Merged thread euro competition

[Portnoy's Complaint]

First topic message reminder :

Apparently there's a meeting today of two mighty behemoths of the English game meet to (presumably) find a common position on the wreckage of the negotiations on the future of European competition.

It will be interesting if they come to any clear (I doubt that it will be satisfactory) conclusion.

This, remember, is a discussion between two spectacularly incompetent bodies which have presided over farcical maladministration over the past decade.

The RFU, standard bearers of the ideals and ethos of the famed 57 Old Farts, have stumbled and staggered their way 'forward' since the dawn of professionalism.
vs
The PRL who have never managed to provide a satisfactory cohesive, decision which actually improves the English game with a satisfactory watertight, long term 'what if?' structured set of rules. They in their short history have represented solely the elite game through a seemingly never-ending stream of short-term, knee-jerk decisions which sow the quick-germinating seeds of insoluble and self-contradictory positions for the future. From its inception it has been nothing less than a disaster from the issue of voting shares, through parachute payments to the fundamental process of promotion/relegation itself. Bumbling incompetents.

Unfortunately they (the PRL) have the players and therefore all the cards over the RFU exactly two years before the 2015 RWC starts on English soil.

Grim and depressing innit? Especially for non-combatants.

[Portnoy's Complaint]

That, Jay, is just an assertion based on no evidence.

The entire bottom-up (i.e. the reverse of the Union-dominated model) is based on aspiration and rewards to sporting success.

Top-down models are based on the concept that talent can be corralled to the elite level with a view (presumably) to reward international success.

Neither is right and neither is wrong per se, but the league system it turns out does seem leave elite clubs more exposed to being between the proverbial rock and a hard place

[TJ]

 If the RFU or IRB try to deny two commercial organisations (PRL & LNR) the right to create a new commercial arrangement because its cuts out the unions or because it is against the interests of a third commercial organisation (PRO12) the PRL would have an excellent case in court. This is especially so when the PRO 12 have been told they are welcome to join so there is no question of a cartel.

However the unions can refuse to sanction it and can throw anyone who takes part in it out of any of their competitions. So no payments from the RFU to the clubs who join a breakaway. No international selection for any player who plays for a breakaway team. Who is going to supply the refs?

Yes the PRL could make a breakaway but it makes no sense to do so. They will be isolated and will be left without the best players, without a meaningful competition to play in, without the money they receive from the RFU.

[TJ]

Portnoy - its from remembering previous arguments between the PRL and the RFU. There was a proposal to ring fence the premiership a couple of years ago.

[HammerofThunor]

I'm pretty sure the PRL want ring fencing. It was the RFU that won't allow it. No references for that. I only remember people like Mark Evans (Quins) saying it was needed. Might just be individual opinions rather than collective stance.

[HammerofThunor]

Maybe not

http://www.sportspromedia.com/notes_and_insights/premier_rugby_league_denies_relegation_rumours/

I know the RFU refused any expansion to 14 teams.

[Exiledinborders]

 If the RFU or IRB try to deny two commercial organisations (PRL & LNR) the right to create a new commercial arrangement because its cuts out the unions or because it is against the interests of a third commercial organisation (PRO12) the PRL would have an excellent case in court. This is especially so when the PRO 12 have been told they are welcome to join so there is no question of a cartel.

However the unions can refuse to sanction it and can throw anyone who takes part in it out of any of their competitions.  So no payments from the RFU to the clubs who join a breakaway.  No international selection for any player who plays for a breakaway team.  Who is going to supply the refs?

Yes the PRL could make a breakaway but it makes no sense to do so.  They will be isolated and will be left without the best players, without a meaningful competition to play in, without the money they receive from the RFU.

When rugby was an amateur game that is the sort of thing they could do certainly. However on becoming professional they have to abide by competition law.  That is why for instance they had to abandon the ban on RL players when the game turned professional. They could refuse to sanction a new competition provided that their reasons are consistent with competition law and the single market. As the reasons are to protect the power and commercial poistion of the unions or a competing organisation (ERC) in which the RFU have a stake then I suggest the reasons would be invalid.

Most of the best players are contracted to the PRL or LNR clubs so why would they be left without players?

[stub]

http://www.lequipe.fr/Rugby/Actualites/Goze-euphorique-lapasset-legaliste/403258

Euphoric Goze, legalistic Lapasset

Joined Sunday, president of the NRL and the president of the IRB are not on the same wavelength. Paul Goze is believed to be able to create a European competition in the margins of the ERC, the Rugby Champions Cup, without the endorsement of the FFR and the IRB, which had initiated a process of mediation between the ERC and the Anglo-French clubs.
Sunday noon, officially, the NRL and the Premiership (English League) initiated, via a release on the internet, a pirate Coupe d'Europe project, on the sidelines of the Heineken Cup and the European Challenge. Pirate because without the endorsement of their federation or the IRB. What did react Bernard Lapasset, president of the body which directs the international rugby since 1890.

Joined, Mr Lapasset confirmed to us that 'there is a procedure already in place.. As 'the folder is followed by a mediator' and ' qEU we will continue to pursue what we launched.. Before adding: "create a competition, to the agreement of the federations and the IRB." Which, obviously, is not the case for this Rugby Champions Cup. The LNR President Paul Goze raffute this argument: " there is no reason that the FFR or the IR or anyone, prevents us from creating a rugby competition.» Not so simple.

Twenty teams in sports awards
'It is fifteen months that are discussed on the same thing without obtaining advances' rail Paul Goze. In place for this season, the Catalan Paul Goze said the creation of this European competition by the fact that "it's been fifteen months. that is discussed on the same thing without obtaining advances "There were blockages at the level of television, of ERC, English.... Suddenly, the English and French clubs pro leagues chose to quickly create their own competition, without waiting for the continuation of the negotiations.

The RCC will open at the clubs, provinces and franchisees who vie for the three major European Championships, namely the Premiership, the Top 14 and the Celtic League. The format would be 20 teams chosen to sports awards, with the following financial redistribution: one-third for English clubs, a third for French clubs, one third for Celtic and Italian teams. For now, only leagues English and French, of this new European Cup, are involved in the process.


From l'equipe this morning via translation.

A bit difficult to wade through the translation but Goze seems quite bullish in his response. This is as unsurprising as the FFR release in my opinion. The mediator is going to earn his money...

[maestegmafia]

 If the RFU or IRB try to deny two commercial organisations (PRL & LNR) the right to create a new commercial arrangement because its cuts out the unions or because it is against the interests of a third commercial organisation (PRO12) the PRL would have an excellent case in court. This is especially so when the PRO 12 have been told they are welcome to join so there is no question of a cartel.

However the unions can refuse to sanction it and can throw anyone who takes part in it out of any of their competitions.  So no payments from the RFU to the clubs who join a breakaway.  No international selection for any player who plays for a breakaway team.  Who is going to supply the refs?

Yes the PRL could make a breakaway but it makes no sense to do so.  They will be isolated and will be left without the best players, without a meaningful competition to play in, without the money they receive from the RFU.

When rugby was an amateur game that is the sort of thing they could do certainly. However on becoming professional they have to abide by competition law.  That is why for instance they had to abandon the ban on RL players when the game turned professional. They could refuse to sanction a new competition provided that their reasons are consistent with competition law and the single market. As the reasons are to protect the power and commercial poistion of the unions or a competing organisation (ERC) in which the RFU have a stake then I suggest the reasons would be invalid.

Most of the best players are contracted to the PRL or LNR clubs so why would they be left without players?

Rugby League players were never banned, professional players were banned. As an amateur game you could not earn any money as a player or coach.

[TJ]

They would not be preventing anyone from earning a living which is the point you refer to. the PRL would be welcome to set up a breakaway but the RFU would easily be able to stop any subsidy and remove any teams and players from their competitions. Players who played in a breakaway league could be sanctioned as well. How long could the PRL survive with no subsidy from the RFU and with no meaningful cross border competitions to play in thus no bumber media deal?

[Standulstermen]

The LNR can't be forced into the HEC. They can still leave. Just won't be able to set up another competition.

If the LNR did leave the competition then it could be the forerunner to a British, Irish and Italian league which in reality is possibly the only entity that could live with the financial power of the Top 14

[Poorfour]

Dredging up from my memory, I can remember individual members of the PRL and/or club CEOs expressing the view that something like the Rugby League franchise system (where teams are granted membership for a number of years based on their business plans and then re-evaluated at the end of that period) would give sufficient stability to enable owners to invest in building the fanbase faster.

I've only ever seen the idea of a complete ringfence (i.e. a fixed pool of teams with no mechanism for review) mentioned by journalists. I think the issue is tied to the question of "how many?". There are a number of championship teams who should probably form part of any ringfence - Bristol, Leeds, maybe the Pirates or Bedford - but the English league couldn't accommodate a 14+ team season without a huge increase in salary cap to enable bigger squads. The French already struggle with 14 teams.

All of which said, there hasn't been much talk of ringfencing since Exeter came up and showed that it is possible for a newly promoted team to stay up and make a success of life in the AP.

Again I find myself agreeing with Maest. It's union vs club control that's the real issue now - though I do feel that France are more likely to be unable to reach an accommodation than England.

[LondonTiger]

In Francde it is certainly a club v union thing. Not a fight for who controls rugby, but who controls club rugby. Right now FFR has all the voting rights on club issues - and really is that correct. They do not fund the clubs in any way, but they decide what they must do. Much of the French disatisfaction came when the FFR voted for Jean-Pierre Lux to remain at the head of ERC - against the clubs wishes. With the other countries who Scotland, Ireland and Italian votes all going to Lux en-masse it made him a shoo-in.


The fact is, the tournament we started with in 1995/96 has changed in very many ways, but the agreement in place to govern it has not changed. This would always lead to some form of conflict and as long as both sides refuse to discuss matters in an adult way - there will be no resolution.

[nathan]

The English and French clubs are also unhappy with the way revenues are split between the three leagues and want to keep a greater share

There we go, what it all boils down to. The Celtic & Italian teams will likely say 'shove it up yer ass' rather than risk bankrupting themselves while the rich get richer.

 

nice and mature there calling the french and english morons...

You got tired of trolling on other threads then did you?

#hypocrite .

you making stuff up?

saint calling someone else a troll! lol
I've never called anyone a moron!

You were trolling on another thread and Maes pulled you up on it. I find it very hypocritical that you'd pull me up for referring to the greedy moneymen trying to ruin rugby as morons. Bit touchy as well aren't you to go and cry to the mods over it?   Why don't you just avoid my posts because all you do is whinge as soon as you see a comment by 'The Saint' and it's grown incredibly tedious.

Trolling?

Think you have the definition of that slightly wrong. What did Maes pull me up on exactly? I was still waiting for him to provide evidence to something he made up....again.

You just remember what you got banned for last time eh...

[Portnoy's Complaint]

Maybe not

http://www.sportspromedia.com/notes_and_insights/premier_rugby_league_denies_relegation_rumours/

I know the RFU refused any expansion to 14 teams.

Quite bloody right. Sometimes the PRL behave like aspirant 19 century Railway Kings who would prefer their navvies to die in the cause of labour than threaten monetary maximisation.

The Jeff ought to be cut rather than extended.

[gregortree]

The Six Nations is an IRB-sponsored tournament, LD. And as such the Unions each have the right to enter.
The problem being that it's not so much an invitational one rather than an exclusive cartel that makes it a self-interested number of major nations that actively combine to make it an impossibility for 'outsiders' to join and share the spoils.

Have we forgotten it went from 5 nations to 6 just a few years ago ?
One might add a couple of others from among Russia, Georgia, Romania Portugal if their quality improved enough.
There would be practical contraints of time / geography / logistics / player availability in enlarging this much beyond Europe, and say 8 nations.
Beyond that you might as well call it the world cup.
A challenge no matter who is in charge of IRB /6N. I see no reason why there might not be a lower tier international round in Europe if the resources and motivation were there.

[Poorfour]

They would not be preventing anyone from earning a living which is the point you refer to.  the PRL would be welcome to set up a breakaway but the RFU would easily be able to stop any subsidy and remove any teams and players from their competitions.   Players who played in a breakaway league could be sanctioned as well.  How long could the PRL survive with no subsidy from the RFU and with no meaningful cross border competitions to play in thus no bumber media deal?

You have to consider the other side of this. It's very much in the RFU's interests to reach an agreement with the PRL. The RFU "subsidy" (actually incentive payments for player release and use of EQPs) is not huge - it amounts to about £0.5m per club. Not peanuts, but the clubs could live without it for a bit, especially if they are getting money from BT. They are certainly far less dependent on the RFU than the Celtic clubs are on their respective governing bodies.

But the flipside is that the players are contracted to the clubs. The EPS players have supplemental contracts with the RFU and agreements on release from their clubs, but it's the clubs that pay the bulk of their salary. Most of them are contracted until 2015 or later, too. England are still not an experienced team by international standards and are perhaps 18 months behind Wales in their rebuilding. Failing to agree a deal with the PRL would mean starting again with lower quality players, or compromising but having their best players in inferior competitions for 2 years - unless they were prepared to stump up the cash needed to buy players out of their contracts (assume an international is on, say, £150k and has 1 year left to run on the contract. 64 EPS + Saxons x (1 year buyout + 2 years' contract) x £150k = £30m. Which is probably about what the RFU earns from an entire season of international rugby. Big money). With the RFU having given the IRB a very high guarantee on ticket revenue for a home RWC in 2015, I don't think they can afford to lose their star players.

Hence the RFU has been very tight lipped and studiously neutral so far. It can't afford to burn any bridges at this point.

As for the FFR, I give you the standard response to anything the French do in rugby, as epitomised by Bernard Laporte's response to being asked about a particularly poor performance: [Shrug] "We're French." [/Shrug]. But in reality they face many of the same issues (the RWC guarantee aside).

[TJ]

I agree that it would all be very difficult for the RFU and they are not in a strong position - thats why the PRL have managed to push things this far. However the PRL case is now weakened as well. No break in ranks from the other regions and all the other unions involved and thus the IRB are united in opposition. Without a european cup to sell to BT they have lost a lot of their bargaining power. I would hate to see the nuclear option invoked but it could happen and the worst would be if players were prevented from playing international rugby. Not just English players but others as well would be effected.

[Welshmushroom]

I'm not sure what I dislike more about McCafferty - his decision to thumb his nose at what purports to be a binding arrangement when he could just sit it out until the agreement expires this year, his playing to the media to further his own agenda, his patent failure to engage properly with the FFR or his strange, orange ties.
 

“We ultimately expect to have RFU support and it’s in the interests of English rugby to have the teams playing in a good competition at the end of the season.

“If that scenario occurs where the RFU oppose what we’re doing, we’d have to look at the reasons for opposing it.

“You can’t just from a legal point of view say ‘we don’t want it so we’re not going to approve it’, especially when there’s a conflict of interests.

i
Er, yes you can actually Mark. That's rather the nature of binding commercial obligations. Enormously ironic that he cannot see is doing precisely the converse - asking that legal obligations be ignored because he has decided that he doesn't like them.

But the PRL and LNR have given notice under the ERC's rules. The climbdown over London Welsh's promotion was because the decision to deny them promotion was against UK and EU competition laws.  If the RFU or IRB try to deny two commercial organisations (PRL & LNR) the right to create a new commercial arrangement because its cuts out the unions or because it is against the interests of a third commercial organisation (PRO12) the PRL would have an excellent case in court. This is especially so when the PRO 12 have been told they are welcome to join so there is no question of a cartel.

Surely a legal challenge would open a can of worms. I'm sure they could probably get the EU to uphold that sort of ruling but the pressure would defo come on from the IRB on the RFU & FFR. Given that scenario I couldn't see the RFU continue to fund the English Clubs, which roughly amounts to between 15-20 million per season. Additionally this could all cause the RFU to centralize their top players with that money and form a regional setup system. This could lead to a boycott of the Aviva for English based players and them joining a revised Pro 12. A little far fetched maybe but not totally out of the question.

[Scrumpy]

'The Rugby Champions Cup'

Sounds good

[Portnoy's Complaint]

[Shrug] "We're French." [/Shrug]

What a shame that there isn't a 'bof' emoticon. Almost half of French attitudes could be expressed with one.

Recalling last year's 6Ns, it seems that at least two - arguably four - French performances could have been explained by [Shrug] "We're French." [/Shrug] judging by their wraith-like performances.

[maestegmafia]

'The Rugby Champions Cup'

Sounds good

Why?

It means absolutely nothing and could amount to nothing...

[Scrumpy]

Same as the HC next season then!  

[Portnoy's Complaint]

The Heineken is a very aspirational one. Shame it wasn't sponsored by Carlsberg the way it reaches the parts that others can't.

'Championship' epithet is an overworked cliche in sport these days. Just like Premiership only for second-bests.

[Toohey]

The name is interesting. Sounds like they are confident that there will be teams from outside Europe involved or at least are leaving the door open.

[beshocked]

Welshmushroom I know you hope that the RFU falls out with the PRL but I don't think they will.

JayP as long as France and England stay united they hold most of the power. Do not underestimate the financial clout of both countries. Both united are a match for the Pro12 countries.

Has it occured to you that the PRL might have actually chatted to the RFU? I saw Ian Ritchie chatting with Nigel Wray at the Championship double header at Allianz Park. Hardly looked at loggerheads to me.

A new European competition should be about clubs, not unions. International rugby is the union's playground.

I don't want England rugby becoming like English cricket where international players never play for clubs.

I want balance. I want both club rugby and international to be important and co-exist.

[TJ]

Beshocked - yes if the french and english clubs stay united they are stronger - but without a meaningful competition to sell they lose a lot of that. What sort of a european cup is simply a play off between the top french and english clubs and how seriously would the french clubs take that?
I don't want english rugby to become like football- where the international setup takes a very poor second place to the clubs.

[whocares]

'The Rugby Champions Cup'

Sounds good

Why?

It means absolutely nothing and could amount to nothing...

 
 

[beshocked]

JayP the amlin is practically Anglo-French anyway.

I don't want international rugby becoming 2nd fiddle either.

The problem is that the Pro12 clubs are not willing to join an European club competition with the English and French.

Club rugby should be run by clubs. International rugby should run by unions.

I do not want unions bullying clubs either.

The current HC and ERC are managed by the unions. A new competition would be managed by clubs.

[TJ]

No - the problem is the PRL and to an extent the french want to have control and the lions share of the money as well as rigging the contest. The pro 12 clubs are perfectly willing to play a european cup and to comprimise on many issues. However the inflexible demands of the PRL are simply unacceptable and the PRL are being intransigent.

[Scrumpy]

JayP the amlin is practically Anglo-French anyway.

I don't want international rugby becoming 2nd fiddle either.

The problem is that the Pro12 clubs are not willing to join an European club competition with the English and French.

Club rugby should be run by clubs. International rugby should run by unions.

I do not want unions bullying clubs either.

The current HC and ERC are managed by the unions. A new competition would be managed by clubs.

+1

It's common sense really.

[butterfingers]

JayP the amlin is practically Anglo-French anyway.

I don't want international rugby becoming 2nd fiddle either.

The problem is that the Pro12 clubs are not willing to join an European club competition with the English and French.

Club rugby should be run by clubs. International rugby should run by unions.

I do not want unions bullying clubs either.

The current HC and ERC are managed by the unions. A new competition would be managed by clubs.

Again, the clubs in Scotland and IReland are union run, in what way have Munster, Leinster, Ulster and Glasgow been hampered by this? They are all competitive on the euro front with a much smaller budget to others! Wales have part ownership, but look at the mess they are in, the regions fight with the rest of the region, the WRU and the and anyone else willing to look at them wrong.

If the new competition must be run by clubs, then how do the IRFU go about what they do with their involvement, similarly the SRU, WRU and IFU? a competition run by clubs is one thing, a Franglo dominated competition that favours the Franglo club massively is what noone wants to sign up to.

Especially as the BT deal allows for a little more money to the Rabo clubs, and masses more to the Franglo ones = death of competitive rugby in 4/6 nations involved!

[Scrumpy]

No - the problem is the PRL and to an extent the french want to have control and the lions share of the money as well as rigging the contest.  The pro 12 clubs are perfectly willing to play a european cup and to comprimise on many issues.  However the inflexible demands of the PRL are simply unacceptable and the PRL are being intransigent.

I don't think the French should get any Lions money!

Where does it say they aren't going to share the money? As for rigging the contest that’s just laughable and shows why the English and French clubs need to break away.

[Brendan]

In the mid 200s the smaller soccer leagues of Scotland, Portugal, Netherlands and belgium wanted to form the Atlantic league to rival the five big leagues.

UEFA said no and that was the end of it. These clubs had money so any EU law would have been used but wasn't because there is none.

If you are a professional boxer you can't compete in the olyimpics. Sporting bodies can make rules for their sports.

I do wonder if the IRB could make any breakaway competition not use the term rugby union.

If 5 of the 6 unions don't allow it the RFU don't have to do anything.

If the PRL & NRL break away they become like the japanesse league which has isolation and money. It also allows the RFU & FFR to set up regions and make their second division the top league. Then when the clubs come back the top level is regions in a 20 team euro league.

The Championship and ProD2 may be weak but 4/6 regions would be ok after 2 years. Plus as the RFU pay about 0.5m per club that is quiet alot they can pay players when you add in tv money aswell.

[butterfingers]

No - the problem is the PRL and to an extent the french want to have control and the lions share of the money as well as rigging the contest.  The pro 12 clubs are perfectly willing to play a european cup and to comprimise on many issues.  However the inflexible demands of the PRL are simply unacceptable and the PRL are being intransigent.

I don't think the French should get any Lions money!

Where does it say they aren't going to share the money? As for rigging the contest that’s just laughable and shows why the English and French clubs need to break away.

Is the proposal of the new tourny not based on what the PRL LNR want from the existing?

So the PRL/LNR want the new tourny to be club run, and the pot shared equally between all clubs? But don't they want the Rabo to qualify harder? Make less spots available for the Rabo? And make the allocated slots by league and not union?

This all adds up to more player fatigue, less Rabo teams, and less varied teams to travel away to = Tournament riggning to their favour.

This also adds up to less Rabo teams, more Franglo teams, and when the pot is split a far greater share goes to the PRL / LNR = unfair bias of funds to 2 nations.

Not rocket science is it?

[maestegmafia]

The problem is that the Pro12 clubs are not willing to join an European club competition with the English and French.

That is not the problem at all. The unions all want to stay in European competition just no one wants the PRL to run it except the PRL.

[Brendan]

The problem is that the Pro12 clubs are not willing to join an European club competition with the English and French.

That is not the problem at all. The unions all want to stay in European competition just no one wants the PRL to run it except the PRL.

The problem is the big clubs don't want any union involvement so they want the IRFU to set up IRFUclub that controls the provinces and fight with the IRFU same can be said with scotland and italy. I don't think we want to go do thw welsh route thank you very much.

[beshocked]

butterfingers Glasgow competitive on an Euro front? That's a joke right? Just because they haven't been poor in the Pro12 for 3 seasons doesn't make them good on an Euro front. Even Ulster have only been good in europe in 3 seasons (no I don't count the season when there were no English sides).

Jayp rigging the contest? You mean like having auto qualification every season?

Of course the English and French want control, at the moment they are being bullied by the Pro12 countries - basically lots of shouting from the Pro12 - you can't do this, you can't do that, no surprise Pro12 are happy with the status quo, it favours them.

Inflexible demands? Do you know exactly what the demands are?

[ChequeredJersey]

 If the RFU or IRB try to deny two commercial organisations (PRL & LNR) the right to create a new commercial arrangement because its cuts out the unions or because it is against the interests of a third commercial organisation (PRO12) the PRL would have an excellent case in court. This is especially so when the PRO 12 have been told they are welcome to join so there is no question of a cartel.

However the unions can refuse to sanction it and can throw anyone who takes part in it out of any of their competitions.  So no payments from the RFU to the clubs who join a breakaway.  No international selection for any player who plays for a breakaway team.  Who is going to supply the refs?

Yes the PRL could make a breakaway but it makes no sense to do so.  They will be isolated and will be left without the best players, without a meaningful competition to play in, without the money they receive from the RFU.

But with a home World Cup coming up and a huge drop in strength below the Premiership in quality of English player, can the RFU afford to not select players from the Clubs? From what I can see the RFU are in the weakest position out of all the parties

[maestegmafia]

The problem is that the Pro12 clubs are not willing to join an European club competition with the English and French.

That is not the problem at all. The unions all want to stay in European competition just no one wants the PRL to run it except the PRL.

The problem is the big clubs don't want any union involvement so they want the IRFU to set up IRFUclub that controls the provinces and fight with the IRFU same can be said with scotland and italy.  I don't think we want to go do thw welsh route thank you very much.

We in Wales would not wish it on anyone... The only reason we ended up taking this route in the first place was because the WRU had no money when they set up the regions, therefor having to go for a franchise deal.... Such a shame.

[maestegmafia]

 If the RFU or IRB try to deny two commercial organisations (PRL & LNR) the right to create a new commercial arrangement because its cuts out the unions or because it is against the interests of a third commercial organisation (PRO12) the PRL would have an excellent case in court. This is especially so when the PRO 12 have been told they are welcome to join so there is no question of a cartel.

However the unions can refuse to sanction it and can throw anyone who takes part in it out of any of their competitions.  So no payments from the RFU to the clubs who join a breakaway.  No international selection for any player who plays for a breakaway team.  Who is going to supply the refs?

Yes the PRL could make a breakaway but it makes no sense to do so.  They will be isolated and will be left without the best players, without a meaningful competition to play in, without the money they receive from the RFU.

But with a home World Cup coming up and a huge drop in strength below the Premiership in quality of English player, can the RFU afford to not select players from the Clubs? From what I can see the RFU are in the weakest position out of all the parties

Not necessarily....! The RFU run the game in England and can put a hold on any of the plans that the PRL have very easily and with the backing of all the other unions that seem concerned by the PRLs actions.

The RFU should never have given the PRL so much leeway in the first place. This has been brewing ten years. Such a shame English rugby's issues potentially now effect other countries so much.

[Brendan]

butterfingers Glasgow competitive on an Euro front? That's a joke right? Just because they haven't been poor in the Pro12 for 3 seasons doesn't make them good on an Euro front. Even Ulster have only been good in europe in 3 seasons (no I don't count the season when there were no English sides).

Jayp rigging the contest? You mean like having auto qualification every season?

Of course the English and French want control, at the moment they are being bullied by the Pro12 countries - basically lots of shouting from the Pro12 - you can't do this, you can't do that, no surprise Pro12 are happy with the status quo, it favours them.

Inflexible demands? Do you know exactly what the demands are?

Yet it has been shown the the poor english and french hold 10 of the 18 votes in the ERC. Must be bad if the big bad Rabo nations are making you vote against yourself.

[Scrumpy]

But with a home World Cup coming up and a huge drop in strength below the Premiership in quality of English player, can the RFU afford to not select players from the Clubs? From what I can see the RFU are in the weakest position out of all the parties

No real surprise seeing as they are stuck in the dark ages.



Mae you're beginning to sound like you have another agenda!

[Cyril]

Mae you're beginning to sound like you have another agenda!

Surely not!

[TJ]

lets see - the french and english have most of the entrants, most of the money and most of the votes but want less rabo teams and a bigger share of the money.

If the competition needs to be reduced in size why not all entrants lose something?  5/5/8 with the rabo teams being top team from each nation plus the next 4 best from the league.  why must the rabo teams bear all the cut? plus two winners - if the english are that good they could end up with seven teams in the competition.

[maestegmafia]

Mae you're beginning to sound like you have another agenda!

I don't have any agenda, I have an opinion.


I just want to see a fair European Rugby competition run and controlled by an organisation that is apart from club owners and in conjunction with the Unions of Europe's top participant Nations.

By fair I mean

Money shared in equal amounts to clubs participating but managed by the Unions.

That implications are made in this competition to reduce European rugby expenditure and debt so that rugby at all levels in Europe is sensibly sustainable.

I would love to see someone take the incredibly sensible step and play the European cup en block, not spread out between other competitions.

[Cyril]

Mae you're beginning to sound like you have another agenda!

I don't have any agenda, I have an opinion.


I just want to see a fair European Rugby competition run and controlled by an organisation that is apart from club owners and in conjunction with the Unions of Europe's top participant Nations.

By fair I mean

Money shared in equal amounts to clubs participating.

That implications are made in this competition to reduce European rugby expenditure and debt so that rugby at all levels in Europe is sensibly sustainable.

I would love to see someone take the incredibly sensible step and play the European cup en block, not spread out between other competitions.

'Clubs' and not unions? Well, that's a start!

[maestegmafia]

lets see - the french and english have most of the entrants, most of the money and most of the votes but want  less rabo teams and a bigger share of the money.

If the competition needs to be reduced in size why not all entrants lose something?  5/5/8 with the rabo teams being top team from each nation plus the next 4 best from the league.  why must the rabo teams bear all the cut? plus two winners - if the english are that good they could end up with seven teams in the competition.

no one has answered that, I have asked the same question many times, so have others... This stance instigated by the PRL is nothing to do with the competition, just money and control above the RFU. That is all this is about.

[Scrumpy]

Mae you're beginning to sound like you have another agenda!

I don't have any agenda, I have an opinion.

Thats fair enough, but please remember that the Top14 (therefore the French) are involved too and not just the English!

[Biltong]

Maes, why should money be split equally?

If the revenue earned is not equal, you are basically suggesting that subsidising must occur?

So there must be equal rights and equal money, even though some contribute less than others?

[maestegmafia]

Mae you're beginning to sound like you have another agenda!

I don't have any agenda, I have an opinion.

Thats fair enough, but please remember that the Top14 (therefore the French) are involved too and not just the English!

There are plenty of French and English who are not aligned or in any agreement with what the PRL have instigated and created.

[Sponsored content]