Mediator appointed- Will the Clubs Engage?

First topic message reminder :

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2013/sep/20/heineken-cup-dispute-lawyer?CMP=twt_gu

The ERC has appointed Graeme Mew, a Canadian lawyer specialising in dispute resolution, to try and get the English and French back in the room and negotiate a future for European rugby. I'm not sure we can hope for much resolution within the framework of the ERC but hopefully we can have all the decision makers meet and not rule anything out- be it continuing within the ERC or forming a new successor body.

We could probably have used this about 3 months ago tbh.

Ah that bit. Hardly an unbiased opinion. we have the FFR against it. The irish union have come out against it. theus the IRB will have to veto it. the PRLs competition is dead in the water with only themselves to play with. If tehy want a six nation tournament its only happening one way - with the approval of the unions.

itsallabouttheincentives wrote:lets follow this logically to its conclusion:

PRL/LNR set up their thing and invite everyone
Rabo set up their thing (as the HC no longer exists) and invite everyone
IRB approves both (as they will both have their unions backing at the end of the day)

PRL/LNR get lots of money
Rab's new competition fails to find a sponsor

Rabo unions accept PRL/LNR offer and find that actually they get more money than before and its really not so bad after all.

although the Unions absolutely hate it.

You're a fantastic optimist. I would have to give you that much  

the PRL plan will not have the backing of the french - they have made that clear. thus your hopeful post fails at the first hurdle

Munchkin wrote:

itsallabouttheincentives wrote:lets follow this logically to its conclusion:

PRL/LNR set up their thing and invite everyone
Rabo set up their thing (as the HC no longer exists) and invite everyone
IRB approves both (as they will both have their unions backing at the end of the day)

PRL/LNR get lots of money
Rab's new competition fails to find a sponsor

Rabo unions accept PRL/LNR offer and find that actually they get more money than before and its really not so bad after all.

although the Unions absolutely hate it.

You're a fantastic optimist. I would have to give you that much  

it helps to be positive i find but i actually do think its whats going to happen. PRL/LNR are not going to compromise. so the HC is dead, and it has only the Celtic Unions to blame as they (understandably) didn't want to give up anything, and were rather hoping the whole thing would blow over and that the ERC/Unions would outmuscle the PRL/LNR. any competition of Unions and clubs is always destined for problems because their agendas are completely incompatible.

TJ wrote:the PRL plan will not have the backing of the french - they have made that clear.  thus your hopeful post fails at the first hurdle

and the PRL need the backing of the french in order to do what?

The LNR are going to have to compromise - they have not got the backing of their union and have been much less aggressive in their tactics showing some willingness. the PRL are the ones left with nowhere to go and will be seen as the villains in all this and are the ones isolated.

I have said right from the beginning that either the PRL will have to back down or we will see Euro cup without them. this is still the case. the PRLs alternative tourney is dead in the water.

itsallabouttheincentives wrote:

TJ wrote:the PRL plan will not have the backing of the french - they have made that clear.  thus your hopeful post fails at the first hurdle

and the PRL need the backing of the french in order to do what?

To have an alternative Franglo cup. that idea is dead in the water thus the BT deal is dead in the water as the PRL have no cross border comp to sell. the PRL are isolated and we have another ball if they take theirs away

TJ wrote:

itsallabouttheincentives wrote:

TJ wrote:the PRL plan will not have the backing of the french - they have made that clear.  thus your hopeful post fails at the first hurdle

and the PRL need the backing of the french in order to do what?

To have an alternative Franglo cup. that idea is dead in the water thus the BT deal is dead in the water as the PRL have no cross border comp to sell.  the PRL are isolated and we have another ball if they take theirs away

deny deny deny, thats all i hear.

when the LNR comes out later this week and says they will not be attending the ERC meeting, will you still believe that the FFR is in control? how, when you wont read links that posters attach for everyone, can you expect to claim to understand the working of French rugby?

TJ wrote:The LNR are going to have to compromise - they have not got the backing of their union and have been much less aggressive in their tactics showing some willingness.  the PRL are the ones left with nowhere to go and will be seen as the villains in all this and are the ones isolated.

I have said right from the beginning that either the PRL will have to back down or we will see Euro cup without them. this is still the case.  the PRLs alternative tourney is dead in the water.  

The LNR have been more bullish about ignoring the union. PRL have said they'll work with the RFU. Goze has said there's nothing the union can do to stop them doing it, etc. I really don't understand where these ideas of he French being less committed comes from.

HammerofThunor wrote:They all the current sides have pretty much equal shares. Not sure if Newcastle lost a little due to the relegation but they'll be back up to full next season. Bristol also have some. So I don't think there is much dissatisfaction in the PRL. The issues would be for new guys like Bedford or Pirates. And if they come up a stay up they can buy the shares off the relegated side like Exeter did off Leeds. Not a super system but it's unlikely to cause much/all dissatisfaction in the league.

Thunor, I'm afraid I can't agree with that at all! The AP is a cartel in all but name - Exe may have bought 'P' shares from Leeds (having to take on debt to do so - you can see it in the published accounts associated with the stadium redevelopment bond deal), but still do not have equal shares of 'A' shares and whatever other malarkey. Certainly not a great example or fairness and level playing field - but who are we kidding in thinking it was about that anyway?!

TJ wrote:

itsallabouttheincentives wrote:

TJ wrote:the PRL plan will not have the backing of the french - they have made that clear.  thus your hopeful post fails at the first hurdle

and the PRL need the backing of the french in order to do what?

To have an alternative Franglo cup. that idea is dead in the water thus the BT deal is dead in the water as the PRL have no cross border comp to sell.  the PRL are isolated and we have another ball if they take theirs away

yes if they were holding a franglo cup they might. but they're not. they're creating something with a much grander title although the sexy names escapes me for now. and that will only require RFU approval. Other national clubs who want to sign up will then require their unions approval, but the ball will already be rolling, horse bolted, etc by then and as the details flesh out, and with the LNR OUT of HC, you are naive to think the PRL will be isolated.

itsallabouttheincentives wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

itsallabouttheincentives wrote:lets follow this logically to its conclusion:

PRL/LNR set up their thing and invite everyone
Rabo set up their thing (as the HC no longer exists) and invite everyone
IRB approves both (as they will both have their unions backing at the end of the day)

PRL/LNR get lots of money
Rab's new competition fails to find a sponsor

Rabo unions accept PRL/LNR offer and find that actually they get more money than before and its really not so bad after all.

although the Unions absolutely hate it.

You're a fantastic optimist. I would have to give you that much  

it helps to be positive i find :)but i actually do think its whats going to happen. PRL/LNR are not going to compromise. so the HC is dead, and it has only the Celtic Unions to blame as they (understandably) didn't want to give up anything, and were rather hoping the whole thing would blow over and that the ERC/Unions would outmuscle the PRL/LNR. any competition of Unions and clubs is always destined for problems because their agendas are completely incompatible.

incentives, you've said it all for me in that one short sentence - absolutely feicin pathetic - "no compromise"

itsallabouttheincentives wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

itsallabouttheincentives wrote:lets follow this logically to its conclusion:

PRL/LNR set up their thing and invite everyone
Rabo set up their thing (as the HC no longer exists) and invite everyone
IRB approves both (as they will both have their unions backing at the end of the day)

PRL/LNR get lots of money
Rab's new competition fails to find a sponsor

Rabo unions accept PRL/LNR offer and find that actually they get more money than before and its really not so bad after all.

although the Unions absolutely hate it.

You're a fantastic optimist. I would have to give you that much  

it helps to be positive i find :)but i actually do think its whats going to happen. PRL/LNR are not going to compromise. so the HC is dead, and it has only the Celtic Unions to blame as they (understandably) didn't want to give up anything, and were rather hoping the whole thing would blow over and that the ERC/Unions would outmuscle the PRL/LNR. any competition of Unions and clubs is always destined for problems because their agendas are completely incompatible.

The HEC is anything but dead, and I have yet to be convinced it will be any time soon. Maybe the PRL have burned their bridge. We don't know. If they have I think it could be challenging times for all, but not least the PRL who just might find themselves isolated. Maybe not, but I believe it's a very real possibility, and that is not wishful thinking in any way. I would much rather they sort out any issues now remaining within the HEC.

Oh yes the FFR are in control - its written into french law.

espn wrote:But the FFR has taken a more hard line approach, on the eve of the launch of this season's Heineken Cup, that appears to set them on a collision course with the English and French clubs.

"No meeting or international competition involving French clubs can be organised outside the framework of the FFR and without its prior agreement," the FFR said in a statement. "The FFR has always been and will remain a major player in the European cups organised by ERC and backs proposals to permit the continuity and development of these.

"If the FFR is in favour of an improvement in the European cups, their organisation can only be envisaged under the edict of the European federations which make up ERC. The statement released by the clubs appears therefore irrelevant and inappropriate."

itsallabouttheincentives wrote:

TJ wrote:

itsallabouttheincentives wrote:

TJ wrote:the PRL plan will not have the backing of the french - they have made that clear.  thus your hopeful post fails at the first hurdle

and the PRL need the backing of the french in order to do what?

To have an alternative Franglo cup. that idea is dead in the water thus the BT deal is dead in the water as the PRL have no cross border comp to sell.  the PRL are isolated and we have another ball if they take theirs away

yes if they were holding a franglo cup they might. but they're not. they're creating something with a much grander title although the sexy names escapes me for now. and that will only require RFU approval. Other national clubs who want to sign up will then require their unions approval, but the ball will already be rolling, horse bolted, etc by then and as the details flesh out, and with the LNR OUT of HC, you are naive to think the PRL will be isolated.

Errmm- any cross border competition requires the approval of the unions and the IRB. the french union are against this new competition as are the IRB. Its not going to happen

TJ wrote:Oh yes the FFR are in control - its written into french law.  

espn wrote:But the FFR has taken a more hard line approach, on the eve of the launch of this season's Heineken Cup, that appears to set them on a collision course with the English and French clubs.

"No meeting or international competition involving French clubs can be organised outside the framework of the FFR and without its prior agreement," the FFR said in a statement. "The FFR has always been and will remain a major player in the European cups organised by ERC and backs proposals to permit the continuity and development of these.

"If the FFR is in favour of an improvement in the European cups, their organisation can only be envisaged under the edict of the European federations which make up ERC. The statement released by the clubs appears therefore irrelevant and inappropriate."

that is not a no. that is a negotiating position. i'm glad you found the article though.

Yeah right - every other commentator has that as a serious slapdown to the LNR and a decision to veto the franglo cup.

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:

itsallabouttheincentives wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

itsallabouttheincentives wrote:lets follow this logically to its conclusion:

PRL/LNR set up their thing and invite everyone
Rabo set up their thing (as the HC no longer exists) and invite everyone
IRB approves both (as they will both have their unions backing at the end of the day)

PRL/LNR get lots of money
Rab's new competition fails to find a sponsor

Rabo unions accept PRL/LNR offer and find that actually they get more money than before and its really not so bad after all.

although the Unions absolutely hate it.

You're a fantastic optimist. I would have to give you that much  

it helps to be positive i find :)but i actually do think its whats going to happen. PRL/LNR are not going to compromise. so the HC is dead, and it has only the Celtic Unions to blame as they (understandably) didn't want to give up anything, and were rather hoping the whole thing would blow over and that the ERC/Unions would outmuscle the PRL/LNR. any competition of Unions and clubs is always destined for problems because their agendas are completely incompatible.

incentives, you've said it all for me in that one short sentence - absolutely feicin pathetic - "no compromise"

just like ERC and Unions did not compromise for 18 months. just because they did it quietly behind the veil of not actually doing anything, doesnt mean it was any less effective, and set the stage for what is happening now.

you want to be angry at someone - try your unions and the ERC. cozy suits in their sweet arrangement with sky and corporate freebies. they have messed this up. and that is why they should not be in charge of the club game. dinosuars from a bygone era.

TJ wrote:Yeah right - every other commentator has that as a serious slapdown to the LNR and a decision to veto the franglo cup.

seriously i'm glad you found the article. and the other ones that give you such confidence about every commentator on this issue.

IIts a seriously weird world you live in that that statement and the others from the French officials leads you to believe that they don't mean what they say. It really is clear. the PRL proposals are dead in the water and even if the RFU agree them the FFR will not.

itsallabouttheincentives wrote:

TJ wrote:Yeah right - every other commentator has that as a serious slapdown to the LNR and a decision to veto the franglo cup.

seriously i'm glad you found the article. and the other ones that give you such confidence about every commentator on this issue.

even if you were right (which i am 100% confident you are not) the LNR will still not attend the ERC meeting and will still leave the HC. their union cannot compel them to do anything whatsoever, only prevent them from doing certain things.

Errmmm - I think you will find that is not so. the French union are much more powerful than the RFU as they are on a statutory basis.

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:They all the current sides have pretty much equal shares. Not sure if Newcastle lost a little due to the relegation but they'll be back up to full next season. Bristol also have some. So I don't think there is much dissatisfaction in the PRL. The issues would be for new guys like Bedford or Pirates. And if they come up a stay up they can buy the shares off the relegated side like Exeter did off Leeds. Not a super system but it's unlikely to cause much/all dissatisfaction in the league.

Thunor, I'm afraid I can't agree with that at all!  The AP is a cartel in all but name - Exe may have bought 'P' shares from Leeds (having to take on debt to do so - you can see it in the published accounts associated with the stadium redevelopment bond deal), but still do not have equal shares of 'A' shares and whatever other malarkey.  Certainly not a great example or fairness and level playing field - but who are we kidding in thinking it was about that anyway?!

But my point was it's just one club. All the others are sorted. The only way it would cause a serious problem with the PRL is if several clubs get replaced. And that is highly unlikely that will happen due to the points you raise.

The LNR have another option that they may well hold to. They cannot start a new franglo cup but they can expand the top 14 instead. It's a definite no risk money spinner, probably a better bet than the franglo cup, and it'd mean that they wouldn't have to compromise on a new h cup deal.

On the other hand can the PRL thrive without any cross border competition? It the worst happens and there's no kind of new h cup or franglo cup then the english clubs will have the most to lose. The pro 12 sides would be supported by their union, which would have to put on an extra international, but would the RFU be able to pump money into all those clubs?

HammerofThunor wrote:Except no minor changes did happen. It took them handing n their notice for this to happen. Then a year of nothing and when they finally say we're done the ERC organise a mediator. Why not do that right at the beginning? Why not after 6 months getting nowhere. The only time the ERC seem to do anŷthing is when they're given ultimatums. Maybe they took the same view many on here seemed to. "Sod 'um. Let them go. They'll be back or they're bluffing. The French aren't that fussed and only want the final pushing earlier (this one I really didn't get as they started the whole and had the biggest gripe)"

All the talk on this side is that the PRL never engaged in negotiations properly- once the BT deal was on the table it was about sabotaging the Heineken Cup and making a power-play to create this new tournament... Several years of refusing to compromise on their demands followed by blaming the Unions for talks breaking down all the while creaming themselves at the thought of all that BT cash if they could just bury the ERC....

I suppose, as per usual, history will be written by the victors.

TJ wrote:Errmmm - I think you will find that is not so. the French union are much more powerful than the RFU as they are on a statutory basis.  

no-one can compel an organisation to enter into a commercially binding arrangement, not even the french President and he has a lot more "statutory" powers than the FFR for fecks sake. you realise statutory just means legal?

Intotouch wrote:The LNR have another option that they may well hold to. They cannot start a new franglo cup but they can expand the top 14 instead. It's a definite no risk money spinner, probably a better bet than the franglo cup, and it'd mean that they wouldn't have to compromise on a new h cup deal.

On the other hand can the PRL thrive without any cross border competition? It the worst happens and there's no kind of new h cup or franglo cup then the english clubs will have the most to lose. The pro 12 sides would be supported by their union, which would have to put on an extra international, but would the RFU be able to pump money into all those clubs?

i agree this is definitely a possibility. the fact that LNR could very profitably put on more domestic games makes it all the more clear thier INCENTIVES do no lie with the HC, no matter what some loudmouth at FFR says.

The LNR would still need FFR approval to expand their league. If the FFR are intent on shafting them they still can. All this is about the fraction between LNR and FFR. How it ends will shape future European rugby, and future RFU and PRL relationships.

Yes - the law in france is such that the federation has to agree anything in that sport. They cannot force them to join the HC - but they can sanction them if they do not and that would be legally binding. If the FFR says - no you cannot play then by law they cannot.

Just my little 2 pence worth here - This is a really fractious argument but it comes over this way to me.

The Celts and Italians have their own cross-border comp for their pro teams. Each country (bar Italy - although Italian rugby?) is individually clearly less wealthy than France/England and has far fewer teams. It is in their interests to co-operate to provide a structure that will sustain pro and international rugby in their countries. Each country individually receives considerably less than France or England (yes we are comparing countries here not leagues) do from the Heineken. The English and French who are spending far in excess of the other countries and who benefit from buying their players to play in their domestic leagues think they ought to have more money to sustain this. They make a straw man argument about merit and qualification (the pro12 is NOT a domestic league - the comparisons are nonsensical) and then threaten to offski if they dont get their way.

Hmmm ... really hard to have sympathy with the English/French clubs position here sorry. It's what's normally described as petulant. They already have considerably greater revenues than the Welsh/Scots/Irish regions and they want more. Thankfully the unions are standing their ground and all sides will have to negotiate if there is to be any European Competition full stop.

Totallybiasedscarlet wrote:Just my little 2 pence worth here - This is a really fractious argument but it comes over this way to me.

The Celts and Italians have their own cross-border comp for their pro teams. Each country (bar Italy - although Italian rugby?) is individually clearly less wealthy than France/England and has far fewer teams. It is in their interests to co-operate to provide a structure that will sustain pro and international rugby in their countries. Each country individually receives considerably less than France or England (yes we are comparing countries here not leagues) do from the Heineken. The English and French who are spending far in excess of the other countries and who benefit from buying their players to play in their domestic leagues think they ought to have more money to sustain this. They make a straw man argument about merit and qualification (the pro12 is NOT a domestic league - the comparisons are nonsensical) and then threaten to offski if they dont get their way.

Hmmm ... really hard to have sympathy with the English/French clubs position here sorry. It's what's normally described as petulant. They already have considerably greater revenues than the Welsh/Scots/Irish regions and they want more. Thankfully the unions are standing their ground and all sides will have to negotiate if there is to be any European Competition full stop.

who wants to watch the (european-sort of) Rabo Cup next year in addition to the Rabo12? because PRL and LNR arent playing in what used to be the HC. oh, yes and doesnt Rabo's sponsorship run out too? interesting to see what the renewal value of that would be in such uncertain times.

people, wake up! amateurish ideas of rugby fairness are completely irrelevant. we are in a professional era. the sooner certain unions recognise that the sooner we can get a European competition going again. times are a-changing, and the ERC and Unions are dinosaurs. Adapt or die.

All this could have been resolved within the ERC but Celtalia, with a weak hand, called the bluff of LNR (first) then PRL, and turns out they werent bluffing. whats done is done. time to move forwards.

TJ wrote:Yes - the law in france is such that the federation has to agree anything in that sport.  They cannot force them to join the HC - but they can sanction them if they do not and that would be legally binding.  If the FFR says - no you cannot play then by law they cannot.

They have to agree player transfers? subsititutes? on-field refreshment? A legally binding sanction? there is no such thing. a sanction is a sanction, which can only be for a breach of a regulation. a legally binding contract is whats expiring between LNR PRL and the HR next summer. please dont quote legalese to me it's irritating for me and embarrassing for you.

I really do want some of what you are smoking - the PRLs bluff has been called and found to be empty. are you called Alice? you appear to live in a wonderland where everything you wish for is true

Only irritting for you as I poke holes in your odd little fantasy world. I have had enough of trying to debate with you tho - such a strange world you live in

itsallabouttheincentives wrote:

Totallybiasedscarlet wrote:Just my little 2 pence worth here - This is a really fractious argument but it comes over this way to me.

The Celts and Italians have their own cross-border comp for their pro teams. Each country (bar Italy - although Italian rugby?) is individually clearly less wealthy than France/England and has far fewer teams. It is in their interests to co-operate to provide a structure that will sustain pro and international rugby in their countries. Each country individually receives considerably less than France or England (yes we are comparing countries here not leagues) do from the Heineken. The English and French who are spending far in excess of the other countries and who benefit from buying their players to play in their domestic leagues think they ought to have more money to sustain this. They make a straw man argument about merit and qualification (the pro12 is NOT a domestic league - the comparisons are nonsensical) and then threaten to offski if they dont get their way.

Hmmm ... really hard to have sympathy with the English/French clubs position here sorry. It's what's normally described as petulant. They already have considerably greater revenues than the Welsh/Scots/Irish regions and they want more. Thankfully the unions are standing their ground and all sides will have to negotiate if there is to be any European Competition full stop.

who wants to watch the (european-sort of) Rabo Cup next year in addition to the Rabo12? because PRL and LNR arent playing in what used to be the HC. oh, yes and doesnt Rabo's sponsorship run out too? interesting to see what the renewal value of that would be in such uncertain times.

people, wake up! amateurish ideas of rugby fairness are completely irrelevant. we are in a professional era. the sooner certain unions recognise that the sooner we can get a European competition going again. times are a-changing, and the ERC and Unions are dinosaurs. Adapt or die.

All this could have been resolved within the ERC but Celtalia, with a weak hand, called the bluff of LNR (first) then PRL, and turns out they werent bluffing. whats done is done. time to move forwards.

I think you'll find it's a pretty solid hand with the FFR opposing their clubs stance.

... and fairness is not outdated.

This club vs union thing is as old as the hills. We had it in Wales 15 years ago. We've got regions vs union now ... same horse different jockey.

... and nobody is interested in "moving forwards" into a situation where the English/French clubs get richer and the rest struggle even more - that's why fairness is still alive and kicking and playing its usual role in a pretty understandable sense of indignation here!

TJ wrote:Only irritting for you as I poke holes in your odd little fantasy world.  I have had enough of trying to debate with you tho - such a strange world you live in

i live and work in the worlds of law, finance and high-level corporate negotiation. where we incorporate data to formulate strategies for identifying the most advantageous negotiating positions and tactics. i'm sorry if that sounds pompous but then i'm just an arrogant englishman who couldnt possibly be any other way.

good luck with the Yes vote

Nice to see a PRL social media officer on here.

Whoopdedoo for you -why don't yo have a basic grip on reality then?

Totallybiasedscarlet wrote:

itsallabouttheincentives wrote:

Totallybiasedscarlet wrote:Just my little 2 pence worth here - This is a really fractious argument but it comes over this way to me.

The Celts and Italians have their own cross-border comp for their pro teams. Each country (bar Italy - although Italian rugby?) is individually clearly less wealthy than France/England and has far fewer teams. It is in their interests to co-operate to provide a structure that will sustain pro and international rugby in their countries. Each country individually receives considerably less than France or England (yes we are comparing countries here not leagues) do from the Heineken. The English and French who are spending far in excess of the other countries and who benefit from buying their players to play in their domestic leagues think they ought to have more money to sustain this. They make a straw man argument about merit and qualification (the pro12 is NOT a domestic league - the comparisons are nonsensical) and then threaten to offski if they dont get their way.

Hmmm ... really hard to have sympathy with the English/French clubs position here sorry. It's what's normally described as petulant. They already have considerably greater revenues than the Welsh/Scots/Irish regions and they want more. Thankfully the unions are standing their ground and all sides will have to negotiate if there is to be any European Competition full stop.

who wants to watch the (european-sort of) Rabo Cup next year in addition to the Rabo12? because PRL and LNR arent playing in what used to be the HC. oh, yes and doesnt Rabo's sponsorship run out too? interesting to see what the renewal value of that would be in such uncertain times.

people, wake up! amateurish ideas of rugby fairness are completely irrelevant. we are in a professional era. the sooner certain unions recognise that the sooner we can get a European competition going again. times are a-changing, and the ERC and Unions are dinosaurs. Adapt or die.

All this could have been resolved within the ERC but Celtalia, with a weak hand, called the bluff of LNR (first) then PRL, and turns out they werent bluffing. whats done is done. time to move forwards.

I think you'll find it's a pretty solid hand with the FFR opposing their clubs stance.

... and fairness is not outdated.

This club vs union thing is as old as the hills. We had it in Wales 15 years ago. We've got regions vs union now ... same horse different jockey.

... and nobody is interested in "moving forwards" into a situation where the English/French clubs get richer and the rest struggle even more - that's why fairness is still alive and kicking and playing its usual role in a pretty understandable sense of indignation here!

nice to get a civil and cogent response. i totally hear you and am sad the HC is ending. But this should have been obvious to everyone given the incentives and the imbalance of power (viz money) versus control of HC (unions). just because the club vs union thing is as old as the hills doesnt mean it isnt going to evolve. 15 yrs ago wales was just getting to grips with the professional setup. hard to compare PRL and LNR with that.

i honestly dont understand, when PRL/LNR are paying top money to players of ALL NATIONALITIES why that is relevant to the welsh, irish, etc etc. Do you honestly believe that by your top players choosing to play in the strongest leagues (lets say LNR) the national team is going to suffer? or are you saying the each nation's clubs have a right to be subsidised by the richest nations clubs, when both are hiring foreign players? i just dont get it.

I refer you to my earlier post.

justified sinner wrote:Nice to see a PRL social media officer on here.

Hey now. That's out of line. I'm all for calling people blind, opinionated, stupid, greedy, vindictive and evil. But that's below the belt.

 

HammerofThunor wrote:

justified sinner wrote:Nice to see a PRL social media officer on here.

Hey now. That's out of line. I'm all for calling people blind, opinionated, stupid, greedy, vindictive and evil. But that's below the belt.

itsallabouttheincentives wrote:

Totallybiasedscarlet wrote:

itsallabouttheincentives wrote:

Totallybiasedscarlet wrote:Just my little 2 pence worth here - This is a really fractious argument but it comes over this way to me.

The Celts and Italians have their own cross-border comp for their pro teams. Each country (bar Italy - although Italian rugby?) is individually clearly less wealthy than France/England and has far fewer teams. It is in their interests to co-operate to provide a structure that will sustain pro and international rugby in their countries. Each country individually receives considerably less than France or England (yes we are comparing countries here not leagues) do from the Heineken. The English and French who are spending far in excess of the other countries and who benefit from buying their players to play in their domestic leagues think they ought to have more money to sustain this. They make a straw man argument about merit and qualification (the pro12 is NOT a domestic league - the comparisons are nonsensical) and then threaten to offski if they dont get their way.

Hmmm ... really hard to have sympathy with the English/French clubs position here sorry. It's what's normally described as petulant. They already have considerably greater revenues than the Welsh/Scots/Irish regions and they want more. Thankfully the unions are standing their ground and all sides will have to negotiate if there is to be any European Competition full stop.

who wants to watch the (european-sort of) Rabo Cup next year in addition to the Rabo12? because PRL and LNR arent playing in what used to be the HC. oh, yes and doesnt Rabo's sponsorship run out too? interesting to see what the renewal value of that would be in such uncertain times.

people, wake up! amateurish ideas of rugby fairness are completely irrelevant. we are in a professional era. the sooner certain unions recognise that the sooner we can get a European competition going again. times are a-changing, and the ERC and Unions are dinosaurs. Adapt or die.

All this could have been resolved within the ERC but Celtalia, with a weak hand, called the bluff of LNR (first) then PRL, and turns out they werent bluffing. whats done is done. time to move forwards.

I think you'll find it's a pretty solid hand with the FFR opposing their clubs stance.

... and fairness is not outdated.

This club vs union thing is as old as the hills. We had it in Wales 15 years ago. We've got regions vs union now ... same horse different jockey.

... and nobody is interested in "moving forwards" into a situation where the English/French clubs get richer and the rest struggle even more - that's why fairness is still alive and kicking and playing its usual role in a pretty understandable sense of indignation here!

nice to get a civil and cogent response. i totally hear you and am sad the HC is ending. But this should have been obvious to everyone given the incentives and the imbalance of power (viz money) versus control of HC (unions). just because the club vs union thing is as old as the hills doesnt mean it isnt going to evolve. 15 yrs ago wales was just getting to grips with the professional setup. hard to compare PRL and LNR with that.

i honestly dont understand, when PRL/LNR are paying top money to players of ALL NATIONALITIES why that is relevant to the welsh, irish, etc etc. Do you honestly believe that by your top players choosing to play in the strongest leagues (lets say LNR) the national team is going to suffer? or are you saying the each nation's clubs have a right to be subsidised by the richest nations clubs, when both are hiring foreign players? i just dont get it.

Because it draws quality players from our sides to go for the money which in turn weakens our competitions and exposes our internationals to a physical treadmill and takes them out of our unions conditioning programmes. That's why it's relevant and that's why our players will suffer. We don't want our players going to the AP or T14 in general. We would like to retain our talent and ensure our competitions are competitive. We wont do that if we give in to English/French clubs who want a bigger slice of the pie.

Sorry, but someone who has been a member for 2 days and has 60+ posts on one subject quoting PRL stance doesn't smell right to me. Anyway that's my thoughts. Will now just ignore.

"It would be a catastrophe if we were to kill the golden goose - personal interest may have to be sacrificed for the greater good," said Schmidt - new Ireland coach.

people at the top of the game see the need for change. i dont think he's talking about PRL/LNR there either. Given he's employed by IRFU he has to speak diplomatically...

justified sinner wrote:Sorry, but someone who has been a member for 2 days and has 60+ posts on one subject quoting PRL stance doesn't smell right to me. Anyway that's my thoughts. Will now just ignore.

the reason i cant stop myself from posting is the amount of unadulterated twaddle being spouted up here by TJ. i wish i could just take a deep breath and walk on but i cant. this discussion should be all about commercial reality as thats where we are now. cries of unfair or anything else are a waste of time and space. pretending its all going to be okay is also silly. thats what ERC and the Unions did and look how that worked out. a long hard look at what sacrifices are required is the only answer. and there is absolutely no willingness to do that, even now from many posters on here.

Shame your view on reality is so odd and your grasp of facts so tenuous.

the commercial relity is the PRL are a busted flush. They have no cross border comp to sell, they are isolated and have two choices - accept a compromise similar to that proposed or go off on there own. their plans are in tatters and they are scrabbling around in desperation. that is the reality

itsallabouttheincentives wrote:

justified sinner wrote:Sorry, but someone who has been a member for 2 days and has 60+ posts on one subject quoting PRL stance doesn't smell right to me. Anyway that's my thoughts. Will now just ignore.

the reason i cant stop myself from posting is the amount of unadulterated twaddle being spouted up here by TJ. i wish i could just take a deep breath and walk on but i cant. this discussion should be all about commercial reality as thats where we are now. cries of unfair or anything else are a waste of time and space. pretending its all going to be okay is also silly. thats what ERC and the Unions did and look how that worked out. a long hard look at what sacrifices are required is the only answer. and there is absolutely no willingness to do that, even now from many posters on here.

No, this isn't right. We have an outstanding european competition with good revenue and a large number of fans. You even quoted a similar comment. Nothing is perfect and there is always room for improvement. This isn't about commercial reality - it's good old fashioned greed. We've been here before with the 6N TV rights fiasco. We saw that one off too. Now is the time to deal with the structural criticisms and head off this unsightly dash for cash and ensure that all the nations remain stakeholders in european rugby and not held to ransom by puffed up club owners in England and France.

justified sinner wrote:Nice to see a PRL social media officer on here.

I suspect you are right.