What really need to save rugby in Europe!

Lets be honest, we've been arguing for a long time about rugby in Europe. But the biggest problem I think that we're facing is the french teams getting super rich and bringing all the top european players over to them while the celtic Italian and english clubs cannot compete finacially with them. I think for us all to be able to stand a chance of competing with them we really need a money source that they dont have. In any new H-Cup the French will receive the same funds as anyone else meaning our teams in the British and Irish isles do not close the money gap.

The only way we can close the money gap with the french is to create a British and Irish cup (not the current one put one for the 24 top teams).

Maybe the English with the BT deal will close the money gap themselves?

Really I'm just saying in a round about way is how do we close the money gap between our leagues and the top14?

There's no point saying they'll bankrupt themselves as ive heard that about the football Prem for over a decade and its srill strong.

Will Sky deal help the Pro 12 teams?

Will our finances grow like the French teams have, and were all just a few years behind and rugby really explofing ib terms of popularity and sponsorship?

A European salary cap would be a way to ensure rugby surviving across every country in Europe and pro teams in developing rugby nations catching up. The current salary cap in France is €9.6 million which is just too high. I have to think that most pro teams in France would like it to be lower than this. It must be possible to find some way of agreeing a realistic universal limit.

The easist way for a union to retain its best players is to simply tell them they won't be selected for the national side if they're playing abroad.

The problem with a universal salary cap that most teams would be capable of is that different costs of living, taxation structures and union contributions would just move comparative advantage from one group to another.

The obvious answer to the only really sustainable way for clubs to close the money gap is for them to remain focused on increasing their fanbase and marketability through the brand of rugby they play, how they interact with their community and the business acumen of their management.

The problem with a country saying they won't pick players if they play abroad is that those players then become even more attractive for French teams! If they can turn their heads with money, especially those players who have loads of international caps already and are coming towards the end of international careers, then they'll be getting a player with no commitments, no call ups, will be available all season, no jet lag, no injuries playing for another side, no wrangling with their union about release and international windows, no Lions tour to wreck the start of the season, etc., etc,. That's a dream come true for a club these days.

For enough money I think a lot of players would be tempted to put their international careers on hold or bring them to an early end.

Griff,

Spot on, lets say players some of the more experienced players would or could be tempted and the clubs would love them, then you have some younger players who are injury prone as well.

They could look at the money and just say sod it my health is more important and I won't be getting battered by call ups, extra games/training. Everyone has a price.

We should be looking to collectively massively reduce the cost of the game.

We need to base the season on block systems where club and international commitments do not clash.

It struck me as highly ironic that french teams claimed things were unfair due to qualification yet find the fact they have salary caps over double that of pro12 perfectly ok.
I find it hard to say that I agree with the prl proposals for a new 3 tier European competition, it will raise the quality of the pro12 and amlin/tier 2 euro comp which is badly needed. But it does place even more stress on over used players already facing burnout as each match becomes more vital and the top players are more heavily relied upon.

Agreed - the more money available at club level the earlier that 'certain point in the career' becomes. More players moving in their prime rather than as their star is waning. The biggest names will be able to negotiate their international releases, but will likely have been flogged at club level and won't be playing at their optimum/will be carrying more injuries.

It is easy to draw comparisons with the route football has gone down, with the club v country debate, but for me the implications in rugby are actually much greater. Football is pretty much non contact these days and if anything reducing further, so the question of fatigue and fitness are different for international release. Rugby is going the other way, the hits are getting bigger and player welfare (and in particular the number of games/intensity of those games) needs to be looked at/solved in the round not at a club or international only level.

If the negotiations don't go well, the current status quo of club rugby being the feeder for international rugby has the potential to be reversed.

maestegmafia wrote:We should be looking to collectively massively reduce the cost of the game.

Why?

Rugby Fan wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:We should be looking to collectively massively reduce the cost of the game.

Why?

Is that a serious question?

maestegmafia wrote:

Rugby Fan wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:We should be looking to collectively massively reduce the cost of the game.

Why?

Is that a serious question?

Yes, it is. What do you mean by reducing the cost of the game? Is that just reducing player salaries? If so, why do you think players should not be earning the sums they are?

There's plenty of money in the sport. It just so happens that most if it is stuck at Test level. The greatest failure to date of rugby administrators is not ensuring that we have a healthy revenue base below the internationals. While the game remains addicted to Test match receipts, union officials will keep making absurd physical demands on players. It also makes many of them fearful of really growing the game because it would threaten their own position at the top table.

The only way to square this circle is to generate as much interest and revenue as possible in competitions below Test level. The main reason rugby went professional is because players became sick of seeing how much money was generated by the internationals. As far as I can tell, anyone talking about "reducing the cost of the game" just wants to see players earn less. That's exactly the attititude which nearly opened the door to Kerry Packer in 1995.

Rugby Fan wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:

Rugby Fan wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:We should be looking to collectively massively reduce the cost of the game.

Why?

Is that a serious question?

Yes, it is. What do you mean by reducing the cost of the game? Is that just reducing player salaries? If so, why do you think players should not be earning the sums they are?

There's plenty of money in the sport. It just so happens that most if it is stuck at Test level. The greatest failure to date of rugby administrators is not ensuring that we have a healthy revenue base below the internationals. While the game remains addicted to Test match receipts, union officials will keep making absurd physical demands on players. It also makes many of them fearful of really growing the game because it would threaten their own position at the top table.

The only way to square this circle is to generate as much interest and revenue as possible in competitions below Test level. The main reason rugby went professional is because players became sick of seeing how much money was generated by the internationals.  As far as I can tell, anyone talking about "reducing the cost of the game" just wants to see players earn less. That's exactly the attititude which nearly opened the door to Kerry Packer in 1995.

Because the game is running at a loss, clubs are over spending to compete against other clubs that are also spending beyond their means. They are putting the game in a perilous position.

maestegmafia wrote:Because the game is running at a loss, clubs are over spending to compete against other clubs that are also spending beyond their means. They are putting the game in a perilous position.

The unions put the game in a perilous position when they were happy to rake in millions in Test revenues without a thought about how this money should be distributed. Some of them even hypocritically championed amateurism - often to the extent of turning former players into pariahs - while simultaneously arranging under-the-table payments, or sham jobs, to allow their best players to train uninterrupted.

We turned professional and yet all the unions have really done is look to wring as much dough out of the international calendar as possible. We need to generate more revenue, not sting the players.

I'd say the IRFU seem to get it right. Good balance between Provincial and International rugby. No idea how the amateur game is run but no reason to think it's bad.

Yes, they make mistakes, pricing for internationals, the one NIQ per position thing but they seem to back away when it becomes clear it's a mistake. They heavily fund the Provinces from the international game and have the central contracts.

I think England are close to having it right. A cap based on turnover would be better.

The financial health of far too many unions is contingent on the success of the international team.

And yet it's impossible for everyone to be successful.

I often hear that rugby is under threat from soccer in Wales, Japan and, to some extent, Australia.

The position of those three countries in the FIFA rankings is 52nd, 42nd and 53rd respectively. If football is growing in popularity, you can hardly say it is on account of glorious international achievements. The attractions lie elsewhere.

Why must rugby rely so heavily on Test matches?

Rugby Fan wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:Because the game is running at a loss, clubs are over spending to compete against other clubs that are also spending beyond their means. They are putting the game in a perilous position.

The unions put the game in a perilous position when they were happy to rake in millions in Test revenues without a thought about how this money should be distributed. Some of them even hypocritically championed amateurism - often to the extent of turning former players into pariahs - while simultaneously arranging under-the-table payments, or sham jobs, to allow their best players to train uninterrupted.

We turned professional and yet all the unions have really done is look to wring as much dough out of the international calendar as possible. We need to generate more revenue, not sting the players.

Signing less expensive foreign players and concentrating your finances on home grown academy players is a sustainable way to run any team. It would massively reduce the cost of rugby in France and England and solve 90% of the issues those two nations are causing the rest of the rugby world.

maestegmafia wrote: It would...solve 90% of the issues those two nations are causing the rest of the rugby world.

How?

Rugby Fan wrote:The financial health of far too many unions is contingent on the success of the international team.

And yet it's impossible for everyone to be successful.

I often hear that rugby is under threat from soccer in Wales, Japan and, to some extent, Australia.

The position of those three countries in the FIFA rankings is 52nd, 42nd and 53rd respectively. If football is growing in popularity, you can hardly say it is on account of glorious international achievements. The attractions lie elsewhere.

Why must rugby rely so heavily on Test matches?

That's actually a very good point.

The downside of having unions running the game is that it perhaps focuses too much cash on the intl side rather than the club side.

The reall question is how we can change that without the whole thing going down the route of soccer etc where thw balance swings too far the other way.

I have said before that I would love ther to be some way that the entrepeneurs in the club game in England and France could work their magic and bring in sponsorship etc. IN COOPERATION WITH the other stakeholders in the European game.

Blame for that lies on both sides of the current divide, and I hope it has not gone so far as to be insollubile.

Characterising the French and English clubs as power hungry panto villians and the Erc as Corupt Blazer wearing throwbacks to the amateur era, is an unhelpful oversimplification.

Rugby Fan wrote:

maestegmafia wrote: It would...solve 90% of the issues those two nations are causing the rest of the rugby world.

How?

Because 90% of all the issues raising the expense of rugby throughout the world are generated by the arms race for foreign players in France and England.

maestegmafia wrote:

Rugby Fan wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:Because the game is running at a loss, clubs are over spending to compete against other clubs that are also spending beyond their means. They are putting the game in a perilous position.

The unions put the game in a perilous position when they were happy to rake in millions in Test revenues without a thought about how this money should be distributed. Some of them even hypocritically championed amateurism - often to the extent of turning former players into pariahs - while simultaneously arranging under-the-table payments, or sham jobs, to allow their best players to train uninterrupted.

We turned professional and yet all the unions have really done is look to wring as much dough out of the international calendar as possible. We need to generate more revenue, not sting the players.

Signing less expensive foreign players and concentrating your finances on home grown academy players is a sustainable way to run any team. It would massively reduce the cost of rugby in France and England and solve 90% of the issues those two nations are causing the rest of the rugby world.

sustainable?

The welsh regions have been struggling both financially and performance wise, neither of those are what you would call running a club well.

nathan wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:

Rugby Fan wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:Because the game is running at a loss, clubs are over spending to compete against other clubs that are also spending beyond their means. They are putting the game in a perilous position.

The unions put the game in a perilous position when they were happy to rake in millions in Test revenues without a thought about how this money should be distributed. Some of them even hypocritically championed amateurism - often to the extent of turning former players into pariahs - while simultaneously arranging under-the-table payments, or sham jobs, to allow their best players to train uninterrupted.

We turned professional and yet all the unions have really done is look to wring as much dough out of the international calendar as possible. We need to generate more revenue, not sting the players.

Signing less expensive foreign players and concentrating your finances on home grown academy players is a sustainable way to run any team. It would massively reduce the cost of rugby in France and England and solve 90% of the issues those two nations are causing the rest of the rugby world.

sustainable?

The welsh regions have been struggling both financially and performance wise, neither of those are what you would call running a club well.

They were straining heavily until a wage cap of £3.5 mil and concentration on their academies have turned their prospects around.

RRW predict all to be in profit this season, and that is with a weaker economy and higher unemployment than England.

Without the Fre/Eng clubs where would the international class players play if their countries can not support professional teams? Where would the players from below Tier One nations be able to play professionally? Perhaps this is what some unions want so that their tier one ranking is not challenged

broadlandboy wrote:Without the Fre/Eng clubs where would the international class players play if their countries can not support professional teams? Where would the players from below Tier One nations be able to play professionally? Perhaps this is what some unions want so that their tier one ranking is not challenged

They have to play amateur rugby at home.

Jenifer McLadyboy wrote:Characterising the French and English clubs as power hungry panto villians and the Erc as Corupt Blazer wearing throwbacks to the amateur era, is an unhelpful oversimplification.

That's exactly the point I made here:

https://www.606v2.com/t35838p150-european-rugby-talks-end-with-no-solution-to-impasse#1603326

In fact, I've just realized I went through an almost identical exercise - albeit at greater length - exactly a year ago, all over a separate thread. For example:

https://www.606v2.com/t35190p100-tv-rights-for-celtic-rugby-and-the-european-rows-threatening-celtic-rugby-a-notice-to-all-rabo-fans#1570909

HammerofThunor wrote:

broadlandboy wrote:Without the Fre/Eng clubs where would the international class players play if their countries can not support professional teams? Where would the players from below Tier One nations be able to play professionally? Perhaps this is what some unions want so that their tier one ranking is not challenged

They have to play amateur rugby at home.

You honestly think that is the best way forward for rugby...?

maestegmafia wrote:

nathan wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:

Rugby Fan wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:Because the game is running at a loss, clubs are over spending to compete against other clubs that are also spending beyond their means. They are putting the game in a perilous position.

The unions put the game in a perilous position when they were happy to rake in millions in Test revenues without a thought about how this money should be distributed. Some of them even hypocritically championed amateurism - often to the extent of turning former players into pariahs - while simultaneously arranging under-the-table payments, or sham jobs, to allow their best players to train uninterrupted.

We turned professional and yet all the unions have really done is look to wring as much dough out of the international calendar as possible. We need to generate more revenue, not sting the players.

Signing less expensive foreign players and concentrating your finances on home grown academy players is a sustainable way to run any team. It would massively reduce the cost of rugby in France and England and solve 90% of the issues those two nations are causing the rest of the rugby world.

sustainable?

The welsh regions have been struggling both financially and performance wise, neither of those are what you would call running a club well.

They were straining heavily until a wage cap of £3.5 mil and concentration on their academies have turned their prospects around.

RRW predict all to be in profit this season, and that is with a weaker economy and higher unemployment than England.

You got a link to that prediction?

As far as im aware not that many of the regions can actually reach the £3.5 cap. It was only 2-3 months ago the WRU had to give extra funding to the regions so i'd be surprised if they managed to turn things around that quickly.

maestegmafia wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:

broadlandboy wrote:Without the Fre/Eng clubs where would the international class players play if their countries can not support professional teams? Where would the players from below Tier One nations be able to play professionally? Perhaps this is what some unions want so that their tier one ranking is not challenged

They have to play amateur rugby at home.

You honestly think that is the best way forward for rugby...?

Sorry, isn't this what you are suggesting. Focus on home grown means fewer spots for PI, etc. so they can play at home, which means amateur.

Personally I think it's a stupid idea.

HammerofThunor wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:

broadlandboy wrote:Without the Fre/Eng clubs where would the international class players play if their countries can not support professional teams? Where would the players from below Tier One nations be able to play professionally? Perhaps this is what some unions want so that their tier one ranking is not challenged

They have to play amateur rugby at home.

You honestly think that is the best way forward for rugby...?

Sorry, isn't this what you are suggesting. Focus on home grown means fewer spots for PI, etc. so they can play at home, which means amateur.

Personally I think it's a stupid idea.

As you well know, professional PI players all play in NZ or OZ prior to being offered the NH contracts they currently have. There is no professional game in the PIs.

That is completely different to what you said above where you said that you would like to see the PRL destroy the professional game in all but England and France.

At least your honest about your appalling opinions.

But they won't be allowed to play for NZ or Aus teams as they should be focusing on home grown players. They should be playing for their home amateur sides. Again, not my opinion but the one you seemed to be putting across.

When did I say I would like to see the PRL destroy the professional game in all but England and France?

Have I been sleep posting again?

Rugby Fan wrote:

Jenifer McLadyboy wrote:Characterising the French and English clubs as power hungry panto villians and the Erc as Corupt Blazer wearing throwbacks to the amateur era, is an unhelpful oversimplification.

That's exactly the point I made here:

https://www.606v2.com/t35838p150-european-rugby-talks-end-with-no-solution-to-impasse#1603326

In fact, I've just realized I went through an almost identical exercise - albeit at greater length - exactly a year ago, all over a separate thread. For example:

https://www.606v2.com/t35190p100-tv-rights-for-celtic-rugby-and-the-european-rows-threatening-celtic-rugby-a-notice-to-all-rabo-fans#1570909

yes but we all needed to go through a bjillion threads slagging eachother off first for no reason so we could get so bored with it that we might actually try and be constructive.

Hopefully all of the erc stakeholders are at the same point.

I think it's great that players are getting paid more, it's such a short, dangerous career, they deserve the money.  Rather than trying to limit the game and what these guys earn (particularly as it would have greater effect on the lower paid squad members), more effort and professional ability should be put in trying to grow it.

The two biggest clubs in Europe in monetary terms are Toulouse and Leicester.  That's not down to sugar daddies but just really well run clubs with great support. 15,000+ attendance figures along with better associated commercial activity is not unachievable for most clubs/provinces/regions' catchment areas if those directing operations were sharper and more able and get the infrastructure in place.

nathan wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:

nathan wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:

Rugby Fan wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:Because the game is running at a loss, clubs are over spending to compete against other clubs that are also spending beyond their means. They are putting the game in a perilous position.

The unions put the game in a perilous position when they were happy to rake in millions in Test revenues without a thought about how this money should be distributed. Some of them even hypocritically championed amateurism - often to the extent of turning former players into pariahs - while simultaneously arranging under-the-table payments, or sham jobs, to allow their best players to train uninterrupted.

We turned professional and yet all the unions have really done is look to wring as much dough out of the international calendar as possible. We need to generate more revenue, not sting the players.

Signing less expensive foreign players and concentrating your finances on home grown academy players is a sustainable way to run any team. It would massively reduce the cost of rugby in France and England and solve 90% of the issues those two nations are causing the rest of the rugby world.

sustainable?

The welsh regions have been struggling both financially and performance wise, neither of those are what you would call running a club well.

They were straining heavily until a wage cap of £3.5 mil and concentration on their academies have turned their prospects around.

RRW predict all to be in profit this season, and that is with a weaker economy and higher unemployment than England.

You got a link to that prediction?

As far as im aware not that many of the regions can actually reach the £3.5 cap. It was only 2-3 months ago the WRU had to give extra funding to the regions so i'd be surprised if they managed to turn things around that quickly.

still waiting for this info meas, think we need it judging by some of the false stuff you've posted in the past.

What is good for the goose is good for the gander
http://www.walesonline.co.uk/business/business-news/sky-signs-four-year-deal-3475362
So much for all in it together

Hold on a second, are you saying the details of the sky deal for the pro12 have not been released. And that the current TV monetise are spread by where they're generated. That's a good idea. Maybe the new Euro comp could be based on those ideas.

broadlandboy wrote:What is good for the goose is good for the gander
http://www.walesonline.co.uk/business/business-news/sky-signs-four-year-deal-3475362
So much for all in it together

Not sure what you mean?

I read that as, S4C and BBC Wales contribute 5 mill of 5.4 and the WRU receive 3.7. Pretty generous of the Welsh so far.

Or should they spit their toys out and negotiate a deal with BT vision and invite the IRFU, SRU and IRU to coe play in their league?

Come on. Even you as a Gloucester fan has got to admit that this is going against what they ask the English and French for. The argument tends to be that the English and French have more subscribers but it's everyone that makes the comp and the money should be split evenly. But in a 10 team league (discounting the Italians) 40% (WRU) takes 70% of the money.

Edit: these numbers are assumed in the article. It may be be more or less than this in reality

the Italian union, which has two representative sides in the league, has not been included in the deal.

So we've been hearing about how the franglo folks to care about other countries and they should be ashamed. Yet they have decided to give nothing to the Italians in their on league!

nathan wrote:

the Italian union, which has two representative sides in the league, has not been included in the deal.

So we've been hearing about how the franglo folks to care about other countries and they should be ashamed. Yet they have decided to give nothing to the Italians in their on league!

I think they've been told to sort out their own deal and keep the money. So the Celtic unions get nothing from Italian TV money. But they've also split it on where the money comes from instead of where the games are played.

If the revenue split for the European games was based on the Pro12 model the PRL would probably be reasonably happy.

So the French and English clubs have been demonised for requesting money is split on a club particpation basis; what in god's name would they have been labelled if they'd requested a split similar to that in the PRO12 which centres more on the broadcaster deals they attract?

nth wrote:So the French and English clubs have been demonised for requesting money is split on a club particpation basis; what in god's name would they have been labelled if they'd requested a split similar to that in the PRO12 which centres more on the broadcaster deals they attract?

What about if there was an insistence the all teams in europe could only have 5players in there squad that were not edible to play for the union that the club belonged to?
To me this would even out a lot of the problens that European rugby faces. It the french and English want to dictate things like qualification into europe to becthe same as the frencj amd english leagues then the celtic/italian sides should dictate rules about non union edible players to match our league. IT WORKS BOTH WAYS.

The whole source of this problem is eight out of the twelve premiership sides in England being up to their ears in debt, year after year. So yes they are making new deals with BT in the hope of making more money. Because if they don't make more money next year they will be in even more debt. So how else will they reduce costs or make more money? A Europe wide salary cap would help or what? Make a suggestion..

Hopefully the statement from the French federation is what is needed. It does show how isolated the PRL clubs ave become. The only European cup next year will be run by the unions and it might or might not have the PRL teams in it. the PRLs championship is simply not going to happen now as it will not get the sanction from the unions.

Welcome JayP. Meant to say after your first post

The PRL have said they won't be at the next ERC meeting. We'll see if they're blowing smoke. Same with the LNR. Also the PRL said that if the RFU didn't sanction their cup they would just do without. I assume they meant the same for the FFR.

So according to everyone at the moment the English and French clubs won't be in Europe next season and nor will there be any other Euro competitions.

Ta

I am sure there will be a European cup including the rabo teams and am reasonably confident the french clubs will join in. I hope the English ones do but its not worth any price - indeed its worth quite a lot to stop the attempted PRL coup.

Its very obvious in all this that all the provocative statements come from the PRL not the french and that the french federation have confidence they have some control over the french clubs. the PRL might not be at the next meeting but no one else is coming to their party. funny euro cup with just the english teams in it.

The LNR have also said they're not going to the next meeting.

HammerofThunor wrote:The LNR have also said they're not going to the next meeting.

The LnR and PRL reps have said they will go to this meeting as well. It's hard to know what they will do, they say one thing then change their plans? It would be stupid for them not to attend as the situation is starting to look like it is going against their wishes.

According to the WalesOnline article quoted previously the LNR and PRL representatives came out after the last ERC meeting denying they agreed to the next meeting. I didn't see the original source for that.

HammerofThunor wrote:According to the WalesOnline article quoted previously the LNR and PRL representatives came out after the last ERC meeting denying they agreed to the next meeting. I didn't see the original source for that.

The ERC said they are attending. I'm not sure what the source was that said they were not attending afterwards.

They are invited therefor they really should attend as it gives them a fine opportunity to be open about what they are doing...! Something they are still failing at.

JayP wrote:Ta

I am sure there will be a European cup including the rabo teams and am reasonably confident the french clubs will join in.  I hope the English ones do but its not worth any price - indeed its worth quite a lot to stop the attempted PRL coup.

Its very obvious in all this that all the provocative statements come from the PRL not the french and that the french federation have confidence they have some control over the french clubs.  the PRL might not be at the next meeting but no one else is coming to their party.  funny euro cup with just the english teams in it.

I am not sure why you think provocative statements come from PRL. I think if you check for every press release from PRL there is a near identical one from the LNR.

It is clear that the PRL and LNR are not going to play in a ERC competition so the options are:
- no European competition
- a new cup with only PRL & LNR
- a new cup with PRL, LNR and eventually SA Super 15 teams
- a new cup with PRL, LNR and Pro 12
- a new cup with PRL, LNR, Pro 12 and eventually SA Super 15 teams

The PRL and LNR can survive in any of these scenarios due to new TV money and larger attendances than Pro12. The Pro12 teams can only survive if they are involved. I therefore expect them to join.