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.

[TJ]

BT are not going to pay a hundred million billions for it tho are they? Like we were promised they would for the PrL run european cup.

[ChequeredJersey]

Ok I should start off by saying I don't think this has anything to do with equal qualification or even money - this entire circus is about control. The clubs want it and the unions have it.

However, let's just say it were about money as the PRL claim. If all the clubs and provinces sign up to the BT deal will it improve the finances of those clubs? Everyone's getting richer right so what's the problem?!

Tell me, what will those clubs do with their new found riches? Invest in new stadia? Bring down the cost of tickets? Nope and nope.

They'll do 2 things.

1) Buy more players and pay them more. This will drive up the cost of your average player, which will in turn create even more competition to sign the cream of the crop. No new players will be magically created, they'll just be paid a lot more (as we have been seeing in France for the past 10 yrs). The Aviva may have a salary cap for now but without the RFU enforcing the comp there's nothing stopping them blowing it wide open and creating hyper inflation in the sport.

2) If there's any money left over after the clubs have finished driving the price of players up, it will go straight into the owners pockets. A lot of the commentary around this issue has focussed on the poor old sugar daddies who have been making a loss in the English game for decades now - the implication being that they're overdue a payday.

Now the problem with these 2 points is that we'll effectively create a football landscape where crazy amounts being paid for players and a few big clubs making a profit for their owners at the expense of the poorer clubs who go to the wall. Fundamentally nothing will change except an extra zero or two on a player's salary.

Whilst I can see where this cynicism comes from, this is utter speculation, especially as in England we do have a salary cap and incentives for EQ players and our clubs are struggling to financially compete with France and a few front-runners anyway. The Salary Cap is enforced and voted up by the Clubs, not the RFU, to my knowledge

[ChequeredJersey]

I've checked, and, yep, the salary cap is set by the PRL not the RFU

[itsallabouttheincentives]

BT are not going to pay a hundred million billions for it tho are they?  Like we were promised they would for the PrL run european cup.

yes in point of fact they BT will pay exactly the same for a franglo cup as they would pay for the euro whatsit. you obviously didnt read all of the article. not sure where you got your figures from either.

[TJ]

Yeah right - what have you been smoking - can I have some? Bt will pay the same for a few franglo games as they would a euro cup with far more games - pull the other one - Bill Beuamonts hiding up it

[stub]

http://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/sport/anglo-french-breakaway-spells-financial-ruin-for-irish-provinces-607833.html[/url]

I thought this made for an interesting read from The Irish Examiner. Quite balanced really even though the reporter feels the implications for Irish rugby are dire.



Our rugby correspondent, Daniel Pitcher takes a look at the dilemma that the ERC faces with yesterday’s announcement of an Anglo-French rugby breakaway from the Heineken Cup.

The ERC were yesterday left with egg on their face as the impending threat of a breakaway European Competition by English and French clubs became a reality, with both sides announcing such a tournament would happen.

For the last few months, parties on both sides of the divide had argued about the structure of the Heineken Cup, with English and French clubs claiming that teams in the Rabo Direct Pro 12 had an unfair advantage – because most of them all qualify automatically, while other clubs had to fight tooth and nail.

In the Pro 12, teams – including all four Irish provinces – can afford to rest their star players before European games, knowing that doing so will have no impact on their qualification through the league, while the English and French have their own Premiership tournaments each week in which they must compete at the highest level in order to book their ticket on the European stage.

Their proposal to the Heineken Cup was to have a fairer distribution of places and they also wanted team numbers participating reduced from 24 to 20.

These proposals were rejected by the ERC, leading to the announcement of a separate competition in which they stress the "Celtic League" teams would have an opportunity to qualify too.

THE RUGBY CHAMPIONS CUP

In a statement, Premiership Rugby and the Ligue Nationale de Rugby have called this breakaway "Rugby Champions Cup".

“The competition will be based on the principles of qualification on merit, a strong competition format, equality between the leagues, higher commercial values for the teams and expansion into new European markets,” the statement said.

“The Top 14 and Premiership Rugby clubs have already confirmed their participation in the new competition and a joint working group has been created to prepare all necessary elements in good time for the 2014/15 season.”

The move comes just days after the ERC announced both sides would enter mediation talks at the next meeting of stakeholders next month.

Both the ERC and IRB appointed Graeme Mew, a senior partner with the Toronto law firm Clyde & Co and a vastly experienced dispute resolution lawyer. He has mediated a wide variety of civil disputes involving international and cross-border issues, commercial transactions and contract law.

But one has to ask what impact mediation talks would have now, or whether it’s too late. I would go with the latter argument – the ERC have known for well over a year about the threat of a breakaway competition and have appeared to do very little or nothing about it.

It’s now coming to bite them with the threat of what is the bread and butter for Irish provinces in particular facing total extinction.



Last week, I checked in with the Irish provinces, and found players and coaches saying that competing in a European competition was crucial to the future set-up of the provinces and crucial for them financially too.

I was sitting in a pub recently and overhearing people around me talking about the future of Irish Rugby and I heard someone say something I never thought would ever be possible in rugby circles again: "amateur rugby".

The man in the pub could have a point.

If the Heineken Cup disappears, that is an immediate cash cut-off for Ulster, Munster, Leinster and Connacht, which will be followed by a sponsor's cut-off: and let’s not forget TV rights money too.

That sort cash drought could be a death sentence for the teams who would have to let go of their players, even home-grown players some of which are subject to transfer speculation to France.

With massive monetary losses for the provinces and the IRFU, no European competition for Irish provinces might just spell the end of the professional game here.

Johnny Sexton is already playing in the French Top 14 . There was a long-standing tussle between Sexton and the IRFU, who just didn’t have the cash in the pocket to keep him playing at Leinster and had no other choice but to let him go.

Sean O’Brien is the latest man to be linked with a move to Paris to join his former team mate at Racing Metro, while Jamie Heaslip is linked with a move to Clermont.

So what do the IRFU do? Logistically you have to think they'll let him go, although they are playing down these latest moves (something they did when Sexton was being looked at).

Can they really afford the ‘well you couldn’t keep Johnny so why are you keeping them’ argument?

I don’t think so, bringing me back to an earlier point, the destruction of the European Cup essentially gives clubs outside Ireland all the power in the world to come in and take whoever they want, leaving the provincial structure in an awful mess when it comes to the League.

The changes will also affect our provincial coaches. Surely the lure of top-quality competition in the Heineken Cup would have been a main selling point for Rob Penny at Munster, Matt O’Connor at Leinster and Pat Lam of Connacht, not forgetting Joe Schmidt as Ireland head coach.

MEDIATION

This row has thrown up some questions which need to be answered very quickly, particularly by the ERC, who you have to say have dealt with this situation in a most unprofessional and shambolic manner.

Knowing about unhappiness with English and French teams for over a year and only attempting to do something about it when there is a gun to their heads is a very poor way of doing business.

Derek McGrath and Jean-Pierre Lux of the ERC had better, for the sake of rugby here and in the other ‘Celtic’ nations, hope that mediation can result in something positive, considering now the English and French seem to have their minds made up already.

[HammerofThunor]

BT were never going to pay £100M for the Euro games. It was supposed to be a 50% increase on the sky deal. The sky deal was about £50M. So we're talking £75M. Of which £25M would be for the PRL. If that's about right the league itself is about £75M. Would BT give £25M for an English cup? Or ramping up the A-W? Maybe, maybe not.

[itsallabouttheincentives]

Yeah right - what have you been smoking - can I have some?  Bt will pay the same for a few franglo games as they would a euro cup with far more games - pull the other one - Bill Beuamonts hiding up it

i posted this for you once already. i am now going to bold the relevant bit for you.

"I cannot see any reason for the IRB to intervene," he said. "This is not their issue and, if any unions try to obstruct the new competition, they will need to be specific and be mindful of conflicts of interest. We want a six-nation European tournament based on merit, with money divided between the three leagues, but it will not be run by ERC and there is no getting round that. Whatever, our competition will start and the money BT is putting in does not vary depending on how many countries are involved."

clear enough?

[itsallabouttheincentives]

BT are not going to pay a hundred million billions for it tho are they?  Like we were promised they would for the PrL run european cup.

yes in point of fact they BT will pay exactly the same for a franglo cup as they would pay for the euro whatsit. you obviously didnt read all of the article. not sure where you got your figures from either.

or is he lying and you know the terms of the BT contract better?

[TJ]

Please can I have some of what you are smoking? You really think BT will pay the same for a much smaller number of games without some of the biggest names? yeah right. cloud cookoo land.

[itsallabouttheincentives]

Please can I have some of what you are smoking?  You really think BT will pay the same for a much smaller number of games without some of the biggest names?  yeah right.  cloud cookoo land.  

So he's lying then?

mate, if you cant accept information shared with you which shows your previous statements were factually wrong, then i suggest you stop posting on this forum. if you dont moderate yourself, then i am sure someone else will.

[TJ]

If you cannot see how nonsensical that is then I am sorry for you. There is no way on earth that BT will pay the same for a half assed franglo cup of a few games than they would for a full blown euro cup of many games. 'cloud cookoo land.

[itsallabouttheincentives]

If you cannot see how nonsensical that is then I am sorry for you. There is no way on earth that BT will pay the same for a half assed franglo cup of a few games than they would for a full blown euro cup of many games.  'cloud cookoo land.

probably best if you talk to PRL directly to tell them they have misread their BT contract as such useful information is wasted on this fora. you could help force PRL back to the ERC negotiating table once they realise they have gotten it all wrong.

[TJ]

come off it - its obvious nonsense to anyone not in your little fantasy world. Ho0ever I am tired of debating with you whaen you spout such abject nonsense and scatter in a few insults for fun.

[stub]

Ok I should start off by saying I don't think this has anything to do with equal qualification or even money - this entire circus is about control. The clubs want it and the unions have it.

However, let's just say it were about money as the PRL claim. If all the clubs and provinces sign up to the BT deal will it improve the finances of those clubs? Everyone's getting richer right so what's the problem?!

Tell me, what will those clubs do with their new found riches? Invest in new stadia? Bring down the cost of tickets? Nope and nope.

They'll do 2 things.

1) Buy more players and pay them more. This will drive up the cost of your average player, which will in turn create even more competition to sign the cream of the crop. No new players will be magically created, they'll just be paid a lot more (as we have been seeing in France for the past 10 yrs). The Aviva may have a salary cap for now but without the RFU enforcing the comp there's nothing stopping them blowing it wide open and creating hyper inflation in the sport.

2) If there's any money left over after the clubs have finished driving the price of players up, it will go straight into the owners pockets. A lot of the commentary around this issue has focussed on the poor old sugar daddies who have been making a loss in the English game for decades now - the implication being that they're overdue a payday.

Now the problem with these 2 points is that we'll effectively create a football landscape where crazy amounts being paid for players and a few big clubs making a profit for their owners at the expense of the poorer clubs who go to the wall. Fundamentally nothing will change except an extra zero or two on a player's salary. Meanwhile the international game will suffer, smaller nations will suffer because their unions can't keep up with rich club owners the game will become further and further removed from its origins.

I understand your concerns and what you say is certainly a potential outcome if the big clubs get all of their own way. I still feel that smaller clubs can temper this to some extent. However I can see extra money also being used to improve stadia as many clubs seem to have development plans and that would be good to see in my opinion. I'm sure that ticket sales won't be reduced though! Also what is to say that clubs will not invest more in academies and grass roots rugby? Certainly my experience around Gloucester, Worcester, Cardiff and Swansea has been that clubs (and it was clubs in Wales then) have been really keen to get into schools and local rugby clubs to develop the game and players. Sure, some of these players will end up being bought by larger clubs but that has always been so. I suppose what I'm saying is that the money has the potential for good too.

[Pot Hale]

Since the proposed new BT cup will not be based on a league basis, but rather an invitational basis to clubs, one assumes that leagues won't be used as a basis for defining anything, since the PRO12 won't be involved in any new cup.

Invited clubs could therefore seek minimum fee guarantees to be paid to them to play. Plus progress and win bonuses.

[malky1963]

BT are not going to pay a hundred million billions for it tho are they?  Like we were promised they would for the PrL run european cup.

yes in point of fact they BT will pay exactly the same for a franglo cup as they would pay for the euro whatsit. you obviously didnt read all of the article. not sure where you got your figures from either.

or is he lying and you know the terms of the BT contract better?

There is a very good chance that he is lying (he has previous form).
I would love to be a salesman with you as the client - you are astonishingly gullible.

[itsallabouttheincentives]

BT are not going to pay a hundred million billions for it tho are they?  Like we were promised they would for the PrL run european cup.

yes in point of fact they BT will pay exactly the same for a franglo cup as they would pay for the euro whatsit. you obviously didnt read all of the article. not sure where you got your figures from either.

or is he lying and you know the terms of the BT contract better?

There is a very good chance that he is lying (he has previous form).
I would love to be a salesman with you as the client - you are astonishingly gullible.

i dont need any hoovers thanks.

[malky1963]

BT are not going to pay a hundred million billions for it tho are they?  Like we were promised they would for the PrL run european cup.

yes in point of fact they BT will pay exactly the same for a franglo cup as they would pay for the euro whatsit. you obviously didnt read all of the article. not sure where you got your figures from either.

or is he lying and you know the terms of the BT contract better?

There is a very good chance that he is lying (he has previous form).
I would love to be a salesman with you as the client - you are astonishingly gullible.

i dont need any hoovers thanks.

itsallabouttheincentives- your opinions have no relevance - you are ignorant (BT willing to pay the same for the Franglo as a wannabee HEC - seriously go and see someone to help you with your issues)
I just hope that somewhere in the IRB/RFU/FFR there are people who are brave enough and far-sighted enough to realise that this land grab by a group of people who are nothing more than short term, self-interested egotists must be resisted.

[HammerofThunor]

Just want to make the point the money is not dependant on the countries involved. It may be dependant on the number of teams, which given the available teams is loosely based on countries. Unless it allows for a domestic English cup with the Championship or something like that.

[HammerofThunor]

Since the proposed new BT cup will not be based on a league basis, but rather an invitational basis to clubs, one assumes that leagues won't be used as a basis for defining anything, since the PRO12 won't be involved in any new cup.  

Invited clubs could therefore seek minimum fee guarantees to be paid to them to play.   Plus progress and win bonuses.

Where have you got that from?

[Guest]

Just want to make the point the money is not dependant on the countries involved. It may be dependant on the number of teams, which given the available teams is loosely based on countries. Unless it allows for a domestic English cup with the Championship or something like that.

That was more or less my thinking. I can't see BT giving £75 million to a lesser competition than the HEC. By lesser I mean less unions represented, and certainly not to a competition consisting of 2 teams. That's fantasy stuff.
Would they part with £50 million for a purely franglo competition? I can't know, but I would doubt it very much.

[maestegmafia]

Since the proposed new BT cup will not be based on a league basis, but rather an invitational basis to clubs, one assumes that leagues won't be used as a basis for defining anything, since the PRO12 won't be involved in any new cup.  

Invited clubs could therefore seek minimum fee guarantees to be paid to them to play.   Plus progress and win bonuses.

Where have you got that from?

Considering that the PRL are having to try to invite clubs to join they can't get clubs to qualify for their concept. They are trying to get clubs to break away from a recognised format. No one has stated they are willing to sign up..!

[madmaccas]

Ok I should start off by saying I don't think this has anything to do with equal qualification or even money - this entire circus is about control. The clubs want it and the unions have it.

However, let's just say it were about money as the PRL claim. If all the clubs and provinces sign up to the BT deal will it improve the finances of those clubs? Everyone's getting richer right so what's the problem?!

Tell me, what will those clubs do with their new found riches? Invest in new stadia? Bring down the cost of tickets? Nope and nope.

They'll do 2 things.

1) Buy more players and pay them more. This will drive up the cost of your average player, which will in turn create even more competition to sign the cream of the crop. No new players will be magically created, they'll just be paid a lot more (as we have been seeing in France for the past 10 yrs). The Aviva may have a salary cap for now but without the RFU enforcing the comp there's nothing stopping them blowing it wide open and creating hyper inflation in the sport.

2) If there's any money left over after the clubs have finished driving the price of players up, it will go straight into the owners pockets. A lot of the commentary around this issue has focussed on the poor old sugar daddies who have been making a loss in the English game for decades now - the implication being that they're overdue a payday.

Now the problem with these 2 points is that we'll effectively create a football landscape where crazy amounts being paid for players and a few big clubs making a profit for their owners at the expense of the poorer clubs who go to the wall. Fundamentally nothing will change except an extra zero or two on a player's salary.

Whilst I can see where this cynicism comes from, this is utter speculation, especially as in England we do have a salary cap and incentives for EQ players and our clubs are struggling to financially compete with France and a few front-runners anyway. The Salary Cap is enforced and voted up by the Clubs, not the RFU, to my knowledge

Yep they do have a salary cap now for practical reasons but if they have significantly more money, and in order to compete with the French clubs, they would more than likely lift it - free market and all that.

It is interesting that French and English clubs band this fairness facade about whilst the French clubs spend tens of millions on their all star squads. If the English clubs were really interested in fairness then they'd force the French to impose a salary cap before jumping into bed with them - their huge star studded squads give them far more of an advantage than the Irish provinces get by resting a couple of players every once in a while.

Hypocrisy, ain't it great!

[HammerofThunor]

Just want to make the point the money is not dependant on the countries involved. It may be dependant on the number of teams, which given the available teams is loosely based on countries. Unless it allows for a domestic English cup with the Championship or something like that.

That was more or less my thinking. I can't see BT giving £75 million to a lesser competition than the HEC. By lesser I mean less unions represented, and certainly not to a competition consisting of 2 teams. That's fantasy stuff.
Would they part with £50 million for a purely franglo competition? I can't know, but I would doubt it very much.

They wouldn't need to give £50M. IF the English keep their bit and French keep their's (or they're about equal) then it would just need to be £25M for them to be at the same point as now. On top of the increase for the league. So for UK televising in theory one or two tier, up to 26 team competition (include D2 and Championship in the 2nd tier?), would they give £25M? No idea.

But I'm don't see a breakaway competition personally (not against the unions wishes). Don't think the PRL are completely stupid and that would be completely stupid. I don't think they would even get involved with an RFU approved comp with the LNR if the FFR are against it.

[HammerofThunor]

What is hypocritical? The French generate their own money and they spend it.

[madmaccas]

Ok I should start off by saying I don't think this has anything to do with equal qualification or even money - this entire circus is about control. The clubs want it and the unions have it.

However, let's just say it were about money as the PRL claim. If all the clubs and provinces sign up to the BT deal will it improve the finances of those clubs? Everyone's getting richer right so what's the problem?!

Tell me, what will those clubs do with their new found riches? Invest in new stadia? Bring down the cost of tickets? Nope and nope.

They'll do 2 things.

1) Buy more players and pay them more. This will drive up the cost of your average player, which will in turn create even more competition to sign the cream of the crop. No new players will be magically created, they'll just be paid a lot more (as we have been seeing in France for the past 10 yrs). The Aviva may have a salary cap for now but without the RFU enforcing the comp there's nothing stopping them blowing it wide open and creating hyper inflation in the sport.

2) If there's any money left over after the clubs have finished driving the price of players up, it will go straight into the owners pockets. A lot of the commentary around this issue has focussed on the poor old sugar daddies who have been making a loss in the English game for decades now - the implication being that they're overdue a payday.

Now the problem with these 2 points is that we'll effectively create a football landscape where crazy amounts being paid for players and a few big clubs making a profit for their owners at the expense of the poorer clubs who go to the wall. Fundamentally nothing will change except an extra zero or two on a player's salary. Meanwhile the international game will suffer, smaller nations will suffer because their unions can't keep up with rich club owners the game will become further and further removed from its origins.

I understand your concerns and what you say is certainly a potential outcome if the big clubs get all of their own way. I still feel that smaller clubs can temper this to some extent. However I can see extra money also being used to improve stadia as many clubs seem to have development plans and that would be good to see in my opinion. I'm sure that ticket sales won't be reduced though! Also what is to say that clubs will not invest more in academies and grass roots rugby? Certainly my experience around Gloucester, Worcester, Cardiff and Swansea has been that clubs (and it was clubs in Wales then) have been really keen to get into schools and local rugby clubs to develop the game and players. Sure, some of these players will end up being bought by larger clubs but that has always been so. I suppose what I'm saying is that the money has the potential for good too.

Oh certainly, clubs of all levels can be wonderful forces for good, they're the lifeblood of the game in every country. However, it isn't a coincidence that whenever a club signs a new sponsorship contract or gets a new owner a raft of big marquee players are signed shortly after. If that's happening across at least 2 leagues (Aviva and Pro) the it will inflate the market, of that there can't be any doubt. Even the small clubs will have to spend more to keep up, as I said just look at football for the model. Sure they run community programmes (usually created by FA as per the RFU) but that is a fraction of the money they will be receiving.

I'm not in any way against clubs, it's just dangerous to let them run things as they have very short term goals (usually restricted to a single season).

[madmaccas]

What is hypocritical? The French generate their own money and they spend it.

I'm talking about the English clubs. It's ridiculous that they want to force the Celts to change the way they run their league/teams (and how they rest players) in the name of 'fairness' but don't see anything wrong with the French having the equivalent of 2 squads packed full of internationals.

It's also pretty amusing that the PRL are complaining about the Rabo not being competitive due to a lack of relegation, yet the PRL have spent the last 15 years fighting with the RFU to ringfence the Premiership.

[Poorfour]

Yep they do have a salary cap now for practical reasons but if they have significantly more money, and in order to compete with the French clubs, they would more than likely lift it - free market and all that.

It is interesting that French and English clubs band this fairness facade about whilst the French clubs spend tens of millions on their all star squads. If the English clubs were really interested in fairness then they'd force the French to impose a salary cap before jumping into bed with them - their huge star studded squads give them far more of an advantage than the Irish provinces get by resting a couple of players every once in a while.

Hypocrisy, ain't it great!

You are aware that the amount of money we're talking about amounts to roughly £800k per team per year? That's enough to enable a PRL team to a) earn roughly as much from the HEC as a Pro12 team does today and b) for most teams, get them to breakeven (most teams make a loss in the £500k - £1m range).

I can see the PRL boardroom now: "Right lads. Despite the objections of the IRFU, the IRB and some blokes on v2, we've pulled it off and got the league we want. Most of us might even breakeven this year if we're careful... oh hang it all. Let's just double the salary cap!"

Not.

And yes, the French do have a bigger salary cap, though IIRC it's only about £8m, not "tens of millions". They also have a big cost advantage because most of their stadia are municipally funded (who pays for the Pro12's grounds, by the way?). Perhaps we should get the French government to make them pay a market rate of rent? It's got about as much chance of success as getting the LNR to cut its cap. What makes you think that the PRL has anything like that much bargaining power? The LNR served notice first. What earthly leverage is there to force the LNR to agree to a reduction?

Reducing a salary cap is much easier said than done. For one thing, the players are already contracted, usually for 2 or 3 years. The only effective way to implement a reduced cap would be by gradually replacing expensive players with less expensive ones - while having to balance it with wage increases for the players you want to keep. You might manage to agree a freeze or a gradual reduction over time, but it will take years to normalise.

Unless you're advocating a mass clear out of 600 or so players across the league - in which case, get real.The teams would never agree it and even if they did the players would strike (and they have more leverage in France than in the UK or Eire, I suspect).

[Poorfour]

What is hypocritical? The French generate their own money and they spend it.

I'm talking about the English clubs. It's ridiculous that they want to force the Celts to change the way they run their league/teams (and how they rest players) in the name of 'fairness' but don't see anything wrong with the French having the equivalent of 2 squads packed full of internationals.

It's also pretty amusing that the PRL are complaining about the Rabo not being competitive due to a lack of relegation, yet the PRL have spent the last 15 years fighting with the RFU to ringfence the Premiership.

No they don't. They want the Celts to have to qualify for a jointly run competition through their domestic league like everyone else. I doubt they'd object to Celtic teams continuing to rest players in the Rabo, but it may not be wise.

And there's plenty to object to about the French playing under a much higher salary cap, but there's much less you can do about it.

I don't think I've read anything from the PRL about the Rabo not having relegation - that's something that the fans trot out from time to time and in my opinion is not a valid criticism. The Pro12 nations don't have multiple tiers of professional teams, so they don't have much option. But it is a valid criticism to say that the lack of relegation and qualification makes the Pro12 less competitive than the AP.

Also what's your source for the PRL fighting with the RFU over ringfencing? I've seen ringfencing discussed on occasion, mainly by journalists and individual CEOs, but I can't remember the last time there was any official discussion of it. In the period that I've been following club rugby closely, I've seen two of the so called "big 4" clubs relegated.

There's an awful lot of mudslinging at the PRL, with precious little to back it up.

[Artful_Dodger]

To be honest, on a few occasions the PRL have been lying gratuitously. Quentin Smith said that the French clubs will not be involved in any competitions run by the ERC. Then the French say they will block any competition NOT run by the ERC. Quentin Smith is talking absolute smack, as is Mark McCafferty, as have the PRL all along. They are absolutely full of it and I think everyone including the French are starting to realize that they are dealing with jumped up little men with the gall to think they can change the very fabric of European rugby for the sake of a bit more cash for them and their backers.

[Guest]

Just want to make the point the money is not dependant on the countries involved. It may be dependant on the number of teams, which given the available teams is loosely based on countries. Unless it allows for a domestic English cup with the Championship or something like that.

That was more or less my thinking. I can't see BT giving £75 million to a lesser competition than the HEC. By lesser I mean less unions represented, and certainly not to a competition consisting of 2 teams. That's fantasy stuff.
Would they part with £50 million for a purely franglo competition? I can't know, but I would doubt it very much.

They wouldn't need to give £50M. IF the English keep their bit and French keep their's (or they're about equal) then it would just need to be £25M for them to be at the same point as now. On top of the increase for the league. So for UK televising in theory one or two tier, up to 26 team competition (include D2 and Championship in the 2nd tier?), would they give £25M? No idea.

But I'm don't see a breakaway competition personally (not against the unions wishes). Don't think the PRL are completely stupid and that would be completely stupid. I don't think they would even get involved with an RFU approved comp with the LNR if the FFR are against it.

Fair points. Think I've been reading so much 'off the wall' stuff that my reasoning has taken a left turn somewhere.

"I don't think they would even get involved with an RFU approved comp with the LNR if the FFR are against it"

That's a very good point, and maybe even more so for LNR. Why invite the grief?, although I would be slightly concerned that PRL may sit out the HEC unless their issue with the voting system is amended in their favour. If they did then LNR might just sit it out along with them. Neither indefinitely though.

[Artful_Dodger]

Smith reiterated that the English and French clubs will not be involved in any competition operating under the auspices of European Rugby Cup (ERC) next season,

The FFR however....

However, the French Rugby Federation (FFR) subsequently released a strongly-worded statement giving its backing to ERC.
"No meeting or international competition involving French clubs can be organised outside the framework of the FFR and without its prior agreement," it read.
"The FFR has always been and will remain a major player in the European cups organised by ERC and backs proposals to permit the continuity and development of these."

Quentin Smith is a parasite.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/24194481

[madmaccas]

Yep they do have a salary cap now for practical reasons but if they have significantly more money, and in order to compete with the French clubs, they would more than likely lift it - free market and all that.

It is interesting that French and English clubs band this fairness facade about whilst the French clubs spend tens of millions on their all star squads. If the English clubs were really interested in fairness then they'd force the French to impose a salary cap before jumping into bed with them - their huge star studded squads give them far more of an advantage than the Irish provinces get by resting a couple of players every once in a while.

Hypocrisy, ain't it great!

You are aware that the amount of money we're talking about amounts to roughly £800k per team per year? That's enough to enable a PRL team to a) earn roughly as much from the HEC as a Pro12 team does today and b) for most teams, get them to breakeven (most teams make a loss in the £500k - £1m range).

Where do you get the 800k figure from? Not contesting it just wondering how you've worked that out.

Even if that is roughly the right the amount, that is actually a very significant figure when you consider that most (non French) clubs and provinces run on £4 million or under a year.

I'm not advocating forcing the French into an equal salary cap at all, I think that's as ridiculous and invasive as attempting to force the Celtic teams to change the way they rest plays. I just find it amusing that both the PRL and LNR  talk about a level playing field when it comes to the celts yet ignore the far more substantial advantage that the French get.

[madmaccas]

What is hypocritical? The French generate their own money and they spend it.

I'm talking about the English clubs. It's ridiculous that they want to force the Celts to change the way they run their league/teams (and how they rest players) in the name of 'fairness' but don't see anything wrong with the French having the equivalent of 2 squads packed full of internationals.

It's also pretty amusing that the PRL are complaining about the Rabo not being competitive due to a lack of relegation, yet the PRL have spent the last 15 years fighting with the RFU to ringfence the Premiership.

No they don't. They want the Celts to have to qualify for a jointly run competition through their domestic league like everyone else. I doubt they'd object to Celtic teams continuing to rest players in the Rabo, but it may not be wise.

Also what's your source for the PRL fighting with the RFU over ringfencing? I've seen ringfencing discussed on occasion, mainly by journalists and individual CEOs, but I can't remember the last time there was any official discussion of it. In the period that I've been following club rugby closely, I've seen two of the so called "big 4" clubs relegated.

Everyone else? What the French and English? They chose their league system, the Celtic nations chose their own. To tell another highly successful league that they're doing it wrong is patronising at best. Fundamentally we come back to the issue of a European Cup either being about European teams, or just about the best clubs who happen to be in Europe (or South Africa!). How lucky are England and France that they have so many teams in their country that they can't send them all forward!

Anyway all of that is irrelevant as I said, this isn't about qualification or even money, it's about power.

There have been multiple occasions in which the Premiership organisers have explored and proposed ring fencing. The latest of which was 2010 http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/rugby/rugby-union/news-comment/rfu-would-block-expanded-premiership-1956677.html

[alcoombe]

The ring fencing thing is a bit of a journalist favourite issue to raise every once in a while that never seems to have any basis.  That Independent article is missing the PRL's comments on the matter from the day before.

Premier Rugby denies plans to scrap relegation- 27 Apr 2010 00:00:00

Premier Rugby has denied media speculation that it is set to scrap the existing relegation system from the Guinness Premiership in order to protect the financial position of the 12 top-flight rugby clubs.

Premier Rugby chief executive Mark McCafferty confirmed that expanding the Premiership from 12 to 14 teams was a possibility ‘two or three years down the line’ but he insisted the plans didn't include any form of ‘stopping of relegation or ring fencing’.

http://www.sportindustry.biz/news/view/7181/premier-rugby-denies-plans-to-scrap-relegation

[Poorfour]

Yep they do have a salary cap now for practical reasons but if they have significantly more money, and in order to compete with the French clubs, they would more than likely lift it - free market and all that.

It is interesting that French and English clubs band this fairness facade about whilst the French clubs spend tens of millions on their all star squads. If the English clubs were really interested in fairness then they'd force the French to impose a salary cap before jumping into bed with them - their huge star studded squads give them far more of an advantage than the Irish provinces get by resting a couple of players every once in a while.

Hypocrisy, ain't it great!

You are aware that the amount of money we're talking about amounts to roughly £800k per team per year? That's enough to enable a PRL team to a) earn roughly as much from the HEC as a Pro12 team does today and b) for most teams, get them to breakeven (most teams make a loss in the £500k - £1m range).

Where do you get the 800k figure from? Not contesting it just wondering how you've worked that out.

Even if that is roughly the right the amount, that is actually a very significant figure when you consider that most (non French) clubs and provinces run on £4 million or under a year.

I'm not advocating forcing the French into an equal salary cap at all, I think that's as ridiculous and invasive as attempting to force the Celtic teams to change the way they rest plays. I just find it amusing that both the PRL and LNR  talk about a level playing field when it comes to the celts yet ignore the far more substantial advantage that the French get.

The £800k was derived from a post elsewhere on here where the poster reported that the PRL proposal was for the English and French teams to share c£10m additional per league, with the Rabo teams getting an additional £600k. I'm afraid I don't have an original source. It sounds unbalanced until you realise it means that each team will get roughly the same amount.

And yes, £800k is significant. For most English clubs - who have to fund their own grounds (unlike the French) and receive only around £500k per team from the RFU - it's the difference between continuing operating losses and breakeven. But my point is that the amounts are talked about on here as if they would enable the English to raise the salary cap by millions and entice away all the remaining Irish and Welsh internationals. It won't. It just means their owners might start to slowly claw back the money they've invested in the game over the last 15 years.

I also saw someone post that the time horizon for a club owner is no more than a year. That would be hysterical nonsense even in football (how long has Abramovich owned and funded Chelsea?), but in rugby it's simply not true. Wasps changed owners a little over a year ago (after at least 5 years with the previous owner), Bath changed owners around 3 years ago and Nigel Wray brought in additional backers (but stayed invested himself) at Sarries around the same time. Quins have had the same backers since the start of professionalism, as have Saints and Glos, IIRC. Worcester's owner has been in place at least 5 years. Tigers are owned by their season ticket holders.

[Poorfour]

Smith reiterated that the English and French clubs will not be involved in any competition operating under the auspices of European Rugby Cup (ERC) next season,

The FFR however....

However, the French Rugby Federation (FFR) subsequently released a strongly-worded statement giving its backing to ERC.
"No meeting or international competition involving French clubs can be organised outside the framework of the FFR and without its prior agreement," it read.
"The FFR has always been and will remain a major player in the European cups organised by ERC and backs proposals to permit the continuity and development of these."

Quentin Smith is a parasite.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/24194481

You need to brush up on your logic a little. Smith said the French clubs won't play in an ERC tournament next season. The FFR said it has to approve any new tournament and "will remain a major player in the European cups organised by the ERC."

There are at least two options that satisfy both of these statements without making anyone a liar:
1) The French clubs opt not to play in any cross-border competition next year
2) The ERC does not organise a tournament next year and the FFR sanctions something else.

We can debate the likelihood of either of these, but that's not the point.

[HammerofThunor]

Fair points. Think I've been reading so much 'off the wall' stuff that my reasoning has taken a left turn somewhere.

"I don't think they would even get involved with an RFU approved comp with the LNR if the FFR are against it"

That's a very good point, and maybe even more so for LNR. Why invite the grief?, although I would be slightly concerned that PRL may sit out the HEC unless their issue with the voting system is amended in their favour. If they did then LNR might just sit it out along with them. Neither indefinitely though.

To be honest I would think the PRL will sit out if they have nothing else.

[TJ]

I tend to agree with you hammer. I always thought it the likeliest outcome - a HC without the PRL teams.

[HammerofThunor]

I think the LNR will also sit out.

[TJ]

Now that I don't agree - but we shall see. Its a lot of speculation really guessing others intentions.

[maestegmafia]

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

Blanco wants clubs like RC Toulon's spending heavily controlled. He made a statement as such before. He thinks the French Club Rugby economy is about to fall apart.

He's right

Absolutely...!

Here's a link. It is worth a read. It shows the separation within the LNR between the wealthiest clubs and those struggling. There is little difference in England where lower, less wealthy English clubs feel that the PRL treat them very unfairly. A number of championship clubs are not happy with the PRLs stipulation on promotion and delegations as they favour elite clubs fare too much.


http://www.planetrugby.co.uk/story/0,25883,9818_8803549,00.html

I call shenanigans. Lower, less wealthy english clubs not happy with the PRL? Provide a reference or you are quite simply lying. The lower clubs get more TV money to smooth out the fact they're getting less from the EPS agreement. They get an equal share of the TV money, as a baseline, as the top clubs. They get an equal share of European money even though several have little prospect of getting in (at the moment). They have aparachute payments if they get relegated. They set a salary cap most of the rich clubs want to extend.

So I'm calling you a liar, unless you can provide references.

You resorting to trying to defame other posters by accusing them of being a liar, when you are too bloody lazy to read the news yourself on a subject, one that has been discussed many many times before....???

Last warning, any more false accusations and you will get reported.

You can write an apology below



Even MPs are concerned at how unjust the PRL run their affairs.

The minimum entry criteria amount to ring-fencing in another word," the Bedford chairman, Geoff Irvine, says. "The system we are playing under is stupid: you can finish top and not get promoted but there are clubs in the Premiership who would not meet the criteria if they were relegated and tried to get back."
'I hope that the Competition Commission will investigate the funding of Premiership Rugby teams.'

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2011/apr/29/bedford-championship-play-offs-rugby

“My point would be that if ourselves or Cornish Pirates managed to win the championship, then with alterations to our ground we could accommodate 6,000 safely. We know we could probably sell out every week so is that better than having a quarter-full football stadium?”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/club/10074408/Bedford-consider-legal-action-if-they-are-are-refused-entry-to-the-Premiership.html

Another Article

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2013/apr/18/the-breakdown-rugby-london-welsh

Gareth Thomas, the MP for Harrow West, has written to the Office Of Fair Trading with a request for the Competition Commission to investigate Premiership Rugby's funding structure.

Thomas claimed that Premiership Rugby distributes money with a 'clear bias' against newly-promoted clubs, because they receive less money than established top flight teams.

'There is a clear bias in how funding is distributed against teams promoted to the Premiership. The funding arrangements have all the appearance of a cartel,' Thomas said.
'They make it extremely difficult for newly promoted teams to survive or thrive.
'The Premiership should surely be a genuine competition in which clubs battle it out on a level playing field.
'It is time that the funding of Premiership Rugby clubs became much more transparent and that newly promoted teams received appropriate funding.

[TJ]

From the telegraph link
In France, it is a legal matter. The French Ministry for Sport invokes the ‘delegation de service public’, by which authority is discharged down through the system from the government to a federation to a national league. It would appear that the French clubs can be arraigned.

[AsLongAsBut100ofUs]

If the FFR were smart, they would acquiesce to an enlarged T16, giving the one thing that the LNR most crave, in return for them getting back on board with the ERC and proper European cup competitions - everyone's a winner ... oh, except PRL

Perhaps it is time for McCafferty to get the boot

[TJ]

Chaps - its an emotive and difficult topic with entrenched attitudes but chucking insults around hardly helps.

Maesteg - nicely done tho in backing up your words with evidence. thats surely enough

[TJ]

I suspect we will see all the French wishes except the 6/6/6 split accomodated and a compromise over representation either 5/5/8 +2 or 6/6/8 offered. The french clubs will come onboard reluctantly under pressure from their union and the PRL clubs will be left with a choice of join in the ERC euro cup or have no cross boarder competition.

8 rabo teams mus surely be the minimum the rabo unions can accept. 6 is obviously not fair.

[maestegmafia]

Chaps - its an emotive and difficult topic with entrenched attitudes but chucking insults around hardly helps.

Maesteg - nicely done tho in backing up your words with evidence.  thats surely enough

Cheers TJ,

Getting very bored of seeing people resort to trolling, name calling and attempts to defame someones character and reputation because they disagree, especially when they are personally so incredibly ignorantly informed.

[LondonTiger]

If the FFR were smart, they would acquiesce to an enlarged T16, giving the one thing that the LNR most crave, in return for them getting back on board with the ERC and proper European cup competitions - everyone's a winner ... oh, except PRL

Perhaps it is time for McCafferty to get the boot

If LNR get an expanded T16 - they would not participate in any European competition.

McCafferty has perhaps been a tw@t - but no more so than Lewis/Lux and many others on both sides. Anyone who claims that their side in this has acted in the good faith of fans and rugby is sadly deluded. Every single one of them, English, French, Irish, Italian, Scottish and Welsh has been fighting for what is best for them. The hatred and intransigence shown by many fans and posters is replicated in the board rooms it seems.

The PRL/LNR proposal was unfair.
So were the current arrangements.

No middle ground will ever be found, as no-one wishes to appear to lose anything.

They could not organise a urine up in a brewery nor an orgy in a brothel.

[TJ]

:-)

[Sponsored content]