End in sight to Euro Mess?

by VietGwentRevisited Fri 11 Oct - 9:40

First topic message reminder :

Reports in the Times today that agreement may be close for pan-European competitions for the next 8 seasons including Pro12/AP/T14 teams. (cannot link due to paywall).

It seems that in the last few weeks Ian Ritchie has been hosting a series of private meetings with all relevant parties to try and thrash out a deal. Interestingly PRLs representative in these meetings has been Bruce Craig - Mark McCafferty being sidelined?
Any way it seems that compromises have been reached on qualification methods, division of finances and management of the new competition. It would seem ERC are out, but the clubs will only have a say in the new competition not the full control they demanded. It even suggests we may see BT and SKY operate as joint broadcasters!!

Supposedly this new competition is almost agreed by all the relevant stakeholders (primarily the 6 Unions but also PRL/LNR). It may all be journalistic bluster - but I see no reason why a NewsCorp paper should be peddling this line if they did not believe it. After all until very recently their stories have always been heaping the utmost scorn on PRL/RFU.

So if a deal is struck that gives us a true set of pan-European competitions I can only be really pleased. I do hope that the story is true about the private meetings - as there has been far too much public posturing from people that only serves to antagonise. A public argument is much harder to heal than a private one.

So if true I guess congrats to Ian Ritchie who has kept RFU out of the limelight. Accused of sticking his head in the sands, it would suggest that he has actually been doing something useful away from the glare of the press and internet.

I need a shower now, cannot believe I just said something decent about the RFU.

by stub Sun 13 Oct - 20:19

TJ wrote:The obvious corollary of a 6/6/6 split in the HC as proposed by the PRL is an end to pro rugby in Scotland and Italy. It might be a slow death over a few years but it would be inevitable

Is it not possible that a second tier, if correctly funded and organised, could allow weaker teams from Eng/Fra and Pro12 nations to grow and develop and eventually compete with the more established larger teams? No need for anyone to wither and die purely based on reorganisation...

by TJ Sun 13 Oct - 20:20

Nope - a lot of folk have.

anyway you have clearly nailed your colours to the mast. the 4 smallest unions have to give up a lot to give the two biggest more, it doesn't matter the adverse effects on them - they can survivce on crumbs and if they don't tough luckon them

Well you might be suprised - because without them the prl have nothing to sell and are now looking desperate as no one will break ranks. theyir gamble has failed and their bluff has been called

by quinsforever Sun 13 Oct - 20:20

Totallybiasedscarlet wrote:
quinsforever wrote:
TJ wrote:
Metal Tiger wrote:
TJ wrote:More nonsensical assertions. how about justifying it? I tell you this. the PRL are isolated and desperately attempting to salvage something from the mess they have made. Its not worth any price to us to have a european cup and we will not accept and intrinsically unfair solution
The ERC is completely RAB dominated and operate as a cartel. If they didn't we would not be in this mess.

You constantly shout about fairness but will not consider any fairness towards the Franglos in your debate and insist that the status quo remains. The minority controlling the majority. The franglos must stay at your party, by your rules and pay for the privilage.

Well the party is over. The gravey train has pulled into the station and the only two paying passengers have got off.

Good luck with that.
Nonsense the french and english between them have the majority of the votes in the ERC. Don't make nonsense up to support your wild claims

I am quite willing to accept change - just not change that penalises only one side.

edit - and the franglos have nothing to sell without the rabo unions - nor are they the only paying customers. the profit is made from selling the european cup. It takes all the teams to make the european cup. the PRL are discovering this as no one will join their RCC and thus they have no product to sell hence the desperation shown by them
really. so how are any of these changes penalising the prl/lnr teams? every single change is penalising (compared to previously unfair arrangement) celtalian teams on average. not one of these proposed changes is penalising franglos.

ie, EVERYONE agrees that the current arrangement needs change in favour of prl/lnr. Apart from JP Lux apparently.
What we can't have is a situation where the pot of money goes up considerably and the Celtic nations are left with the same as before while the Franglo's income goes up dramatically. Neither can we afford a situation where the Franglo clubs take control and invite the rest to join them. It has to be a joint effort. I'm not arguing for the status quo - I'm arguing against creating a new order that severely disadvantages the Celtic teams.

but you said teams should get the same? prl/lnr agree and that is what they are trying to do.

and the only way to do that while keeping rabo teams on the same money, was to bring in a much bigger sponsorship deal that gets prl/lnr teams to the same amount per team.

i challenge anyone to say that this is unfair. surely equality is the very basis of fairness?

by TJ Sun 13 Oct - 20:22

stub wrote:
TJ wrote:The obvious corollary of a 6/6/6 split in the HC as proposed by the PRL is an end to pro rugby in Scotland and Italy. It might be a slow death over a few years but it would be inevitable
Is it not possible that a second tier, if correctly funded and organised, could allow weaker teams from Eng/Fra and Pro12 nations to grow and develop and eventually compete with the more established larger teams? No need for anyone to wither and die purely based on reorganisation...

I do not believe so. I think its far more likely they become permanently disadvantaged. Less money. less ability to attract good players, less opportunity to play top teams, a downward spiral.

Edit - with only 6 rabo teams in the HC it will become very hard for teams to break thru

by TJ Sun 13 Oct - 20:23

quinsforever wrote:
Totallybiasedscarlet wrote:
quinsforever wrote:
TJ wrote:
Metal Tiger wrote:
TJ wrote:More nonsensical assertions. how about justifying it? I tell you this. the PRL are isolated and desperately attempting to salvage something from the mess they have made. Its not worth any price to us to have a european cup and we will not accept and intrinsically unfair solution
The ERC is completely RAB dominated and operate as a cartel. If they didn't we would not be in this mess.

You constantly shout about fairness but will not consider any fairness towards the Franglos in your debate and insist that the status quo remains. The minority controlling the majority. The franglos must stay at your party, by your rules and pay for the privilage.

Well the party is over. The gravey train has pulled into the station and the only two paying passengers have got off.

Good luck with that.
Nonsense the french and english between them have the majority of the votes in the ERC. Don't make nonsense up to support your wild claims

I am quite willing to accept change - just not change that penalises only one side.

edit - and the franglos have nothing to sell without the rabo unions - nor are they the only paying customers. the profit is made from selling the european cup. It takes all the teams to make the european cup. the PRL are discovering this as no one will join their RCC and thus they have no product to sell hence the desperation shown by them
really. so how are any of these changes penalising the prl/lnr teams? every single change is penalising (compared to previously unfair arrangement) celtalian teams on average. not one of these proposed changes is penalising franglos.

ie, EVERYONE agrees that the current arrangement needs change in favour of prl/lnr. Apart from JP Lux apparently.
What we can't have is a situation where the pot of money goes up considerably and the Celtic nations are left with the same as before while the Franglo's income goes up dramatically. Neither can we afford a situation where the Franglo clubs take control and invite the rest to join them. It has to be a joint effort. I'm not arguing for the status quo - I'm arguing against creating a new order that severely disadvantages the Celtic teams.
but you said teams should get the same? prl/lnr agree and that is what they are trying to do.

and the only way to do that while keeping rabo teams on the same money, was to bring in a much bigger sponsorship deal that gets prl/lnr teams to the same amount per team.

i challenge anyone to say that this is unfair. surely equality is the very basis of fairness?

Quins - understand this - the teams do get equal shares right now ! ( apart from the scots anomaly) based on the representation in the HC thats how the money si divided. the amlin produces no money so no one gets paid to play in it.

by Totallybiasedscarlet Sun 13 Oct - 20:27

quinsforever wrote:
Totallybiasedscarlet wrote:
quinsforever wrote:
TJ wrote:
Metal Tiger wrote:
TJ wrote:More nonsensical assertions. how about justifying it? I tell you this. the PRL are isolated and desperately attempting to salvage something from the mess they have made. Its not worth any price to us to have a european cup and we will not accept and intrinsically unfair solution
The ERC is completely RAB dominated and operate as a cartel. If they didn't we would not be in this mess.

You constantly shout about fairness but will not consider any fairness towards the Franglos in your debate and insist that the status quo remains. The minority controlling the majority. The franglos must stay at your party, by your rules and pay for the privilage.

Well the party is over. The gravey train has pulled into the station and the only two paying passengers have got off.

Good luck with that.
Nonsense the french and english between them have the majority of the votes in the ERC. Don't make nonsense up to support your wild claims

I am quite willing to accept change - just not change that penalises only one side.

edit - and the franglos have nothing to sell without the rabo unions - nor are they the only paying customers. the profit is made from selling the european cup. It takes all the teams to make the european cup. the PRL are discovering this as no one will join their RCC and thus they have no product to sell hence the desperation shown by them
really. so how are any of these changes penalising the prl/lnr teams? every single change is penalising (compared to previously unfair arrangement) celtalian teams on average. not one of these proposed changes is penalising franglos.

ie, EVERYONE agrees that the current arrangement needs change in favour of prl/lnr. Apart from JP Lux apparently.
What we can't have is a situation where the pot of money goes up considerably and the Celtic nations are left with the same as before while the Franglo's income goes up dramatically. Neither can we afford a situation where the Franglo clubs take control and invite the rest to join them. It has to be a joint effort. I'm not arguing for the status quo - I'm arguing against creating a new order that severely disadvantages the Celtic teams.
but you said teams should get the same? prl/lnr agree and that is what they are trying to do.

and the only way to do that while keeping rabo teams on the same money, was to bring in a much bigger sponsorship deal that gets prl/lnr teams to the same amount per team.

i challenge anyone to say that this is unfair. surely equality is the very basis of fairness?

I don't believe they are. What you are saying is fair, what the PRL /LNR are doing is splitting 3 ways. As I've said before, this arrangement will be a severe worsening of the financial differential that exists and if the WRU concede it will be the most suicidal thing they've done so far. We go in as Welsh regions not as part of a Celtic league. We submit four pro teams to two different cross border competitions. I would be happy for the Scarlets to get the same as say Leicester for qualifying. If the PRL/LNR get their way I do not believe it will be equal. Furthermore as I keep on saying, it would be idiotic to allow the PRL/LNF to organise the competition and attend as invitees. All the regions/clubs are stakeholders as are the unions. All must be involved in the organisation of the competition.

by quinsforever Sun 13 Oct - 20:28

TJ wrote:Nope - a lot of folk have.

anyway you have clearly nailed your colours to the mast. the 4 smallest unions have to give up a lot to give the two biggest more, it doesn't matter the adverse effects on them - they can survivce on crumbs and if they don't tough luckon them

Well you might be suprised - because without them the prl have nothing to sell and are now looking desperate as no one will break ranks. theyir gamble has failed and their bluff has been called

good to know then that all the articles quoted in this thread must be lies from the biased english media, even from the bit of it owned by murdoch.

the only bluff thats been called is ERC's. and thats why there are being sacrificed. celtic unions should never have listened to ERC and JP lux from the start of these last 18months of non-negotiations. his belief in his buddies at IRB and FFR ability to stop prl/lnr leaving gave false comfort to WRU/IRFU/SRU/FIR.

like the pathetic thread started recently with 3 week old article that Lux said RFU promised to back the ERC...how patently out of date that turned out to be in light of Ian Ritchie quotes directly to the press in last 3 days.

by Metal Tiger Sun 13 Oct - 20:28

Apologies to one and all for my little outburst.

I got angry at TJ and posted rarther harshly I think.

I personally would like to have seen the HEC survive albeit in a modified form as I value the contribution by all teams in the competition and have always looked forward to HEC games as something special.

But I recognise the need to change and believe it is right that it does.

There has been soms good debate on this which I have found informative & intriguing too.

Then there are certain posters, on both sides, who will not even consider anyone elses point of view and just shout louder and louder when people differ from their stand point of bias.

by stub Sun 13 Oct - 20:31

TJ wrote:
stub wrote:
TJ wrote:The obvious corollary of a 6/6/6 split in the HC as proposed by the PRL is an end to pro rugby in Scotland and Italy. It might be a slow death over a few years but it would be inevitable
Is it not possible that a second tier, if correctly funded and organised, could allow weaker teams from Eng/Fra and Pro12 nations to grow and develop and eventually compete with the more established larger teams? No need for anyone to wither and die purely based on reorganisation...
I do not believe so. I think its far more likely they become permanently disadvantaged. Less money. less ability to attract good players, less opportunity to play top teams, a downward spiral.

Well that would not suit a lot of folk in any country... Surely then the detail of how tier 2 would work and crucially how it would be funded is vital to keep things fresh and exciting. By which I mean ensuring that Toulon etc are not forever the best team in Europe. I think most of us would want to see a scenario where smaller teams can push their way into tier 1 and compete. I know people will argue that we have that now to some extent but the reality seems to be that something new needs to be brokered.

by quinsforever Sun 13 Oct - 20:31

totally - "this arrangement will be a severe worsening of the financial differential that exists"

yes, it will in fact eliminate the financial differential that exists. ie bring about equality. sounds very fair to me, and rabo league doesnt even have to give up 1 penny of money.

are you saying only a "financial differential" is fair? come on, really?

by TJ Sun 13 Oct - 20:34

Come off it. Its obvious the PRLs bluff has been called and failed. they wanted something they are not going to get. They thought the rabo unions would roll over and they could divide and conquer. they badly underestimated the resolve of the other unions and the opposition they would get. a huge misjudgement that has come back to haunt them.

Lets see - the PRL wanted club control - they are not going to get it, they wanted 6/6/6 - they are not going to get it. they wanted to take away twice the %share of the money they do now - its not going to happen. They wanted the european cup to be nothing to do with unions - now they have the RFU trying to broker a compromise. tehir bluff is called, their gamble has failed, its damage limitation from them now. tehy uddenly realised how bleak the future looked for them with no european cup to play in.

by TJ Sun 13 Oct - 20:36

quinsforever wrote:totally - "this arrangement will be a severe worsening of the financial differential that exists"

yes, it will in fact eliminate the financial differential that exists. ie bring about equality. sounds very fair to me, and rabo league doesnt even have to give up 1 penny of money.

are you saying only a "financial differential" is fair? come on, really?

Quins - the money is split equally on a per team entrant basis right now. the amilin makes no profit, no one is paid to play in it. that is how it works. It makes me laugh the claims of "meritocracy" and " subsidising the rabo teams" then the PRL want to account the other way when it comes to their teams.

by Trevor40 Sun 13 Oct - 20:37

Tj you are utterly deluded.

by LeinsterFan4life Sun 13 Oct - 20:37

Metal Tiger wrote:Apologies to one and all for my little outburst.

I got angry at TJ and posted rarther harshly I think.

I personally would like to have seen the HEC survive albeit in a modified form as I value the contribution by all teams in the competition and have always looked forward to HEC games as something special.

But I recognise the need to change and believe it is right that it does.

There has been soms good debate on this which I have found informative & intriguing too.

Then there are certain posters, on both sides, who will not even consider anyone elses point of view and just shout louder and louder when people differ from their stand point of bias.

I think most Rabo fans are willing to accept the 6/6/8 split but nobody else seems to agree with it.

by TJ Sun 13 Oct - 20:37

Metal Tiger wrote:Apologies to one and all for my little outburst.

I got angry at TJ and posted rarther harshly I think.

No problem from me. NO need to apologise as far as I am concerned

by Totallybiasedscarlet Sun 13 Oct - 20:40

quinsforever wrote:totally - "this arrangement will be a severe worsening of the financial differential that exists"

yes, it will in fact eliminate the financial differential that exists. ie bring about equality. sounds very fair to me, and rabo league doesnt even have to give up 1 penny of money.

are you saying only a "financial differential" is fair? come on, really?

This is where we have to agree to disagree. I just don't buy it.

Your last sentence I don't understand. I've also said that leaving the running of the HEC to the PRL/LNF would be stupid. All the stakeholders should be represented - including the unions.

by TJ Sun 13 Oct - 20:41

Yes - to the English 1/4 of the money is not enough. they want more.

by quinsforever Sun 13 Oct - 20:42

TJ wrote:Come off it. Its obvious the PRLs bluff has been called and failed. they wanted something they are not going to get. They thought the rabo unions would roll over and they could divide and conquer. they badly underestimated the resolve of the other unions and the opposition they would get. a huge misjudgement that has come back to haunt them.

Lets see - the PRL wanted club control - they are not going to get it (recent press indicates they will get commercial control), they wanted 6/6/6 - they are not going to get it (you hope, or rather, as you prefer to say, assertion). they wanted to take away twice the %share of the money they do now - its not going to happen (they actually wanted i think between 4-5x per team for prl than the £400k/team that they get guaranteed and i wouldnt bet against them getting it). They wanted the european cup to be nothing to do with unions (i suspect that was a negotiating position they were always willing to sacrifice on order to get what they reall wanted, ie more money and commercial control) - now they have the RFU trying to broker a compromise. tehir bluff is called, their gamble has failed, its damage limitation from them now. tehy (i presume by this you mean IRUF,SRU, WRU and FIR who looked at the implications for their own finances of no HC?) suddenly realised how bleak the future looked for them with no european cup to play in.

by TJ Sun 13 Oct - 20:45

Quins - the english clubs get THE SAME AMOUNT OF MONEY PER ENTRANT AS EVERYONE ELSE RIGHT NOW the rfu keep some of it and some of it is given to clubs who don't earn it - the bottom 6. this is a fact

( apart from the scots anomaly)

by quinsforever Sun 13 Oct - 20:47

TJ wrote:
quinsforever wrote:totally - "this arrangement will be a severe worsening of the financial differential that exists"

yes, it will in fact eliminate the financial differential that exists. ie bring about equality. sounds very fair to me, and rabo league doesnt even have to give up 1 penny of money.

are you saying only a "financial differential" is fair? come on, really?
Quins - the money is split equally on a per team entrant basis right now. the amilin makes no profit, no one is paid to play in it. that is how it works. It makes me laugh the claims of "meritocracy" and " subsidising the rabo teams" then the PRL want to account the other way when it comes to their teams.

please stop repeating the untruth that the amlin makes no money. it is all wrapped up in ERC deal with sky, and unless sky said somewhere that they paid ZERO for amlin i do not understand where you get your data from?

or unless you mean its worth nothing to Scottish teams, which technically is correct.

that's a bit one-eyed no?

by TJ Sun 13 Oct - 20:50

No - its worth little. It makes no profit. the HC makes a profit and this is distributed on a equal shares basis. YO really need to understand what is happening. the english and french have the majority of votes in the ERC, and the money is shared out on an equal basis. the english get 25% of the money. 1/4. they want 1/3

by lostinwales Sun 13 Oct - 20:52

TJ wrote:Come off it. Its obvious the PRLs bluff has been called and failed. they wanted something they are not going to get. They thought the rabo unions would roll over and they could divide and conquer. they badly underestimated the resolve of the other unions and the opposition they would get. a huge misjudgement that has come back to haunt them.

Lets see - the PRL wanted club control - they are not going to get it, they wanted 6/6/6 - they are not going to get it. they wanted to take away twice the %share of the money they do now - its not going to happen. They wanted the european cup to be nothing to do with unions - now they have the RFU trying to broker a compromise. tehir bluff is called, their gamble has failed, its damage limitation from them now. tehy uddenly realised how bleak the future looked for them with no european cup to play in.

TJ its fantastic that you are so passionate about your cause, and that you can keep up this level of debate without falling into the trap of abusing the opposition, but there is absolutely no evidence of some of the things you claim beyond wishful thinking. None.

We dont know what is going on in private, and the guts of what has been said in public by the Rabo unions has been remarkably non committal. About the only statement I have heard of from someone with real influence that is truly anti 'franglo' is from Lux, which, given the circumstances of his position and how he got there isnt exactly surprising

by Totallybiasedscarlet Sun 13 Oct - 20:53

"A good compromise is one were both parties are dissatisfied." Larry David laughing

I can go with that Very Happy

No ERC and no PRL/LNF cartel either. I sincerely hope that sanity will prevail and the unions and clubs/regions form a new organisation to run the competition and negotiate an equitable solution and re-tender TV rights so we can have a clean start next season. Both sides have to compromise - neither will be entirely happy - ask Larry! Wink

by quinsforever Sun 13 Oct - 20:55

TJ wrote:Quins - the english clubs get THE SAME AMOUNT OF MONEY PER ENTRANT AS EVERYONE ELSE RIGHT NOW the rfu keep some of it and some of it is given to clubs who don't earn it - the bottom 6. this is a fact

( apart from the scots anomaly)

this is just untrue and by repeating it you arent going to suddenly make it different.

by stub Sun 13 Oct - 20:56

Totallybiasedscarlet wrote:"A good compromise is one were both parties are dissatisfied." Larry David

I can go with that No ERC and no PRL/LNF cartel either. I sincerely hope that sanity will prevail and the unions and clubs/regions form a new organisation to run the competition and negotiate an equitable solution and re-tender TV rights so we can have a clean start next season. Both sides have to compromise - neither will be entirely happy - ask Larry!

Wise words from Larry!

by lostinwales Sun 13 Oct - 20:56

Totallybiasedscarlet wrote:"A good compromise is one were both parties are dissatisfied." Larry David

I can go with that No ERC and no PRL/LNF cartel either. I sincerely hope that sanity will prevail and the unions and clubs/regions form a new organisation to run the competition and negotiate an equitable solution and re-tender TV rights so we can have a clean start next season. Both sides have to compromise - neither will be entirely happy - ask Larry!

I remember years ago doing one of those negotiation games as part of some kind of management training thingy. Two different teams negotiated a deal and one thought they had done badly and the other well. There was sod all difference in the actual deals they had negotiated. The rest was just about attitude

by TJ Sun 13 Oct - 20:57

The evidence is there - but of course its surmise and conjecture. Just from watching the statements made and interpreting them in the light of experience. Someone with a winning hand stays quiet. All the pronouncements about who of the Rabo unions will break ranks and join the RCC is a sign of desperation in attempting to divide and conquer as is going back to the RFU to negotiate.

by TJ Sun 13 Oct - 21:00

quinsforever wrote:
TJ wrote:Quins - the english clubs get THE SAME AMOUNT OF MONEY PER ENTRANT AS EVERYONE ELSE RIGHT NOW the rfu keep some of it and some of it is given to clubs who don't earn it - the bottom 6. this is a fact

( apart from the scots anomaly)this is just untrue and by repeating it you arent going to suddenly make it different.

Its the truth. Its an inconvenient truth for you and your position. Its just one of the places the PRL line is nonsense. that is how the money is divided - according to the entrants in the HC on an equal shares basis. If its unfair the Italians get the same per entrant as the english - ( the english claim of subsidising the Italians) then why is it OK for the top English clubs to subsidise the bottom ones?

by quinsforever Sun 13 Oct - 21:02

TJ wrote:No - its worth little. It makes no profit. the HC makes a profit and this is distributed on a equal shares basis. YO really need to understand what is happening. the english and french have the majority of votes in the ERC, and the money is shared out on an equal basis. the english get 25% of the money. 1/4. they want 1/3

do you understand the difference between profit and revenue? HC and Amlin generate revenue for ERC (a not-for-profit company) that then distributes revenue streams on a largely pre-agreed financial basis (some variability for performance payments).

This claim than the Amlin has no value is so completely and utterly at odds with your position that european competition should have "developmental and redistributive goals". why shouldnt bucarest or lusitanos be in the HC? and if they arent are you saying they should get ZERO money because according to you the Amlin "makes no money"? is it just me or is this incredibly hypocritical?

by lostinwales Sun 13 Oct - 21:03

TJ wrote:The evidence is there - but of course its surmise and conjecture. Just from watching the statements made and interpreting them in the light of experience. Someone with a winning hand stays quiet. All the pronouncements about who of the Rabo unions will break ranks and join the RCC is a sign of desperation in attempting to divide and conquer as is going back to the RFU to negotiate.

What - like the RFU? - most of the 'pronouncements' have come from the media and the rent-a-nuts.

We all look at what evidence there is with different coloured glasses. No denying personal bias, its just going back to an older analogy- We are all biased, its just that some of us are more biased than others

by quinsforever Sun 13 Oct - 21:06

TJ wrote:
quinsforever wrote:
TJ wrote:Quins - the english clubs get THE SAME AMOUNT OF MONEY PER ENTRANT AS EVERYONE ELSE RIGHT NOW the rfu keep some of it and some of it is given to clubs who don't earn it - the bottom 6. this is a fact

( apart from the scots anomaly)this is just untrue and by repeating it you arent going to suddenly make it different.
Its the truth. Its an inconvenient truth for you and your position. Its just one of the places the PRL line is nonsense. that is how the money is divided - according to the entrants in the HC on an equal shares basis. If its unfair the Italians get the same per entrant as the english - ( the english claim of subsidising the Italians) then why is it OK for the top English clubs to subsidise the bottom ones?

ok, so you would have no objection to SRU being forced to enter 2 teams into the Amlin, with no extra money to the SRU? same for IRFU, WRU (italy already has several teams in Amlin)? because that would be fair, and the english and french teams cant pull out of Amlin because its part of the ERC/SKY contract...

oh wait...they have pulled out...because this is one of the many areas of significant weakness of the european competitions...

by nathan Sun 13 Oct - 21:08

well this thread changed quickly!

by quinsforever Sun 13 Oct - 21:09

there was a brief pause while some rugby was play, then it was GAME ON! Very Happy

by nathan Sun 13 Oct - 21:10

quinsforever wrote:there was a brief pause while some rugby was play, then it was GAME ON!

bit bored of going around in circles and reading blatantly made up facts, so i'm going to give this one a miss!

by TJ Sun 13 Oct - 21:11

Quins - its the reality.

so by your logic the scots could enter the entire first division into the amilin and thus end up with loads more money? Its a part of the reason the scots do not have any teams in the amlin - no money for doing so.

its the hypocicy of saying the english are subsidising the italians by getting equal shares and thats wrong, but its OK to subsidise the weaker english teams who do nothing to earn the money.

the money from the eureopena cup is shared on an equal shares basis to the teams in the HC. thats how it works. the english get 24% of the money right now

by TJ Sun 13 Oct - 21:15

lostinwales wrote:
TJ wrote:The evidence is there - but of course its surmise and conjecture. Just from watching the statements made and interpreting them in the light of experience. Someone with a winning hand stays quiet. All the pronouncements about who of the Rabo unions will break ranks and join the RCC is a sign of desperation in attempting to divide and conquer as is going back to the RFU to negotiate.
What - like the RFU? - most of the 'pronouncements' have come from the media and the rent-a-nuts.

We all look at what evidence there is with different coloured glasses. No denying personal bias, its just going back to an older analogy- We are all biased, its just that some of us are more biased than others

correct - I do understand this

I do get tired of the nonsense talked tho. so far we have been told the rabo unions control the erc when the french and english could outvote them as they hold the majority of the votes between them, that the english get less per team when the do not as they get 25% of the money, that the english subsidise the rest etc etc.

by mystiroakey Sun 13 Oct - 21:15

nathan wrote:
quinsforever wrote:there was a brief pause while some rugby was play, then it was GAME ON!
bit bored of going around in circles and reading blatantly made up facts, so i'm going to give this one a miss!

You have sense bud. This argument(untill the powers at be fix it) is nonsense..

I am out as well. Only when it has been sorted out will I be back..

by Sin é Sun 13 Oct - 21:16

quinsforever wrote:the reason the prl/lnr are likely to get most of what they want is quite simply that they have the support of the RFU, and he thinks they have i_) a great piont, and ii) the right not to participate in ERC if they choose not to. The new RFU CEO Ian Ritchie is a modern rugby administrator with sports experience in tennis and football, and commercial experience running Granada TV i think it was. And he was a barrister before that.

he is commercial, pragmatic, discreet, and recognizes that helping the prl clubs get a better deal will be good for the RFU.

those who hoped/assumed RFU would "tell the prl clubs to do this, that or the other thing" were dreaming. The RFU is evolving. Professional rugby is evolving in PRL/LNR (although not FFR!). IRFU/SRU/WRU have chosen a different path. good luck to them, but i know who my money is on to win the long game. Commercial astuteness + enlightened administration.

The reason why the PRL will get the support of the RFU is because the PRL are blackmailing them over the world cup. Its not a coincidence that the French were making all the moves in 2007 coming up to the world cup in France.

Its a pity the other Unions have to take the hit for the weakness of the French & England Unions.

by quinsforever Sun 13 Oct - 21:19

Sin é wrote:
quinsforever wrote:the reason the prl/lnr are likely to get most of what they want is quite simply that they have the support of the RFU, and he thinks they have i_) a great piont, and ii) the right not to participate in ERC if they choose not to. The new RFU CEO Ian Ritchie is a modern rugby administrator with sports experience in tennis and football, and commercial experience running Granada TV i think it was. And he was a barrister before that.

he is commercial, pragmatic, discreet, and recognizes that helping the prl clubs get a better deal will be good for the RFU.

those who hoped/assumed RFU would "tell the prl clubs to do this, that or the other thing" were dreaming. The RFU is evolving. Professional rugby is evolving in PRL/LNR (although not FFR!). IRFU/SRU/WRU have chosen a different path. good luck to them, but i know who my money is on to win the long game. Commercial astuteness + enlightened administration.
The reason why the PRL will get the support of the RFU is because the PRL are blackmailing them over the world cup. Its not a coincidence that the French were making all the moves in 2007 coming up to the world cup in France.

Its a pity the other Unions have to take the hit for the weakness of the French & England Unions.

thats your opinion and fair enough.

mine is that the reason prl and rfu will get along better and better is because they have a truly modern administrator at the RFU who doesnt give 2 farts about the approval and pressure from the cigar-club blazer community representing all the other unions.

other countries would do well to take note. can't stop evolution. and success will breed success once you have the right people in the right places.

by TJ Sun 13 Oct - 21:22

Fortunatly the french union found some backbone and because of that the PRL have had to start some real negotiations - something they have refused to do until now. It does amuse me that the PRL said they would not talk to the unions - but now are having to under the auspices of the RFU.

Hopefull this negoitation will save the day. depends on the PRL being willing to compromise as the others are and / or the RFU finding some backbone.

by nathan Sun 13 Oct - 21:25

TJ wrote:Fortunatly the french union found some backbone and because of that the PRL have had to start some real negotiations - something they have refused to do until now. It does amuse me that the PRL said they would not talk to the unions - but now are having to under the auspices of the RFU.

Hopefull this negoitation will save the day. depends on the PRL being willing to compromise as the others are and / or the RFU finding some backbone.

Seriously TJ, you read the same news as each and everyone of us. How the hell are you making these "conclusions", some of them are truly baffling.

by quinsforever Sun 13 Oct - 21:28

TJ wrote:Quins - its the reality.

so by your logic the scots could enter the entire first division into the amilin and thus end up with loads more money? Its a part of the reason the scots do not have any teams in the amlin - no money for doing so.

its the hypocicy of saying the english are subsidising the italians by getting equal shares and thats wrong, but its OK to subsidise the weaker english teams who do nothing to earn the money.

the money from the eureopena cup is shared on an equal shares basis to the teams in the HC. thats how it works. the english get 24% of the money right now

franglo teams, 48% of ERC money, 26 teams in Europe = 1.85% per team

celtalian teams 52% of ERC money, 17? (incl 4 italian teams in amlin) = 3.05% per team (obviously more if just sru,wrfu,irfu teams considered)

if i have the wrong figures pls correct me anyone. i dont know how much lusitanos and bucarest get in amlin but i imagine not much!

by quinsforever Sun 13 Oct - 21:34

TJ wrote:Fortunatly the french union found some backbone and because of that the PRL have had to start some real negotiations - something they have refused to do until now. It does amuse me that the PRL said they would not talk to the unions - but now are having to under the auspices of the RFU.

Hopefull this negoitation will save the day. depends on the PRL being willing to compromise as the others are and / or the RFU finding some backbone.

no, they said they wouldnt be attending ERC meetings in future, and prl have been very clear that they are willing to talk to everyone directly, and before they would welcome clubs from celtalian countries, those clubs will need to sort out their own situations with their respective unions.

quentin smith from walesonline interview oct 2nd

ST: Do you sympathise with the Welsh regions who might want to be part of your competition but can’t join without WRU approval?

QS: We won’t comment on internal matters between the clubs and their Union. That’s not just Wales, but Scotland, Ireland and Italy.

It would be wrong.

I know that if a team wants to join the Champions Cup they will have to have conversations with their governing Union about how that can be achieved.

by quinsforever Sun 13 Oct - 21:36

quinsforever wrote:
TJ wrote:Fortunatly the french union found some backbone and because of that the PRL have had to start some real negotiations - something they have refused to do until now. It does amuse me that the PRL said they would not talk to the unions - but now are having to under the auspices of the RFU.

Hopefull this negoitation will save the day. depends on the PRL being willing to compromise as the others are and / or the RFU finding some backbone.
no, they said they wouldnt be attending ERC meetings in future, and prl have been very clear that they are willing to talk to everyone directly, and before they would welcome clubs from celtalian countries, those clubs will need to sort out their own situations with their respective unions.

quentin smith from walesonline interview oct 2nd

ST: Do you sympathise with the Welsh regions who might want to be part of your competition but can’t join without WRU approval?

QS: We won’t comment on internal matters between the clubs and their Union. That’s not just Wales, but Scotland, Ireland and Italy.

It would be wrong.

I know that if a team wants to join the Champions Cup they will have to have conversations with their governing Union about how that can be achieved.

apols to everyone else for actually bringing in some outside data

by TJ Sun 13 Oct - 21:36

Nathan - I am very sceptical, have been involved in lots of negotiation and have a lot of experience in reading people.

I find the way some believe in the utterances from the PRL astounding and the way that the big lie technique seems to work on some folk.

if the PRL had a strong hand they would not be making all these ridiculous public utterances about how this or that team will join the RCC. Making these statements is an obvious sign of desperation as is putting a time limit on other teams joining. Its clear they have tried to divide adn conquer and its not worked.

Until a couple of weeks ago the PRL poosition was its nothing to do with unions and the unions will have no part in running the european cup. Well look now - the RFU appear to be brokering talks with the other unions. Again a huge sign of weakness from the PRL and a massive climbdown.

bascially IMO the PRL thought they could get the others to buckle and have failed - and I bet behind the scences the RFU is very unhappy with them. we will see if an agreement is reached but the PRL were wrong-footed as they had a position of - "its our way or we won't play" and were taken aback to be told - fine - go off and play on your own then. they have no european cup to sell without the rabo unions and look very we4ak and foolish now.

by TJ Sun 13 Oct - 21:40

quinsforever wrote:
TJ wrote:Quins - its the reality.

so by your logic the scots could enter the entire first division into the amilin and thus end up with loads more money? Its a part of the reason the scots do not have any teams in the amlin - no money for doing so.

its the hypocicy of saying the english are subsidising the italians by getting equal shares and thats wrong, but its OK to subsidise the weaker english teams who do nothing to earn the money.

the money from the eureopena cup is shared on an equal shares basis to the teams in the HC. thats how it works. the english get 24% of the money right now
franglo teams, 48% of ERC money, 26 teams in Europe = 1.85% per team

celtalian teams 52% of ERC money, 17? (incl 4 italian teams in amlin) = 3.05% per team (obviously more if just sru,wrfu,irfu teams considered)

if i have the wrong figures pls correct me anyone. i dont know how much lusitanos and bucarest get in amlin but i imagine not much!

Try to understand - its divided on the number of teams in the HC only as its only that that makes money. So its equal shares. this is a fact. this is how its worked out. On an ewual shares basis on participation in the HC. You may think it should be a differnt basis but it is not.

by markb Sun 13 Oct - 21:43

The idea that the Amlin doesn't generate any money is rubbish. If it doesn't, what happens to the sponsorship money from Amlin Insurance and the other secondary sponsors who are plastered around the match venues? What happens to the money generated by the broadcasters from selling ad time around the Amlin pool and knock-out stage games?

However, irrespective of whetever it's value was in the past, what we're talking about now is it's value in the future after the restructuring. More higher quality sides, resulting in more competitve matches will attract more viewers. And with more broadcasters with the rights to show more of those matches it's value will increase to them. Sponsors will pay more to be visible at the more watched matches.

Based on last season the introduction of a third tier with a top two of twenty each would have seen an Amlin comprised of:

Connacht, Cardiff, Edinburgh, Dragons, Zebre
Bath, Wasps, Irish, Sale, Worcester, Newcastle
Bayonne, Biarritz, Stade, Grenoble, Bordeaux, Brive, Oyonnax
Mogliano, Cavalieri

Are people seriously suggesting that those clubs' supporters wouldn't tune in to watch their games just because it's the Amlin? Broadcasters put on games between those sides when it's just within the same league.

by splenetic Sun 13 Oct - 21:53

nathan wrote:
TJ wrote:Fortunatly the french union found some backbone and because of that the PRL have had to start some real negotiations - something they have refused to do until now. It does amuse me that the PRL said they would not talk to the unions - but now are having to under the auspices of the RFU.

Hopefull this negoitation will save the day. depends on the PRL being willing to compromise as the others are and / or the RFU finding some backbone.
Seriously TJ, you read the same news as each and everyone of us. How the hell are you making these "conclusions", some of them are truly baffling.

Maybe that Hong Kong animated news channel is covering rugby now.

by TJ Sun 13 Oct - 21:54

the money generated is tiny. it will never have any significant value. Its only because the PRL wanbt to grab an unfair share of the money they pretend its of equal vlalue.

its part of their humbug. according tothe PRL Glasgow are subsidised by the English despite getting an equal share of the money and thats wrong, but newcastle should get the same as Leicester despite playing in a lower tournament that generates no significnt money and thats not s subsidy and its OK.

the reason the english clubs get less each is to do with the policy of the RFU they recveive the same per entrant in the HC as everyone else

by lostinwales Sun 13 Oct - 22:03

TJ wrote:the money generated is tiny. it will never have any significant value. Its only because the PRL wanbt to grab an unfair share of the money they pretend its of equal vlalue.

its part of their humbug. according tothe PRL Glasgow are subsidised by the English despite getting an equal share of the money and thats wrong, but newcastle should get the same as Leicester despite playing in a lower tournament that generates no significnt money and thats not s subsidy and its OK.

the reason the english clubs get less each is to do with the policy of the RFU they recveive the same per entrant in the HC as everyone else

That mean nasty mercenary PRL wants everyone in the AP to get the same money which just goes to show how unfair they naturally are

by Sponsored content