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.

IMHO it will depend on whether the LNR want to push it. As the PRL stated about RFU opposing the Franglo comp They had better have a very good legal reason for its opposition. I can see a restraint of trade court case if not, & we all know that The European Courts like to throw their wait about.

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.

regarding your ill-considered petty insult, i just noticed, my friend TJ has been a member only 1 day and posted almost 100 times on the topic. by extension does that means he works for some SRU/ERC conspiracy? Obviously not. He and i have earned the right to grapple as we have exchanged so many posts. you on the other hand are joining in late to throw insults. classy.

Its not restraint of trade.

TJ wrote:

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

I suspect you are right.  

Get quite used to it being in Scotland, the Cyber Nats, acknowledged by SNP flood every political forum.

I am a returning member - new account old name. Returning after a ban and a sabbaticial.

justified sinner wrote:

TJ wrote:

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

I suspect you are right.  

Get quite used to it being in Scotland, the Cyber Nats, acknowledged by SNP flood every political forum.

that would be unusual, because the last survey i saw said 65% of english people want the scots to have independence and 30% of scots want independence? i see we are back to the usual exchanging of data for insults. in line with expectations i suppose.

Confirmed TJ was around years ago, but occasionally lost the plot a bit.

A bit? I lost it spectacularly before my demise :-)

Ah night of the meltdown. I managed to survive, but we lost quite a few that night, good to see you back.

Thanks. I am a little embarrassed about my part in it. the lesson for me is even if you are right the mods are always more right. I forgot.

Totallybiasedscarlet wrote:

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.

i agree its a good tournament, but PRL/LNR arent happy with it so what now? commercial reality means precisely everyone trying to get whats best for themselves. just because the clubs goals are financial doesnt make them any more or less valid in a negotiation than unions whose agenda are primarily national (and perhaps somewhat club) success. they're just different. and if you're in the weak negotiating position be very careful about not being willing to make sacrifices. PRL/LNR clearly think their negotiating position is far stronger, financially and legally or they wouldnt have done this. i think they are serious. to believe otherwise would be very risky.

itsallabouttheincentives, for heavens sake, Schmidts views can be easily found on google. The articles tend to go by titles like "Schmidt: We must save the Heineken Cup" and Schmidt keen to see Heineken Cup saved.

If you have an argument in favour of the PRL position of destroying the HC then back it up, don't twist and spin the truth to fit your position. Although that does sum up the PRL media statements so far, I guess.

TJ, I wouldn't be so confident that the PRL plans are a busted flush. The BT deal has changed the balance of power. The clubs have the money to push others around now. I hate what they're doing. But they may succeed. Let's hope not. I'm encouraged by the FFR statements.

Feckless - the reason I think they are a busted flush is they have nothing to sell to BT. No cross border comp not even a franglo cup. I see desperation in their statements as they realise they have bluffed and lost. the FFR statement changes the game. the only cross border european competition next year will be run by the unions and be similar to the existing HC - with perhaps some compromise acceptable to the Rabo unions. the PRL will have a join in or play by yourself choice as will the french but I think we will see the french onside shortly.

+1

I hope so TJ. And everyone can declare victory.

But the English have sold the Premiership to BT. Although I'm not sure, I heard the French have a big increase in TV money on the horizon. And money talks.

itsallabouttheincentives wrote:

Totallybiasedscarlet wrote:

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.

i agree its a good tournament, but PRL/LNR arent happy with it so what now? commercial reality means precisely everyone trying to get whats best for themselves. just because the clubs goals are financial doesnt make them any more or less valid in a negotiation than unions whose agenda are primarily national (and perhaps somewhat club) success. they're just different. and if you're in the weak negotiating position be very careful about not being willing to make sacrifices. PRL/LNR clearly think their negotiating position is far stronger, financially and legally or they wouldnt have done this. i think they are serious. to believe otherwise would be very risky.

No doubt the clubs are serious and think their position is strong, but you assume the unions position is weak. I think you're wrong. I like the emphasis you carefully choose in your language: "just because the clubs goals are financial doesnt make them any more or less valid..." However this is like saying "Bankers were only trying to make more money" after stuffing the taxpayer for billions. The clubs goals are greedy and self-serving. They will damage the European game. The Unions are right to challenge them and retain their stake in the competition.

Feckless Rogue wrote:itsallabouttheincentives, for heavens sake, Schmidts views can be easily found on google. The articles tend to go by titles like "Schmidt: We must save the Heineken Cup" and Schmidt keen to see Heineken Cup saved.

If you have an argument in favour of the PRL position of destroying the HC then back it up, don't twist and spin the truth to fit your position. Although that does sum up the PRL media statements so far, I guess.

TJ, I wouldn't be so confident that the PRL plans are a busted flush. The BT deal has changed the balance of power. The clubs have the money to push others around now. I hate what they're doing. But they may succeed. Let's hope not. I'm encouraged by the FFR statements.

i'm not arguing in favour of PRL doing anything with this quote. it came from a video interview he did. if you watch his video interview it pretty clear that he thinks sacrifices need to be made by the Celtic League, and his clear use of the term golden goose is in relation to irish rugby and the HC, not anyone else. he is trying to encourage sensible people in the celtic game to make sacrifices to keep the heineken cup alive. he is definitely not saying call the PRL/LNR bluff they dont mean it. it's just that almost all the celtic posters on here have no interest in compromise, but some of the people at the top of your game recognise its necessity.

itsallabouttheincentives wrote:

Feckless Rogue wrote:itsallabouttheincentives, for heavens sake, Schmidts views can be easily found on google. The articles tend to go by titles like "Schmidt: We must save the Heineken Cup" and Schmidt keen to see Heineken Cup saved.

If you have an argument in favour of the PRL position of destroying the HC then back it up, don't twist and spin the truth to fit your position. Although that does sum up the PRL media statements so far, I guess.

TJ, I wouldn't be so confident that the PRL plans are a busted flush. The BT deal has changed the balance of power. The clubs have the money to push others around now. I hate what they're doing. But they may succeed. Let's hope not. I'm encouraged by the FFR statements.

i'm not arguing in favour of PRL doing anything with this quote. it came from a video interview he did. if you watch his video interview it pretty clear that he thinks sacrifices need to be made by the Celtic League, and his clear use of the term golden goose is in relation to irish rugby and the HC, not anyone else. he is trying to encourage sensible people in the celtic game to make sacrifices to keep the heineken cup alive. he is definitely not saying call the PRL/LNR bluff they dont mean it. it's just that almost all the celtic posters on here have no interest in compromise, but some of the people at the top of your game recognise its necessity.

Again this is nonsense. We see the validity of the regions competing for HEC places. We just don't see why the English/French should get even more money than they get now ... and they get their fair share.

If the FFR do somehow stop the new euro competition, I like the idea of the french going back to a T16 and the english to FA Cup style competition ( which the RFU would love). Neither the PRL or LNR actually need the euro cash with their new or imminent tv deals.

The R12 has been successful in producing elite test players but has failed to generate the required interest and subsequent financial backing. The Unions in their dash for cash with top down centralised structures with the advent of the professional game was always a huge strategic risk - R12 fans would say there was no alternative. The risks have currently manifested themselves on the need for relying on alternate sources of income beyond their control.

The businessmen who own french and english clubs are easily a match for unknown rugby administrators as several are worth more than the Unions. This was never a fair fight because businessmen dont deal in fair, they deal in success on their terms. The Unions have been simply naive.

None of this will be the "death of test rugby" but the commercial structure of the professional game will continue to evolve.

Totallybiasedscarlet wrote:

itsallabouttheincentives wrote:

Totallybiasedscarlet wrote:

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.

i agree its a good tournament, but PRL/LNR arent happy with it so what now? commercial reality means precisely everyone trying to get whats best for themselves. just because the clubs goals are financial doesnt make them any more or less valid in a negotiation than unions whose agenda are primarily national (and perhaps somewhat club) success. they're just different. and if you're in the weak negotiating position be very careful about not being willing to make sacrifices. PRL/LNR clearly think their negotiating position is far stronger, financially and legally or they wouldnt have done this. i think they are serious. to believe otherwise would be very risky.

No doubt the clubs are serious and think their position is strong, but you assume the unions position is weak. I think you're wrong. I like the emphasis you carefully choose in your language: "just because the clubs goals are financial doesnt make them any more or less valid..." However this is like saying "Bankers were only trying to make more money" after stuffing the taxpayer for billions. The clubs goals are greedy and self-serving. They will damage the European game. The Unions are right to challenge them and retain their stake in the competition.

seriously that is poor. "Bankers were only trying to make more money" after stuffing the taxpayer for billions"? are you kidding? the unions are taxpayers? that is quite possibly the worst metaphor i have ever heard. you want a banking analogy - it's like co-operative banks (unions) negotiating something with shareholder banks (clubs). Unions' agenda is their national game, clubs (for-profit companies) is p&l. you can't put the professional genie back in the bottle. bit late for that. Celtic league has benefited wonderfully from the HC, largely on the back of the financial asymmetry engineered by shrinking welsh and scottish team such that no-one need qualify. ok fair enough. and now the PRL/LNR want to renegotiate.

edit - refer to itsallabuuts post above
Completely untrue. the Rabo teams are quite prepared to compromise and have offered such. its the PRL that have refused to negotiate at all.  They want 6/6/6 and clubs to be in control and will not countenance anything else.  No way can the Rabo unions agree to this.  Realistic negotiation requires movement from all sides - not just from one and the PRL have refused to budge at all from a position a that everyone knows is simply untenable for the Rabo unions.  Its not negotiating to say - we want everything and if we don't get it we are going to walk away.  ~Stop making stuff up mr PRL PR man.

Just read this on another forum
According to a very reliable source on the Stade Francais forum the Lnr has not yet signed an agreement with the Ffr about player release this season. As a gesture of goodwill the clubs have released players for an EDF training session this week. Without the agreement the FFR have no powers to call up the internationals. The Irb maybe have but as French Employment law says the employer I.e. the clubs is responsible for their employees it could be interesting if they send out an amateur side against the All Blacks

TJ wrote:edit - refer to itsallabuuts post above
Completely untrue. the Rabo teams are quite prepared to compromise and have offered such. its the PRL that have refused to negotiate at all.  They want 6/6/6 and clubs to be in control and will not countenance anything else.  No way can the Rabo unions agree to this.  Realistic negotiation requires movement from all sides - not just from one and the PRL have refused to budge at all from a position a that everyone knows is simply untenable for the Rabo unions.  Its not negotiating to say - we want everything and if we don't get it we are going to walk away.  ~Stop making stuff up mr PRL PR man.

conor o'shea also wants 6/6/6 and he probably know a bit more about rugby than most. but then you probably didnt go and check that video out did you.

itsallabouttheincentives wrote: and now the PRL/LNR want to renegotiate.

do they? that would be a first but it seems they are refusing to do so. No serious negotiation from them so far. Just a series of demands that no one can acquiesce to and that they are not going to get.

Did he really? Or is that more of your weird lack of understanding like the french saying they will veto meaning nothing?

itsallabouttheincentives wrote:"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...

Um, what?  

He's probably suggesting compromises need to made for the greater benefit of everybody which would tally with the IRFUs ongoing desire to broker a compromise deal within the ERC. Of course he's no doubt speaking personally as opposed to as an IRFU employee, but to read a quote saying 'we need to compromise so European rugby can continue' and inferring that as a statement of support for the side that refuse to rejoin negotiations or compromise must take some pretty alarming mental gymnastics!

Personal interest will need to be sacrificed. By all sides. The IRFU are at the table ready to talk about qualification and reducing the size of the Tier 1 tournament to strengthen the second tier. Are the PRL ready to give up their swivel-eyed demands about unions and super-secret TV deal and get back into working within the only organisation that can deliver a truly European Cup?

itsallabouttheincentives wrote:

Totallybiasedscarlet wrote:

itsallabouttheincentives wrote:

Totallybiasedscarlet wrote:

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.

i agree its a good tournament, but PRL/LNR arent happy with it so what now? commercial reality means precisely everyone trying to get whats best for themselves. just because the clubs goals are financial doesnt make them any more or less valid in a negotiation than unions whose agenda are primarily national (and perhaps somewhat club) success. they're just different. and if you're in the weak negotiating position be very careful about not being willing to make sacrifices. PRL/LNR clearly think their negotiating position is far stronger, financially and legally or they wouldnt have done this. i think they are serious. to believe otherwise would be very risky.

No doubt the clubs are serious and think their position is strong, but you assume the unions position is weak. I think you're wrong. I like the emphasis you carefully choose in your language: "just because the clubs goals are financial doesnt make them any more or less valid..." However this is like saying "Bankers were only trying to make more money" after stuffing the taxpayer for billions. The clubs goals are greedy and self-serving. They will damage the European game. The Unions are right to challenge them and retain their stake in the competition.

seriously that is poor. "Bankers were only trying to make more money" after stuffing the taxpayer for billions"? are you kidding? the unions are taxpayers? that is quite possibly the worst metaphor i have ever heard. you want a banking analogy - it's like co-operative banks (unions) negotiating something with shareholder banks (clubs). Unions' agenda is their national game, clubs (for-profit companies) is p&l. you can't put the professional genie back in the bottle. bit late for that. Celtic league has benefited wonderfully from the HC, largely on the back of the financial asymmetry engineered by shrinking welsh and scottish team such that no-one need qualify. ok fair enough. and now the PRL/LNR want to renegotiate.

No, you are poor. You are still talking out of your hat. There is no financial asymmetry. This is a myth perpetuated by liars. The analogy stands despite your pathetic effort. The English clubs are acting on greed and self interest. You are probably employed by them. Take a look at the distribution of HEC funds and you see that England gets double what Wales gets. This broadly represents the number of sides.

So the English Clubs end up as Billy no-mates. Good enough for them I say. Leave them to it if that's what they want. Don't give in to bullies.

TJ wrote:Did he really?  Or is that more of your weird lack of understanding like the french saying they will veto meaning nothing?

lets make a bet. £1,000 witnessed by all on this fora, that the FFR do not veto LNR joining an international club competition that is not the Heineken Cup. Talk is cheap. Put your money where your mouth is.

conor O shea - director of rugby at harlequins   - what has he got to do with the stance of the rabo unions? i really fail to see what his positionas someone who would benefit from the 6/6/6 split has as relevance to the Rabo position.

itsallabouttheincentives wrote:

TJ wrote:Did he really?  Or is that more of your weird lack of understanding like the french saying they will veto meaning nothing?

lets make a bet. £1,000 witnessed by all on this fora, that the FFR do not veto LNR joining an international club competition that is not the Heineken Cup. Talk is cheap. Put your money where your mouth is.

getting desperate mr PRL PR man? You are looking increasingly ridiculous.

itsallabouttheincentives wrote:

TJ wrote:Did he really?  Or is that more of your weird lack of understanding like the french saying they will veto meaning nothing?

lets make a bet. £1,000 witnessed by all on this fora, that the FFR do not veto LNR joining an international club competition that is not the Heineken Cup. Talk is cheap. Put your money where your mouth is.

 

all this from the web warrior keyboard king!

Well it's been fun folks. Good night all!  

the irish position from their union

A leading Irish Rugby Football Union figure is adamant that none of their provinces will join the new European tournament proposed by their English and French rivals.

Premiership Rugby, the umbrella body for the leading English clubs, and their French counterparts, the Ligue National de Rugby, plan to launch the Rugby Champions Cup in 2015-16 having failed to negotiate a re-vamp of the Heineken Cup. They have also refused to deal with the union-dominated European Rugby Cup Ltd, the organisers of both the Heineken Cup and the Amlin Challenge Cup, and insist the clubs will take on the responsibility of running the new competition.

The Rugby Champions Cup will be open to teams from the rival PRO12 league but Peter Boyle, an IRFU representative on the ERC management board, has pledged his loyalty to the current set-up and ruled out the union-funded Connacht, Leinster, Munster or Ulster throwing their support behind the new competition.

"The RFU and French Rugby Federation have already confirmed that there will be no new company other than ERC to run European competitions," Boyle told the Independent on Sunday. "It is unequivocal that the negotiation of TV and other rights is central and it's done by ERC. The IRFU are bound into ERC and that restricts completely the movement of Leinster, Munster, Ulster and Connacht."

Boyle has also rejected claims that the PRO12 have refused to give any ground in negotiations with the English and French sides, insisting that the IRFU were prepared to give ground on the subject of meritocratic qualification and reducing the Heineken Cup from 24 teams to 20.

itsallabouttheincentives wrote:

TJ wrote:Did he really?  Or is that more of your weird lack of understanding like the french saying they will veto meaning nothing?

lets make a bet. £1,000 witnessed by all on this fora, that the FFR do not veto LNR joining an international club competition that is not the Heineken Cup. Talk is cheap. Put your money where your mouth is.

What an ass. Betting a significant amount of money on a trivial matter to look big on the internet.

He is looking as desperate and ridiculous and the PRL I believe employs him

Notch wrote:

itsallabouttheincentives wrote:"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...

Um, what?  

He's probably suggesting compromises need to made for the greater benefit of everybody which would tally with the IRFUs ongoing desire to broker a compromise deal within the ERC. Of course he's no doubt speaking personally as opposed to as an IRFU employee, but to read a quote saying 'we need to compromise so European rugby can continue' and inferring that as a statement of support for the side that refuse to rejoin negotiations or compromise must take some pretty alarming mental gymnastics!

Personal interest will need to be sacrificed. By all sides. The IRFU are at the table ready to talk about qualification and reducing the size of the Tier 1 tournament to strengthen the second tier. Are the PRL ready to give up their swivel-eyed demands about unions and super-secret TV deal and get back into working within the only organisation that can deliver a truly European Cup?

The organisation that could deliver the nearest thing to a true European Cup is FIRA-AER - ERC has delivered, and would probably continue to deliver, an obscene, money-bloated 6N protectionist competition. However, there ain't enough money floating around to deliver a true European Cup. From what I've seen, the PRL/LNR proposal for a tier 3 competition makes some inroads. ERC's poor record in broadening European club competition does not inspire confidence.

How happy will a customer focused organisation like BT be, knowing that their money is being used to kill the golden goose of European rugby?

I would not be surprised to see BT walk away. they have not got and are not going to get what they thought they were - a european cup.

Notch wrote:

itsallabouttheincentives wrote:

TJ wrote:Did he really?  Or is that more of your weird lack of understanding like the french saying they will veto meaning nothing?

lets make a bet. £1,000 witnessed by all on this fora, that the FFR do not veto LNR joining an international club competition that is not the Heineken Cup. Talk is cheap. Put your money where your mouth is.

What an ass. Betting a significant amount of money on a trivial matter to look big on the internet.

its a trivial amount of money to me on an issue which appears to generating a significant amount of bluff, bluster and outrage from TJ. as he has declined to entertain my offer i will assume he doesnt actually have the strength of conviction of his posts on matters he has no knowledge or control over. not that i anticipate that will prevent further inane repetitve utterances along the same lines.

Bye bye mr PRL PR man - you have made yourself look very foolish. You would be better off not wasting any more of your employers time here. Its not just me - many others including england fans can see how deluded you are. I still want to know tho what the harlequins employees views on the make-up of a European cup are ment to mean in the context of the rabo unions position. a particularly semi detached viewpoint of yours. More ridiculous than the rest.

HammerofThunor wrote:

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 context, however, is the moral compass (as much as those mythical artefacts exist in business) of PRL, and they are found wanting. I used to think that PRL were the root of all evil, sucking all the money out of English rugby - I've since eased my stance. PRL are now the root of most evil, not all. My opinion of RFU and their fellow federations has not altered - they are the root of all incompetence. There is a separate discussion to be had on the morals of PRL - Championship fora will give endless opinion, mostly damning, and Premiership fora will show little opinion, perhaps displaying a careless self-satisfaction? MSC, parachute payments, D/R & loans,and inequitable financial distribution for promoted teams are subjects of weary resistance from tier 2.

How this affects euro discussions is probably subjective, but should be considered. For me, I'm all in favour of PRL/LNR if it gets Stuart Barnes off my screen. Unfortunately, Sky have the RFU contract for the Championship, so I'm knackered whichever way.