rugby specifically.

The higher the standard you're exposed to, the higher standard you will be forced to attain; therefore without a truly elite competition, the argument could be that the non-French clubs will be ill prepared for the gap in standard by Test level. But then having an elite weekly competition is hardly doing France any good.

I think things have probably moved on since Dallaglio's day, where it was a lot less structured. Then, it would have helped immensely to know the kind of pace and skill levels you would be facing against France, Ireland etc. Though that clearly still has relevance now, I suppose it's less so given how few clubs, and therefore international players (how many of Toulon represent their countries!?), contest the Heineken Cup into the latter stages. Also the English Premiership is a higher standard of competition and, although it doesn't prepare players exactly for Test level, it still creates a good competitive spirt. Contrast that to the Rabo, where the occassional high pressure game is interspersed with rests and less intense games, that prepares the international players differently. Wales typically take one or two games to get up to fitness and accustomed to the patterns anyway. You could argue this is in part due to their clubs' dire showing in the HC, perhaps.

I fail to see how the HC affects anyone in the SH, barring perhaps in the medium term (less money therefore fewer players coming up North?)?

Yes. A competition featuring the best teams from all six nations benefits all six nations. A PRL-LNR breakaway competition will damage Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Italy in the short term and England and France in the long term.

Have you watched the Top14? The standard is not as good as the Heineken Cup. In many Top14 games the standard of back play is very poor. The Premiership is also less intense than the Heineken Cup.

The less high quality competition there is in Europe, the less chance there is to assess future internationals.

GloriousEmpire wrote:Laurence Dallaglio has said if the Heineken Cup is saved, a NH side is more likely to win the 2015 RWC.

Personally I feel the HC actually operates against international representative rugby, and its best boon to NH chances is by sucking international players from contention in their home country, putting excessive demands on players and increasing injury rates.

A reformed season without the HC is better for international rugby in general and NH rugby specifically.

So the S15 should be scrapped?

An interesting point on a season without the HEC though. I can't know, but maybe the FFR/LNR would appreciate a season HEC free with the forthcoming RWC? Maybe there is merit in that?

miaow wrote:Also the English Premiership is a higher standard of competition and, although it doesn't prepare players exactly for Test level, it still creates a good competitive spirt. Contrast that to the Rabo, where the occassional high pressure game is interspersed with rests and less intense games, that prepares the international players differently

Nonsense. Maybe that was true a couple of years ago, but its not true now. The Premiership and Pro12 are of roughly equivalent intensity week on week, and both are a far cry short of Heineken Cup level never mind test level.

I know more of the Rabo than I do of the Premiership, but having watched a bit more of the English league over the last 2 seasons, it doesn't have the variance in quality of games that the Rabo has. Some are truly dreadful, lacklustre affairs, whereas they can have near HC level games some weeks. There's more gruelling and grinding in the Premiership, not to labour on the forward-dominated English cliche, but it's certainly more taxing for the forwards than the Rabo. That, although not up to international pace, sets them up better for Test level.

Also, although it's a sensible suggestion, does playing in the HC really make you ready for international rugby? Wales has undoubtedly been the most successful NH team since the World Cup in 2011, yet the regions have done nothing in Europe during this time. Nor has their been a great number of Welsh players, if any (?), who have gone to the latter stages with non-Welsh clubs. The Irish provinces have been the most successful in Europe over the last few years, yet internationally they have been disappointing. If anything, this proves that players simply are not able to play more than 10-15 games a season at near-Test level intensity, which many HC games are (certainly some HC games were of played at higher skill levels and pace that some 6N games in 2013). You could argue that the provinces' relative success has been at the detriment of the national team.

I know what Lol means, but a minimum 28/30 game domestic season (excl the LV=) + internationals means the top NH players often don't have enough left in the tank come the RWC.

Yup, the NH have contested all bar one RWC final, but have only won it once.

Just how does the New Breakaway League,I presume this is what is referred too help the
NH sides.?Assuming of course it actually happens.Will France and England big Money Clubs
start developing there own talent or stop importing established overseas players.
Will France have more than 45% less overseas non qualified players under it?or is it just
that the rich clubs want to freeze the lesserfunded teams out.?

St Andre has already bemoaned the money and foreign imports in French clubs are hindering him as a national coach so would a breakaway help him or hinder him more I wonder.

I think ditching the HC will benefit France, Wales, Ireland and Scotland in different ways. I think possibly England benefit from it due to the higher standard of competition because they have a player pool big enough to insure against the injury toll and generally rely on external clubs for talent identification and training.

Dallaglio is right on this one and generally is on most rugby issues. He is the one rugby pundit that IMO gets it right the most. Its no surprise that he is taking this view because I imagine he has whats best for Euro rugby at heart.

GE have you got a link to his article?

Euro rugby? or English rugby?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/24134236

"There's a responsibility to ensure the best players are playing each other on the biggest stage," Dallaglio said. I'm not so sure why he is bringing up SuperRugby here, but he seems to think it's important.

European rugby. He does say "saving the Heineken Cup is key to northern hemisphere countries' chances of winning the 2015 World Cup".

He actually has Irish, English and Italian heritage so although he represented England I would trust and believe that he would genuinely have the best interests of European rugby at heart.

It will only be right.IF 1.More Home grown players are developed instead of importing the
Overseas players as now.2 National Teams have access to Overseas based Players at
ALL times for there National sides to train and play.3 if ALL the NH sides are treated the same.Otherwise it is just a case of Rugby going the Soccer Route where the rich clubs
buy all the players and trophies.
Yes in Soccer it worked for certain teams they got richer,top stars,more trophies more
money.Thru bums on seats,merchandising ,sponsor ship etc.
BUT when did an 5Ns side ,France apart regularly win top national tournaments,and
how many ENGLISHMEN[for example]regularly start for your local team.
THE First team to win the European Cup was Scottish,Glasgow Celtic THAT side wasn't
full of NON qualified overseas players.
What the new Tournament IF it takes off means England,and France teams will be playing
matches at a higher level.The Rest of Europe will get buy on the leavings unless rich enough
to compete.OR are they expecting SA Franchises in Europe if the Super series finishes?
Effectively little has changed just money driving things UNLESS Qualification rules are
changed again.Recycled Overseas players going into National teams N O it won`t improve
NH Rugby.As to winning a RWC that's a lottery unforeseen circumstances have huge effects
there.One shock result changing every thing.

There's a great Seinfeld episode from 198x where he points out that parrochial home fans of largely imported teams are actually cheering for the clothes.

 Welsh Regions continue to bomb in the HC and yet they are the top NH team in recent years both in the 6 Nations and the last RWC - DayGlo is wrong as usual with his erroneous correlation but surely most of you knew that

But had a relatively low winning % in the world cup and outside of the 6 nations didn't they? I think having experience of big games in all comps is beneficial but the problem some have is raising themselves for the rest?

Dayglo is now saying he wants the present set up to stay according to Planet Rugby.

emack2 wrote:Dayglo is now saying he wants the present set up to stay according to Planet Rugby.

I'm all for some change, so long as it doesn't mean handing over power to PRL, but good on him if true.

Jonny Wilkinson also came out in support of the HEC according to another article.

Is there ANY Team in France but B****Y TOULON another couple of Boks going there are
there actually ANY French Players in the Squad I`m sick of hearing the name.They really
are going the Soccer Route aren't they.Remember an discussion with a co member at work
about the Arsenal side that went unbeaten that year [2007 or 8 maybe]"Howmany Englishmen in you Squad? " answer"Oh NONE of them !!!!!"

emack2 wrote:Is there ANY Team in France but B****Y TOULON another couple of Boks going there are
there actually ANY French Players in the Squad I`m sick of hearing the name.They really
are going the Soccer Route aren't they.Remember an discussion with a co member at work
about the Arsenal side that went unbeaten that year [2007 or 8 maybe]"Howmany Englishmen in you Squad? " answer"Oh NONE of them !!!!!"

It's not great but there are worse things out there.

For example, can you imagine somebody supporting another international side over their own?

I guess they both amount to glory-hunting.

Good old Cyril not an original thought in his head,or an original comment ,get a life and
leave me be.

Munchkin wrote:

emack2 wrote:Dayglo is now saying he wants the present set up to stay according to Planet Rugby.

I'm all for some change, so long as it doesn't mean handing over power to PRL, but good on him if true.

Jonny Wilkinson also came out in support of the HEC according to another article.

They're rugby men see, not Nigel come lately "I wanna buy a toy to play with until I get tired of it" types.

Just a footnote Cyril IF I`d been a glory hunter back in 1953 I`d have started with the Boks
they were top dog then.Maybe if I`d been atMurrayfield 1951-2 who knows, I`m not someone who discovered and started backing England when SCW arrived.

Cyril wrote:

emack2 wrote:Is there ANY Team in France but B****Y TOULON another couple of Boks going there are
there actually ANY French Players in the Squad I`m sick of hearing the name.They really
are going the Soccer Route aren't they.Remember an discussion with a co member at work
about the Arsenal side that went unbeaten that year [2007 or 8 maybe]"Howmany Englishmen in you Squad? " answer"Oh NONE of them !!!!!"

It's not great but there are worse things out there.

For example, can you imagine somebody supporting another international side over their own?

I guess they both amount to glory-hunting.

Actually when I first met my mates English wife she told me how she loved rugby but supported the ABs rather than England. I was surprised until she told me it was because of the style of rugby over nationalism. I guess if you changed your support to a more successful team because of their success then that would be glory hunting.

emack2 wrote:Good old Cyril not an original thought in his head,or an original comment ,get a life and
leave me be.

You just seem to bad-mouth players or sides for "selling-out". It's no different to what you've done. Quite a bit of hypocrisy. I guess we could all support New Zealand, Man Utd, Spain, Brazil or Barcelona.

nganboy wrote:

Cyril wrote:

emack2 wrote:Is there ANY Team in France but B****Y TOULON another couple of Boks going there are
there actually ANY French Players in the Squad I`m sick of hearing the name.They really
are going the Soccer Route aren't they.Remember an discussion with a co member at work
about the Arsenal side that went unbeaten that year [2007 or 8 maybe]"Howmany Englishmen in you Squad? " answer"Oh NONE of them !!!!!"

It's not great but there are worse things out there.

For example, can you imagine somebody supporting another international side over their own?

I guess they both amount to glory-hunting.

Actually when I first met my mates English wife she told me how she loved rugby but supported the ABs rather than England. I was surprised until she told me it was because of the style of rugby over nationalism. I guess if you changed your support to a more successful team because of their success then that would be glory hunting.

Generally NZ have been the best of the bunch so becoming a NZ supporter is probably due to wanting to support the best side. Just seems weird. I just think Alan should be careful about going hell for leather criticising French sides buying success when he's just taken a short-cut in supporting (generally) the best international side when he's actually an Anglo-Scot.

Cyril you`re on a losing wicket with me ,we both know it,it isn`t hypocrisy or just that the
Top14 is full of imports.It seems that Toulon more than ANY OTHER are going that road as
t o buying success.IF you look at Toulon`s Trophy Cabinet from the time Andrew Merthen`s
boot got them into the Top14.THEN you will find the Cabinet is almost bare over that period
.also IF you bother to read ALLmy posts.You will see I am interested in TEST Rugby almost exclusively.
I cannot see that having your top sides full of non qualified imports on huge salaries helps
England,France,South Africa,or Wales ,Scotland Georgia or whoever.
NZ and OZ only pick home based players and have been pretty successful in the Pro Era.
YES ,I know that if they relaxed that rule the floodgates would open and the national side
suffer.IF you want to go to the Soccer analogy then the Clubs have been very successful
How many World or European Cups have England won since 1966 the Clubs attitude isn`t
helping.NOR is it helping NH test sides long term either.
Cyril,I know this is just a bit of banter between us,but really we will always agree to differ
on my support of the AB`s  

emack2 wrote:Dayglo is now saying he wants the present set up to stay according to Planet Rugby.

That wouldnt surprise me one bit. Sensible man.

Notch wrote:

miaow wrote:Also the English Premiership is a higher standard of competition and, although it doesn't prepare players exactly for Test level, it still creates a good competitive spirt. Contrast that to the Rabo, where the occassional high pressure game is interspersed with rests and less intense games, that prepares the international players differently

Nonsense. Maybe that was true a couple of years ago, but its not true now. The Premiership and Pro12 are of roughly equivalent intensity week on week, and both are a far cry short of Heineken Cup level never mind test level.

One the one hand the Aviva Premiership:
- Every team has something to play for throughout season whether that be avoiding relation, European qualification, a play off place or a home semi final
- the ratio of points for the top third compared to the bottom third of the table is 1.88

On the the hand the RaboDirect PRO 12:
- top teams are trying to qualify for a play off place or home semi final
- bottom teams have nothing to play for
- the ratio of points for the top third compared to the bottom third of the table is 2.69

The PRO 12 quite obviously contains much easier matches than the Aviva. London Welsh were one of the weaker teams to appear in the league in recent years and they won 5 games whereas Zebre won precisely none!

As a matter of interest I googled the Toulon squad 22 out of 35 were non qualified of the 13
others some of those may not be France qualified either Ruan Pianaar was not included in that.That's at least 62% not qualified for the national side IF every other Top14 side has
as many no wonder French Clubs are causing concern to there Hierachy.

"The PRO 12 quite obviously contains much easier matches than the Aviva. London Welsh were one of the weaker teams to appear in the league in recent years and they won 5 games whereas Zebre won precisely none!"

Interesting conclusion, you could look at it another way i.e.., the Aviva has at least three teams not much better than London Welsh and in your own words were weak.