It's about time the RFU detailed their position and aligned themselves with either the PRL or Rugby.

First topic message reminder :

Clubs face oblivion if RFU take on PRL over Europe

Posted on October 4, 2013 by Jeff Probyn in Jeff Probyn

Financial Oblivion are the words used by Bath’s owner Bruce Craig when describing the possible fate facing the RaboDirect Pro12 if they don’t join the new Rugby Champions Cup.

There was also a threat of legal action should the IRB or Unions try to interfere or stop it. So there it is: Capitulate or there will be out and out war between the clubs and Unions.

If it is war, the big question is, would the RFU have the courage to do what’s needed to win?

I have no doubt the IRB will be up for the fight given the possible consequences of ceding power to a few rich club owners, or that if the French Union (FFR) remain strongly against any new competition, that their clubs (LNR) will back down rather than face a possible ban from the FFR – but the RFU are different.

Not since the first days of professionalism when Cliff Brittle was chairman have the RFU stood against PRL (the Premiership clubs) or its predecessors and it would be hard for them to take such a stand now, especially this close to the World Cup – but not impossible.

PRL are using the ‘carrot and stick’ approach with the Union in trying to gain their support. The ‘carrot’ is the promise of a more financially stable Premiership by their running and organising the competition in Europe.

The ‘stick’ is possible legal action and the threat of withholding players from international preparations if the RFU refuse to give their backing for the new competition.

If the RFU were strong enough to face up to this challenge from the clubs they could possibly rescue not just the English but the European game from total meltdown.

It would be incredibly painful and could involve going back to those dark days of turmoil and bankruptcy that were so much a part of those early days of the professional game in England – but let’s imagine this possible scenario…

The RFU vote against the formation of the new competition and the PRL retaliate by not releasing players for international duties stating primacy of contract and launch a restraint of trade action against the Union and the IRB.

The RFU then withdraw from negotiations to pay the clubs for player release and announce that they will form six regional teams to take part in Europe.

The RFU enter negotiations with NCA (National Clubs Association) for players to be brought into the EPS along with a number of elite academy players and, at this point, the RFU announce that from now on they will centrally contract the players for regions as they have done for the England Sevens squad.

This would enable the RFU to save the money currently paid to the PRL clubs for playing English Qualified Players and it would allow the RFU to contract only EQP for each region, should they wish to do so.

To avoid any legal or financial repercussions each step would be brought in as contracts between the RFU and PRL end, while at the same time the RFU would withdraw all non-contracted funding from PRL clubs.

With agreement from government, the RFU announce that the academies are to be removed from the Premiership clubs and transferred to universities and colleges in each of the regions along with all accompanying funding.

The PRL clubs would then form a break-away game, but without the funding from the RFU, those that don’t have rich owners prepared to cover the shortfall would quickly find themselves in financial difficulties.

Then the RFU call a special general meeting to create regional teams and restructure the leagues with a return of limited funding for all levels of the game, which is approved.

The season is restructured so that the leagues feed into a county championship that acts as a number of trials for regional selection and the European games are moved to a time that fits better with the French season to appease LNR.

Players in England would have to make tough choices when it comes to contract renewal.

Do they stay with the PRL clubs with no hope of international honours or take a chance and sign for the RFU regions with a chance to play for England and the extra earning potential that brings?

There would be short term consequences for the national side as all the current squad members are contracted to PRL clubs but that would last only until either contracts were renewed or new players emerged through the ranks, which could be just a single season.

The potential outcome would be a stable league structure in England with the RFU funding just six regional teams instead of the 24 clubs in the Premiership and Championship.

The European competitions would remain under Union control, enabling them to continue the role of developing rugby across the whole of the European rugby community while PRL would have caught the bus to their own Financial Oblivion!

I'm getting tired of all this arguing and the amount of guesswork involved, so I've started reading 'unions' as 'onions' every time they're mentioned in a post. It's quite entertaining.

Casartelli wrote:There should be a law against selling stuff that you don't own.

Not my fault the guy paid me cash up front for the Eiffel Tower, I said I'd accept 12 monthly installments.

SecretFly wrote:So all the Unions and sundry outfits that were part of the ERC are now history?  Hmmm, good chess move, Hammer!

That has solved the whole deal and onwards an upwards we go now with the Monty Python Circus

All the Unions and indeed the club organisations that have a part share in ERC (PRL, FFR) are heretofore defunct.

Glad that's all over.  What'll we all watch this weekend now?  Don't attempt to get me interested in football!

Not my move, but if the ERC and the PRL/LNR are out it's the only solution.

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:I'm getting tired of all this arguing and the amount of guesswork involved, so I've started reading 'unions' as 'onions' every time they're mentioned in a post. It's quite entertaining.

On a chart, or graph or some sort, this whole Franglo debate would show the biggest 'disconnect' between number of opinions/level of emotion/actual known facts, in the history of internet forums, ever.

It's been entertaining though.

I SEE, NO CORRELATION SIR, NONE, NADDA, NOPE, ZIP SWEET FA.

TJ wrote:

No9 wrote:This all upsets me and really p!$$ing me off....

It has nothing to do with Rugby, and is all about greed and the battle of 2 big companies, Sky and BT, who neither care two hoots about the game, only about increasing their market share.

I think most are in agreement  that qualification should be based on the top places in each of the leagues and not, as the Pro 12 currently do, guaranteeing qualification from each nation. Also, have no question that the revenue should be split EVENLY between each of the leagues to split amongst qualifying teams/unions. Which makes the BT deal just as unfair giving the English and French bigger shares of the money.

Nope - only the English think this is right and a few others with soft heads.  Others are prepared to accept compromise and to right historical anomalies but to think that the pro 12 which consists of four countries can be treated the same as the aviva which has only one country playing in it is nonsense.  Its not our fault your (hell of an assumption that) structures hanicap you.  Its utter arrogance to tell another country how it should run its pro game.

Sorry completely wrong there. The HC qualification is taken from 3 leagues, and the nationality should not be a deciding fact. I appreciate it was agreed that way when set up, but that thought process is out of date and needs changing. If you carry on that principal, then what is stopping the Pro 12 inviting clubs from Greece and guaranteeing them HC rugby as they do Italy. It the Celtic/Italian nations still competed in their own home nations and those had qualification places for the HC, then fine. But thanks to the unique way the WRU fund professional rugby (ie. f*** it up) then we don't have a professional league of our own. Would you expect Swansea and Cardiff to be guaranteed a Euro Champ position because they are Welsh playing in the Premiership - NO. They have to perform in their chosen league to get qualification.

I'm Welsh, and why should we get ALL 3 of our regions in the HC if they all finish in the bottom half of the table or the flip side, why shouldn't we get ALL 4 of our regions in the HC if they finish in the top 6. If that happened, can you imagine the uproar, if the bottom one is sacrificed, yet finished 6th or better.

It has to change.... I don't like the way it is being done, and think it will end in tears with everyone losing out in the long term, but it has to change....

Should be final position gets qualification, not national identity.

It would be great for the Pro 12. I was a sceptic, when they brought in the play-offs. But this has given the Pro12 excitement to the end of the season, with clubs trying to get in the final four. It will increase that end of season excitement, with teams playing for euro qualification.

Another thing... The PRL are saying that current qualification isn't fair, as the English sides have to play to win qualification, where the Irish, Welsh, Scottish and Italians (the latter two) get effectively auto qualification. Yet they have put out an open invitation to any Pro 12 side to join them. So how is that "invite" being qualified. Surely that's no difference...

As I've said, it has to change, but the current "fight" is no more than big egos with big cheque books arguing over who can pee highest up the wall. And they wont care two hoots when it destroys rugby's roots...

Casartelli wrote:There should be a law against selling stuff that you don't own.

Along with sitting on the board of directors of one organisation and providing influential information to another that, said people's, know will have conflicting interests...!

No9 wrote:

TJ wrote:

No9 wrote:This all upsets me and really p!$$ing me off....

It has nothing to do with Rugby, and is all about greed and the battle of 2 big companies, Sky and BT, who neither care two hoots about the game, only about increasing their market share.

I think most are in agreement  that qualification should be based on the top places in each of the leagues and not, as the Pro 12 currently do, guaranteeing qualification from each nation. Also, have no question that the revenue should be split EVENLY between each of the leagues to split amongst qualifying teams/unions. Which makes the BT deal just as unfair giving the English and French bigger shares of the money.

Nope - only the English think this is right and a few others with soft heads.  Others are prepared to accept compromise and to right historical anomalies but to think that the pro 12 which consists of four countries can be treated the same as the aviva which has only one country playing in it is nonsense.  Its not our fault your structures hanicap you.  Its utter arrogance to tell another country how it should run its pro game.

Sorry completely wrong there. The HC qualification is taken from 3 leagues, and the nationality should not be a deciding fact. I appreciate it was agreed that way when set up, but that thought process is out of date and needs changing. If you carry on that principal, then what is stopping the Pro 12 inviting clubs from Greece and guaranteeing them HC rugby as they do Italy.

Sorry No9.  But you're wrong.  The HEC was Union created.  Union created to allow for better player selection come International time - such as the 6N.  A method devised to have a European 'club' competition for profit's sake - yes - but moreso to uncover the standard of player required to then go on and perform at International.  It is a blinkered view of history, and an inaccurate one, to suggest the HEC was ever designed as a fully elitist event between the top sides of three distinct European leagues.  It just has never been so.  It has always had the eagle eye of Unions looking over its shoulder, thinking constantly of the bigger International picture.

About Greece.  The PRO12 has no distinct say in the make up of HEC.  It has no shareholding in ERC.  The Pro12 does not have the power to 'invite' Greece to participate in the HEC.  That authority comes from ERC alone... and the ERC is a conglomeration of the present 6N unions (and sundry club organisations).  The approval of the ERC is needed for any new Nation to be entered into HEC selection.  Pro12 has no power to include an extra nation.

Should be final position gets qualification, not national identity.

Your opinion.  Not shared by all.  It is especially not shared by those who still believe any European top grade competition is a training ground for prospective International players.  Many ask why should the English and French have a guaranteed entry into such a high value International training competition when others would not have the same automatic guaranteed entry (Italy, Scotland, Wales, Ireland)

Another thing... The PRL are saying that current qualification isn't fair, as the English sides have to play to win qualification, where the Irish, Welsh, Scottish and Italians (the latter two) get effectively auto qualification. Yet they have put out an open invitation to any Pro 12 side to join them. So how is that "invite" being qualified. Surely that's no difference...

You can only win the competition if you are in it.  And the more of you in it, the better the chance your stable has of bringing back the silverware.  The PRL can talk about having to play to qualify all they like.  It is their choice how they select their teams for HEC entry.  Their choice - they make it alone.  And no matter how they choose, no matter if they use short straws or dice, they will still always have four more sides each automatically entered into HEC than the Italians or the Scottish with their automatic entries.  All Nations have 'Automatic' entries.  All of them.  You can only win a competition if you are in it and English and French sides have more than enough entries in HEC to dominate it already.  Greed seems to require rules to ensure even less competition from the 'others'.

As I've said, it has to change, but the current "fight" is no more than big egos with big cheque books arguing over who can pee highest up the wall. And they wont care two hoots when it destroys rugby's roots...

Agree.

Ok, I'm bored, off work and sad.

What Lewis actually said in the interview

Roger Lewis wrote:Even at this moment I remain confident that an agreement CAN be achieved.  The reason why I say that...I was involved 7 years ago..2006/2007. We were at similar issues then, with primarily the English clubs, and we reached an agreement. It took us to the end of the season, in fact we didn't reach the agreement until the final of the HEC in 2007 at Twickenham. We agreed it that very day before kick off and I think we can reach an agreement now. Ourselves, the WRU, and the four regions are absolutely united in our position. And our position is we are prepared to accept meritocracy, so qualification would come through the RABO, we'd like that to come through the RABO, we back ourselves, the 4 regions back themselves, and we back them and we're prepared for an equitable distribution of monies as well.

Break

Roger Lewis wrote:Everyone needs to model their businesses and manage the risks accordingly, and risk has been taken, as I say, the Cardiff Blues have signed Gethin Jenkins in this context, they have laid anew pitch, and I think that negotiation for certain players needs to be concluded as quickly as possible. And yes £1M is available and want that to be spent as quickly as possible.

Interviewer wrote:So why isn't it being given to the regions at the moment? What's the delay with that?

Roger Lewis wrote:Erm. At the moment, we're waiting to hear back from the 4 regions. We met with them last week. We outlined our joint views on players and those views were arrived at from discussions with the regions and WRU coaching staff and we've also expressed the clear terms and conditions. One of them, which you make reference to, is the Participation Agreement. We agreed with the regions in 2009 that the new Agreement going forward would be signed in between July of this year and December of this year. And it would continue on with the same terms and condition from next year, from 2014 through to 2019. And we now await that, because without that there's no certainty for the regions and no certainty for ourselves.

Interviewer wrote:What are the consequences then, if the regions don't sign this new Participation Agreement? You say the deadline is Christmas. If they decidedit's not in their interests to do so , maybe waiting to see what happens in Europe and maybe thinking about jumping ship to a new tournament. What are the consequences?

Roger Lewis wrote:Well together, the 4 regions and the WRU, agreed this timescale. Together, the 4 regions and the WRU, agreed the process going forward. And we all know if one doesn't sign the Agreement there is no Region. And that is the consequence of not signing the Agreement. I don't want that to happen, I don't think the 4 Regions want that to happen. But if that's the case we then have to think what is the future of professional rugby in Wales.

Interviewer wrote:So no Region. They'd still have all the contracted players and staff they had. What would that mean practically speaking?

Roger Lewis wrote:What that means...they won't be playing in Europe, they'd not be playing in RABO, they'd not be receiving the monies off the WRU, they would not have insurance off for their players and they would not have any referees.

Break

Roger Lewis wrote:It's got to be compromise. It's got to be give and take. In any negotiation it's got to be that. and that's why I feel, with the right people, saying the right things at the right time, we can get this competition up a running again.

The only bit in there about the Champions Cup is what the interviewer slipped in, suggesting the Regions are holding off to decide whether they jump ship. Even though on the same program they have an interview with Smith saying they need to get agreement from their unions to be involved.

The WRU, or Lewis, haven't said they wouldn't approve their teams joining the CC. They have said they're teams won't join unless the union approves (which is obvious).

The bigger issue on this is the fact it sounds like the WRU want more control over the players in the new agreement (possible the Central Contracts). Are they trying to force through the changes they wanted (central contracts but less money to the Regions)? And is this why the regions are delaying? Especially if the Regions want the WRU to specify a monetary figure they'll receive that isn't dependant on the European Money coming in.

The WRU, SRU, IRFU and FIR outlined their position regarding the RCC a couple of weeks ago. Basically the same statement was issued but the union initials were changed each time

And they said they wouldn't permit their teams in a competition without the approval of their union (obviously) and the IRB (obviously). It doesn't say anything specifically about the Champions Cup or the ERC. They were rather pointless statements really as they didn't say anything. The only thing they DID do is suggest that the unions were willing to work outside the ERC (and that was only by omission).

How can the Unions work outside themselves? The Directors/Shareholders of the ERC are the Unions (plus PRL & LNR).

Because the ERC deals with a competition that ends in 2014. The 'new body' will deal with a competition that may start in 2014.

HammerofThunor wrote:Because the ERC deals with a competition that ends in 2014. The 'new body' will deal with a competition that may start in 2014.

So, you think changing the name of the company is going to solve the problem, because thats all they will be doing.

HammerofThunor wrote:And they said they wouldn't permit their teams in a competition without the approval of their union (obviously) and the IRB (obviously). It doesn't say anything specifically about the Champions Cup or the ERC. They were rather pointless statements really as they didn't say anything. The only thing they DID do is suggest that the unions were willing to work outside the ERC (and that was only by omission).

Yep the erc was the only notable omission. I still don't see that they would be willing to work in a competition that isn't heavily union controlled or rather influenced but you're right. As things stand though they won't work outside the erc. They might be persuaded to do so if details of the BT deal were announced and there could be negotiation on monetary distribution but given that the PRL have already stated they won't budge on the money I doubt they will go there.

Standulstermen wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:And they said they wouldn't permit their teams in a competition without the approval of their union (obviously) and the IRB (obviously). It doesn't say anything specifically about the Champions Cup or the ERC. They were rather pointless statements really as they didn't say anything. The only thing they DID do is suggest that the unions were willing to work outside the ERC (and that was only by omission).

Yep the erc was the only notable omission. I still don't see that they would be willing to work in a competition that isn't heavily union controlled or rather influenced but you're right. As things stand though they won't work outside the erc. They might be persuaded to do so if details of the BT deal were announced and there could be negotiation on monetary distribution but given that the PRL have already stated they won't budge on the money I doubt they will go there.

So Roger Lewis said that, and Roger Lewis is the head of WRU, so unless the WRU approve of the new competition then the regions will have to jump ship to play in it, and seeing as the WRU will not back a competition that is run by the clubs then you can work it out for yourself.

I know you would love for the Welsh/Irish/ Scottish to come and play with you and you are turning anything said out of contexed into a vague hope to assure yourself that the PRL are going to win, but truth be told, none of the Rabo teams at this moment in time, look as though they will be playing in this BT champions cup competition.

I remember one of LNR's original requests/demands being that the ERC be replaced by a new organisation based in Paris. It wouldnt be the biggest surprise if the current cosy tax break got lost in all the horse trading that is about to commence.

Recwatcher wrote:I remember one of LNR's original requests/demands being that the ERC be replaced by a new organisation based in Paris. It wouldnt be the biggest surprise if the current cosy tax break got lost in all the horse trading that is about to commence.

They have this belief in France that the ERC disciplinary panels are overkind to Irish teams and over harsh on French. They feel that by moving the offices they would get a fair deal. Perhaps instead they should stop trying to rip people's eyeballs out?

Recwatcher wrote:I remember one of LNR's original requests/demands being that the ERC be replaced by a new organisation based in Paris. It wouldnt be the biggest surprise if the current cosy tax break got lost in all the horse trading that is about to commence.

That's a cosy tax break for the RFU and PRL getting lost? Yeah, it might happen. But it'll be worth it to ship the new organisation away from Lilliput and rest it down in the home of England's most cherished historical 'friend' in Europe. Now that's cosy.

LordDowlais wrote:I know you would love for the Welsh/Irish/ Scottish to come and play with you and you are turning anything said out of contexed into a vague hope to assure yourself that the PRL are going to win, but truth be told, none of the Rabo teams at this moment in time, look as though they will be playing in this BT champions cup competition.

That Pro12 teams will not play does not mean they do not want to play. There is certainly enough noise to suggest most of the regions are interested, while Scotland and Italy are just desperate for whatever scraps they are allowed.

Any way when will people get it through their thick heads. No-one is winning this, we are all losing.

Sin é wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:Because the ERC deals with a competition that ends in 2014. The 'new body' will deal with a competition that may start in 2014.

So, you think changing the name of the company is going to solve the problem, because thats all they will be doing.

Well it would be more a chance in the stakes rather than the name. Not saying it will happens course.

StandUlsterman, the WRU and SRU have already suggested they would accept finances split by the number of teams in the 2 tiers (although not specifically, what does "equitable" actually mean exactly?).

On to the control thing. Do we know exactly what they want? Do they want more control over the European game than they do over their own league? Currently the RFU hold ultimate power over the league except for commercial decisions. The blocked an expansion to 14 teams a few years ago. And they can take back the commercial powers when the deal comes up for renewal in 2016 if they want. Then in the agreement the clubs have certain obligations they have to meet.

If there was an agreement from the unions that the commercial and day to day running of the competition was done by team representatives (including IRFU guys for Ireland) and any major changes had to receive rTification from the unions, and there were certain vote percentages required for certain decisions (unanimous). Would his be acceptable? And wht would be the problem with it? The above suggest was an attempted analogy with the PRL and RFU deal.

LordDowlais wrote:

Standulstermen wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:And they said they wouldn't permit their teams in a competition without the approval of their union (obviously) and the IRB (obviously). It doesn't say anything specifically about the Champions Cup or the ERC. They were rather pointless statements really as they didn't say anything. The only thing they DID do is suggest that the unions were willing to work outside the ERC (and that was only by omission).

Yep the erc was the only notable omission. I still don't see that they would be willing to work in a competition that isn't heavily union controlled or rather influenced but you're right. As things stand though they won't work outside the erc. They might be persuaded to do so if details of the BT deal were announced and there could be negotiation on monetary distribution but given that the PRL have already stated they won't budge on the money I doubt they will go there.

So Roger Lewis said that, and Roger Lewis is the head of WRU, so unless the WRU approve of the new competition then the regions will have to jump ship to play in it, and seeing as the WRU will not back a competition that is run by the clubs then you can work it out for yourself.

I know you would love for the Welsh/Irish/ Scottish to come and play with you and you are turning anything said out of contexed into a vague hope to assure yourself that the PRL are going to win, but truth be told, none of the Rabo teams at this moment in time, look as though they will be playing in this BT champions cup competition.

When has the WRU said they would not back a competition run by the clubs (clubs being teams, not just 'clubs')?

SecretFly wrote:

Recwatcher wrote:I remember one of LNR's original requests/demands being that the ERC be replaced by a new organisation based in Paris. It wouldnt be the biggest surprise if the current cosy tax break got lost in all the horse trading that is about to commence.

That's a cosy tax break for the RFU and PRL getting lost?  Yeah, it might happen.  But it'll be worth it to ship the new organisation away from Lilliput and rest it down in the home of England's most cherished historical 'friend' in Europe.  Now that's cosy.

Hopefully we will ship out the B&I Lions as well. Its about time the Irish tax payers stopped subsidising them.

VietGwentRevisited wrote:

Recwatcher wrote:I remember one of LNR's original requests/demands being that the ERC be replaced by a new organisation based in Paris. It wouldnt be the biggest surprise if the current cosy tax break got lost in all the horse trading that is about to commence.

They have this belief in France that the ERC disciplinary panels are overkind to Irish teams and over harsh on French. They feel that by moving the offices they would get a fair deal. Perhaps instead they should stop trying to rip people's eyeballs out?

That because the French don't seem to have a problem with it (read Confession of a Rugby Mercenary by John Daniell) whereas the Irish seem to be a bit touchy about it (actually, I think most of the big 'contact with the eye area' bans have comes from an Englishman. The Irish are the ones getting their eyes fingered).

Although the one that really got their goat was Tincu getting banned against the Ospreys. There was no evidence that Tincu did anything in the scrum (other than James' eye socket getting damaged) and Ian Evans lied and his evidence was struck out. although I'm pretty sure it was an Englishman on that one as well.

If the French had their way, they would get rid of the Irish tax rate arbitrage (and jobs) period. Be careful what you wish for.

Recwatcher wrote:If the French had their way, they would get rid of the Irish tax rate arbitrage (and jobs) period.  Be careful what you wish for.

??  It's you doing the ...thinking/wishing... Recwatcher.  You shoot a "careful, careful" shot across the Irish bow with your neat French 'end to tax break' line and I countered by saying the RFU and PRL are shareholders in the neat little tax break ERC show.  I'm sure they prefer the tax break - wink, wink, nod, nod.

You all keep forgetting that the ERC is being run by the people who are fighting with it.  Strange but true.

BTW, we all know what the French...the Germans and...even the English ... would want if they got their way on the Irish tax rate.  An 'equal' Europe where all the nice technology companies set up in the Big Three, and the little folk from other nations could migrate to work in them.  Lovely... almost a PRL sheen to that one

Recwatcher wrote:If the French had their way, they would get rid of the Irish tax rate arbitrage (and jobs) period.  Be careful what you wish for.

In fairness, its not just the French who would like to get rid of the Irish tax rate arbitrage. So far, they have failed to get anywhere on that one.

Anyway, its not the corporate tax rate that applies in this instance. Its just that sporting organisations are tax exempt in Republic of Ireland and that won't change because of the status of our amateur sporting organisations.

HammerofThunor wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

Standulstermen wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:And they said they wouldn't permit their teams in a competition without the approval of their union (obviously) and the IRB (obviously). It doesn't say anything specifically about the Champions Cup or the ERC. They were rather pointless statements really as they didn't say anything. The only thing they DID do is suggest that the unions were willing to work outside the ERC (and that was only by omission).

Yep the erc was the only notable omission. I still don't see that they would be willing to work in a competition that isn't heavily union controlled or rather influenced but you're right. As things stand though they won't work outside the erc. They might be persuaded to do so if details of the BT deal were announced and there could be negotiation on monetary distribution but given that the PRL have already stated they won't budge on the money I doubt they will go there.

So Roger Lewis said that, and Roger Lewis is the head of WRU, so unless the WRU approve of the new competition then the regions will have to jump ship to play in it, and seeing as the WRU will not back a competition that is run by the clubs then you can work it out for yourself.

I know you would love for the Welsh/Irish/ Scottish to come and play with you and you are turning anything said out of contexed into a vague hope to assure yourself that the PRL are going to win, but truth be told, none of the Rabo teams at this moment in time, look as though they will be playing in this BT champions cup competition.

When has the WRU said they would not back a competition run by the clubs (clubs being teams, not just 'clubs')?

All unions bar the RFU, who are apparently still fumbling around regarding their stance, stated on the 26th of September 2013, that they will only back a union run competition. Only two weeks ago, your memory is getting worse.

From ESPN.com

The Unions in charge of the game in Italy, Scotland, Wales and Ireland have all released statements saying their respective teams will not be taking part in any European tournament which does not have the approval of the relevant Unions or the International Rugby Board.

Have you really read "their respective teams will not be taking part in any European tournament which does to have the approval of the relevant Union or the IRB" with "they will only back a union run competition"?

I'm sorry but on no level what so ever are they the same thing. Is there something missing?

and statement from FFR:

"No international competition involving French clubs can be organised outside the framework of the FFR without its prior agreement. The FFR will remain a major player in the European cups organised by ERC and backs proposals to permit the continuity and development of these." -

See more at: http://www.independent.ie/sport/rugby/heineken-cup-gets-shot-in-arm-from-french-29598769.html#sthash.MWHJgnlZ.dpuf

Oh yes. The FFR have said that. But no-one else has said it. Or at least recently if they said it back a year ago. Can't remember.

Hammer, is it really necessary for Philip Browne of the IRFU to say I back Philip Browne of the ERC?

Why are people finding it so difficult to understand that the ERC is mostly made up of the unions and those that are not of the Unions that are there is down to their Union gifting them with a seat on the board (which can be taken away at any time).

Sin é wrote:Hammer, is it really necessary for Philip Browne of the IRFU to say I back Philip Browne of the ERC?

Why are people finding it so difficult to understand that the ERC is mostly made up of the unions and those that are not of the Unions that are there is down to their Union gifting them with a seat on the board (which can be taken away at any time).

I think all the acronyms confuse people.

It's not difficult at all. But the ERC is simply a framework. It only exists because of an agreement that runs until 2014. After then it doesn't exist anymore unless the parties renew. We know at least some won't.

What they haven't said is that they won't join the PRL and LNR in a different framework for competitions from 2014. That dean't mean they WILL, of course.

Irish teams will not be involved without the approval of their Union.  Neither can they be involved without their Union being part of the running of the competition - as the Union is the owner.
So, for Ireland at least I would assume that the word 'approval' is one and the same as Union participation in the running.

I couldn't speak of the others but I would assume a few of the teams (Italian, Scottish ) would feel safer under the umbrella of their Unions.

Plus.... talking about the Pro12 sides in this context is just far too evasive in real terms as rugby is a business (as we're all being told over and over).

It is a business - we all appreciate that.  Therefore it's about money.  Now why would any Union - any of them - willing walk into a twilight of less influence and less income considering that most money in an exclusively 'club' run competition would go to clubs themselves.  Token amounts might go to Unions to keep them smooth and willing in so far as club dealings with the IRB go.  

But really, no Union is going to walk willing away from a money making venture.  So when people say the RFU are staying quiet for now... the result might be that they are weighing up their options for taking the initiative back from the very vocal PRL.  The silence doesn't necessarily mean things to worry about for the Pro12 sides...it might mean yet another monumental in-fight is going to commence between PRL and the RFU.

The rest of us might prove to be nothing but curious onlookers as the pressure grows on RFU to make its position clear.

maestegmafia wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

Standulstermen wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:And they said they wouldn't permit their teams in a competition without the approval of their union (obviously) and the IRB (obviously). It doesn't say anything specifically about the Champions Cup or the ERC. They were rather pointless statements really as they didn't say anything. The only thing they DID do is suggest that the unions were willing to work outside the ERC (and that was only by omission).

Yep the erc was the only notable omission. I still don't see that they would be willing to work in a competition that isn't heavily union controlled or rather influenced but you're right. As things stand though they won't work outside the erc. They might be persuaded to do so if details of the BT deal were announced and there could be negotiation on monetary distribution but given that the PRL have already stated they won't budge on the money I doubt they will go there.

So Roger Lewis said that, and Roger Lewis is the head of WRU, so unless the WRU approve of the new competition then the regions will have to jump ship to play in it, and seeing as the WRU will not back a competition that is run by the clubs then you can work it out for yourself.

I know you would love for the Welsh/Irish/ Scottish to come and play with you and you are turning anything said out of contexed into a vague hope to assure yourself that the PRL are going to win, but truth be told, none of the Rabo teams at this moment in time, look as though they will be playing in this BT champions cup competition.

When has the WRU said they would not back a competition run by the clubs (clubs being teams, not just 'clubs')?

All unions bar the RFU, who are apparently still fumbling around regarding their stance, stated on the 26th of September 2013, that they will only back a union run competition. Only two weeks ago, your memory is getting worse.

From ESPN.com

The Unions in charge of the game in Italy, Scotland, Wales and Ireland have all released statements saying their respective teams will not be taking part in any European tournament which does not have the approval of the relevant Unions or the International Rugby Board.

I am not sure the RFU are fumbling. They are however the only participant who are refraining from shouting from the rooftops. Perhaps others could learn from them.

Had the original requests for change been met with constructive engagement the whole thing may have been solved with compromise on both sides. Unfortunately it was met with a mixture of disdain and insults. Now threats have been issued from all sides.

The only saving grace is that Martyn Thomas has gone.

Exiledinborders wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

Standulstermen wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:And they said they wouldn't permit their teams in a competition without the approval of their union (obviously) and the IRB (obviously). It doesn't say anything specifically about the Champions Cup or the ERC. They were rather pointless statements really as they didn't say anything. The only thing they DID do is suggest that the unions were willing to work outside the ERC (and that was only by omission).

Yep the erc was the only notable omission. I still don't see that they would be willing to work in a competition that isn't heavily union controlled or rather influenced but you're right. As things stand though they won't work outside the erc. They might be persuaded to do so if details of the BT deal were announced and there could be negotiation on monetary distribution but given that the PRL have already stated they won't budge on the money I doubt they will go there.

So Roger Lewis said that, and Roger Lewis is the head of WRU, so unless the WRU approve of the new competition then the regions will have to jump ship to play in it, and seeing as the WRU will not back a competition that is run by the clubs then you can work it out for yourself.

I know you would love for the Welsh/Irish/ Scottish to come and play with you and you are turning anything said out of contexed into a vague hope to assure yourself that the PRL are going to win, but truth be told, none of the Rabo teams at this moment in time, look as though they will be playing in this BT champions cup competition.

When has the WRU said they would not back a competition run by the clubs (clubs being teams, not just 'clubs')?

All unions bar the RFU, who are apparently still fumbling around regarding their stance, stated on the 26th of September 2013, that they will only back a union run competition. Only two weeks ago, your memory is getting worse.

From ESPN.com

The Unions in charge of the game in Italy, Scotland, Wales and Ireland have all released statements saying their respective teams will not be taking part in any European tournament which does not have the approval of the relevant Unions or the International Rugby Board.

I am not sure the RFU are fumbling. They are however the only participant who are refraining from shouting from the rooftops. Perhaps others could learn from them.

Had the original requests for change been met with constructive engagement the whole thing may have been solved with compromise on both sides. Unfortunately it was met with a mixture of disdain and insults. Now threats have been issued from all sides.

The only saving grace is that Martyn Thomas has gone.

Can I get a hallelujah?

HammerofThunor wrote:It's not difficult at all. But the ERC is simply a framework. It only exists because of an agreement that runs until 2014. After then it doesn't exist anymore unless the parties renew. We know at least some won't.

What they haven't said is that they won't join the PRL and LNR in a different framework for competitions from 2014. That dean't mean they WILL, of course.

No we only know that the RFU have not stipulated whether they will or not.

Kind of the point of this thread is questioning what the hell the RFU are doing now that the lines are drawn.



Though it will also be interesting to see whether legal action is taken against Peter Wheeler over this.

Legal action over what?

And I take it that quote is all you had to infer your point?

Exiledinborders wrote:I am not sure the RFU are fumbling. They are however the only participant who are refraining from shouting from the rooftops. Perhaps others could learn from them.

Had the original requests for change been met with constructive engagement the whole thing may have been solved with compromise on both sides. Unfortunately it was met with a mixture of disdain and insults. Now threats have been issued from all sides.

The only saving grace is that Martyn Thomas has gone.

Hold your horses mate...!

Ritchie has done bugger all so far, making Thomas look more than capable. As mentioned rightly by Jeff Probyn in the OP Cliff Brittle was the last decent chairman of the RFU, since them the clubs have made a mockery of the organisation.

The other unions who you a use of shouting from the roof tops, most would say releasing joint press releases, are worried sick about the impact that the RFUs lack of action will cause.

Last we heard from the RFU on this was a year ago when they stated they thought the PRL deal was likely illegal but that they were going to try to work this all out..


If anyone has prevented this being sorted, besides the prime instigators BT vision and the PRL, it has been the in activity by the RFU.



I am sure the RFU will be at the next ERC meeting without the PRL.

HammerofThunor wrote:Legal action over what?

And I take it that quote is all you had to infer your point?

Sitting as a director at the ERC and PRL when it becomes so apparent his position is used to compromise the former organisation for financial gain.

maestegmafia wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

Standulstermen wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:And they said they wouldn't permit their teams in a competition without the approval of their union (obviously) and the IRB (obviously). It doesn't say anything specifically about the Champions Cup or the ERC. They were rather pointless statements really as they didn't say anything. The only thing they DID do is suggest that the unions were willing to work outside the ERC (and that was only by omission).

Yep the erc was the only notable omission. I still don't see that they would be willing to work in a competition that isn't heavily union controlled or rather influenced but you're right. As things stand though they won't work outside the erc. They might be persuaded to do so if details of the BT deal were announced and there could be negotiation on monetary distribution but given that the PRL have already stated they won't budge on the money I doubt they will go there.

So Roger Lewis said that, and Roger Lewis is the head of WRU, so unless the WRU approve of the new competition then the regions will have to jump ship to play in it, and seeing as the WRU will not back a competition that is run by the clubs then you can work it out for yourself.

I know you would love for the Welsh/Irish/ Scottish to come and play with you and you are turning anything said out of contexed into a vague hope to assure yourself that the PRL are going to win, but truth be told, none of the Rabo teams at this moment in time, look as though they will be playing in this BT champions cup competition.

When has the WRU said they would not back a competition run by the clubs (clubs being teams, not just 'clubs')?

All unions bar the RFU, who are apparently still fumbling around regarding their stance, stated on the 26th of September 2013, that they will only back a union run competition. Only two weeks ago, your memory is getting worse.

From ESPN.com

The Unions in charge of the game in Italy, Scotland, Wales and Ireland have all released statements saying their respective teams will not be taking part in any European tournament which does not have the approval of the relevant Unions or the International Rugby Board.

Fantastic selective reading there again. According to you the unions have said their teams 'will not be taking part in any European tournament which does not have the approval of the relevant Unions or the International Rugby Board'.

Says squat all about who is going to run it - just that they have to approve of it and there is a big gap right there

maestegmafia wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:Legal action over what?

And I take it that quote is all you had to infer your point?

Sitting as a director at the ERC and PRL when it becomes so apparent his position is used to compromise the former organisation for financial gain.

Insider trading!

Perhaps the RFU has better Lawyers.
What financial gain?

lostinwales wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

Standulstermen wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:And they said they wouldn't permit their teams in a competition without the approval of their union (obviously) and the IRB (obviously). It doesn't say anything specifically about the Champions Cup or the ERC. They were rather pointless statements really as they didn't say anything. The only thing they DID do is suggest that the unions were willing to work outside the ERC (and that was only by omission).

Yep the erc was the only notable omission. I still don't see that they would be willing to work in a competition that isn't heavily union controlled or rather influenced but you're right. As things stand though they won't work outside the erc. They might be persuaded to do so if details of the BT deal were announced and there could be negotiation on monetary distribution but given that the PRL have already stated they won't budge on the money I doubt they will go there.

So Roger Lewis said that, and Roger Lewis is the head of WRU, so unless the WRU approve of the new competition then the regions will have to jump ship to play in it, and seeing as the WRU will not back a competition that is run by the clubs then you can work it out for yourself.

I know you would love for the Welsh/Irish/ Scottish to come and play with you and you are turning anything said out of contexed into a vague hope to assure yourself that the PRL are going to win, but truth be told, none of the Rabo teams at this moment in time, look as though they will be playing in this BT champions cup competition.

When has the WRU said they would not back a competition run by the clubs (clubs being teams, not just 'clubs')?

All unions bar the RFU, who are apparently still fumbling around regarding their stance, stated on the 26th of September 2013, that they will only back a union run competition. Only two weeks ago, your memory is getting worse.

From ESPN.com

The Unions in charge of the game in Italy, Scotland, Wales and Ireland have all released statements saying their respective teams will not be taking part in any European tournament which does not have the approval of the relevant Unions or the International Rugby Board.

Fantastic selective reading there again. According to you the unions have said their teams 'will not be taking part in any European tournament which does not have the approval of the relevant Unions or the International Rugby Board'.

Says squat all about who is going to run it - just that they have to approve of it and there is a big gap right there

The question asked was "When has the WRU said they would not back a competition run by the clubs (clubs being teams, not just 'clubs')?".

The answer was the 26th of September 2013. I answered the question. You repeated the answer.

Five of the six unions involved, want a union run competition. They do not want to be part of this PRL concept cup. NO ONE appears to want to join. McCafferty is so desperate that he is threatening the welsh regions with deadlines for joining. BT are distancing themselves from the PRL too. Recently announcing that they didn't mean to cause all these issues.

As far as anyone can see this Concept European alternative that McCafferty has dreamed up is dead in the water.

maestegmafia wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:Legal action over what?

And I take it that quote is all you had to infer your point?

Sitting as a director at the ERC and PRL when it becomes so apparent his position is used to compromise the former organisation for financial gain.

How?

maestegmafia wrote:

lostinwales wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

Standulstermen wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:And they said they wouldn't permit their teams in a competition without the approval of their union (obviously) and the IRB (obviously). It doesn't say anything specifically about the Champions Cup or the ERC. They were rather pointless statements really as they didn't say anything. The only thing they DID do is suggest that the unions were willing to work outside the ERC (and that was only by omission).

Yep the erc was the only notable omission. I still don't see that they would be willing to work in a competition that isn't heavily union controlled or rather influenced but you're right. As things stand though they won't work outside the erc. They might be persuaded to do so if details of the BT deal were announced and there could be negotiation on monetary distribution but given that the PRL have already stated they won't budge on the money I doubt they will go there.

So Roger Lewis said that, and Roger Lewis is the head of WRU, so unless the WRU approve of the new competition then the regions will have to jump ship to play in it, and seeing as the WRU will not back a competition that is run by the clubs then you can work it out for yourself.

I know you would love for the Welsh/Irish/ Scottish to come and play with you and you are turning anything said out of contexed into a vague hope to assure yourself that the PRL are going to win, but truth be told, none of the Rabo teams at this moment in time, look as though they will be playing in this BT champions cup competition.

When has the WRU said they would not back a competition run by the clubs (clubs being teams, not just 'clubs')?

All unions bar the RFU, who are apparently still fumbling around regarding their stance, stated on the 26th of September 2013, that they will only back a union run competition. Only two weeks ago, your memory is getting worse.

From ESPN.com

The Unions in charge of the game in Italy, Scotland, Wales and Ireland have all released statements saying their respective teams will not be taking part in any European tournament which does not have the approval of the relevant Unions or the International Rugby Board.

Fantastic selective reading there again. According to you the unions have said their teams 'will not be taking part in any European tournament which does not have the approval of the relevant Unions or the International Rugby Board'.

Says squat all about who is going to run it - just that they have to approve of it and there is a big gap right there

The question asked was "When has the WRU said they would not back a competition run by the clubs (clubs being teams, not just 'clubs')?".

The answer was the 26th of September 2013. I answered the question. You repeated the answer.

Five of the six unions involved, want a union run competition. They do not want to be part of this PRL concept cup. NO ONE appears to want to join. McCafferty is so desperate that he is threatening the welsh regions with deadlines for joining. BT are distancing themselves from the PRL too. Recently announcing that they didn't mean to cause all these issues.

As far as anyone can see this Concept European alternative that McCafferty has dreamed up is dead in the water.

Those statements say nothing about who runs them. Just that they have to be sanctioned by the unions. Like every single competition.

And again the RFU have NEVER said the BT deal was illegal. I've called you on that over and over and you still insist on posting it. Reinforcing the point you're a manipulative WUM. Either back it up, stop posting it or accept the label Chief Wummer.

SecretFly wrote:Who is RFU chief Exec these days anyway?   Mr Oddjob?  His silence is omenous...keep your garden gnomes safely stashed in the garage for a month or two.

Neither the RFU CEO or President have been silent on the subject, SF. This was what they had to say about a month ago...



http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2013/sep/17/heineken-cup-rugby-union-world-cup

Note the bit about the RFU being in a 'difficult position'. Ian Ritchie is far more astute than I think you realise.

Until the RFU have something more concrete to say, then it is right that they say no more.

I trust Ritchie and Beaumont to be working hard to persuade the PRL representatives to attend the (farcically delayed) ERC meeting on 23rd Oct.

The timescale given for anyone else wanting to join the RCC of 31st Oct is, I believe, to allow some meaningful discussion/negotiation to take place at the 23rd October meeting to rescue the HC.

Yes, there has now been some concessions offered by certain people from the Pro12 unions, but none of these have been formally proposed or debated at the extremely intermittent meetings that ERC have convened since the issue surfaced 18 months ago.

HT you always resort to insults which is pathetic. Every time you ask for evidence to back up something that is in the press it is shown to you and you forget time and time again and resort to insulting.

12th of September 2012

"The RFU refuse to endorse Premier Rugby's BT deal"