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

First topic message reminder :

Dubbelyew L Overate wrote:

Sin é wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:

Sin é wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:

broadlandboy wrote:I don't think any one is argueing that the HEC is not a great comp, some are saying that it is not be all & end all & there is more to rugby.
PRL/BT have not stated the amount for Aviva & Europe separately as this would give information to Sky. However PRL have stated that PRL clubs will be better off with just the Aviva under the BT deal than they are now with the present combined Aviva/Europe.
The BT deal is for Aviva with an agreement that BT will have PRL's rights in any European comp.

It sounds like they have. The quote from Sin e suggests the BT part is worth about 20-odd million per year. Assuming he's talking in Euros and that 20-odd is about 20 (certainly reads that way). Over three years so thats 60 million. So that's about £50MM. Assuming that's top amount and therefore releases the whole "up to" £152M it means there is between £102M for the Premiership over four years. So thats £25M per year. Previous Sky/ESPN deal was for around £54M for 3 years, or about £18M per year. So that's an extra £7M a year for the Premeirship.

About

Thats working out ok so for the AP clubs. They now have a little over £2m for tv rights this year. Last year they got £1.9m (between AP & ERC).

Down guarantee of 3 home sell-out games (plus corporate entertainment ect).

They weren't sell outs. Even Tigers didn't sell out all the ERC games. But they can replace it with an English cup. Won't make as much but will probably make enough. Would be great if the Championship sides got involved and got an equal share (per team).

I wouldn't expect Tigers to sell out as they have a fairly big stadium, but clubs like Exeter were selling out (average 10k for HCup). Average about 7K for Aviva Premiership last year.

No HC sell-outs at Sandy Park last year (not even for Leinster), and the AP average was a little higher.

Last season:

Sale Sharks 5,568
Saracens 6,141
Quins 8,472
Warriors 7,295
Wasps 7,557
L Irish 7,557
Bath 10,744
L Welsh 7,317

etc. etc..

Heineken Cup
Clermont 9,819
Scarlets 9,258
Leinster 10,198

At least 2k more per game (and tickets are also more expensive).

The Currie Cup is being expanded to 8 teams so even less room in the Saffers schedule

Looks like another pipe dream to me.

The only realistic option appears to be an expanded Aviva, with extra English clubs.
However once that genie is out the bottle they will not be able to reduce it to accommodate a European competition

Collapse of Welsh Regional rugby ?

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2013/dec/05/wales-regions-legal-action-against-board

If I was a betting man I would say the Regions could possibly disappear and 4 clubs sides will be playing in the Pro12 and HC with financial support from the WRU but with far less independence.

Intotouch wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:

Intotouch wrote:What happens if (a) the PRL can't deliver a cross-border competition to BT or (b) they rejoin the h-cup?

Either way they'd be breaking their BT contract. What would then happen? What is the least bad option now for the PRL?

The BT contract was released as for any future European competition. Not sure how not having one is a breach of contract. It sounds like it was rather none specific and the leaked rumours are likely to be related to the European side of it (rather than the league side as suggested). So X for 6 countries, Y for 4, etc.

Thank you for the reply.

I keep reading in articles that the BT deal is what is stopping the PRL from being able to go back to the h-cup. That they sold the rights to European matches their clubs took part in. Is this not so? Are these only rumours?

That's right.

scrap my previous post written by that muppet Paul Rees

Intouch PRL have sold their rights if involved in euro comp. After being told that they dont have the rights ERC went ahead with selling exclusive rights to SKY (even the matches in england)so one of them would have to break their contract with neither willing to

geoff999rugby wrote:The Currie Cup is being expanded to 8 teams so even less room in the Saffers schedule

Looks like another pipe dream to me.

The only realistic option appears to be an expanded Aviva, with extra English clubs.
However once that genie is out the bottle they will not be able to reduce it to accommodate a European competition

What about an English cup? Potentially with the Championship sides, depending on B&I Cup.

geoff999rugby wrote:scrap my previous post written by that muppet Paul Rees

Only quote doesn't appear to be referenced to anyone

"The WRU, by telling us we have to play in the Heineken Cup with a more modest increase in funding than the other teams in the tournament at a time when we receive less centrally than any of them, are not allowing us to run our business properly," said one regional official. "It amounts to a restraint of trade. We believe we have the right to explore opportunities elsewhere, whether it is an Anglo-Welsh league or an alternative to the Heineken Cup. We are being squeezed by our own union to the point where they are telling our players not to sign contracts. This cannot go on."

Interesting about Newport football team. Certainly sets a potential precedent. IRB will do everything to fight it though.

broadlandboy wrote:Intouch PRL have sold their rights if involved in euro comp. After being told that they dont have the rights ERC went ahead with selling exclusive rights to SKY (even the matches in england)so one of them would have to break their contract with neither willing to

That is not what is happened.

The ERC had Board approval (all Unions, including RFU) to sell the rights to Heineken Cup rugby to Sky.

The PRL had no ones permission to sell anything to anyone. They should have at least have had the RFUs.

The HEC only existed in potential. It didn't (and still doesn't) exist post 2014.

The PRL (from the RFU) have the control over their TV rights and give directions to the ERC on the sale of the English portion of the HEC and ECC.

this wru vs rrw debate on the welsh rugby forums is going into complete meltdown. it's been brewing for years. but as the statements come out from the regions about WRU advising players to leave, and the underhandedness of the WRU spills into the open, mixed with preconceptions about awful mismanagement of the regions by the regions, it's going nuts. you probably wont get many welsh posters on 606 for a while as they are waging vicious club vs country rugby war amongst themselves.

So nothing much has changed.

LNR will reconsider their position and probably provide 6 teams to Camou's ERC Cup, which will probably be enough for the FFR/LNR stuff to be signed off, and LNR will get shedloads of dosh from BeIN.

Camou's Cup proceeds for next season, pretty much status quo for the participants. There is a possibility that RFU chuck Championship clubs into the Cup - I'd be surprised (pleasantly) if they do.

All 12 AP clubs and 8 T14 clubs have 6 spare weekends to fill (or to rest in).

Lapasset's FIRA-AER Cup still up in the air - a year of discussions to take place? A well-structured NH season would be nice.


Alternatively, one or more of the parties goes nuclear and everything goes boobiesup for a couple or more years.


Alternatively alternatively, the Fairy Godmother takes everyone out for a beer, gets them pi$$ed, everyone agrees (but not sure what to) and we all live happily ever after.

Sin é wrote:

broadlandboy wrote:Intouch PRL have sold their rights if involved in euro comp. After being told that they dont have the rights ERC went ahead with selling exclusive rights to SKY (even the matches in england)so one of them would have to break their contract with neither willing to

That is not what is happened.

The ERC had Board approval (all Unions, including RFU) to sell the rights to Heineken Cup rugby to Sky.

The PRL had no ones permission to sell anything to anyone. They should have at least have had the RFUs.

stop it. for the love of pete. seriously. this is all irrelevant now.

I, for one, am feicin angry - absolute shower of utter tw@ts   

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:I, for one, am feicin angry - absolute shower of utter tw@ts   

This was going to happen as soon as the two TV deals were announced. The only chance was that the Sky deal was specifically for the HEC and ACC and then ERC ended and the unions walked away from it. I think most people knew that wasn't going to happen (in fact most didn't WANT it to happen).

Year off gives everyone a chance to sort out their priorities.

Still nothing has changed .

As bad as we all can be, we would have resolved it better.

So PRL have opted not to enter HEC then. Maybe can't get out of the BT contract. There will be blood in the boardroom, methinks.

Nelson Mandela - perspective.

That is all.

Munchkin wrote:So PRL have opted not to enter HEC then. Maybe can't get out of the BT contract. There will be blood in the boardroom, methinks.

rubbish post.

have they opted not to enter HEC or are they unable to get out of the BT contract? they are mutually exclusive.

seems pretty darned clear from interviews from key decision-makers that the premiership club owners support this decision. mccafferty/q smith this week said they hoped the clubs would support the decision not to participate in an ERC-run HC. that impies to me at least that they had a get-out clause if they wanted to use it.

so, to correct your rubbish post, "PRL have opted not to enter HEC as the club owners (the PRL decision makers) vote to stay out"

you're welcome

Quinners, I would not believe everything McCafferty claims. For instance:

An ERC spokesman insisted last night Premiership Rugby’s statement did not reflect the reality of its voting structure.

“At the last accord [in 2007], France agreed for its clubs to have four out of its five votes on commercial matters and Premiership Rugby has all five of the English votes.

“The Welsh regions also have one, which gives the clubs a total of 10 out of 18 on commercial matters and the clubs have been very much at the heart of the commercial success of both tournaments.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/club/10499269/English-clubs-vote-not-to-play-in-Heineken-Cup-next-season-and-explore-idea-of-Anglo-Welsh-league.html

Now, what is all this talk about not having commercial control?

Oh, yes maybe, they were talking about commercial control at all, at all !

Sin é wrote:Quinners, I would not believe everything McCafferty claims. For instance:

An ERC spokesman insisted last night Premiership Rugby’s statement did not reflect the reality of its voting structure.

“At the last accord [in 2007], France agreed for its clubs to have four out of its five votes on commercial matters and Premiership Rugby has all five of the English votes.

“The Welsh regions also have one, which gives the clubs a total of 10 out of 18 on commercial matters and the clubs have been very much at the heart of the commercial success of both tournaments.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/club/10499269/English-clubs-vote-not-to-play-in-Heineken-Cup-next-season-and-explore-idea-of-Anglo-Welsh-league.html

Now, what is all this talk about not having commercial control?

Oh, yes maybe, they were talking about commercial control at all, at all !

stop posting this drivel. you are ridiculous. of course the english and french clubs have been at the heart of the commercial success of both tournament. in fact they are at least 75% of the commercial appeal of the competition (probably more). but they weren't getting monies that reflected this (24% each). and thats one of the reasons they wanted change. but the voting structure with FFR having all the votes on matters it deemed important was the main reason change was not possible within ERC.

Did you know Sin e, in all you wisdom, that changing the payout structure of ERC, IS NOT A COMMERCIAL MATTER? that is a corporate charter matter.

posters like you are what makes me happy that the english clubs have pulled out of ERC. there is no possibility of explaining things to your or discussing them. only severing the limb makes you, and ERC, pull your heads out of your warm smelly enclaves, and assess how important the limb is to the body.

Quinners, Heineken the main sponsor, cant even be advertised in France - how can they be at the heart of any commerical success / appeal?

Should the Heineken money be deducted from the French?

And by the way, Heineken were the sponsor before England was involved, so they were hardly the attraction.

do you really think most of the money in the Heineken Cup, or H-Cup, comes from Heineken? are you for real?

and do you think that having the french clubs in the tournament as a whole would make it more or less attractive to Heineken as a sponsor, even though they cant use their brand name in france?

and do you think that having the french clubs in the tournament....etc...etc............................to broadcasters?

please stop. i can omly assume you are trying to wind me and everyone else up because nobody could possibly be this obtuse for this long - could they?

Sin é wrote:Quinners, Heineken the main sponsor, cant even be advertised in France - how can they be at the heart of any commerical success / appeal?

Should the Heineken money be deducted from the French?

And by the way, Heineken were the sponsor before England was involved, so they were hardly the attraction.

top14 TV deal rumoured to be worth in excess of EUR100m per annum ring any bells with you?

vs IRFU's estimate of the value of tv rights of irish clubs of around EUR5m per annum

quinsforever wrote:

Munchkin wrote:So PRL have opted not to enter HEC then. Maybe can't get out of the BT contract. There will be blood in the boardroom, methinks.

rubbish post.

have they opted not to enter HEC or are they unable to get out of the BT contract? they are mutually exclusive.

seems pretty darned clear from interviews from key decision-makers that the premiership club owners support this decision. mccafferty/q smith this week said they hoped the clubs would support the decision not to participate in an ERC-run HC. that impies to me at least that they had a get-out clause if they wanted to use it.

so, to correct your rubbish post, "PRL have opted not to enter HEC as the club owners (the PRL decision makers) vote to stay out"

you're welcome

Before you have a rant at another poster for sharing an opinion, you should try to ensure that you understand fully what it is that you are responding too.

Have another look:


"So PRL have opted not to enter HEC then. Maybe can't get out of the BT contract. There will be blood in the boardroom, methinks."

Now, I say opted not to because that seems to be what the reports are claiming. I say maybe because those of PRL have been claiming that they cannot sign up to HEC due to their having signed the BT contract. If you have a problem with these two 'mutually exclusive' positions then email PRL, and complain.

Also, there's not much point in you quoting Smith, and McCafferty, to me as I don't trust a word of any of them at this point, or some of the journalists that do indeed print rubbish.

Hope that's cleared up my side of things.

You're welcome

quinsforever wrote:in fact they are at least 75% of the commercial appeal of the competition (probably more).

Want to back that up? its simply not so. 75% of the income may come from people living in england and in France - but that is not the same thing at all. We have looked at viewing figures - its the european cup that is the product that is sold to those people.

TJ wrote:

quinsforever wrote:in fact they are at least 75% of the commercial appeal of the competition (probably more).

Want to back that up?  its simply not so.  75% of the income may come from people living in england and in France - but that is not the same thing at all.  We have looked at viewing figures - its the european cup that is the product that is sold to those people.  

top14 latest tv deal is going to be in the region of EUR 100m per annum (they declined Canal+ offer of 65m per annum, up from 31.7m per annum under the old contract)

PRL is £150m over 4 years, so about EUR45m per annum (£3m per club in AP)

Rabo12 league gets what from SKy under their new deal?

divide the tv rights per league by the number of games per league and that tells you what broadcaster are willing to pay per match involving teams from that league.

pretty simple calculation. if AP, top14 and rabo12 got the same in tv rights per game (which they clearly clearly do not) then this woud work out at about 1/3 of commercial value each. the reality is that if the french teams tender their rights to HC matches they could bring in more money that the tv rights for everyone else combined.

quinsforever wrote:do you really think most of the money in the Heineken Cup, or H-Cup, comes from Heineken? are you for real?

and do you think that having the french clubs in the tournament as a whole would make it more or less attractive to Heineken as a sponsor, even though they cant use their brand name in france?

and do you think that having the french clubs in the tournament....etc...etc............................to broadcasters?

please stop. i can omly assume you are trying to wind me and everyone else up because nobody could possibly be this obtuse for this long - could they?

Well, Heineken are a major sponsor of the 'Heineken' Cup. Their sponsorship has never earned anything from the French market.
Answer this question, should France be excluded from the income generated from Heineken?

quinsforever wrote:

TJ wrote:

quinsforever wrote:in fact they are at least 75% of the commercial appeal of the competition (probably more).

Want to back that up?  its simply not so.  75% of the income may come from people living in england and in France - but that is not the same thing at all.  We have looked at viewing figures - its the european cup that is the product that is sold to those people.  

top14 latest tv deal is going to be in the region of EUR 100m per annum (they declined Canal+ offer of 65m per annum, up from 31.7m per annum under the old contract)

PRL is £150m over 4 years, so about EUR45m per annum (£3m per club in AP)

Rabo12 league gets what from SKy under their new deal?

divide the tv rights per league by the number of games per league and that tells you what broadcaster are willing to pay per match involving teams from that league.

pretty simple calculation. if AP, top14 and rabo12 got the same in tv rights per game (which they clearly clearly do not) then this woud work out at about 1/3 of commercial value each. the reality is that if the french teams tender their rights to HC matches they could bring in more money that the tv rights for everyone else combined.

Goodie, Canal+ will be anxious to splash the 65M on Heineken Cup rugby. They might even start televising the Rabo in France now that they will have a schedule to fill  

yes lets exclude the french clubs from the income generated from Heineken.

bit i'm glad you opened this particualr pandora's box. because should the english, welsh, irish, scots, italian clubs be excluded from the income generated by french clubs selling the tv rights to their home games?

and should the french, scots, italians, irish and welsh be excluded from the income generated by the english clubs selling the tv rights to their home games?

by your reasoning presumably yes and yes

Sin é wrote:

quinsforever wrote:

TJ wrote:

quinsforever wrote:in fact they are at least 75% of the commercial appeal of the competition (probably more).

Want to back that up?  its simply not so.  75% of the income may come from people living in england and in France - but that is not the same thing at all.  We have looked at viewing figures - its the european cup that is the product that is sold to those people.  

top14 latest tv deal is going to be in the region of EUR 100m per annum (they declined Canal+ offer of 65m per annum, up from 31.7m per annum under the old contract)

PRL is £150m over 4 years, so about EUR45m per annum (£3m per club in AP)

Rabo12 league gets what from SKy under their new deal?

divide the tv rights per league by the number of games per league and that tells you what broadcaster are willing to pay per match involving teams from that league.

pretty simple calculation. if AP, top14 and rabo12 got the same in tv rights per game (which they clearly clearly do not) then this woud work out at about 1/3 of commercial value each. the reality is that if the french teams tender their rights to HC matches they could bring in more money that the tv rights for everyone else combined.

Goodie, Canal+ will be anxious to splash the 65M on Heineken Cup rugby. They might even start televising the Rabo in France now that they will have a schedule to fill  

that's it. i'm done. when presented with facts you completely ignore them, preferring to quote your favourite mccgrath artice from august about the BT deal he knows nothing about.

you are clearly a WUM.

i tend to bring facts and relevant pieces of information to this thread. you bring nothing but disinformation and irrelevant facts.

i won't be engaging with you any more as it's clearly upsetting me far more than it is you.

quinsforever wrote:

TJ wrote:

quinsforever wrote:in fact they are at least 75% of the commercial appeal of the competition (probably more).

Want to back that up?  its simply not so.  75% of the income may come from people living in england and in France - but that is not the same thing at all.  We have looked at viewing figures - its the european cup that is the product that is sold to those people.  

top14 latest tv deal is going to be in the region of EUR 100m per annum (they declined Canal+ offer of 65m per annum, up from 31.7m per annum under the old contract)

PRL is £150m over 4 years, so about EUR45m per annum (£3m per club in AP)

Rabo12 league gets what from SKy under their new deal?

divide the tv rights per league by the number of games per league and that tells you what broadcaster are willing to pay per match involving teams from that league.

pretty simple calculation. if AP, top14 and rabo12 got the same in tv rights per game (which they clearly clearly do not) then this woud work out at about 1/3 of commercial value each. the reality is that if the french teams tender their rights to HC matches they could bring in more money that the tv rights for everyone else combined.

Isn't there meant to be an element of european rugby in that worth 20m? Also, there is a 7s tournament involved as well.

quinsforever wrote:yes lets exclude the french clubs from the income generated from Heineken.

bit i'm glad you opened this particualr pandora's box. because should the english, welsh, irish, scots, italian clubs be excluded from the income generated by french clubs selling the tv rights to their home games?

and should the french, scots, italians, irish and welsh be excluded from the income generated by the english clubs selling the tv rights to their home games?

by your reasoning presumably yes and yes

No, I want you to say since the French market contributes nothing for Heineken Rugby, should they be excluded from a share of the Heineken sponsorship cash?

Sin é wrote:

Dubbelyew L Overate wrote:

Sin é wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:

Sin é wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:

broadlandboy wrote:I don't think any one is argueing that the HEC is not a great comp, some are saying that it is not be all & end all & there is more to rugby.
PRL/BT have not stated the amount for Aviva & Europe separately as this would give information to Sky. However PRL have stated that PRL clubs will be better off with just the Aviva under the BT deal than they are now with the present combined Aviva/Europe.
The BT deal is for Aviva with an agreement that BT will have PRL's rights in any European comp.

It sounds like they have. The quote from Sin e suggests the BT part is worth about 20-odd million per year. Assuming he's talking in Euros and that 20-odd is about 20 (certainly reads that way). Over three years so thats 60 million. So that's about £50MM. Assuming that's top amount and therefore releases the whole "up to" £152M it means there is between £102M for the Premiership over four years. So thats £25M per year. Previous Sky/ESPN deal was for around £54M for 3 years, or about £18M per year. So that's an extra £7M a year for the Premeirship.

About

Thats working out ok so for the AP clubs. They now have a little over £2m for tv rights this year. Last year they got £1.9m (between AP & ERC).

Down guarantee of 3 home sell-out games (plus corporate entertainment ect).

They weren't sell outs. Even Tigers didn't sell out all the ERC games. But they can replace it with an English cup. Won't make as much but will probably make enough. Would be great if the Championship sides got involved and got an equal share (per team).

I wouldn't expect Tigers to sell out as they have a fairly big stadium, but clubs like Exeter were selling out (average 10k for HCup). Average about 7K for Aviva Premiership last year.

No HC sell-outs at Sandy Park last year (not even for Leinster), and the AP average was a little higher.

Last season:

Sale Sharks 5,568
Saracens 6,141
Quins 8,472
Warriors 7,295
Wasps 7,557
L Irish 7,557 8,986
Bath 10,744
L Welsh 7,317
Saints 8,357
Tigers 10,427
Gloucester 10,744

Av 8,328

etc. etc..

Heineken Cup
Clermont 9,819
Scarlets 9,258
Leinster 10,198

Av 9,758

At least 2k more per game (and tickets are also more expensive).

I have OCD issues with incomplete data sets, so had to finish this off if it's going to be at the top of this topic for 20 pages.

quinsforever wrote:

TJ wrote:

quinsforever wrote:in fact they are at least 75% of the commercial appeal of the competition (probably more).

Want to back that up?  its simply not so.  75% of the income may come from people living in england and in France - but that is not the same thing at all.  We have looked at viewing figures - its the european cup that is the product that is sold to those people.  

top14 latest tv deal is going to be in the region of EUR 100m per annum (they declined Canal+ offer of 65m per annum, up from 31.7m per annum under the old contract)

PRL is £150m over 4 years, so about EUR45m per annum (£3m per club in AP)

Rabo12 league gets what from SKy under their new deal?

divide the tv rights per league by the number of games per league and that tells you what broadcaster are willing to pay per match involving teams from that league.

pretty simple calculation. if AP, top14 and rabo12 got the same in tv rights per game (which they clearly clearly do not) then this woud work out at about 1/3 of commercial value each. the reality is that if the french teams tender their rights to HC matches they could bring in more money that the tv rights for everyone else combined.

But what they are selling is not ap or french games - what they are selling is european cup games - the value is greater for european cup games involving teams from outside those leagues. You confuse the market place - england with the product which is not english teams but european cup games

What a relief to find out that PRL have stuck to their guns and put to fingers up to ERC, for a min yesterday I thought they were going to give in.

England needs a European Cup now more than ever - that French TV deal means they will blow everyone else out the water.

The Celts will loose their bigger players first but the English will soon follow.
If the anomosity clouds that fact then more fool them

Can anyone else log into the ERC website, it won't let me in!



Got in at last, no mention of English clubs pulling out!  

A website with discernment? Whatever next?

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:A website with discernment? Whatever next?

Let's hope this site doesn't adopt this, it could become quite lonely on here

indeed, cakey

It appears peace and harmony has broken out in France

gavin mortimer ‏@gavinmortimer7 2h M.O reports that LNR & FFR agreed an Accord for the next 4 years in the wee small hours of Thursday and it will be signed today.

I would be 99% certain that means a mega TV deal and HC participation.

So just the Welsh to go - the biggest mess of the lot

OK I'm lost can anyone please summerize where things are at?

All the Unions bar the RFU have backed the heino.

The PRL have left the heino. The RFU are sitting on the fence.

The LNR have committed to the Heino, if the English play.

The Welsh Regions previously backed the RC.

Have I missed something?

Yes

It appear from last night that the French are in for the HC
Civil War is about to break out in Wales

Do keep up

Sin é wrote:Quinners, I would not believe everything McCafferty claims. For instance:

An ERC spokesman insisted last night Premiership Rugby’s statement did not reflect the reality of its voting structure.

“At the last accord [in 2007], France agreed for its clubs to have four out of its five votes on commercial matters and Premiership Rugby has all five of the English votes.

“The Welsh regions also have one, which gives the clubs a total of 10 out of 18 on commercial matters and the clubs have been very much at the heart of the commercial success of both tournaments.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/club/10499269/English-clubs-vote-not-to-play-in-Heineken-Cup-next-season-and-explore-idea-of-Anglo-Welsh-league.html

Now, what is all this talk about not having commercial control?

Oh, yes maybe, they were talking about commercial control at all, at all !

The trigger for all of the current mess was when the FFR pulled back its votes from the LNR so that they could re-elect Lux rather than appoint Wheeler. I know some people on here don't think Wheeler was neutral enough for the role, but that's not particularly relevant. It was a commercial decision (trying to put one of the few people with a demonstrable track record of commercial success in club rugby in a position to drive the commercial development of the tournament) that the majority of the clubs wanted but the FFR chose to veto it. That's not commercial control.

Poorfour wrote:

Sin é wrote:Quinners, I would not believe everything McCafferty claims. For instance:

An ERC spokesman insisted last night Premiership Rugby’s statement did not reflect the reality of its voting structure.

“At the last accord [in 2007], France agreed for its clubs to have four out of its five votes on commercial matters and Premiership Rugby has all five of the English votes.

“The Welsh regions also have one, which gives the clubs a total of 10 out of 18 on commercial matters and the clubs have been very much at the heart of the commercial success of both tournaments.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/club/10499269/English-clubs-vote-not-to-play-in-Heineken-Cup-next-season-and-explore-idea-of-Anglo-Welsh-league.html

Now, what is all this talk about not having commercial control?

Oh, yes maybe, they were talking about commercial control at all, at all !

The trigger for all of the current mess was when the FFR pulled back its votes from the LNR so that they could re-elect Lux rather than appoint Wheeler. I know some people on here don't think Wheeler was neutral enough for the role, but that's not particularly relevant. It was a commercial decision (trying to put one of the few people with a demonstrable track record of commercial success in club rugby in a position to drive the commercial development of the tournament) that the majority of the clubs wanted but the FFR chose to veto it. That's not commercial control.

ERC Commerial Committee

René Bouscatel Chairman (Toulouse)
Max Guazzini LNR
Andrea Rinaldo FIR
Mick Dawson IRFU
Dominic Hayes Premiership Rugby
Dominic McKay Scottish Rugby
Craig Maxwell WRU
Jean-Pierre Lux ERC Chairman
Derek McGrath ERC Chief Executive

McCafferty was the chair at one stage (or so he has on his ESPN CV).

Wheeler was just not suitable as chairman of the board as he had an interest in a club and one league. There would be a conflict of interest.

The fact that the PRL/LNR have been vicious about Lux (who is actually indepenent) just shows that they wouldn't be capable of being neutral.

Massive conflict of interest, I'm afraid

Neutrality has got nothing to do with it, and neither does who is or isn't on the committee now. The point is that the majority of the teams wanted to appoint someone to a commercially critical role, and the FFR pulled back its votes and over-ruled them. I don't have the full details, but it's clear that the LNR clubs at least felt that the FFR had said it wouldn't do that.

And it's even clearer that the PRL are no longer happy to be part of a competition where - in effect - a single body (the FFR) can arbitrarily decide to give itself a casting vote on any issue.

The FFR's recent tactics make it clear why. It may suit the IRFU, SRU, WRU and FIR that the FFR has acted the way it has now, but how long will it remain aligned to the other unions? Governance reform is in everyone's long term interest.

rodders wrote:OK I'm lost can anyone please summerize where things are at?

All the Unions bar the RFU have backed the heino.

The PRL have left the heino. The RFU are sitting on the fence.

The LNR have committed to the Heino, if the English play.

The Welsh Regions previously backed the RC.

Have I missed something?

I was on a nice winter break from this madhouse.  Read a few posts on this one this morning and here I am, dragged back to the nuthouse.  Hopefully not for long though.

Anyway, you're almost spot on there, Rodders...but there are a number of fatal errors - itemised below:


All the Unions bar the RFU have backed the heino.

The PRL have left the heino. The RFU are sitting on the fence.  

No.  The RFU have already burned the section of the fence they were sitting on in their little stove, coz it's been nippy of late.  Besides, in some media circles it has been suggested that RFU considered themselves a 'neutral' honest broker by virtue of the fact that they make no direct money from HEC.  One then asks why they were ever allowed to sit on the ERC board in the first place?  And there is certainly scant room for them now, given that they'll have no teams with them at any HEC boardroom meetings.


The LNR have committed to the Heino, if the English play.  

The LNR also committed to the RCC, even if the rest of us (Pro12) didn't! 
The LNR also got into bed with the PRL and slipped out the window after the deal was 'consumated', leaving their "Don't ring us, we'll ring you" card on the pillow.  The LNR also committed themselves to collecting as many blank cheques as possible from anyone prepared to give them during this strategic period that they've known was coming for a long, long time...as PRL rightly wouldn't shut up about what was coming for a long, long time.


The Welsh Regions previously backed the RC.  

The Welsh regions hate being Welsh it seems... and would much prefer be controlled by PRL than their own Welsh Union ... except of course the relegation.... which they never could accept ....as they are Unique  ...being Welsh and all..............................!!!! In short, the Welsh regions don't like the idea of being controlled by anyone!! 
Go figure that one out - I know the WRU are trying to at present.  And the English clubs that will be expected to continue to fall down the relegation ladder will also be trying to work out the logic of that one if the Welsh come onboard - with their NO-RELEGATION clause, signed by a 'happy-to-see-you' McCafferty.

SF

Couldn't hold out I take it 

Poorfour wrote:

The FFR's recent tactics make it clear why. It may suit the IRFU, SRU, WRU and FIR that the FFR has acted the way it has now, but how long will it remain aligned to the other unions? Governance reform is in everyone's long term interest.

Only if Governance FOR everyone is the conclusion of that reform.  Meaning - if you have a vote, we have a vote.  If you have two votes, we have two.  But that's NOT the kind of reform McCafferty seemed altogether interested in.  
Turkeys don't vote for Christmas... and the PRL are just a little annoyed (and surprised!) that dumb turkeys showed so much interest in their civic rights.