New European Rugby cup (or whatever it is called) - Qualification agreed

First topic message reminder :

But didn't the WRU and its regions capitulate and join their English Masters? Have they done a U-turn now? Looks like it.

Unless they want to hype up the Low Value Cup...

quinsforever wrote:should add that i have a very low opinion of carling. just to be clear

Phew! Thought I was going to have to batter you for a minute there.

Jenifer McLadyboy wrote:You have got to see it from the blazer's pov too. I know a few of them over here. They are largely amateur (not the ones in the ERC obviously) and they do it for the love of the game. The only benefits they get are the odd junket and tickets for themselves and their families.

Scale that attitude up to ERC level and it becomes corruption.

Just like in tribal Africa when a man brings the chief a chicken in "prior appreciation" of being allowed to hunt in a certain part of the jungle. That = "quaint tradition"

Bring that scenario into modern Africa where the chief is "the minister for foreign affairs" and the Jungle is an oil field........

Same concept. Different scale. That = "Extreme corruption"

There is an awful lot of begrudgery with blazers. Most are very hard working and have a lot of responsibility. Most are not in the job long enough (generally, its a term of at most 3 years) to get corrupt and they don't get paid for it either.

Just think of the responsibility the President of the GAA has? And think of how good most of them have been?

You really couldn't buy the expertise that someone like Tom Grace would bring to the IRFU (and for free).

quinsforever wrote:

they dont need jobs, they want them, for the power and status it affords them. i know exactly how it works.

not so different from when carling described them as 57 old farts.[/quote]
Who in the name of god would want to deal with a slimeball like McCafferty for free?

The power and the status don't last very long.

treasurer's aren't usually free. thats a full time job. does he really work for free? are u sure? amazingly generous of him if so.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_presidents_of_FIFA

Wow! There have only been 8 presidents of FIFA in 110 years.  

nIGHT jOHN bOY!

Sin é wrote:
they dont need jobs, they want them, for the power and status it affords them. i know exactly how it works.

not so different from when carling described them as 57 old farts.

Who in the name of god would want to deal with a slimeball like McCafferty for free?

The power and the status don't last very long.

[/quote]true. most things in life dont last very long. i am off to me bed now. wonder what tomorrow will bring in this exciting soap opera...aren't the unions supposed to be making an offer to the PRL or something?

quinsforever wrote:treasurer's aren't usually free. thats a full time job. does he really work for free? are u sure? amazingly generous of him if so.

Yep. He is Honorary Treasurer of the IRFU.

He is retired from PWC (is a non-executive director of Paddy Powers).

Jenifer McLadyboy wrote:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_presidents_of_FIFA

Wow! There have only been 8 presidents of FIFA in 110 years.  

LOL i thought there had only been 1

night all.

FIFA is feicked....

dont get me started on it.

Jeas you lot stay up late.

My excuse is the Cricket!

SecretFly wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:"So, despite what some of your country men say, that I'm talking shcit about the desire of PRL and LNR to clip the wings of successful Irish sides - that is the only conclusion that can be logically reached, given that Irish sides were virtually the only sides English and French sides feared."

SF dude, seriously I think you need to come away from your conspiracy theorys a bit bud. There is no Logic to your statement at all. It really is more about control and MONEY!!

Seriously, dude...I'm right on the button.  

Being at the fun part of the end of the premier European rugby event is printing money for big sides.  You think sponsors want to feel that their names would slide off the radar every year after the pool stages.  
Any competition is about winning the competition.  It's not about accountants making profits - it's about winning.  Because winning gains reputation and heightens value.  Winning attracts best players and heightens value.  Winning is why sponsors are willing to pay higher rates - and adds value.

If you insist on talking economics, talk economics.  Winning matters and both French and English sides haven't been doing enough of it over the last half decade.  They want that changed.  You can only see how frustrated Clermont have been by all their star players failing and failing.  Sponsors and money implanters don't like that failure repeated and repeated.  It's bad business.

I know exactly where I'm standing.  I'm not dumb.  Annoying? - Yes  Dumb - no.

Given that the HC qualification changes the Franglos asked for at the beginning of all this was for the top 6 from each league and the top 3 Irish sides have finished inside that for the last 3 years, with Munster and Leinster not having registered lower than that for a decade, I struggle to see how you think that request for change was designed to limit the succesful Irish sides.

As mystiroakey rightly states, the cornerstone of this has always been power and money.  The PRL and LNR are there to represent all their clubs in both European competitons, not just the couple that are capable of winning the HC, and for that majority of the clubs the issues are the share of the ERC money they get for their participation (obviously along with the total the competitions are capable of generating) and the quality of the competions and match-ups they are in (of particular concern to the half of their members in the poorly structured Amlin), along with the governance necessary to bring about change to all this and for all the clubs to have a greater say in the future.

LNR haven't passed comment yet. Seems to me that there could be some unhappy owners if some get European comp & others don't, suppose it depends how many places France get

The situation in France is going to be really interesting now.  The singular 20 team ERC tournament guarantees all the PRO12 sides spots.  Even if all those remaining 8 spots are taken by the French, that would leave 6 not involved in Europe.  There have been suggestions that there will be 6 French sides with the other 2 being taken by Italian or Spanish sides.  Camou is supposedly confident of 4 or 5 French sides, which is meant to include Toulon (Boudjellal doesn't want to adhere to the LNR's new French player quota), Biarritz (Blanco wants to be the next FFR president, the club look almost certain to be relegated and they have financial issues), Bayonne (similar financial and performance issues) and one would suspect the league's new boys Oyonnax (who wouldn't ordinarily qualify for that level of European competition and would be very happy with the extra cash to further strengthen their squad to Top 14 levels).

If it is a minority that is competing in Europe, will the LNR leave them the same gaps in the Top 14 schedule or might they reorganise it to better suit the majority of teams (avoiding clashes with international weekends for instance), forcing the minority teams to prioritise the use of their squads between competitions?

What certainly seems likely is that with a split between French sides in and out of Europe, there will be some fractious fun and games involving the different clubs and union across the Channel.

the Welsh regions are already stating that they knew nothing of decisions that were yesterday being taken on their behalf, and it remains to be seen the extent of English, French and Welsh involvement, in England’s case if at all. This in turn would have implications on the extent of Heineken’s involvement as tournament sponsors, and for the television deal agreed with Sky

http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/five-unions-resolve-to-press-ahead-with-a-pan-european-tournament-next-season-1.1603154

A response from the Ospreys, Blues, Scarlets and Dragons has yet to be made. It is understood they are waiting for full details of the competition, including how revenue streams would be split and which French teams are involved, before signing up.

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/sport/rugby/rugby-news/fresh-twist-european-cup-saga-6329652

Lets just say this goes ahead as announced yesterday where does that really leave English clubs and the RFU.

Do they go cap in hand and crawl back into the tournament to save face.

Do they stick by their guns and boycott it meaning they just have the Aviva (Wales have proved you don't need success in the HC for success at National level)

Will this see a player drain from England if these guys want to play in the big competition.

Once again its as clear as mud as to what will happen next year.

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2013/nov/21/english-clubs-unions-save-heineken-cup

"A problem in all this is that the unions see it as a power struggle, which it is not," said Mark McCafferty, the chief executive of Premiership Rugby. "We work closely with the RFU to the benefit of the both of us and that is what we will do through the Rugby Champions Cup. They made a mistake not inviting the RFU to the meeting.

"We are meeting the French clubs again next week to sort out details about our cup, such as a logo, and they are fully committed to the Rugby Champions Cup. They have made it clear that they will not play in a European tournament that does not involve the English clubs and it may well be that there are two European tournaments next season."

Under the plan of the five unions the Amlin Challenge Cup would cease next season because of cost and the lack of teams for it, but without the French they would be left with the clubs in the Pro 12 to take part along with eight amateur teams from Italy and emerging countries in Europe.

"I cannot see it having much commercial appeal and the Pro 12 unions need to think carefully because they cannot afford to lose income," said McCafferty. "If we had no European rugby next season our income would neither go up nor down and this is a time when they should be looking at the bigger picture: if they are not careful, they will lose their leading players to clubs in other countries through their determination to retain ERC and their control of it. They should focus on growing the game and its income."

The four Welsh regions last month backed the Rugby Champions Cup but would have to defy their union to take part in it. "We hope they stay with us and the revenues for them would certainly be greater," said McCafferty, who revealed that Premiership Rugby will receive an increase in money from BT Sport next season regardless of whether the company had a European tournament to televise.

Why is it thought that the PRL clubs would be left with just the premiership? They could, at minimum, have an English Cup. The current one includes the Regions but it could easily go back to the previous incarnation that is older than the HEC. That would give them extra fixtures if needed. Also there are other teams. I'd prefer an expansion of he LV as a development competition to include other groups (such as the Russians). 10 Professional teams and I've never seen anything about them and have no idea what standard they play to. Better than the Spanish teams? worse?

Also, the main 'good' thing to come out of this will hopefully be the French mess being sorted out. FFR have to give to get and the talk about Central Contracts suggests they're now willing (although CC means they want complete control over the players). Personally I think an EPS type agreement would be more suitable for the French. Since it came into effect the number of English players has increased (used to 65%, now 65% is minimum for each club some are must higher) and the RFU has also complete access to the players (including control over the training and medical aspects throughout the year).

Camou and his clique (Blanco and others FFR blazers) are meeting with the LNR today.
meeting might be less appropriate than bullying as they want to put the french clubs participation to the new/old ERC competition as a condition to sign the LNR mandate to run french pro rugby. so there is little options left for the LNR but to agree on something and certainly not send clubs to the RCC.


edit : when I saw that Maestri was being cleared to play agaisnt SA despite getting a red card against Tonga, I knew something dodgy was going on.

Correct me if I'm wrong but this proposed competition is for one year? I presume the French Participation Agreement would be signed for several years. I really hope we don't another year of this nonsense.

 

HammerofThunor wrote:Correct me if I'm wrong but this proposed competition is for one year? I presume the French Participation Agreement would be signed for several years. I really hope we don't another year of this nonsense.

yesterday dublin meeting was for next season european competion indeed. I assume that if the English clubs dont join then we will have another year of shenanigans going in the ERC meeting room and on these boards  

The current FFR 'coercement' has restrictive trade practice written all over it.

Recwatcher wrote:The current FFR 'coercement' has restrictive trade practice written all over it.

How is it restrictive practice? The English, French & Welsh clubs can set up their own competition if they want to, but it won't be Rugby Union - they can't force the Unions to supply refs, discipline etc.

Comments from a French poster on Munsterfans.

Do you really believe it? FFR threats to not sign the agreement necessary to conduct professional rugby.

Without it, LNR has no power in France. Of course there will never be regional teams in France because the FFR has neither the money for it nor the intention to lead a long and disastrous war for everyone.

But FFR don't have to use such methods, it just have to wait a month to kick in the balls the LNR.

Because LNR wants to renegociates its tv rights. It has sold it to canal+ for 31.7M/year until 2016. There is a clause to break this contract but LNR has to use it before mid-december. With a war Canal+ vs Being Sport, LNR was hoping to sold it between 80M and 120M/year. So at worst gaining 48.3M, so that to say 3.45M/year per club. And with no "convention", LNR can't (legally) negociate any tv rights. In my opinion, the clubs wil not want to risk losing so much money. And now without the PRL, to have a competition with 20 teams, (counting the 12 from the rabo) you must have 8 French teams. Many clubs would be happy to be almost guaranteed for 4 years to play Heineken Cup.

Recwatcher wrote:The current FFR 'coercement' has restrictive trade practice written all over it.

No its not - they are free to leave anytime they want BUT if if they want to be part of the competition they abide by the rules.

Contracts and business models are trade practice. FFR are introducing restrictions, it is very clear. EU Competition Directives would cause an injunction at the very least, if that route is chosen.

Recwatcher wrote:Contracts and business models are trade practice.  FFR are introducing restrictions,  it is very clear. EU Competition Directives would cause an injunction at the very least,  if that route is chosen.

Not according to French law.

The FFR aren't obligated to give the LNR the license to run the game in France. That the card Camou has and he seems intent on playing it. Where I get a tad lost is how the LNR is made up. I know it is essentially the top14 teams and I'm presuming Goze is a figurehead just then. If camou has already got 5 teams lined up then surely the infighting amongst the top14 will already be massive. 

I don't know, I'm just trying to get a sense of where the LNR may fall. If the club owners want to flip back to the HEC (and I'm not suggesting they all will) is there anything the LNR can do?

EU Directives supercede nation state law.

Recwatcher wrote:Contracts and business models are trade practice.  FFR are introducing restrictions,  it is very clear. EU Competition Directives would cause an injunction at the very least,  if that route is chosen.

FFR are not introducing restrictions. The IRB introduced the rule that they must approve cross-border competitions (and the FFR are affiliated to the IRB and must abide by their rules) if you want to play Rugby Union.

geoff998rugby wrote:

Recwatcher wrote:The current FFR 'coercement' has restrictive trade practice written all over it.

No its not - they are free to leave anytime they want BUT if if they want to be part of the competition they abide by the rules.

Correct...!

bedfordwelsh wrote:Lets just say this goes ahead as announced yesterday where does that really leave English clubs and the RFU.

Do they go cap in hand and crawl back into the tournament to save face.

Do they stick by their guns and boycott it meaning they just have the Aviva (Wales have proved you don't need success in the HC for success at National level)

Will this see a player drain from England if these guys want to play in the big competition.

Once again its as clear as mud as to what will happen next year.

Bedfordwelsh

I doubt the English will go cap in hand. I expect them to stick to their guns with just the AP. They could strengthen links with the Championship.

Player drain? I doubt it. HC without the English clubs will be devalued.

ME-109 wrote:

Recwatcher wrote:Contracts and business models are trade practice.  FFR are introducing restrictions,  it is very clear. EU Competition Directives would cause an injunction at the very least,  if that route is chosen.

Not according to French law.

France competition authority was one of the major contributor to EU competition law. when it comes to commercial matters the latter overules any local law or practice. that said some restrictions of trade are allowed or tolerated. in rugby the JIFF scheme which imposes a number of homegrown player to the clubs is a clear restriction of trade but has been deemed acceptable by the french legislator as it helps the french academies without being an excessive restraint for foreigners to ply their trade overhere. A bit like when it comes to the music/cinema industry and some food business where local producers get an extra help for the sake of a "higher good". Those could be overruled by EU law but at the end of the day politics have the last word.

Standulstermen wrote:The FFR aren't obligated to give the LNR the license to run the game in France. That the card Camou has and he seems intent on playing it. Where I get a tad lost is how the LNR is made up. I know it is essentially the top14 teams and I'm presuming Goze is a figurehead just then. If camou has already got 5 teams lined up then surely the infighting amongst the top14 will already be massive. 

I don't know, I'm just trying to get a sense of where the LNR may fall. If the club owners want to flip back to the HEC (and I'm not suggesting they all will) is there anything the LNR can do?

this is the equivalent of a nuclear bomb, slightly excessive. if the FFR does play this card , it is the end of professional club rugby in France and the return to the dark ages. clubs are businesses and cannot be run by some union. end of. economy would suffer, politicians will be involved and the FFR will get told off by the government to which they report anyway...I would love to see that happening just to send Camou to a deserved early retirement.
wont happen, LNR priority is to maximise revenues for french clubs full stop, if it means yes to the ERC then so be it.

LNR = TOP14 + proD2 teams. all teams have a vote. their main job is to negociate tv rights, sponsorhsip and promote pro rugby.

LNR wants to renegotiate its tv rights,its current deal is 31.7m a year with Canal+ until 2016.The interesting thing is that they have a clause allowing them to break the contract to renegotiate with the broadcasters.This clause lapses in Mid December. If the FFR do not sign their agreement with the LNR and dig their heels in,then the LNR cannot(legally) negotiate any tv rights and they miss their opportunity. The LNR were hoping to gain a new TV deal of between 70-110 million a year

I saw the above on planetrugby. Major chip for Camou if true. Hopefully we know one way or another soon enough

Is it me or is McCafferty's statement already a bit disjointed. He says the French and Welsh are with him already but later states only the French have said they won't participate without English involvement. So basically what he is saying is the Welsh Regions have expressed their interest but at no stage have they committed themselves to it.

Basically the only way I can see the Welsh Regions joining is if they already have assurances from the PRL they will additionally be included in the Aviva and the income they will get from both exceeds the 16 million that the WRU fund them. There is no way on this planet the WRU would back this so would withdraw funding immediately. This is just the Regions trying to barter better deals with the WRU prior to signing a new agreement. You can't read anymore into it that that. Besides the Regions couldn't afford to pay the player insurances which the WRU pay for all Welsh based players.

At any rate could the Dragons do anything as the WRU own them 50%.

I do wonder if the WRU wouldn't be better served buying out the remaining shares for the various regions. That way they would be in total control of the professional game without constantly being forced to agree terms. Its not like the current benefactors are actually pumping any money of their own into the Regions which makes me wonder why they should actually be controlling them.

Surely the Dragons and Scarlets would be very cheap acquisitions to begin with at any rate. That way they could then centrally contract their players and move them around as needed.

Anyway, I just think McCafferty is starting to panic. I cant believe his recent statement where he states even without any European rugby the PRL would not be worse off. Really? The loss of 3 home games per English club at group stage (not including later stages) and the 25% of turnover they get paid to compete in it. I'm not sure who he is trying to kid here? For starters the impact for clubs season ticket holders would be massive as most buy them with the inclusion of the 3 extra games so you are automatically impeding PRL clubs income before a ball has been kicked in 2014/2015 season.

Whocares (or any of French contributor) If the LNR goes against the FFR who will the supporters back? Are they more pro Club or Union? Who would get the blame?

broadlandboy wrote:Whocares (or any of French contributor) If the LNR goes against the FFR who will the supporters back? Are they more pro Club or Union? Who would get the blame?

The LNR is similar to what the ERC or PRL is. All that would happen is one particular organisation would be dissolved - just like what the PRL wanted to do to the ERC. The Unions would still be there, just like the clubs.

All that needs to happen is for the PRL to dump McCafferty and set up a new company to manage the affairs of the league.

Sin é wrote:

broadlandboy wrote:Whocares (or any of French contributor) If the LNR goes against the FFR who will the supporters back? Are they more pro Club or Union? Who would get the blame?

The LNR is similar to what the ERC or PRL is. All that would happen is one particular organisation would be dissolved - just like what the PRL wanted to do to the ERC. The Unions would still be there, just like the clubs.

All that needs to happen is for the PRL to dump McCafferty and set up a new company to manage the affairs of the league.

This is where it's going, behind closed doors must be a lot of RFU/club head honchos with their heads in their hands, promised the world and all of a sudden it looks like Mcafferty has backed them into a corner and letting his ego lose them money and competition...

The PRL is a great idea implimented badly, nothing they do makes club life easier, and they tend to micromanage for no reason, it needs someone to clean house and refocus on priorities, not to mention building bridges with all the unions again, all this has done one thing, alienated English rugby from the rest of the world!

beshocked wrote:

bedfordwelsh wrote:Lets just say this goes ahead as announced yesterday where does that really leave English clubs and the RFU.

Do they go cap in hand and crawl back into the tournament to save face.

Do they stick by their guns and boycott it meaning they just have the Aviva (Wales have proved you don't need success in the HC for success at National level)

Will this see a player drain from England if these guys want to play in the big competition.

Once again its as clear as mud as to what will happen next year.

Bedfordwelsh

I doubt the English will go cap in hand. I expect them to stick to their guns with just the AP. They could strengthen links with the Championship.

Player drain? I doubt it. HC without the English clubs will be devalued.

Your right, a HC without us is devalued, but is it devalued to a point where it will cease to exist? Or will the devalued HC still produce enough funds and meaningfull competition for everyone else to get a leg up on us?

Who will suffer the most long term? Our clubs across the board are struggling now, even lower teams who receive that nice little HC boast yearly and don't participate, larger teams who sell huge gates for the 3 home games and bumper crowds for knockouts. I think we'll see a real divide between the have's and have nots in the league which will ultimately lower the standard.

mystiroakey wrote:FIFA is feicked....

dont get me started on it.

Jeas you lot stay up late.

My excuse is the Cricket!

I wish that were true, Mysti.

However, despite the Qatar WC fiasco and being run by an utter **** in Blatter, FIFA is going nowhere.

The WC generates them around $4billion every 4 year cycle and it's still the biggest show on the Planet despite most International Footy being sh**e nowadays.

It's a dreadful, bloated and corrupt organistaion but it's bloody rich and succesful sadly

Be grateful that the IRB President can only serve 3-4 years then!

No winner in this, just some are not as bigger losers as could have been the case.

Will be interesting to see what happens now,

For Irish Scots and Italians without English H-cup is devalued.
Welsh WRU will enter regions, but will the war between WRU and RRW, come to a head with the RRW's breakaway threat (that could not take place).
French FRU bring clubs into line, but we already know they can be flakey about the H-cup, without the English and reduced income, they will prob take it even less serious.

Most interesting is the English, will the RFU be able to get them back in?
Can they rejoin after a year or does BT deal mean the can't until that expires?
Can the RCC go ahead in any form?
Can the LV cup be reformatted into a sort of Pilkington cup? Prem, Championship and regions all play in a cup that will take on some real meaning?
Can Championship clubs take part or are they tied into BandI cup, or will they just sent 2nd teams out into the BandI?

Personally a reformatted LV cup does sound interesting ,it wouldn't be 2nd teams but first teams from the beginning, only issue would be could the regions put out competitive teams? They'll be in H-cup Pro 12 and LV cup, and this pushes them even with putting out 2nd teams in LVcup.

If the new LV is played on H-cup weekends, or they couldn't put on pretty much 2nd teams the regions couldn't really compete in it.

Why werent the RFU invited, even if it was only to tell them "this is what were doing, if you can find teams to enter your more than welcome to."?

Could have made it easier to get the English back in, in a year or two down the line,

At the heart of this whole issue is French governance.

The Irish, Scottish and Italian teams are essentially one with their unions in governance terms. The PRL and RFU are separate but have managed to work effectively together.

The RRW and WRU situation is more complex and I do not know to what extent the regions could act independently of the union, but if we are honest they would only hold a decisive influence in certain circumstances.

The FFR effectively started this whole dispute by pulling their votes back from the LNR to reinstate Lux. If Wheeler had been elected the chances are that the ERC would have been able to reform itself commercially and competitively to a point where the LNR and PRL would not have felt it necessary to resign. But by pulling their votes back against the wishes of the clubs, the FFR a) were the first aggressors in this process and b) demonstrated very clearly that the teams playing in the competition could not be assured of controlling their own destiny even if a majority of them wanted to move in a particular direction.

That, to my mind, is why governance has always been a part of this.

So what it comes down to is that Camou is using a quirk of French law (which is based on Roman law, rather than the common law basis behind UK and Irish law, so it's quite plausible that FFR really does hold that much power) to blackmail the LNR clubs into going right back into the situation they were trying to change.

For some reason, this is being loudly applauded on these boards. As is the signing of the ERC Sky deal - which (according to the only interview that's explicitly discussed it - admittedly from the PRL side) was definitely signed after the PRL BT deal was signed and, IIRC, after it was notified to the ERC.

Both of these tactics are at least as underhand as anything the PRL has done. Double standards, much?

I don't think the dust is anywhere near settled.

Analysis from London Times (behind paywall).

For a time the Celtic unions accepted the “jaw-jaw”. But the longer time went on, the longer PRL went on with it sown agenda with the Rugby Champions Cup, the more the Celts became suspicious and frustrated.

Camou and the Celts’ collective frustration was born out of what they perceived to be the failure of the RFU publicly to make a stand and show support. As the months passed, they came to the conclusion that Ritchie and the RFU were trying to broker a deal that helped PRL and kept relations cordial within England, rather than one that was for the greater good of European rugby.

Ritchie was said to be incensed by what has happened, believing that with a little more time he could have delivered. Now he feels betrayed. Relations have soured.

The ball is in the court now of Mark McCafferty, the PRL chief executive. He has masterminded this course of action, but he has backed the clubs into a corner from which there is no escape without massive loss of face.

he sponsor and the broadcaster, BSkyB, are said to be committed, although without English participation the value of the broadcast rights will be significantly reduced. And how long can English clubs afford not to take part in Europe? The £88 million deal with BTSport over four years for Premiership rights will cushion them for only so long.

Wales will deliver its four regions, who will be forced into line or else face the prospect of ruin, with the WRU making clear it will otherwise withdraw its support. French clubs will take part, although which of them depends upon the outcome of negotiations between the French RFU and LNR, the French clubs’ governing body.

Kingshu wrote:

Personally a reformatted LV cup does sound interesting ,it wouldn't be 2nd teams but first teams from the beginning, only issue would be could the regions put out competitive teams? They'll be in H-cup Pro 12 and LV cup, and this pushes them even with putting out 2nd teams in LVcup.

If the new LV is played on H-cup weekends, or they couldn't put on pretty much 2nd teams the regions couldn't really compete in it.

I think a lot of that depends on when the sponsorship and tv rights for the LV are next up for discussion. If they could negotiate a good enough deal it's not inconceivable that they'd send out 1st choice sides for that and second strings for other games. Especially if the regions feel annoyed at the WRU for forcing them into back into ERC. That might be a few years down the line though.

I'm not sure that's what I want either. By all means expand the LV as a development tournament, but best thing for me is to stop the clashes between international and league matches. As a Tigers fan it's very disappointing that so many of our big games against the likes of Saints, Saracens and Quins have been with depleted squads.

It's hard to know what to say at this point.  

Like I've said before, it seems now that the entire European theatre (of rugby or war, I'm not sure which is the better word!) is rancid with ill feeling and acrimony.... but that's to be expected when nobody gets things all their own way; and no side in this debate has.  Much worse, though, is the seething distrust, cynicism about ulterior motives and genuine suspicions of spies in each other's camps................

It's like a Mafia family - once distrust is sewn, it can't go away again.  It's there and it grows and festers.  You don't know who you're talking to (pretend friend or actual foe), what he'll tell someone else when he's been told what he's been told in strict confidence, and who is going to come for you one day (often your best 'pal') to ask you to do a job with them - but you know the job entails you being found in a car boot with some holes left in you.

It's obvious that absolute distrust amongst the 'players' has killed any idea of unification or compromise in the short to medium term.  

But - having said that, I respect the PRL for not being dragged to what they regard as a white-flag surrender and lynch party.  If I was English, and I genuinely felt my guys were being asked to supplicate themselves before the ERC, I certainly wouldn't be wanting my guys to roll over or go begging for any scraps at the ERC table.  So I can certainly understand things from their point of view - emotions being as high as they are right now.

The reason I understand those emotions and such views, though, is because I am distinctly on the other side of the argument, and I most definitely didn't want my Union and my Provinces going begging for any meek and humble scraps from the RCC/PRL table.

The main issue has always been for me - and it seems five Unions agree with me - that they were never going to stand for or accept a single European League administrator (PRL) dictating policy, sponsorship, broadcasting and entry rights to a new 'European' competition; non-negotiable.  
PRL wanted a slice of the European Control Panel that wasn't in any way commensurate with its actual position of being just one - ONE - of three big rugby Leagues in Europe.  It got greedy under the spell of all the money it was allegedly being offered, and the result is here we are.  And what have we?

Crap, that's what we have.

Actually how about this for the reformatted LV cup.

Regions, Prem clubs and Championship clubs, are all broken down to groups of 4, based entirely on location, and not in which league/division they play in,

eg
Newcastle, Leeds, Sale and Rottherdam for one group as all based in the North,
Leicester, Northampton, Nottingham and Bedford make up midland group

Each team plays each other home and away (regions use their Pro 12 games)[would need to arrange with Celtic rugby that the last of these take place by March]

7 group winners, plus best runner up (to make it up to 8) play knock out cup.

With this format Regions could be accommodated, and creates interest through derby games in group stages.

Poorfour - Wheeler was not a suitable chair. He has too many vested interests. At least Lux is Independent.

Would you for instance think that the President of Biarritz (Blanco) be a suitable chair?

The FFR should never have given the LNR a vote in the first place. You wouldn't have UEFA letting the chair of Manchester United on their Board, let alone electing him chair.