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.

[ChequeredJersey]

TJ, the French and English aren't one League though. The RABO are. The main issue for me is hat the RABO want participation and money to be split by country/union and the other two by League. Thus Franglos losing teams is not an issue but the fact that the RABO will still have more than either league will be a sticking point. In this case the French and English happen to kind of be the same side but it can only be a deliberate error to put them together when talking about the sharing of money, ERC votes or entrants- they are clearly separate entities. The RABO constituent Nations seem to want to be seen as the same entity in some contexts yet as separate Unions when it benefits them, and are equally as guilty of eating cake and having it at the same time as the French or English. I don't actually agree with, or approve of what the PRL are doing but this painting of them as the bad guys whilst ignoring the legitimate gripes they have and the hypocrisy of the RABO nations by a small number of posters is highly annoying. I wish I hadn't posted this as I don't want to get involved but the self-righteousness popping up on here is too much to allow to go without being commented upon

[TJ]

I don't see it as a legitimate gripe. What business of the PRL is it how the others select their entrants and why should the reduction be at the expense of the smaller unions?

[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!

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

Thats fair enough, but your posts/opinions seem to be a little unbalenced, don't forget the French.

[whocares]

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?

from what I read here, it is meant to be for the "greater good" of Rugby Biltong as it is meant to help "poorer" unions to keep developping or at least maintaining some competitive teams which would also mean better national side.
Socialism meets Rugby in essence

[beshocked]

Well said Chequered jersey.

The Pro12 supporters are very self righteous.

I can see the Pro12 point of view. The status quo is something they are happy with. If I was in your shoes I wouldn't want change either but you must understand the English and French point of view.

TJ you want an European competition to be run by unions. English and French clubs want a competition run by clubs. I agree with the English and French stance.

International rugby is the domain of the unions - they should be left to that sphere of influence.

[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?

from what I read here, it is meant to be for the "greater good" of Rugby Biltong as it is meant to help "poorer" unions to keep developping or at least maintaining some competitive teams which would also mean better national side.
Socialism meets Rugby in essence

That I fully understand.

But that means the RAbo Teams are effectively reliant on the English and French clubs, therefor having to give a little should come from their side, hard balling them is to their detriment.

[HammerofThunor]

And the lovely little kicker is that the PRO12 TV rights are split based on who generated the money as BBCW gives the biggest chunk so the WRU get the biggest chunk. The SRU get bugger all the Italian have to make do with what they can get for it in Italy.

I love the smell of hypocrisy in the morning.

[TJ]

two points - the money comes from selling a European cup. without the rabo teams there is no european cup to sell so to say the french and english provide the bulk of the money is wrong and also the rabo teams are prepared to compromise - just their red lines and the PRLs are too far apart. The rabo teams have said they will look at qualification and a reduction in teams - but why should all the reduction come from those with least representation? If a reduction in teams is needed then why cannnot this be shared all round? why should th erabo teams lose 40% of their representation and the english and french none?

[ChequeredJersey]

Numerically it makes no sense whatsoever, but as it stands it is a result of the inherent differences between the RABO and the other leagues, which will not change. The most sensible options IMO are

A) global rugby, getting the Super 15 involved in a conference style pan-nations club cup for the top teams of every country involved and the RABO/ AP/T14/ITM/Curry cup teams in sub leagues with no dual competing and relegation optional if a nation desires it for their team . This is deeply deeply unlikely

B) increase the HEC to 32 teams, 10 from each league plus the champion qualifiers. 24 actually fits into a sensible number of groups and though the extra matches gor a best of 16 round might seem like a burden, it would seem to me to be better than the current system which laughs at the concept of meritocracy.

[HammerofThunor]

two points - the money comes from selling a European cup.  without the rabo teams there is no european cup to sell so to say the french and english provide the bulk of the money is wrong  and also the rabo teams are prepared to compromise - just their red lines and the PRLs are too far apart.  The rabo teams have said they will look at qualification and a reduction in teams - but why should all the reduction come from those with least representation?  If a reduction in teams is needed then why cannnot this be shared all round?  why should th erabo teams lose 40% of their representation and the english and french none?

Surely the PRO12 is made up of more than just the Welsh. It needs the Scots, Irish and Italians to make it a competition. Why should the WRU get (reportedly) 70% of the TV revenues generated in Britain and Ireland?

The reason the English and French representation won't be reduced is the same as the reason it was increased. They are the primary revenue generators and the unions agreed to the increase to make themselves more money.

[butterfingers]

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.

Thats fair enough, but your posts/opinions seem to be a little unbalenced, don't forget the French.

Scrumpy, forgetting the French, and highlighting the instigater of this whole situation are 2 different things.

The PRL are in a war, on numerous fronts, with everyone it wants to dominate! It is merely a matter of time before their true intentions are seen by all!

[HammerofThunor]

The LNR were the first to give notice. It was their initial proposals that the PRL jumped on the back of (originally they suggested 8,8,8 split but the French wanted 6,6,6). The French are the instigators. But it's ok as I have it on reliable authority they only want to shift the EC final so should be brought round easily.

[butterfingers]

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.

From an English POV, this sounds ok to me. If the Rabo teams must face a loss of 2 teams then dropping 1 from the AP and T14 seems about even. Why though should 1 league lose 4 slots when the other 2 lose none?

I want to see a neutral governing body, ERC is the best option to do this, but if the union issue is the true issue for the PRL (ye right) control of the ERC could be given to a club sponsored committee?

8 Rabo, 5 English and 5 French with 2 winners slots going to their nation seems fair, especially as the top union team from each nation gets a slot and the 4 highest place finishers, allowing for full or part allocation dependant on finish.

A tougher Rabo, no one nation has the potential to miss out, and all nations have the chance at full / more representation than present. Does that not clear up all arguments? Or is there an undercurrent the PRL aren't mentioning:whistle: 

[TJ]

Butterfingers - its a position I think the rabo teams could sign up for and it would answer most things.

[Scrumpy]

[quote="butterfingers"]Scrumpy, forgetting the French, and highlighting the instigater of this whole situation are 2 different things.

The PRL are in a war quote]

That's my point, PRL!

Using the term 'The English!' isn't fair when used with such anger and resentment.

[itsallabouttheincentives]

Rabo12 are reaping what they have sown from becoming over-reliant on HEC monies. The landscape of many of their club games have been downsized in order that the HEC money is a reliable revenue stream (Welsh clubs going from 9 to 4, Scottish from 3 to 2), and the 2001-2 Celtic League went from 15 Welsh, Irish and Scottish sides down to Rabo12 with 2 Italian sides.

The qualification and voting have not changed, yet the Celtic unions have morphed their club/regional setup to maximise club and union revenues, increase player availability for internationals (Rabo doesnt conflicts with 6N - this is a big reason why PRL and LNR need bigger squads and hence have higher wage bills), and remove the threat of non-HEC-qualification.

Unfortunately the Rabo controlling unions have grown too accustomed to being subsidised by PRL/LNR viwers (TV rights value) and are understandably extremely reluctant to concede any of their advantages in this setup.

As an inevitable consequence, if the PRL/LNR felt they were never going to get proper accommodation/negotiation, they had no choice but to exercise the nuclear option of withdrawing and starting over.

[Guest]

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?

from what I read here, it is meant to be for the "greater good" of Rugby Biltong as it is meant to help "poorer" unions to keep developping or at least maintaining some competitive teams which would also mean better national side.
Socialism meets Rugby in essence

That I fully understand.

But that means the RAbo Teams are effectively reliant on the English and French clubs, therefor having to give a little should come from their side, hard balling them is to their detriment.

From what I understand the Rabo Unions have been giving more than just a little since the European Cup inception, and also that they are prepared to compromise to help facilitate the current demands of PRL/LNR. The demands of the PRL/LNR, however, appear to be something of a red herring as club control of the Unions, I believe, lies at the heart of these demands.
As far as being reliant on PRL/LNR? All are reliant on each other as far as a European competition is concerned, unless you view two sides playing each other in a breakaway competition as a truly European competition.

[beshocked]

butterfingers you talk about instigator. I know you want the status quo - you would. A restructure is needed. I think the PRL are actually being really brave standing up to the Pro12. The Pro12 like to puff up their chests and now things start to look like they might go in the PRL's favour they'll want the IRB to step in.

Constantly underestimating the PRL and demonising them does not help matters.

Who exactly are the PRL in a war with in your eyes?

[butterfingers]

Scrumpy, forgetting the French, and highlighting the instigater of this whole situation are 2 different things.

The PRL are in a war quote]

That's my point, PRL!

Using the term 'The English!' isn't fair when used with such anger and resentment.

I agree, there are tempers here who are using this to stir a pot. The RFU has done nothing wrong here, and are awaiting for actual information before they get dragged into the shouting match, I think the RFU are actually helping the situation at present. What they need to do though is be very carefull, and back the PRL at their peril.

[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?

from what I read here, it is meant to be for the "greater good" of Rugby Biltong as it is meant to help "poorer" unions to keep developping or at least maintaining some competitive teams which would also mean better national side.
Socialism meets Rugby in essence

That I fully understand.

But that means the RAbo Teams are effectively reliant on the English and French clubs, therefor having to give a little should come from their side, hard balling them is to their detriment.

From what I understand the Rabo Unions have been giving more than just a little since the European Cup inception, and also that they are prepared to compromise to help facilitate the current demands of PRL/LNR. The demands of the PRL/LNR, however, appear to be something of a red herring as club control of the Unions, I believe, lies at the heart of these demands.
As far as being reliant on PRL/LNR? All are reliant on each other as far as a European competition is concerned, unless you view two sides playing each other in a breakaway competition as a truly European competition.

I obviously don't know the ins and outs of European rugby, but how I rad it is the RAbo teams currently have a majority vote, if that is the case them the English and Frnach have no control over the proceedings whilst bringing in the most revenue.

Where in any business does that happen?

[TJ]

The rabo teams have a long history of accommodating the english teams in competitions - letting them enter after the cup was established without the english, letting them add more teams etc etc.

[TJ]

Biltong - the english and french do not bring in the most revenue. The product that is sold is the european cup and that has no value without the rest of the teams. the english market maybe the biggest but the product sold there is mord than the english club games - its the drama of the big european games that makes the money OK Zebre and currently Edinburgh bring little to the table - but its only 2 seasons ago edinburgh got to the knockout stage beating top french clubs

[butterfingers]

butterfingers you talk about instigator. I know you want the status quo - you would. A restructure is needed. I think the PRL are actually being really brave standing up to the Pro12. The Pro12 like to puff up their chests and now things start to look like they might go in the PRL's favour they'll want the IRB to step in.

Constantly underestimating the PRL and demonising them does not help matters.

Who exactly are the PRL in a war with in your eyes?

Firstly I do not want the status quo, the ERC aren't very good, and the whole thing does need a restructure, but one that compliments the ethos of the sport, not one that is hashed out in court and leaves bad feelings between everyone involved (or those who are not involved)

You talk about the Pro 12 like it's an entity when it has been pointed out by all it is not, it is a collection of 4 nations clubs, 4 nations who have a share in a 6 nation tournament I might add. Does 2/3's of the shareholders not deserve a voice? Do 2/3's of the competition not deserve to be backed by a governing body when 1/6th of the tournament hold them to ransom? Or should they just die out like good little celts?

Let me make myself clear, I am not pro Ireland/Wales/Scotland/Italy, I am clearly anti PRL and everything it does. How the PRL have approached this is very soccer esque, you may be happy with Leicester dominating euro rugby, and the 6N falling by the side of the road, but I am not.

I believe the PRL are in a war with the RFU, LNR and anyone else in it's way of making profits! The PRL will align itself with the LNR and stroke the back of the RFU now, when it maximises profit margins from this negotiation it'll move onto the next, international call ups, player availability, compensation from all unions wanting player release, then it will get it's claws into the RFU pie in as many ways it can.

Lets get one thing straight, this isn't an underdogs fight for survival from the PRL, it's a coup in which the ramifications will dictate how our game is run from here on in, big nations with potential viewing figures will be invested in heavily and will dominate the sport at every level, is that what we all want?

[Guest]

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?

from what I read here, it is meant to be for the "greater good" of Rugby Biltong as it is meant to help "poorer" unions to keep developping or at least maintaining some competitive teams which would also mean better national side.
Socialism meets Rugby in essence

That I fully understand.

But that means the RAbo Teams are effectively reliant on the English and French clubs, therefor having to give a little should come from their side, hard balling them is to their detriment.

From what I understand the Rabo Unions have been giving more than just a little since the European Cup inception, and also that they are prepared to compromise to help facilitate the current demands of PRL/LNR. The demands of the PRL/LNR, however, appear to be something of a red herring as club control of the Unions, I believe, lies at the heart of these demands.
As far as being reliant on PRL/LNR? All are reliant on each other as far as a European competition is concerned, unless you view two sides playing each other in a breakaway competition as a truly European competition.

I obviously don't know the ins and outs of European rugby, but how I rad it is the RAbo teams currently have a majority vote, if that is the case them the English and Frnach have no control over the proceedings whilst bringing in the most revenue.

Where in any business does that happen?

The Rabo only has a majority vote if you believe the spin. There are 18 votes in total. 10 votes between RFU/PRL (5 votes), and FFR/LNR (5 votes), with the Rabo getting a combined 8 votes (2 votes per country represented).

[Poorfour]

A thought. I said somewhere earlier that the RFU has a very strong interest in reaching an agreement with the PRL because it has made a huge guarantee to the IRB over RWC2015 revenues, which will be very hard to achieve if the club game is a mess and its best players are not getting top class rugby.

It occurs to me that the IRB is actually in a similar position. Only England and France can deliver the kind of ticket sales needed to keep the IRB's coffers full, which is why the tournament keeps coming back to one of them. A poorly attended RWC2015 would be a disaster for the IRB.

So they, too, have a strong vested interest in coming up with a solution that keeps the PRL and LNR onside - whatever they may say publicly (which, if you read it carefully only actually says that the unions currently making up the ERC ought to agree to any tournament. It carefully sidesteps whether the ERC itself has to be part of that).

[butterfingers]

The Rabo only has a majority vote if you believe the spin. There are 18 votes in total. 10 votes between RFU/PRL (5 votes), FFR/LNR (5 votes), and the Rabo 8 votes (2 votes per country represented).

Hence why the PRL want the unions out, it is a move to oust the RFU's involvement as much as anything. If the PRL's LNR's proposals are what the tournament needs the RFU /FFR back it and it's done, no matter what the Rabo nations do, fact is the RFU, and FFR generally look out for the good of the tournament, and the PRL/LNR look after the good of themselves.

[Biltong]

Biltong - the english and french do not bring in the most revenue.  The product that is sold is the european cup and that has no value without the rest of the teams.  the english market maybe the biggest but the product sold there is mord than the english club games - its the drama of the big european games that makes the money  OK Zebre and currently Edinburgh bring little to the table - but its only 2 seasons ago edinburgh got to the knockout stage beating top french clubs

Well, if they don't then what is the problem?

If they don't bring in the money then the RABO doesn't need them, eh?

Besides, the tournament's quality is what brings in the money, not the fact of who participates.

[Guest]

Biltong - the english and french do not bring in the most revenue.  The product that is sold is the european cup and that has no value without the rest of the teams.  the english market maybe the biggest but the product sold there is mord than the english club games - its the drama of the big european games that makes the money  OK Zebre and currently Edinburgh bring little to the table - but its only 2 seasons ago edinburgh got to the knockout stage beating top french clubs

Well, if they don't then what is the problem?

If they don't bring in the money then the RABO doesn't need them, eh?

Besides, the tournament's quality is what brings in the money, not the fact of who participates.

If that's true then the biggest share should go to Ireland, and France at present.

[TJ]

Thats my point Biltong - its not the french and english that bring in the money - its the great tournament. A tournament without any of the top sides would be diminished. Its nonsense to say the englisha dnfrench bring in the most money tho

[maestegmafia]

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?

Simple in my opinion Bill the revenue earned is absolutely and unequivocally equal.

Any cup or championship is only about the competitors, without them there is nothing. So every participant is equally relevent at the start and should be rewarded for their inclusion.

As the competition progresses then those that are progressin should receive bonuses related to how far they progress.

A media company, advertiser or sponsor will agree on a deal based on the competitors involved, the exposure.

Should those competitors reduce in any way, the media company, sponsor or advertiser would pay less.

No one team brings any more to the competition than that that wins it, reducing as such through the teams that fell earlier.

What do you suggest?

[butterfingers]

Biltong - the english and french do not bring in the most revenue.  The product that is sold is the european cup and that has no value without the rest of the teams.  the english market maybe the biggest but the product sold there is mord than the english club games - its the drama of the big european games that makes the money  OK Zebre and currently Edinburgh bring little to the table - but its only 2 seasons ago edinburgh got to the knockout stage beating top french clubs

Well, if they don't then what is the problem?

If they don't bring in the money then the RABO doesn't need them, eh?

Besides, the tournament's quality is what brings in the money, not the fact of who participates.

I read on here yesterday that the Rabo is essentially funded by S4C and BBC wales, they contribute 5 of 5.4 million in TV revenue, the WRU receiving 3.7 mill.

The English and French TV audiences have been numbered by Sky sports subscriptions over the last few years, and indeed those 2 nations provide the bulk of the audience for the HC. What is not clear is what the audiences are per game, and the nationality of the audience. There was someone doing a survey in Australia for the lions tour, working out fan trends, and whereas the English were deemed most affluent, and larger fans numbers wise over 45% of lions support was Welsh (not definitive mind) and 80% of those did not live regularly in Wales.

[HammerofThunor]

Biltong - the english and french do not bring in the most revenue.  The product that is sold is the european cup and that has no value without the rest of the teams.  the english market maybe the biggest but the product sold there is mord than the english club games - its the drama of the big european games that makes the money  OK Zebre and currently Edinburgh bring little to the table - but its only 2 seasons ago edinburgh got to the knockout stage beating top french clubs

Why isn't that principle applied to the Pro12 league?

[butterfingers]

Also read an article the other day that said audiences in England bumped massively when English clubs played Leinster, Munster or Toulon, Is this down to Irish fans living in England? Is it down to English interest in Munster, Leinster, or the interest in a euro comp that wants to pit their club against the very best?

[TJ]

because each nation in the pro twelve makes their own deal. thats how it was set up. Thats not what the PRL have done or are attempting to do

[Portnoy's Complaint]

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.    

As I understand it, the 6Ns give the power of veto from any union for competition changes. If a divisional NH 4Ns started this season, the competing D1 sides would be E,W,S & It. But as there wasn't a pre-agreement, there would probably have been a more predictable set of unions.

[TJ]

Butterfingers - indeed which is why I was at an edinbrgh HC game a couple of years ago with 40 000 in the ground - ten times the usual audience

[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?

Simple in my opinion Bill the revenue earned is absolutely and unequivocally equal.

Any cup or championship is only about the competitors, without them there is nothing. So every participant is equally relevent at the start and should be rewarded for their inclusion.

As the competition progresses then those that are progressin should receive bonuses related to how far they progress.

A media company, advertiser or sponsor will agree on a deal based on the competitors involved, the exposure.

Should those competitors reduce in any way, the media company, sponsor or advertiser would pay less. No one team brings any more to the competition than that that wins it, reducing as such through the teams that fell earlier.

What do you suggest?

To be honest, I am over this whole inter provincial tournaments, it has taken the shine off test rugby.

Test rugby used to be a mystical thing, we looked forward to pitting our best against another nation's best. These days players play other nation's players so often during the year that the mystique has gone.

I would prefer to just have domestic competitions within each country, let each country take responsibility for developing their own rugby, some have become reliant on others to have a sustainable system and in my opinion it has been to their detriment.

Even SA, having been involved with Super Rugby has gone backwards, we used to have 6 top class Currie Cup teams, now we have 5 teams in Super Rugby and the development of the other 9 provinces has stagnated.

We should have built to 10 pro teams and 10 semi pro teams by now.

[ChequeredJersey]

Also, when are the next FFR presidential elections? Is not Blanco, of very differing views to Camou, hotly tipped to win power?

[TJ]

Biltong - thats all very well if your country can sustain a pro league. Scotland, Italy cannot, Wales and ireland would struggle. go down that route and Scotland adn italy will dissapear from pro rugby and their international teams would be even worse.

the Rabo and the HC make for two very good competitions

[beshocked]

TJ yes keep on bringing up Edinburgh's 1 semi final appearance in 17 HCs. Just ignore how rubbish Edinburgh normally are.

butterfingers of course they deserve a voice in the 6 nations - that's a competition involving England,France,Wales,Italy,Scotland and Ireland. That is the union's domain.

An European competition should be about clubs, not unions. Ultimately it's the clubs who take part in the competition, not international sides. Italy does not play in the HC. Treviso and Zebre do. Sure they are representatives of Italy but they are clubs.

You talk about voting yet we know that PRL and RFU aren't necessarily on the same side on all issues are they? Same with LNR and FFR.

RFU and FFR look out for the good of the tournament? Perhaps in your eyes, I think they look after themselves like all the other unions.


You say it's not an underdogs fight yet on the other hand you say the PRL are fighting everyone? Which is it?


Well I am not a big fan of the RFU. I think greed drives them. They screwed over loyal debenture holders for the rugby world cup 2015 so they could get more money. They charge an awful lot for international matches. They just want to make as much money as they can. They plunder clubs for coaches as well.

Why should the PRL and FFR be bullied by unions?

PRL and FFR want an European competition to be run by clubs. Afterall it's them who take part!

[HammerofThunor]

because each nation in the pro twelve makes their own deal. thats how it was set up.  Thats not what the PRL have done or are attempting to do

No. they're on about selling their rights and putting it in a pot. The PRO12 participants sell their rights and keep it for themselves. And no, the ERC wasn't set-up like that. Perhaps it should be.

[butterfingers]

Biltong - thats all very well if your country can sustain a pro league.  Scotland, Italy cannot, Wales and ireland would struggle.  go down that route and Scotland adn italy will dissapear from pro rugby and their international teams would be even worse.

the Rabo and the HC make for two very good competitions

I'm not sure the Rabo is proving a good tournament, travel from fans is minor, stadiums are half empty at best in some areas, and the quality of games is poor with very few internationals on show regularly.

[HammerofThunor]

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?

Simple in my opinion Bill the revenue earned is absolutely and unequivocally equal.

Any cup or championship is only about the competitors, without them there is nothing. So every participant is equally relevent at the start and should be rewarded for their inclusion.

As the competition progresses then those that are progressin should receive bonuses related to how far they progress.

A media company, advertiser or sponsor will agree on a deal based on the competitors involved, the exposure.

Should those competitors reduce in any way, the media company, sponsor or advertiser would pay less.

No one team brings any more to the competition than that that wins it, reducing as such through the teams that fell earlier.

What do you suggest?

I'll ask what I asked TJ, why isn't the Pro12 set up like that then?

[TJ]

No - the PRL tried to sell all the rights - not just to english games. thats the difference

[TJ]

Butterfingers - the Rabo provides some great games. Do yo actually watch it? Much better than many jeff games. Attendances are rising each year

[itsallabouttheincentives]

No - the PRL tried to sell all the rights - not just to english games.  thats the difference

no - they sold the rights to all games with english clubs in and agreed to put the money into a pot.

[TJ]

A pot that they would then take the lions share of...................... Not that they actually have any product to sell nor any right to sell anything especially away games

[Scrumpy]

Butterfingers - the Rabo provides some great games.  Do yo actually watch it?  Much better than many jeff games.  Attendances are rising each year

I agree some games are great, but travel is a problem and I fail to see how playing in half empty stadiums is helpful to anyone.

[itsallabouttheincentives]

the hypocrisy in this whole discussion is getting really irritating. of course this is all about greed. PRL and LNR monetary greed - a.k.a maximising their p&L and looking after their shareholders. just like its also about Irish fan greed in wanting continued success in HC, Irish and Welsh Union greed in wanting to control their clubs/provinces/regions and retain and develop their own players. it's all about everyone's self interests and so it should be.

why should the PRL/LNR give two hoots about, for example, the SRU? they shouldnt as they have no overlap of common interests, and the same is equally true for the SRU caring about PRL/LNR.

the final outcome will be determined by whose rugby models are the most sustainable financially WITHOUT Heineken Cup, as that is indubitably the strongest negotiating position. pretending otherwise is really dangerous, and probably why we are where we are today.

[butterfingers]

Butterfingers - the Rabo provides some great games.  Do yo actually watch it?  Much better than many jeff games.  Attendances are rising each year

I used to watch a lot of Welsh games while living in Cardiff, now watch some Scottish gaes now I am in Edinburgh...

Lets be honest, there are differing games between the Rabo and AP, but on the whole the intensity is higher, the pressure far greater and quality of player in any average gae is better in the AP.

I caught the Glasgow, Blues game recently... Dire. No real quality, young kids and old fogies throughout, both squads were lacking, and that will happen about 50% of the season (until the last few games where HC qualification is questionable). Take Leinster last week at Glasgow too...

[Sponsored content]