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

First topic message reminder :

TJ wrote:What the PRL said.  They were saying how much the RCC was worth and how much each union would get from it.  That implies they had "sold" all the games.

They haven't specifically said how much it will be worth, just that there will be more money than the ERC have negotiated because of what they've managed to negotiate and what the French are expecting to get.  They won't know for certain what it is worth until the French have sold their rights.  The LNR ccertainly wouldn't be on board with the PLR if they had sold rights to their games, and there wouldn't be the money they are alluding to if they had.

mystiroakey wrote:

Portnoy's Complaint wrote:Contract law, TJ.

It will all be about contract law. Those TV deals will be at the centre of the case and who actually said what and to whom and how and where and when.

Probably.

That's the n-word in the woodpile.

in regards to who suing who?

Indeed.

Unless a satisfactory compromise can be achieved.

It could be BT v BSkyB or PRLvERC or any permutation of them.

But the broadcasters have the deepest pockets.

Yeah well said Poorfour that sums up the situation well.

TJ wrote:Control issues is sorted.  Unions will run it.  PRL can take it or leave it.  No further negotiations to be done on anything substantive.  PRL have nothing left to bargain with

 
All of this seems to be correct bar the last comment as PRL can still decide whether or not to join ERC.  After all it is also correct that PRL have (so far at least) refused to play in an ERC run tournament and will seemingly only play in a tournament run by the clubs.  So you could equally say that unless the unions budge they have nothing left to bargain with.  Ultimately unless one or the other budges or they find something mutually agreeable (which may still be possible, i.e. unions govern structure and clubs are allowed to deal with the commercial side) they will leave it.  And LNR may follow if they aren't happy with progress after the one year extension.  All of which is fine by me.  
 
They can still form the RCC - silly name if it ends up being a national cup, but nothing wrong with having a national cup per se.  They can also invite teams other than those in ERC, be that US teams, SA teams, Russian, Georgian, etc.  Not likely to be a massive money spinner unless they get the SA teams in, but good for spreading the game and giving development teams a decent run out and would make for some interesting away trips!

Big wrote:

TJ wrote:Control issues is sorted.  Unions will run it.  PRL can take it or leave it.  No further negotiations to be done on anything substantive.  PRL have nothing left to bargain with

 
All of this seems to be correct bar the last comment as PRL can still decide whether or not to join ERC.  After all it is also correct that PRL have (so far at least) refused to play in an ERC run tournament and will seemingly only play in a tournament run by the clubs.  So you could equally say that unless the unions budge they have nothing left to bargain with.  Ultimately unless one or the other budges or they find something mutually agreeable (which may still be possible, i.e. unions govern structure and clubs are allowed to deal with the commercial side) they will leave it.  And LNR may follow if they aren't happy with progress after the one year extension.  All of which is fine by me.  
 
They can still form the RCC - silly name if it ends up being a national cup, but nothing wrong with having a national cup per se.  They can also invite teams other than those in ERC, be that US teams, SA teams, Russian, Georgian, etc.  Not likely to be a massive money spinner unless they get the SA teams in, but good for spreading the game and giving development teams a decent run out and would make for some interesting away trips!

Two good posts in a few minutes. The place is looking up?

I tried those lines yesterday and i got pretty much ganged up on lol.

But to be fair you have made the point more succinctly

mystiroakey wrote:

Big wrote:

TJ wrote:Control issues is sorted.  Unions will run it.  PRL can take it or leave it.  No further negotiations to be done on anything substantive.  PRL have nothing left to bargain with

 
All of this seems to be correct bar the last comment as PRL can still decide whether or not to join ERC.  After all it is also correct that PRL have (so far at least) refused to play in an ERC run tournament and will seemingly only play in a tournament run by the clubs.  So you could equally say that unless the unions budge they have nothing left to bargain with.  Ultimately unless one or the other budges or they find something mutually agreeable (which may still be possible, i.e. unions govern structure and clubs are allowed to deal with the commercial side) they will leave it.  And LNR may follow if they aren't happy with progress after the one year extension.  All of which is fine by me.  
 
They can still form the RCC - silly name if it ends up being a national cup, but nothing wrong with having a national cup per se.  They can also invite teams other than those in ERC, be that US teams, SA teams, Russian, Georgian, etc.  Not likely to be a massive money spinner unless they get the SA teams in, but good for spreading the game and giving development teams a decent run out and would make for some interesting away trips!

Two good pro PRL posts in a few minutes. The place is looking up?

I tried those lines yesterday and i got pretty much ganged up on lol.

But to be fair you have made the point more succinctly

And before you ask, I read neither of them.    I just know OK?

Jenifer McLadyboy wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:

Big wrote:

TJ wrote:Control issues is sorted.  Unions will run it.  PRL can take it or leave it.  No further negotiations to be done on anything substantive.  PRL have nothing left to bargain with

 
All of this seems to be correct bar the last comment as PRL can still decide whether or not to join ERC.  After all it is also correct that PRL have (so far at least) refused to play in an ERC run tournament and will seemingly only play in a tournament run by the clubs.  So you could equally say that unless the unions budge they have nothing left to bargain with.  Ultimately unless one or the other budges or they find something mutually agreeable (which may still be possible, i.e. unions govern structure and clubs are allowed to deal with the commercial side) they will leave it.  And LNR may follow if they aren't happy with progress after the one year extension.  All of which is fine by me.  
 
They can still form the RCC - silly name if it ends up being a national cup, but nothing wrong with having a national cup per se.  They can also invite teams other than those in ERC, be that US teams, SA teams, Russian, Georgian, etc.  Not likely to be a massive money spinner unless they get the SA teams in, but good for spreading the game and giving development teams a decent run out and would make for some interesting away trips!

Two good pro PRL posts in a few minutes. The place is looking up?

I tried those lines yesterday and i got pretty much ganged up on lol.

But to be fair you have made the point more succinctly

And before you ask, I read neither of them.    I just know OK?

Do you take drugs?

You are allways so flighty

Why do people presume that just because you dislike how ERC run things and what it stands for that it automatically makes you Pro PRL?

Scrumpy wrote:Why do people presume that just because you dislike how ERC run things and what it stands for that it automatically makes you Pro PRL?

Yeah i made that point for you earlier- Its becoming ridiculas

mystiroakey wrote:
Do you take drugs?

You are allways so flighty

No. Not since the last millennium anyway.

Just trying to liven up a dull as fock thread where 2 sets of people talk (Well, post) at each other neither one really listening (reading) at all and both seeing the same complex situation through the lens of whichever side they are on. Struggling (The PRL side at the moment, but it changes depending who is in the papers and which papers) to see positives when their side is on the receiving end.

Goes round and round over the same old ground, but have they foooound the same old fears? Wish you were here.....

Only so much of it I can take really. Which is why I have rarely posted on these threads over the last year and a half. I get into them for a little while then give up out of boredom.

mystiroakey wrote:Asbo I am not sure scrumpy was sticking up for any other format.

Just because he doesn't like the ERC as it stands does not mean he has to offer unadulterated support for the prl' proposal .

Why do you argue as if everyone has to be in two defined camps. The world is grey.

Strokey, thanks for replying on behalf of stumpy - I fear he's gone rather silent. You will notice that I laced my response quite deliberately with words like "for example" and "say" to provide colour (sic!) as to the 'grey'-ness of the situation. Indeed my entire point, underwritten by the conclusion, that what is 'fair' in the eyes of one person may be anything but in the eyes of another

@ArnaudDavidSO: #HCup @simonrug The presence of French clubs will be guaranteed nextweek by a legal clause in the agreement that the LNR has to sign withFFR

@simonrug: @ArnaudDavidSO [B]So much for them only being on board if England are?

Thats put that one to bed.
I suspect the French threat to possibly not play if the English or not on board referes to 2015-16 not next year.
This would tend to confirm this - probably got lost in translation

So the ffr are going to hold the lnr to the iron sword.

Don't expect that to go down well.

You seriously think the French care about the English Clubs? Crickey, you'll never learn.

They have much bigger fish to fry with their new tv deal to be signed, central contracts for international players and the nice little sweetner of 2m for teams who play in the HCup.

I fgind it quite amazing how the PRL supporters still cannot see how the PRL have overplayed their hand, have been isolated, have overstated their alliance witht eh french and fail to see reality

There is going to be no change to governance. The PRL have a take it or leave it offer -and as Mccaffrey knows they cannot leave it for very long.

The rest of the unions final;ly had enough of the PRLs intransigence and of the RFUs fence sitting. they had given the LNR everything they wanted and the PRL everything they claimed they wanted bar letting the PRL run the show. Bluff called, PRL isolated adn left with nothig to bargain with.

lets just be clear on where we are now
1) No changes to governance in the european cup - now or in the foreseeable future
2) PRL isolated
3) no RCC in any meaningful form

Sin do you seem to think they care about the rabbo.

And tj. There are no prl supporters here. Just some with common sense and others like you that think you have won something..when you are far from winning anything

mystiroakey wrote:Sin do you seem to think they care about the rabbo.

And tj. There are no prl supporters here. Just some with common sense and others like you that think you have won something..when you are far from winning anything

Let me take a wild gues, strokey, you'd be in the former camp?  

Well what do you think..

The nonsense on here about the French saving the cup. Omg you guys are just idiots. The French do not give a feick about anyone. The rfu brokered the deal. The French will infight forever. They are the nation that doesn't care about caps or quotas. They are ones that will take half the pot when it's 1 union v 4.

You lot just want to make out anything English is evil.

Imagine the French were the English and vice versa. You lot would still blame the english

I really hope the PRL decline to participate in 2014-15. Will give all sides a chance to cool their heels, Camou will be gone, JP Lux will be gone.

Additionally, i personally would be quite excited to see all the England squad players doing England squad training on the weekends of HC matches. This would double to squad training days in the year ahead of RWC2015, and the financial compensation to the clubs would go a long way (combined with BT deal for AP games) to plugging the gap of no Heineken cup.

I think this is win-win for everyone. Celts and FFR can claim moral victory for having kicked the PRL out. English clubs financially do ok. RFU gets more squad training. Change of personnel at the top may make compromise easier for the new (name, governance and format changed) competition from 2015-.

mystiroakey wrote:Well what do you think..

The nonsense on here about the French saving the cup. Omg you guys are just idiots. The French do not give a feick about anyone. The rfu brokered the deal. The French will infight forever. They are the nation that doesn't care about caps or quotas. They are ones that will take half the pot when it's 1 union v 4.

You lot just want to make out anything English is evil.

Imagine the French were the English and vice versa. You lot would still blame the english

Fantastic!! Strokey, I hope that your sources are impeccable as you are miles ahead of the national media in any country with that revelation - bravo!

mystiroakey wrote:Well what do you think..

The nonsense on here about the French saving the cup. Omg you guys are just idiots. The French do not give a feick about anyone. The rfu brokered the deal. The French will infight forever. They are the nation that doesn't care about caps or quotas. They are ones that will take half the pot when it's 1 union v 4.

You lot just want to make out anything English is evil.

Imagine the French were the English and vice versa. You lot would still blame the english

 

Are you ever going to discuss rugby or keep up the nonsense

and i have to say that the RFU not being invited to the meeting hosted by Camou is going to make it more likely that the RFU supports the english clubs whatever they choose to do. For that at least, i am grateful to Camou. If nothing else

quinsforever wrote:I really hope the PRL decline to participate in 2014-15. Will give all sides a chance to cool their heels, Camou will be gone, JP Lux will be gone.

Additionally, i personally would be quite excited to see all the England squad players doing England squad training on the weekends of HC matches. This would double to squad training days in the year ahead of RWC2015, and the financial compensation to the clubs would go a long way (combined with BT deal for AP games) to plugging the gap of no Heineken cup.

I think this is win-win for everyone. Celts and FFR can claim moral victory for having kicked the PRL out. English clubs financially do ok. RFU gets more squad training. Change of personnel at the top may make compromise easier for the new (name, governance and format changed) competition from 2015-.

Why would we claim any such thing? The PRL left, as was their right, as we can all acknowledge. The PRL will palpably be worse off, unless they are able to invoke some other competition or amend an existing one

quinsforever wrote:and i have to say that the RFU not being invited to the meeting hosted by Camou is going to make it more likely that the RFU supports the english clubs whatever they choose to do. For that at least, i am grateful to Camou. If nothing else

Camout is not unlike McCafferty, or indeed any other chief exec, all with their own interests dear to their heart - some are just better at the PR side of the equation than others

mystiroakey wrote:Sin do you seem to think they care about the rabbo.

And tj. There are no prl supporters here. Just some with common sense and others like you that think you have won something..when you are far from winning anything

Nope, they couldn't give two tosses about the Rabo either.

Our history helps us deal with these sort of situations thougth! One good one to remember from your history.

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:

quinsforever wrote:I really hope the PRL decline to participate in 2014-15. Will give all sides a chance to cool their heels, Camou will be gone, JP Lux will be gone.

Additionally, i personally would be quite excited to see all the England squad players doing England squad training on the weekends of HC matches. This would double to squad training days in the year ahead of RWC2015, and the financial compensation to the clubs would go a long way (combined with BT deal for AP games) to plugging the gap of no Heineken cup.

I think this is win-win for everyone. Celts and FFR can claim moral victory for having kicked the PRL out. English clubs financially do ok. RFU gets more squad training. Change of personnel at the top may make compromise easier for the new (name, governance and format changed) competition from 2015-.

Why would we claim any such thing?  The PRL left, as was their right, as we can all acknowledge.  The PRL will palpably be worse off, unless they are able to invoke some other competition or amend an existing one

it just seems that there is a lot of ego and emotion at the moment, and unless both sides can come away from this claiming they have both gotten something they wanted, i do not think compromise will be possible.

for example, if FFr railroad their clubs and give them nothing in return, that is just a disaster waiting to happen. everyone needs to be able to hold their heads up or the simmering resentment will prevent a meaningful deal.

Did anyone watch 'Question time' last night?

No, tend not to have enough time for much TV, scrumpy, what happened?

The deal was discussed and agreed with the rfu.

If the prl go back into the comp it will be exactly as what was agreed foemerly.

I know you Celts want hope the erc gets strict and says no you only get a few spots and less money. But that isn't going to happen

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:

quinsforever wrote:and i have to say that the RFU not being invited to the meeting hosted by Camou is going to make it more likely that the RFU supports the english clubs whatever they choose to do. For that at least, i am grateful to Camou. If nothing else

Camout is not unlike McCafferty, or indeed any other chief exec, all with their own interests dear to their heart - some are just better at the PR side of the equation than others

true. i focused on Camou and Lux because i see the FFR/LNR dispute as the really intractable one. It was Camou who took the LNR clubs votes back against their wishes to elect JP Lux, sowing the seeds for the present state of affairs. Mccafferty is clearly not Mr Popular with lots of folk, but publicly, he doesnt seem to have fallen out with Ian Ritchie and the RFU in quite the same was as LNR and FFR.

The deal between the FFR and the LNR was "was discussed and agreed with the rfu" - this may come as a surprise to messrs Camou, Bouscatel, et al - I hope that they have been informed

quinsforever wrote:and i have to say that the RFU not being invited to the meeting hosted by Camou is going to make it more likely that the RFU supports the english clubs whatever they choose to do. For that at least, i am grateful to Camou. If nothing else

Hosted by Camou? Isn't he the FFR Chairman?

That meeeting was hosted by the ERC - Lux, as Chair would have been the one who didn't invite the RFU (and asked the Gallacher to leave the room when the Unions were going to discuss the situation).

That isn't what I said. The original deal struck by the rfu will come into play if the prl come back in.

quinsforever wrote:

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:

quinsforever wrote:and i have to say that the RFU not being invited to the meeting hosted by Camou is going to make it more likely that the RFU supports the english clubs whatever they choose to do. For that at least, i am grateful to Camou. If nothing else

Camout is not unlike McCafferty, or indeed any other chief exec, all with their own interests dear to their heart - some are just better at the PR side of the equation than others

true. i focused on Camou and Lux because i see the FFR/LNR dispute as the really intractable one. It was Camou who took the LNR clubs votes back against their wishes to elect JP Lux, sowing the seeds for the present state of affairs. Mccafferty is clearly not Mr Popular with lots of folk, but publicly, he doesnt seem to have fallen out with Ian Ritchie and the RFU in quite the same was as LNR and FFR.

No, he hasn't, quins, as the PRL and RFU have carefully avoided, at least in public, being in open dispute with one another - but it would seem odd to minimise McCafferty's role in this debacle, along with Lux and Bouscatel

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:The deal between the FFR and the LNR was "was discussed and agreed with the rfu" - this may come as a surprise to messrs Camou, Bouscatel, et al - I hope that they have been informed

i think yous are all referring to different deals. strokey means the deal that hammered out the new financial and qualification criteria, which appear to still be on the table. I dont think he means the 5-union statement that the RFU weren't invited to

mystiroakey wrote:That isn't what I said. The original deal struck by the rfu will come into play if the prl come back in.

That is what you implied, strokester, apologies if I misunderstood. Why do you think that the RFU-brokered deal, which was vetoed only a fortnight ago by the other 5 unions, will now come back into play?

quinsforever wrote:

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:The deal between the FFR and the LNR was "was discussed and agreed with the rfu" - this may come as a surprise to messrs Camou, Bouscatel, et al - I hope that they have been informed

i think yous are all referring to different deals. strokey means the deal that hammered out the new financial and qualification criteria, which appear to still be on the table. I dont think he means the 5-union statement that the RFU weren't invited to

i actually thought he meant yet another deal altogether, the one between the FFR and LNR! Perhaps he was a little unclear ... but probably my fault

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:

quinsforever wrote:

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:

quinsforever wrote:and i have to say that the RFU not being invited to the meeting hosted by Camou is going to make it more likely that the RFU supports the english clubs whatever they choose to do. For that at least, i am grateful to Camou. If nothing else

Camout is not unlike McCafferty, or indeed any other chief exec, all with their own interests dear to their heart - some are just better at the PR side of the equation than others

true. i focused on Camou and Lux because i see the FFR/LNR dispute as the really intractable one. It was Camou who took the LNR clubs votes back against their wishes to elect JP Lux, sowing the seeds for the present state of affairs. Mccafferty is clearly not Mr Popular with lots of folk, but publicly, he doesnt seem to have fallen out with Ian Ritchie and the RFU in quite the same was as LNR and FFR.

No, he hasn't, quins, as the PRL and RFU have carefully avoided, at least in public, being in open dispute with one another - but it would seem odd to minimise McCafferty's role in this debacle, along with Lux and Bouscatel

i am not minimising anyone's role. just thanking Camou in this particular instance for driving the RFU and PRL closer together.

i think Camou, McCafferty, Lux, Bruce Craig would do well on here - they each appear to be able to have an argument with a traffic cone.

mystiroakey wrote:The deal was discussed and agreed with the rfu.

If the prl go back into the comp it will be exactly as what was agreed foemerly.

I know you Celts want hope the erc gets strict and says no you only get a few spots and less money. But that isn't going to happen

I'd say the IRB / Unions are sick of the behaviour of the English & French clubs. If they don't smash them now for good and all, they will have this little problem every time France or England get to host a world cup.

I suppose they could decide to let the clubs back into the ERC again, but never, ever let them host a world cup again.

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:No, tend not to have enough time for much TV, scrumpy, what happened?

Its just that I got the impression that after all these years the Celts still see getting one up against the English as the most important thing, whether it is in their best interest or not!  

 

Sin é wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:The deal was discussed and agreed with the rfu.

If the prl go back into the comp it will be exactly as what was agreed foemerly.

I know you Celts want hope the erc gets strict and says no you only get a few spots and less money. But that isn't going to happen

I'd say the IRB / Unions are sick of the behaviour of the English & French clubs. If they don't smash them now for good and all, they will have this little problem every time France or England get to host a world cup.

I suppose they could decide to let the clubs back into the ERC again, but never, ever let them host a world cup again.

 

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:

quinsforever wrote:and i have to say that the RFU not being invited to the meeting hosted by Camou is going to make it more likely that the RFU supports the english clubs whatever they choose to do. For that at least, i am grateful to Camou. If nothing else

Camout is not unlike McCafferty, or indeed any other chief exec, all with their own interests dear to their heart - some are just better at the PR side of the equation than others

You talk about the PR side. Who would you say has done particularly well in that department?

It's a huge shambles that everyone is part of. It's just most of the blame has been pinned upon a scapegoat, the PRL.

Blinded so much by irrational hatred of McCafferty and the PRL has meant you cannot see that the bigger threat has always been the French. They have had a foot in both camps and have been in complete control. The French must be laughing their heads off at the foolish English,Celts and Italians.

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:

quinsforever wrote:

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:The deal between the FFR and the LNR was "was discussed and agreed with the rfu" - this may come as a surprise to messrs Camou, Bouscatel, et al - I hope that they have been informed

i think yous are all referring to different deals. strokey means the deal that hammered out the new financial and qualification criteria, which appear to still be on the table. I dont think he means the 5-union statement that the RFU weren't invited to

i actually thought he meant yet another deal altogether, the one between the FFR and LNR!  Perhaps he was a little unclear ... but probably my fault

Was the last ERC meeting constitutional (I wonder)?

Has anyone actually left it?

I honestly think everyone will be back in the erc next year as per the 6 union agreement. But somehow celt fans will still believe they have won some non existent war.

Scrumpy wrote:

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:No, tend not to have enough time for much TV, scrumpy, what happened?

Its just that I got the impression that after all these years the Celts still see getting one up against the English as the most important thing, whether it is in their best interest or not!  

On a separate, but related topic, i actually agree that Scotland should be able to plough their own furrow. It is almost certain to lead to less animosity towards the english oppressors, and you never know, gaining independence might re-invigorate and re-energise the country and be a great thing for both England and Scotland.

Scrumpy wrote:

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:No, tend not to have enough time for much TV, scrumpy, what happened?

Its just that I got the impression that after all these years the Celts still see getting one up against the English as the most important thing, whether it is in their best interest or not!  

I presume it was about Scottish independence, scrumpy, an issue close to my heart - I also presume that you would be in the 'too wee, too poor, too stupid' camp in favour of continued union? I would happily debate the issues at length with you, but fear I am already on the naughty step from unionist moderator RDW

Scrumpy wrote:

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:No, tend not to have enough time for much TV, scrumpy, what happened?

Its just that I got the impression that after all these years the Celts still see getting one up against the English as the most important thing, whether it is in their best interest or not!  

Personally, I'm pleased that the PRL and their chairman are put back in their box and didn't get away with stealing rugby.

Don't confuse that with wanting to have great clubs like Leicester, Northampton, Quins, Wasps, Gloucester, Exeter etc. in the Heineken Cup.

I'd be quite happy though to never see Saracens again.

Just remember lads the prl have backed down. Call it saving face or whatever.

mystiroakey wrote:I honestly think everyone will be back in the erc next year as per the 6 union agreement. But somehow celt fans will still believe they have won some non existent war.

there will be no deal unless everyone feels they have won something.

TJ wrote:
There is going to be no change to governance. The PRL have a take it or leave it offer -and as Mccaffrey knows they cannot leave it for very long.

The bit in bold is where I think you are fundamentally wrong. I have seen absolutely no evidence at all that PRL cannot leave permanently. If anything the comments I've seen point to the contrary. With the BT deal they are reportedly making as much money now for the premiership alone as they were for premiership and HC before. So financially they're no worse off without any additional tournament. Plus they manage to make more financially from domestic games than they do from HC games - so no reason that they couldn't make more with an expanded premiership/national cup/whatever else than they would returning to the ERC fold.