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]

If its all about the free market and competition why does the RFU distribute the European cup money t gets equally to 12 clubs?  surely it should only be to the 6 who generate it as the amilin does not really generate any money.

thats the same logic they use to say they subsidise the SRU

TJ - I'm going to have to disagree with you. Scottish teams have no experience of the Amlin. The Italian and 2nd tier nations club qualifiers get most of their seasons profits from the visiting English, French (and Dragons ) fans who turn up in numbers for away games.

Gate money yes - but that is peanuts compared to the TV money and its the TV money that is distributed by the unions is it not? So the money the RFU distribute to 12 teams is basically the RFs share of the TV money from the HC wich is genrated by the 6 in the HC

[Notch]

Why should PRL worry about what happens to the game in Scotland, their job is to get a good deal for the English clubs.
 
The argument 'oh it will weaken the 6 nations' so what!
Maybe Scotland should pull out of the 6 nations and accept defeat, I'm sure Romania, Georgia or Russia would replace them.

How can you post this and then post an article about how unjust it is that the English clubs and their apparatchiks are derided for damaging the wider game! And why would you as a rugby fan want the 6 Nations or the Scottish Pro sides to suffer? Isn't that a bad thing for anyone who loves the game? Don't you think it would be sad, a loss to the sport?

I may post about how the PRL are a threat to the game but I don't want the English clubs or national side to go bust and can't see why anyone else would! I think the English clubs have some valid concerns and have long hoped a compromise could be found that would leave all sides happy but really... this attitude of "We're Alright, so everyone else can go to hell" is the opposite of the spirit the game was buil;t on.

the game was built on COMPETITION. when it was amateur there was no profit motive, but it was still build on WINNING. now it's professional can you please explain why Gloucester (made 3rd successive profit this yr) should give 2 farts about the SRU? or vice versa?

Because there's more to life than money and profit margins. Games aren't played in the board room, they are played on the pitch and we'll get the best games when we have the most even spread of resources. Presumably the people running Gloucester love this game, are fans of this game. Why would they then want the Calcutta Cup- amongst the longest running rivalries in world sport- to become uncompetitive, or even stop existing?

You can throw around words like COMPETITION and WINNING like some dead eyed, soulless neo-liberal if you want, but on the pitch I can't see how a real rugby fan would want less competition on the field of play as a result of more competition off it. Rugby will thrive when people approach problems like this with an attitude of working together to create the best possible compromise. Despite what you've been told, greed is not good.

I'm not asking that the PRL neglect their own interests, but they have to listen to the other Unions and accept they have needs which are in the best interest of the game and the other parties have to appreciate the needs of the PRL. If English clubs are not willing to care about the SRU and vice versa then we're not going to get a European Cup and everyone will suffer. The RFU, so derided on here, and the FFR both seem to want a compromise that benefits European Rugby as a whole and not just their clubs. So there's still hope.

games arent played in the board room? really? RFU (albeit not so bad now they have a CEO from another sport), WRU, FFR? at least within clubs everything is fairly transparent. i mistrust these anonymous groups old people directing the game from on high. it feels all wrong to me.

I want more competition off the field which will lead to better competition on it. subsidy/development/transfer/leveling the playing field, call it whatever you want, it creates dependency. which is a very bad thing. Scottish rugby is crippled yet addicted to HC funding. how is that a sustainable situation?

TV money is what funds the PRL, the LNR as well- are they addicted too? TV money in general is what funds the professional game, or at least is the biggest source of income. Everyone is dependent on that right now so thats neither here nor there.

I'm not saying they should be subsidised, I'm saying that they should work with other nations under the auspices of the ERC or a similar body to create a situation where we can have a mutually sustainable model for European rugby. Breakaway tournaments? Bad for everyone. The solution may be to reconvene and create a successor organisation to the ERC and I would like our Unions to be open to that but once club rugby threatens international rugby we begin to see a situation where the game is being damaged by this.

A strong Edinburgh and Glasgow are of great benefit to the teams they play against, but more importantly are a prerequisite for a strong Scotland team which makes international rugby more competitive and therefore more lucrative. The problem fans have with the PRL is their lack of incentive to be concerned with the international game. Unlike a Union, they have no vested interest in ensuring that club level and international level have a symbiotic mutually beneficial relationship and that is the root of the problem. They have a much narrower scope than the other ERC stakeholders. It's a set up which is bad for other levels of the game.

[itsallabouttheincentives]

Why should PRL worry about what happens to the game in Scotland, their job is to get a good deal for the English clubs.
 
The argument 'oh it will weaken the 6 nations' so what!
Maybe Scotland should pull out of the 6 nations and accept defeat, I'm sure Romania, Georgia or Russia would replace them.

How can you post this and then post an article about how unjust it is that the English clubs and their apparatchiks are derided for damaging the wider game! And why would you as a rugby fan want the 6 Nations or the Scottish Pro sides to suffer? Isn't that a bad thing for anyone who loves the game? Don't you think it would be sad, a loss to the sport?

I may post about how the PRL are a threat to the game but I don't want the English clubs or national side to go bust and can't see why anyone else would! I think the English clubs have some valid concerns and have long hoped a compromise could be found that would leave all sides happy but really... this attitude of "We're Alright, so everyone else can go to hell" is the opposite of the spirit the game was buil;t on.

the game was built on COMPETITION. when it was amateur there was no profit motive, but it was still build on WINNING. now it's professional can you please explain why Gloucester (made 3rd successive profit this yr) should give 2 farts about the SRU? or vice versa?

Because there's more to life than money and profit margins. Games aren't played in the board room, they are played on the pitch and we'll get the best games when we have the most even spread of resources. Presumably the people running Gloucester love this game, are fans of this game. Why would they then want the Calcutta Cup- amongst the longest running rivalries in world sport- to become uncompetitive, or even stop existing?

You can throw around words like COMPETITION and WINNING like some dead eyed, soulless neo-liberal if you want, but on the pitch I can't see how a real rugby fan would want less competition on the field of play as a result of more competition off it. Rugby will thrive when people approach problems like this with an attitude of working together to create the best possible compromise. Despite what you've been told, greed is not good.

I'm not asking that the PRL neglect their own interests, but they have to listen to the other Unions and accept they have needs which are in the best interest of the game and the other parties have to appreciate the needs of the PRL. If English clubs are not willing to care about the SRU and vice versa then we're not going to get a European Cup and everyone will suffer. The RFU, so derided on here, and the FFR both seem to want a compromise that benefits European Rugby as a whole and not just their clubs. So there's still hope.

games arent played in the board room? really? RFU (albeit not so bad now they have a CEO from another sport), WRU, FFR? at least within clubs everything is fairly transparent. i mistrust these anonymous groups old people directing the game from on high. it feels all wrong to me.

I want more competition off the field which will lead to better competition on it. subsidy/development/transfer/leveling the playing field, call it whatever you want, it creates dependency. which is a very bad thing. Scottish rugby is crippled yet addicted to HC funding. how is that a sustainable situation?

TV money is what funds the PRL, the LNR as well- are they addicted too? TV money in general is what funds the professional game, or at least is the biggest source of income. Everyone is dependent on that right now so thats neither here nor there.

I'm not saying they should be subsidised, I'm saying that they should work with other nations under the auspices of the ERC or a similar body to create a situation where we can have a mutually sustainable model for European rugby. Breakaway tournaments? Bad for everyone. The solution may be to reconvene and create a successor organisation to the ERC and I would like our Unions to be open to that but once club rugby threatens international rugby we begin to see a situation where the game is being damaged by this.

A strong Edinburgh and Glasgow are of great benefit to the teams they play against, but more importantly are a prerequisite for a strong Scotland team which makes international rugby more competitive and therefore more lucrative. The problem fans have with the PRL is their lack of incentive to be concerned with the international game. Unlike a Union, they have no vested interest in ensuring that club level and international level have a symbiotic mutually beneficial relationship and that is the root of the problem. They have a much narrower scope than the other ERC stakeholders. It's a set up which is bad for other levels of the game.

"The solution may be to reconvene and create a successor organisation to the ERC and I would like our Unions to be open to that but once club rugby threatens international rugby we begin to see a situation where the game is being damaged by this."1000% agree.

[TJ]

Thats the key notch. Is commercial freedom to flex their muscles for the PRL worth the damage it will do to the wider game. I'd ahte to see the Scots and Italians drop in standards further agiast the rest. Rabo. HC rugby has really helped Italy progress and prevented a serious decline in Scots fortunes ad even some signs of recovery

[Guest]

"1000% agree"



You agree that PRL/LNR are damaging international rugby?

[broadlandboy]

Except that a successful England is probably the quickest way to create interest in rugby and increase support for their clubs

[Hound of Harrow]

TJ - you'll need to ask ERC/Sky/FIR why the Italian league (as opposed to the two Pro12) clubs' HC/TV revenue is virtually non existent. Their union collects most of it.

Having been to games there three times, and spoken to people involved with the clubs, I can assure you that a visit from the likes of Bath, Gloucester, Wasps etc. will pull in more money than all their home league games combined.

Don't knock the Amlin, even though Embra and Glasgow haven't needed to concern themselves with it. You should try it - it's a grand weekend away.

[itsallabouttheincentives]

Why should PRL worry about what happens to the game in Scotland, their job is to get a good deal for the English clubs.
 
The argument 'oh it will weaken the 6 nations' so what!
Maybe Scotland should pull out of the 6 nations and accept defeat, I'm sure Romania, Georgia or Russia would replace them.

How can you post this and then post an article about how unjust it is that the English clubs and their apparatchiks are derided for damaging the wider game! And why would you as a rugby fan want the 6 Nations or the Scottish Pro sides to suffer? Isn't that a bad thing for anyone who loves the game? Don't you think it would be sad, a loss to the sport?

I may post about how the PRL are a threat to the game but I don't want the English clubs or national side to go bust and can't see why anyone else would! I think the English clubs have some valid concerns and have long hoped a compromise could be found that would leave all sides happy but really... this attitude of "We're Alright, so everyone else can go to hell" is the opposite of the spirit the game was buil;t on.

the game was built on COMPETITION. when it was amateur there was no profit motive, but it was still build on WINNING. now it's professional can you please explain why Gloucester (made 3rd successive profit this yr) should give 2 farts about the SRU? or vice versa?

Because there's more to life than money and profit margins. Games aren't played in the board room, they are played on the pitch and we'll get the best games when we have the most even spread of resources. Presumably the people running Gloucester love this game, are fans of this game. Why would they then want the Calcutta Cup- amongst the longest running rivalries in world sport- to become uncompetitive, or even stop existing?

You can throw around words like COMPETITION and WINNING like some dead eyed, soulless neo-liberal if you want, but on the pitch I can't see how a real rugby fan would want less competition on the field of play as a result of more competition off it. Rugby will thrive when people approach problems like this with an attitude of working together to create the best possible compromise. Despite what you've been told, greed is not good.

I'm not asking that the PRL neglect their own interests, but they have to listen to the other Unions and accept they have needs which are in the best interest of the game and the other parties have to appreciate the needs of the PRL. If English clubs are not willing to care about the SRU and vice versa then we're not going to get a European Cup and everyone will suffer. The RFU, so derided on here, and the FFR both seem to want a compromise that benefits European Rugby as a whole and not just their clubs. So there's still hope.

games arent played in the board room? really? RFU (albeit not so bad now they have a CEO from another sport), WRU, FFR? at least within clubs everything is fairly transparent. i mistrust these anonymous groups old people directing the game from on high. it feels all wrong to me.

I want more competition off the field which will lead to better competition on it. subsidy/development/transfer/leveling the playing field, call it whatever you want, it creates dependency. which is a very bad thing. Scottish rugby is crippled yet addicted to HC funding. how is that a sustainable situation?

TV money is what funds the PRL, the LNR as well- are they addicted too? TV money in general is what funds the professional game, or at least is the biggest source of income. Everyone is dependent on that right now so thats neither here nor there.

I'm not saying they should be subsidised, I'm saying that they should work with other nations under the auspices of the ERC or a similar body to create a situation where we can have a mutually sustainable model for European rugby. Breakaway tournaments? Bad for everyone. The solution may be to reconvene and create a successor organisation to the ERC and I would like our Unions to be open to that but once club rugby threatens international rugby we begin to see a situation where the game is being damaged by this.

A strong Edinburgh and Glasgow are of great benefit to the teams they play against, but more importantly are a prerequisite for a strong Scotland team which makes international rugby more competitive and therefore more lucrative. The problem fans have with the PRL is their lack of incentive to be concerned with the international game. Unlike a Union, they have no vested interest in ensuring that club level and international level have a symbiotic mutually beneficial relationship and that is the root of the problem. They have a much narrower scope than the other ERC stakeholders. It's a set up which is bad for other levels of the game.

However cant agree with this. just my opinion, but a strong national side comes from development of the game at the youth level combined with attractive opportunities to earn money. stop hiring journeyman foreign players, invest in the youth setup, and be happy if top scots players move to top clubs. additionally, there will always be, shall we call them, younger journeyman who will be able to declare for the weaker international sides in order to play international rugby. don't be afraid, be aggressive and invest for the future, rather than spending everything on the now.

sorry, bit longwinded, but i think its really important.

awesome film i watched recently called "Moneyball". its about baseball, but very inspiring about loyalty and making the best out of what you have and figuring out how to win without the big budgets.

[itsallabouttheincentives]

"1000% agree"



You agree that PRL/LNR are damaging international rugby?

no. you obviously do. so tell me how you think it is damaging international rugby. not how you fear it might. not interested in hypotheticals.

[TJ]

Hound - But the Italian union get less money than the SRU . thats not right

[Guest]

"1000% agree"



You agree that PRL/LNR are damaging international rugby?

no. you obviously do. so tell me how you think it is damaging international rugby. not how you fear it might. not interested in hypotheticals.

You're not interested in hypothetical's?   90% of your discussion is based on hypothetical's...

Let's see... What about the French LNR not releasing players for international duty? Do you think that's a hypothetical, or is it a fact?

Seems to be a lot of discussion on how the RFU need to tread carefully so as not to upset PRL...so close to the RWC. PRL may make things very awkward for the RFU who dares to step out of line. Are you one of those who voiced this "hypothetical"?

That's just a start.

[maestegmafia]

It's about time that the RFU made things a little more difficult for the PRL.

[itsallabouttheincentives]

nice. couldnt resist could you.

dont know so much about the LNR intl duty debate. presumably that's outside of the window?

i have never once mentioned the WRC. i think the IRB needs to tread carefully, but thats to do with employment law and an uncertain outcome if they invite EU to arbitrate. i assume the connection here is that the PRL might withhold players from RWC? who knows. the nicer the RFU plays relative to other unions, the better deal it will strike. Bullying and brinkmanship wont work - see FFR/ERC.

[Hound of Harrow]

Maybe TJ - but it's up to them to negotiate a better deal.

My experience with Wasps is that we will turn up to the Italian games early and spend our money in their bar, on their food and some club merchandise. We believe in supporting the wider game in Europe from what I have seen.

I do believe that most English fans who travel to support their clubs want healthy Euro competitions involving as many nations as possible.

A huge problem with forums is it allows confrontational views to be  aired. These are not necessarily the views of the reasonable majority.

[broadlandboy]

Why should the RFU make it harder for the PRL when they have the best working relationship with them with increased access for the EPS squad & a good supply of young english talent

[lostinwales]

"1000% agree"



You agree that PRL/LNR are damaging international rugby?

no. you obviously do. so tell me how you think it is damaging international rugby. not how you fear it might. not interested in hypotheticals.

You're not interested in hypothetical's?   90% of your discussion is based on hypothetical's...

Let's see... What about the French LNR not releasing players for international duty? Do you think that's a hypothetical, or is it a fact?

Seems to be a lot of discussion on how the RFU need to tread carefully so as not to upset PRL...so close to the RWC. PRL may make things very awkward for the RFU who dares to step out of line. Are you one of those who voiced this "hypothetical"?

That's just a start.

What about the international players who get a chance to be fully paid up professionals and develop their game full time rather than the eternal struggle of balancing a job and playing rugby? Perceptions...

[Guest]

"1000% agree"



You agree that PRL/LNR are damaging international rugby?

no. you obviously do. so tell me how you think it is damaging international rugby. not how you fear it might. not interested in hypotheticals.

You're not interested in hypothetical's?   90% of your discussion is based on hypothetical's...

Let's see... What about the French LNR not releasing players for international duty? Do you think that's a hypothetical, or is it a fact?

Seems to be a lot of discussion on how the RFU need to tread carefully so as not to upset PRL...so close to the RWC. PRL may make things very awkward for the RFU who dares to step out of line. Are you one of those who voiced this "hypothetical"?

That's just a start.

What about the international players who get a chance to be fully paid up professionals and develop their game full time rather than the eternal struggle of balancing a job and playing rugby? Perceptions...

Yep, what about it? Should they not get released for international duty? Maybe only the big names from the big unions, like NZRU, deserve that privilege?
Guys dreaming of playing for their home nation can't because they might be ousted from whatever club they have joined with.
Point is, whether you agree with it or not, it is still an example of club against union, as is any threat to not release players to the Unions as a leverage.

Sorry, didn't mean to come across as so pointed. Tired, and away to me bed

[maestegmafia]

Even Mick Cleary is showing the Premiership up in this debacle

"Bath, mindful of matches coming up, made seven changes, were 31-3 adrift at half-time. This is the downside of the end-of-season play-off format.

Clubs shuffle their squads to keep players fresh knowing that they can make up for any ground lost and finish in the top four. If it were first-past-the-post as in football, they would take no such risks."


Wasn't that the very reason that the Rabbo teams are not deemed elidgable by the the PRL...???

[itsallabouttheincentives]

intersting interview with two Ulster boys on the topic of HC. they can see its unbalanced and they are right in the middle of it? so why cant the people on here? why cant ERC and the unions?

BY NIALL CROZIER – 18 SEPTEMBER 2013
Ulster and Ireland centre Darren Cave's love of the Heineken Cup dates from when he was an impressionable, fresh-faced schoolboy making his way to Ravenhill for those big European match days and nights.
Even now the competition has lost none of its appeal or magic. For him, it's the best club-level tournament in world rugby bar none.
So with negotiations as to its future going on behind closed doors, the 26-year-old is keen to see an amicable agreement on theHeineken Cup's future.
"There's been a bit of talk among us," he said. "Obviously the boys love it. Everyone in Ulster loves it. I remember going to watch it as a fan and I absolutely loved it. The fans love it, the players love it."
Hardly surprisingly, he has followed the debate closely. Less predictably, he understands the position of the English and French clubs who have threatened – unless there are changes – to withdraw and stage a tournament of their own.
"I understand why they have a problem," he said. "I think Edinburghwere the example a couple of years ago when they got to the semi-final and finished 11th in the league.
"I think the English and French teams have a right to question the qualification format. And if they are producing more revenues because they are bigger countries, then the money shouldn't be split four ways. I don't know what the answer is; that's why I'm a player and not an administrator. But I think they make a very valid point.
"I hope something is sorted out because it's a special tournament. There are times when it's maybe not as good to watch as Super Rugby because there are fewer tries and the weather means it's a wee bit less free-flowing, but I don't have any doubt that it's the best club-rugby competition in the world.
"I think it's absolutely fantastic and it would be a real, real shame if it was no more."
Colleague Declan Fitzpatrick agrees. The 30-year-old tight-head said: "It'll be interesting to see how it evolves. At this stage we're just looking at our season game on game, so we haven't been thinking about how next season's Heineken Cup might work out.
"But it's something we're aware of and hopefully they can get it sorted out because it's a fantastic competition.
"And it's not a bad idea to be looking at the format. If it's not working, maybe it needs changed, though it has been pretty successful for the Irish provinces so obviously the format is working for us at the minute.

[Hound of Harrow]

Even Mick Cleary is showing the Premiership up in this debacle

"Bath, mindful of matches coming up, made seven changes, were 31-3 adrift at half-time. This is the downside of the end-of-season play-off format.

Clubs shuffle their squads to keep players fresh knowing that they can make up for any ground lost and finish in the top four. If it were first-past-the-post as in football, they would take no such risks."


Wasn't that the very reason that the Rabbo teams are not deemed elidgable by the the PRL...???

Not quite the same. He is not talking about qualifying for the HC and the play offs were introduced to give teams with a lot of internationals the chance to make up lost ground when their international players were back. Plus, I'm not sure if the English clubs have just entered a 'stand down' period of 120 minutes of game time for the EPS players over 3 weeks. That may explain some of the Bath changes.

Which journal did Cleary write this in? He writes for an Irish and an English paper. I can't access either paper via my phone atm.

[alcoombe]

If its all about the free market and competition why does the RFU distribute the European cup money t gets equally to 12 clubs?  surely it should only be to the 6 who generate it as the amilin does not really generate any money.

thats the same logic they use to say they subsidise the SRU

TJ - I'm going to have to disagree with you. Scottish teams have no experience of the Amlin. The Italian and 2nd tier nations club qualifiers get most of their seasons profits from the visiting English, French (and Dragons ) fans who turn up in numbers for away games.

Gate money yes - but that is peanuts compared to the TV money and its the TV money that is distributed by the unions is it not?  So the money the RFU distribute to 12 teams is basically the RFs share of the TV money from the HC wich is genrated by the 6 in the HC

The money the Amlin generates will certainly not be as much as the Heineken, but it will be far from meaningless.

The broadcasters in France, Italy and the BIs block buy TV rights for both European competitons obviously based on the number of viewers they expect to attract.  The Amlin pool matches generally wouldn't attract as many casual viewers (though personally I do often tend to sit through all the weekend's European matches, with Amlin games providing Thursday night viewing and pre or post the day's Heineken matches over the weekend), but they will still bring in those clubs' fans and the bulk in the Amlin are the relatively well supported French & English clubs.  The knockout stages will get decent numbers watching them.

As well as the TV money there is also the sponsorship.  Amlin will be paying a decent amount for the title name.  Then there are the secondary sponsors like FedEx, EDF, Dove, Adidas, etc who sponsor both competitions and whose names you see on the touchline boards and other strategic stadium positions.  They pay to get the attention of all the attending supporters as well as the TV audience.

If you had to get all the broadcasters and sponsors to separately value the competiton I'd be surprised if it didn't make up at least a quarter of the total the ERC get from them for both.

[Poorfour]

The money can be partially separated from the competition. There's no reason why the tv money can't be split evenly regardless of tier (in fact, I think this is what the PRL does today), and the gate money will rise with a stronger competition.

[maestegmafia]

Even Mick Cleary is showing the Premiership up in this debacle

"Bath, mindful of matches coming up, made seven changes, were 31-3 adrift at half-time. This is the downside of the end-of-season play-off format.

Clubs shuffle their squads to keep players fresh knowing that they can make up for any ground lost and finish in the top four. If it were first-past-the-post as in football, they would take no such risks."


Wasn't that the very reason that the Rabbo teams are not deemed elidgable by the the PRL...???

Not quite the same. He is not talking about qualifying for the HC and the play offs were introduced to give teams with a lot of internationals the chance to make up lost ground when their international players were back. Plus, I'm not sure if the English clubs have just entered a 'stand down' period of 120 minutes of game time for the EPS players over 3 weeks. That may explain some of the Bath changes.

Which journal did Cleary write this in? He writes for an Irish and an English paper. I can't access either paper via my phone atm.

Hound mate

Poppycock..! Squad rotation is what it is, looks like another of the PRLs arguments is transparent.

What annoys me even more about the PRLs movements not just that they use deceitful allegations aimed at other parties in Europe for making a great competition unfair, to possibly demolish the competition the massive majority of fans and players love and want to keep and this is all for political meanderings, mostly within their own country.

The RFU have lacked the backbone to deal with this situation for far too long. It is unfair that they have left it so far as a situation that drags us all in too, not only that one which may seriously damage rugby in many countries.

[HammerofThunor]

If Bath rest players and the team weakens then they won't be in the top tier of European competition. That's the difference. If they think they have a strong enough squad to rotate and not weaken...great. If they do they take the consequences. That's the theory.

[Poorfour]

There's also an important difference in what it means competitively. Bath benched some players because they were gambling that they are better off managing those players' game time and fitness than fielding their strongest side in an away game that they do not need to win to make the playoffs. They are opting to be less competitive now in order (they hope) to be more competitive later. It's a legitimate strategy in a long, attritional season and isn't detrimental to the competitiveness of the league.

In the Pro12, teams regularly opt to rest players in one competition in order to keep them fit and fresh for a different competition. The key difference is that it boosts competitiveness in the HEC, but to the detriment of the Rabo. That's a fairly subtle point, but to me it makes all the difference.

[maestegmafia]

It is no different managing your squad in either league. There isn't even a realistic certainty of relegation in the premiership.

But as we have all said many times this is nothing about the initial HEC stipulations that the PRL stated.

It is a wrangle for power and cash within England.

[rodders]

There's also an important difference in what it means competitively. Bath benched some players because they were gambling that they are better off managing those players' game time and fitness than fielding their strongest side in an away game that they do not need to win to make the playoffs. They are opting to be less competitive now in order (they hope) to be more competitive later. It's a legitimate strategy in a long, attritional season and isn't detrimental to the competitiveness of the league.

In the Pro12, teams regularly opt to rest players in one competition in order to keep them fit and fresh for a different competition. The key difference is that it boosts competitiveness in the HEC, but to the detriment of the Rabo. That's a fairly subtle point, but to me it makes all the difference.

That is simply not true. In the case of the Irish provinces they have restricted use of the Irish internationals due to the player welfare system, that means they have to be used sparingly throughout the season i.e. the biggest games which are the heino, Rabo play off games etc. It is for that reason you rarely see the BOD's, Bowes, O'Connells etc.

Have a look at Ruan Pienaar, Jared Payne, Doug Howlett or Isa Nacewa and see how often they are/were rested over the past few seasons.

[munkian]

We (Dragons) can't really afford to 'rest' players, we have to rotate our squad occassionally to prevent injury but its usually to the detriment of our game.

I love this idea that all the Rabbo players are kept on ice and then releases 3 times a season for games of touch rugby

[itsallabouttheincentives]

Yes rodders, but this is precisely what prl/lnr have a problem with. Unions running a intl club tourny for national team reasons, unfairly commercially benefiting from prl/lnr.

[itsallabouttheincentives]

And why anyone thinks rfu/ffr are happy with this is also puzzling - ie ffr vetoed ERC counter proposal...

Only reason ffr isn't right behind its clubs in ERC is their domestic power struggle and ffr wanting to preserve their nice cushy power and stature.

[HammerofThunor]

Yes rodders, but this is precisely what prl/lnr have a problem with. Unions running a intl club tourny for national team reasons, unfairly commercially benefiting from prl/lnr.

Well that's not going to change regardless of who is on the board of any European competition. The players are only available for a certain amount of time. It's effectively set a mximum number of games that international players can play. It's the same in England only ours are a smaller proportion of the total.

But having 12 teams fighting for 6 places has an impact. Certainly more than having two lots of 4 fighting for 3-4 spots. But it's not really a resting issue. It's the completely different emphasis it puts on league games. All league games. The top teams are strong and look to win the league. But they're competing again sides that have no incentive to push once playoff are out of reach beyond pride. And yes, everyone tries to win every game but it is human nature to react differently when something real is at stake. Almost every single side that is due to be relegated has a surge at the end of the season, going for certainties to bringing to the last game. these factors have an impact even if it's only psychological.

That's my thoughts on it anyway.

[itsallabouttheincentives]

Totally agree. It's the uncompetitive nature Of qualification from rab12 that needs to be changed (in addition to the money and the votes Of course).

[Poorfour]

It is no different managing your squad in either league. There isn't even a realistic certainty of relegation in the premiership.

But as we have all said many times this is nothing about the initial HEC stipulations that the PRL stated.

It is a wrangle for power and cash within England.

What does "there isn't even a realistic certainty of relegation" mean? In the 9 years I've been a season ticket holder, someone has been relegated every year and that's included two of the current top 4; Sale and Wasps have come very close to it, too. In about half of those seasons who was relegated was only settled in the last couple of games of the season and at least once - when Quins went down - it was settled by the last kick of the last game of the season. Relegation is a reality and it makes a big difference.

"A wrangle for power and cash within England." Seriously? The RFU might wish that it controlled professional rugby, but it missed that boat and has accepted the reality that it will have to work with the PRL and clubs. The relationship has had some rocky moments but I've seen nothing to suggest that either side is unhappy with the current domestic situation. That the RFU has kept its powder drier than anyone else's in the current spat only suggests to me that it's the one organisation involved that's run by a professional administrator.

I'm pretty sure the RFU doesn't want to directly control the club game in England. For one thing, it couldn't afford to. For another, it's never made any moves in that direction - not even offering to stump up cash for ground development. To suggest otherwise is fantasyland stuff.

[maestegmafia]

Debate on RTE with Conor O'Shea, Shane Horgan and Donal Lenihan.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mI_pcMESYI8#t=382

[Scrumpy]

"The Heineken Cup is finished, it's over. The Rugby Champions Cup is a way to save European rugby."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/24224152

[itsallabouttheincentives]

more combative statement from PRL's Bruce Craig
Premiership Rugby deputy chairman Bruce Craig has warned that Pro12 clubs face "financial oblivion" if administrators try to thwart the Rugby Champions Cup
He added: "The Heineken Cup is finished, it's over. The Rugby Champions Cup is a way to save European rugby."
Craig, who is chairman of Bath, believes every Pro12 team is prepared to sign up to the new competition, but that they are being held back by their national governing bodies.
He has warned the national unions from interfering, and also indicated that they and the International Rugby Board (IRB) could face court action if they attempt to stop the Rugby Champions Cup.
"If all 38 [European] clubs were actually given the opportunity to come into the Rugby Champions Cup, I believe all 38 would probably agree," said Craig, a former scrum-half with Paris side Racing Metro. "It's basically the Celtic unions that would stop them from participating.
"Everyone would prefer that we didn't go down the legal route. We all want a competition that is a fabulous European competition

lots more within the article on bbc. cant post link.

ah, thx scrumpy.

[Poorfour]

"The Heineken Cup is finished, it's over. The Rugby Champions Cup is a way to save European rugby."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/24224152

OK, Bruce Craig has a vested interest in getting across his point of view - but he's confirmed a lot of factual points that we have been speculating about. The point about the FFR having served notice on the ERC is interesting - makes me wonder if there is a domestic French issue that the FFR and LNR need to resolve between them before anything else can be confirmed.

[Notch]

God I'm tired of the English and French clubs trying to get their way by brandishing a big club.

Sign up with us or face financial oblivion is their line. Hard to believe negotiations will take place in good faith at the end of a gun barrel.

Union involvement in running this tournament should be a prerequisite for anyone else coming aboard.

[itsallabouttheincentives]

unions will be involved. via their club votes i would imagine.

[Scrumpy]

God I'm tired of the English and French clubs trying to get their way by brandishing a big club.

Sign up with us or face financial oblivion is their line. Hard to believe negotiations will take place in good faith at the end of a gun barrel.

Union involvement in running this tournament should be a prerequisite for anyone else coming aboard.

ERC had their chance but they dragged their feet and then didn't want to negotiate, what else could these clubs do if they saw a way to secure their futures for many years to come?

[Casartelli]

God I'm tired of the English and French clubs trying to get their way by brandishing a big club.

Sign up with us or face financial oblivion is their line. Hard to believe negotiations will take place in good faith at the end of a gun barrel.......

Yeah, Mr Craig sounds like a really nice guy to 'do business' with doesn't he?

Rugby Champions Cup is also the most dismal proposal for a tournament name in the history of professional sport.

Rugby should be run by clueless enthusiasts, not clueless shysters.

[HammerofThunor]

I wished Mr Craig and Mr Wray would bugger off. But they are also the ones complaining about the salary cap in England and are kept in order by the PRL (that should tell you something).

[Guest]

unions will be involved. via their club votes i would imagine.

#

In other words the Unions would be cut out of any decision making. Imagination's a great thing, but not to be trusted. Wasn't it you who said that Unions should stick to the amateur game, and the national teams? Only the clubs should run the clubs?

You just have to look at how the PRL/LNR are behaving now to know that they can't be trusted. They have entrenched themselves into a postion were they have to abandon the HEC, and if the Unions hold their ground, and no new Franglo is established, then the LNR will be ok with a T16, but the PRL is stuffed. The Rabo Unions take a serious hit as well, and I just hope that the Unions are working hard together on putting together a viable alternative.
A lot to expect from the Unions I know, but I'm allowed to hope.

[tatterd]

Craig looks like a right c**k in that photo

[broadlandboy]

IIRC PRL have stated with the BT deal for the Aviva they will be no worse off with no European money than they are at the moment

[Scrumpy]

Some of you need to take a break, calm down and face up to the fact that there will be no HC next year.

[HammerofThunor]

unions will be involved. via their club votes i would imagine.

#

In other words the Unions would be cut out of any decision making. Imaginations a great thing, but not to be trusted. Wasn't it you who said that Unions should stick to the amateur game, and the national teams? Only the clubs should run the clubs?

You just have to look at how the PRL/LNR are behaving now to know that they can't be trusted. They have entrenched themselves into a postion were they have to abandon the HEC, and if the Unions hold their ground, and no new Franglo is established, then the LNR will be ok with a T16, but the PRL is stuffed. The Rabo Unions take a serious hit as well, and I just hope that the Unions are working hard together on putting together a viable alternative.
A lot to expect from the Unions I know, but I'm allowed to hope.

What decision making do you think they will be cut out of? The unions still have to give this power 'away' and can take it back every time the competition is renegotiated. Also caveats and vetos could be put in place for major changes. All major changes in the Jeff are snactioned by the RFU. The PRL has commercial responsibility and put forward ideas. I don't see why they would want more control in Europe than they would in their own league.

[LordDowlais]

Some of you need to take a break, calm down and face up to the fact that there will be no HC next year.

It will not affect WRU's finances that much, so we will be ok, I have hered that they might even try and fit in another international game or two with the less games being played. So they could end up making even more money. 

[Guest]

Some of you need to take a break, calm down and face up to the fact that there will be no HC next year.

Not in its present format, and if it does survive it will be weakened. No doubt. The thing you should consider is that there may well be no Franglo, and no European competition for PRL. If all that I read is to be believed I would say this is very likely.

Well done PRL for destroying what was a fantastic competition    

[Scrumpy]

Well done PRL for destroying what was a fantastic competition    

For the few teams who walk into it every year without earning their place I'm sure it's great!

Don't cry about it  

I'm sure when all sides see sense then we'll get a fair (for all) European rugby cup in some shape or form.

[Sponsored content]