English rugby maybe has an opportunity for change?

I am firmly of the opinion that the professional game in England has been gravely wounded from birth due to incompetence of the rfu blazers who failed to secure the players contracts and thus failed to create structures and competitions capable of delivering both club and country success on an ongoing basis. Dudley Wood and his kin of backwards men have left us with another schism which is just as profound as that of 1895.

The consequences of this failure are all around us and plague our game day in day out. The sheer and utter madness of our season alone is enough to send the sane to Bedlam.

Now I am in no doubt that the current attempted European land grab by the English premier clubs is but the latest consequence of this schism. However by perverse consequence, the catastrophic failure of this coup may actually offer us an opportunity for change. The clubs and rfu must realise that our futures stand and fall together?

If the english clubs do not compete in Europe, which it appears will be temporary outcome for at least one season, then surely everyone should take stock, surely it is time for good men to be counted? How long can the english game continue in this schizophrenic way, each hand left and right trying shoot its opposing foot?

Perhaps it is time the players finally and with real consequence stood their ground, after all it is their signatures that hold the key to the promised land.

As for Dudley Wood.......

Rubbish

Toast wrote:Rubbish

Really, rubbish is it Toast, that our season is such a ham-fisted concoction of competitions, that our players are over played dragged and exhausted prone to injury and curtailed careers, that our clubs and Union have been at logger heads from day one, that not one of the premiership managers even applied to coach the national side, that the union has twice positioned incompetents into the most important coaching position in the land, that the clubs and union are in a state of war that has produced chairman whose only attainable vision is a game less of international interference......rubbish you say...whets your ducking name toast not Dudley by chance is it?

Lancaster is continuing to prove you wrong though King. Still doing a good job.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Lancaster is continuing to prove you wrong though King. Still doing a good job.

That is such an idiotic comment. Lancaster is not going to deliver when it counts but that is not the big picture. The issue is the game in england and what chance we have to change amongst the detritus of the fallout of the european rubble.

Do you really think the club game in england is sustainable?

No need to get offensive king, just replying to your previous post which was obviously based on your want for Mallinder and now Baxter.

No 7&1/2 wrote:No need to get offensive king, just replying to your previous post which was obviously based on your want for Mallinder and now Baxter.

Trust me i'm not being offensive - however I suggest you read the post before adding off topic comments.

How is it off topic to pick out a point made by the creator of the article?

'that the union has twice positioned incompetents into the most important coaching position in the land,'

Just pointing out that Lancaster is far from incompetent.

No 7&1/2 wrote:How is it off topic to pick out a point made by the creator of the article?

'that the union has twice positioned incompetents into the most important coaching position in the land,'

Just pointing out that Lancaster is far from incompetent.

How far exactly is your head in the sand?

The rfu has just posted record profits, a very few clubs are able to show profit, the majority don't. Each has opposing agendas that negate the other, how is this good for the english game?

By consequence the clubs act unilaterally in a European power grab where they believe greater income can be generated and the thin stitches holding the game together will soon unravel.

Have you ever considered and compared the set up in england with our rivals - do you think our game has got it right or is it disadvantaged and squandering the absolutely massive opportunity to fully exploit its potential?

What is it, or is G&T's all round?

Personally don't know enough about the ins and outs of the finances involved of all parties but to me the current system in Europe seems a touch unfair so not surprised clubs and leagues are trying to get the best structure to suit themselves. My only real quibble is your assertion that Lancaster isn't doing a good job.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Personally don't know enough about the ins and outs of the finances involved of all parties but to me the current system in Europe seems a touch unfair so not surprised clubs and leagues are trying to get the best structure to suit themselves. My only real quibble is your assertion that Lancaster isn't doing a good job.

Well I think you've enlightened us enough. Thanks for your contribution.

I have to say the last ten years has been terrible. We have the best resources in the world but only a third rate team. The quality of eq players is generally not good enough. The rfu need to identify what's going wrong and fix it. Eg. They should develop a really slick path for scouting the best and bringing them on. I don't think the ap clubs are doing as well as they could.

englandglory4ever wrote:I have to say the last ten years has been terrible. We have the best resources in the world but only a third rate team. The quality of eq players is generally not good enough. The rfu need to identify what's going wrong and fix it. Eg. They should develop a really slick path for scouting the best and bringing them on. I don't think the ap clubs are doing as well as they could.

Currently I do think the england u20 pathway has to be credited for its identification and development of players, however once they're away to the clubs it all becomes eps driven and rather dull.

I think we will need a totally new collaborative approach. However I honestly think we could see things getting a whole lot worse (clubs in administration) before there is a change for the better. I'm not advocating this as a course of action, it’s just the battle ground is well defended and nothing short of capitulation is going to resolve the ridiculous positions taken on each side.

As far as I can see we need to realise an entire new competition structure where tournaments are played to completion before we move onto the next. This will probably require the moving of either the european games or 6 nations (or whatever that morphs into?) to the end of the season before any overseas tour.

So for example; from October (global season) you would play consecutive Aviva games until completion - the autumn internationals would be played without interruption to the Aviva - then the european competitions too completion, and then the european (6 nations?) international competition before any tour overseas. This would provide same season european club qualification and end of season international consistency similar to that enjoyed post the RC by the SH nations - a sustained period enabling real international development.

However here is the nub we need to limit players to 25 games per season (anymore than 30 minutes constitutes a game), club and international, as a way of protection from fatigue and injury. We need to recognise the physical nature of the modern game, with the NFL professional RU is probably the most injury inducing game in the world.

The player’s contracts will need to be rewritten to recognise joint ownership by club and country and the professional games funding will have to restructure so as to enable far greater rfu funding.

The whole clubs versus country misadventure needs to be put to bed - there is no us and them, we are all one.

The problem with playing all competitions and series consecutively is fitting them all in.


22 weekends for the AP if you do away with play-offs.  Clubs will want at least 6 weeks pre-season though, so that takes you up to 28.

9 for European competitons.

5 for the 6N, plus you would need at least a week before the first match for training together as a team, so that takes you up to 6.

3 weeks for the AIs.

3 weeks for the summer tours, with an extra week to allow for the effects of travelling to places like Aus and NZ, so 4.


That's 50 weeks already, but you would want to factor in a few weeks break in the middle of all that, say one between each competiton and a couple in the middle of big comps like the AP and European, plus one in the middle of a group of high intensity matches like the 6N (unless players don't play every week).  Then you obviously need to give players some sort of off-season.


If you play all club competitons in a row and then international with non-international players effectively entering off-season, what happens when injuries occur and you need to draft players in who haven't played any rugby for a month or two?

How is playing 11 international matches in a row going to affect players?

If you assume those same international players for top clubs will feature in almost all European games, that doesn't leave many games in the AP they can be scheduled to play in before your 25 match limit.

What happens to the limit if injuries during the season mean England has to draft in a player from outside the EPS who has already featured in most of his club games in the AP and Europe?

Clearly whatever set up is created, the top players just can't play every game.

The ABs play super rugby and tests. They just don't play ITM cup.
It works for us because the setup is focussed on the higher level game. We have less (not no) conflict about what the different levels want.
It means there's less problem fitting everything in.

Good luck to England sorting out the club vs country thing - personally I don't see it happening soon.

Exactly, the ITM sides and super rugby franchises are distinct entities. Perhaps England need to look at some form of regionalisation and creating Super-clubs to combat French squad depth and allow player rotation?

Won't happen. Only way forward is an improved partnership between the RFU and the Clubs, with clear goals and rules of the road each can easily follow.  That would, in my mind, include a reduction in the amount of Rugby. But will that happen considering the personalities involved????

The RFU despite its profits cannot fund the professional tier.

A top down Union controlled game has financial limits. Look at NZRU who have had to scrap teams, be answerable to sponsors and play 14/15 games a season. They are running out of options.

Fewer games is key and TV contracts are the only short to medium term option.

The much maligned AP clubs are producing a stream of young English players but there is no substitute for Test experience and so SH players are brought in.

The area that needs the biggest improvement is coaching. The RFU should be investing to the maximum in this area because the raw material is there with the players available.

This is no doubt silly, but could the RFU pinch the signatures of an elite group of players (say the England squad) and then manage them out to clubs etc under sub-contracts they're happier with? The RFU could make up any shortfalls in salary for a select few.I'm sure it's a minefield and clubs will be peed off. But if they want high profile local players they'll have to bend.

The RFU had the chance originally to contract players but baulked at the cost particularly as at the time they were trying to redevelop Twickenham. So the club's took on the responsibility for a payroll. Ownership of player contracts and you hold the keys to the professional tier and the club's will not give this up nor should they.

Regionalism wouldn't work. The clubs have history and tradition and a fan base. Plus there's no need for region's. England has the large population to support 12 top flight clubs.

I'd like English rugby to move more towards the way Irish, Kiwi, Aussie etc. rugby is run. The fact is the clubs pay the players wages. If many of them are not making money, and the RFU has the finances, why don't they cough up some of it to support the clubs, in return for more control over the players. Supporting the clubs financially would also mean they would have more influence in stopping them from doing things like trying to destroy the HC.

I definitely agree with the idea of a more streamlined European season. Play the leagues, then the HC then the 6 Nations. In fact I'd go further and say I'd like to see the separate leagues replaced by a pan European Super Rugby type tournament with a limited number of games. I'd move the 6 Nations to the end of the season and all of Europe can build towards the highlight of the calender. Before heading down south to thrash the colonials.  

Looking at mbernz list you'd have to drop one or two of those to play the season consecutively. If you were doing that I'd be more inclined to let Europe go.

Although a fudge, I'd probably still stick with overlapping similar to present however, with maybe just a slightly different configuration.

Toast wrote:Rubbish

Your posts are pathetic, usually 1 line, often one word, usually derisory and no content to offer a forum….why bother.

mbernz wrote:The problem with playing all competitions and series consecutively is fitting them all in.


22 weekends for the AP if you do away with play-offs.  Clubs will want at least 6 weeks pre-season though, so that takes you up to 28.

9 for European competitons.

5 for the 6N, plus you would need at least a week before the first match for training together as a team, so that takes you up to 6.

3 weeks for the AIs.

3 weeks for the summer tours, with an extra week to allow for the effects of travelling to places like Aus and NZ, so 4.


That's 50 weeks already, but you would want to factor in a few weeks break in the middle of all that, say one between each competiton and a couple in the middle of big comps like the AP and European, plus one in the middle of a group of high intensity matches like the 6N (unless players don't play every week).  Then you obviously need to give players some sort of off-season.


If you play all club competitons in a row and then international with non-international players effectively entering off-season, what happens when injuries occur and you need to draft players in who haven't played any rugby for a month or two?

How is playing 11 international matches in a row going to affect players?

If you assume those same international players for top clubs will feature in almost all European games, that doesn't leave many games in the AP they can be scheduled to play in before your 25 match limit.

What happens to the limit if injuries during the season mean England has to draft in a player from outside the EPS who has already featured in most of his club games in the AP and Europe?

MBernz I appreciate your general thrust, specifically regards the length of a consecutive season. However I do think we need real radical solutions if we are to evolve the English professional game. I know we're all just keyboard warriors but I do think it’s important these serious issues are aired and sent forth into the ether. Therefore on reflection I would suggest a radical revision of the AP similar to the Super XV structure.

With regards the 6 nations I have to say I am conflicted by the arguments for progress and equally for tradition. I am a real advocate for European international expansion however to truly do so would mean you would have to move it to the end of the season (which as mentioned previously does provide and an international block of games before the overseas tours and thus team development opportunities which are not otherwise available), and yet like any NH rugby fan I know the singular joy that a mid winter competition provides - and also the financial value it gives the game as a whole - would those financial options be on offer later in the season? The 6 Nations has a unique position. The compromise would be expansion (and either one or two more games!!!) in the mid winter, but still that is not satisfactory.
The proposed solution would require a secondary annual European B competition that would provide its winner the opportunity to enter the following years 6(7) nations - NOT promotion/relegation, so NOT threatening the current 6 nations who will be guaranteed their position. This annual additional game does offer real benefits (financial, expansion, travel, development) and I believe justifies its existence/inclusion.
Finally, interjecting an international comp between club competitions would enable a natural break -and second finally; playing a 6 week consecutive international competition would demand player rotation and opportunity, and may or may not negate the requirement of a secondary Saxon type tournament?

Assuming the European club competitions are each of 20 teams, you would then have to decide on either a 5x4(6h&a+q,s+f)= 9 games or 4x5(8h&a+s+f)= 10 games structure. I prefer the current 9 games format.

Finally I have to reassert the requirement for a strict limit on the number of games played, especially the internationally selected players.

So this is the revised season to start from October;

6 AP weekends

Interruption -Autumn Internationals 3 weekends

5 AP weekends - the AP alternates home & away year on year meaning only 11 league games.

AP finals - quarters, semis and final - 3 weekends

Expanded European 6(7 - for example Romania) nations - 6 weekends

European competitions, 9 (6+3) weekends

Finally Overseas tour 4(3 games) weekends

NB;

1,Not all clubs will qualify for later stages of AP and European comps.
2,Total only 36 weekends meaning 2 break weekends can be added
3,Player rotation and maximum 25 games are an absolute set in stone necessities.
4,Fewer club games will increase the quality of performance.

News Flash - Kieran Read wins player of the year having made less than 25 starts in 2013!!!

Was there an International who made 25 starts?

Agree with the OP that the RFU and PRL need to realign their prorities and have been saying if for years that the RFU ultimately for the greater good of English rugby need to take control of English clubs. Glad they dont is all I can say.

'The Greater Good'

What exactly is the end game for all this? What is the 'goal'?

kingelderfield wrote:News Flash - Kieran Read wins player of the year having made less than 25 starts in 2013!!!

Yeah its amazing how well he has played considering the injuries he has had this year.