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

by Sin é Tue 03 Dec 2013, 17:42

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).

by TJ Sun 08 Dec 2013, 21:41

Munchkin wrote:
quinsforever wrote:Key dates coming up:

WRU RRW meeting wednesday. need to sign a new participation agreement by end Dec or its principality rugby meltdown
LNR club owners need to approve FFR-LNR "Convention" from their side dec 19th

any more to add to the calendar?

PRL appear to be out so not expecting anything from them.

When do the format, etc info about 2014-15 HC get agreed/announced?
Thought I had read somewhere that RFU are asking the other 5 Unions to meet on Tuesday? Also think FFR and LNR have signed agreement, but just waiting until the AGM to announce it?

I think so - but its clear the english have been given a take it or leave it option and chose to leave it. What more is to negotiate about?

by Sin é Sun 08 Dec 2013, 21:50

RFU want to talk to other Unions again.

Someone saying that apparently the Celts & Italians were prepared to go with McCaff's cup, but the FFR were having none of it.

by nathan Sun 08 Dec 2013, 21:51

TJ wrote:
Munchkin wrote:
quinsforever wrote:Key dates coming up:

WRU RRW meeting wednesday. need to sign a new participation agreement by end Dec or its principality rugby meltdown
LNR club owners need to approve FFR-LNR "Convention" from their side dec 19th

any more to add to the calendar?

PRL appear to be out so not expecting anything from them.

When do the format, etc info about 2014-15 HC get agreed/announced?
Thought I had read somewhere that RFU are asking the other 5 Unions to meet on Tuesday? Also think FFR and LNR have signed agreement, but just waiting until the AGM to announce it?
I think so - but its clear the english have been given a take it or leave it option and chose to leave it. What more is to negotiate about?

Lets be honest TJ, nothing in this whole mess is "clear".

by HammerofThunor Sun 08 Dec 2013, 21:56

Sin é wrote:RFU want to talk to other Unions again.

Someone saying that apparently the Celts & Italians were prepared to go with McCaff's cup, but the FFR were having none of it.

Who or what is "Someone"?

by Guest Sun 08 Dec 2013, 21:56

HammerofThunor wrote:There was a Guardian article saying he wanted to try and salvage a 6 country competition but there was no substance to any of it. Not a single quote from Richie. Nothing about proposed meetings Nothing really.

I seem to remember in one of quinsforever's translated articles that the agreement would be made (has been now) but wouldn't be formally announced until it have been ratified by whoever needs to do that (20th Dec was the date I think).

Christmas is coming up.

Yes, that's pretty much what I had read on the FFR agreement with LNR. I read the Richie article on here, but think I read on one of the Welsh regions forums about a Tuesday meeting. Makes sense that it stems from the Guardian. Same article spouting complete nonsense as to why Court, and Afoa are leaving for English clubs. It's that kind of reporting that discredits Rees as a credible sports journalist.

by HammerofThunor Sun 08 Dec 2013, 21:58

Munchkin wrote:
HammerofThunor wrote:There was a Guardian article saying he wanted to try and salvage a 6 country competition but there was no substance to any of it. Not a single quote from Richie. Nothing about proposed meetings Nothing really.

I seem to remember in one of quinsforever's translated articles that the agreement would be made (has been now) but wouldn't be formally announced until it have been ratified by whoever needs to do that (20th Dec was the date I think).

Christmas is coming up.
Yes, that's pretty much what I had read on the FFR agreement with LNR. I read the Richie article on here, but think I read on one of the Welsh regions forums about a Tuesday meeting. Makes sense that it stems from the Guardian. Same article spouting complete nonsense as to why Court, and Afoa are leaving for English clubs. It's that kind of reporting that discredits Rees as a credible sports journalist.

I know. You can't trust anything they print Whistle

by TJ Sun 08 Dec 2013, 21:58

nathan wrote:
TJ wrote:
Munchkin wrote:
quinsforever wrote:Key dates coming up:

WRU RRW meeting wednesday. need to sign a new participation agreement by end Dec or its principality rugby meltdown
LNR club owners need to approve FFR-LNR "Convention" from their side dec 19th

any more to add to the calendar?

PRL appear to be out so not expecting anything from them.

When do the format, etc info about 2014-15 HC get agreed/announced?
Thought I had read somewhere that RFU are asking the other 5 Unions to meet on Tuesday? Also think FFR and LNR have signed agreement, but just waiting until the AGM to announce it?
I think so - but its clear the english have been given a take it or leave it option and chose to leave it. What more is to negotiate about?
Lets be honest TJ, nothing in this whole mess is "clear".

by Guest Sun 08 Dec 2013, 22:00

TJ wrote:
Munchkin wrote:
quinsforever wrote:Key dates coming up:

WRU RRW meeting wednesday. need to sign a new participation agreement by end Dec or its principality rugby meltdown
LNR club owners need to approve FFR-LNR "Convention" from their side dec 19th

any more to add to the calendar?

PRL appear to be out so not expecting anything from them.

When do the format, etc info about 2014-15 HC get agreed/announced?
Thought I had read somewhere that RFU are asking the other 5 Unions to meet on Tuesday? Also think FFR and LNR have signed agreement, but just waiting until the AGM to announce it?
I think so - but its clear the english have been given a take it or leave it option and chose to leave it. What more is to negotiate about?

I agree, TJ. There no room for any further concessions to the demands of PRL. If there's a way to encourage PRL back to the HEC without giving more ground then great. We all want to see all 6 Nations involved.

by quinsforever Sun 08 Dec 2013, 22:00

Munchkin wrote:
quinsforever wrote:Key dates coming up:

WRU RRW meeting wednesday. need to sign a new participation agreement by end Dec or its principality rugby meltdown
LNR club owners need to approve FFR-LNR "Convention" from their side dec 19th

any more to add to the calendar?

PRL appear to be out so not expecting anything from them.

When do the format, etc info about 2014-15 HC get agreed/announced?
Thought I had read somewhere that RFU are asking the other 5 Unions to meet on Tuesday? Also think FFR and LNR have signed agreement, but just waiting until the AGM to announce it?

didnt know about that tues mtg. assume ritchie is organising.

FFR have confirmed the ffr-lnr deal at their "comite general". LNR general assumbly dont meet til dec 19th, so they wont have ratified if from their side til then. seems extremely unlikely they wont do so.

by Guest Sun 08 Dec 2013, 22:01

HammerofThunor wrote:
Munchkin wrote:
HammerofThunor wrote:There was a Guardian article saying he wanted to try and salvage a 6 country competition but there was no substance to any of it. Not a single quote from Richie. Nothing about proposed meetings Nothing really.

I seem to remember in one of quinsforever's translated articles that the agreement would be made (has been now) but wouldn't be formally announced until it have been ratified by whoever needs to do that (20th Dec was the date I think).

Christmas is coming up.
Yes, that's pretty much what I had read on the FFR agreement with LNR. I read the Richie article on here, but think I read on one of the Welsh regions forums about a Tuesday meeting. Makes sense that it stems from the Guardian. Same article spouting complete nonsense as to why Court, and Afoa are leaving for English clubs. It's that kind of reporting that discredits Rees as a credible sports journalist.
I know. You can't trust anything they print

by SecretFly Sun 08 Dec 2013, 22:02

Sin é wrote:RFU want to talk to other Unions again.

Someone saying that apparently the Celts & Italians were prepared to go with McCaff's cup, but the FFR were having none of it.

Well it never looked to me like Browne's demeanour suggested he ever wanted to go with McCaff's cup, much less be in the same room as him. I sensed that there was much more bitterness between him and the PRL than even the French v PRL.

I might be wrong - but I've actually felt that he was much more central to the ERC stance than any French man was.

by Guest Sun 08 Dec 2013, 22:04

quinsforever wrote:
Munchkin wrote:
quinsforever wrote:Key dates coming up:

WRU RRW meeting wednesday. need to sign a new participation agreement by end Dec or its principality rugby meltdown
LNR club owners need to approve FFR-LNR "Convention" from their side dec 19th

any more to add to the calendar?

PRL appear to be out so not expecting anything from them.

When do the format, etc info about 2014-15 HC get agreed/announced?
Thought I had read somewhere that RFU are asking the other 5 Unions to meet on Tuesday? Also think FFR and LNR have signed agreement, but just waiting until the AGM to announce it?
didnt know about that tues mtg. assume ritchie is organising.

FFR have confirmed the ffr-lnr deal at their "comite general". LNR general assumbly dont meet til dec 19th, so they wont have ratified if from their side til then. seems extremely unlikely they wont do so.

Well it's one that's doing the rounds, but apparently should be taken with a pinch of salt. The Guardian reported Richie to arrange the meeting with Unions, so it's probably nonsense Very Happy

by quinsforever Sun 08 Dec 2013, 22:04

Sin é wrote:RFU want to talk to other Unions again.

Someone saying that apparently the Celts & Italians were prepared to go with McCaff's cup, but the FFR were having none of it.

actually mccaff and q smith hinted that there was only 1 union holding out against the mcnaff cup Smile

doesnt seem like they were lying then. but if the holdout was the FFR, then it may as well have been all 5.

by HammerofThunor Sun 08 Dec 2013, 22:25

Although, if (and it's a big if) the FFR were the only ones against it (probably because of power struggles with the LNR) AND they've got what they wanted with this new EPS-type deal...perhaps things would move forward?

Or is that the my glass-is-a-quarter-full optimism coming out?

by SecretFly Sun 08 Dec 2013, 22:37

Well, if there is a meeting between the Unions......again! There'll be strict conditions set:

"Ritchie...will ya be sayin' something this time like a good man instead of standin' there in a corner silently with your microphone and camera, recordin' our auld bollickin so you can go home and give to them PRL lads"

by quinsforever Sun 08 Dec 2013, 22:52

HammerofThunor wrote:Although, if (and it's a big if) the FFR were the only ones against it (probably because of power struggles with the LNR) AND they've got what they wanted with this new EPS-type deal...perhaps things would move forward?

Or is that the my glass-is-a-quarter-full optimism coming out?

who knows. but i was interested to see that there was not a single mention of ERC in the FFR-LNR main "convention", and in the annex where it referred to the monies distributed by ERC, the first line was "at the time of this signature, ERC pays....."

so while camou clearly wanted to flex his muscles, and did so successfully, he also clearly had no interest in contractually (for the next 4 years) binding FFR or LNR to ERC. would be hard to imagine a volte-face for next year's competition from camou, so i dont see them ditching ERC just yet Sad

by Sin é Sun 08 Dec 2013, 23:36

The Heineken Cup is a side issue for the French clubs now, quinners. That article in s'oud west that you posted said that the PRL were annoyed with Goze for offering what he did, because they were going to be forced to play in it anyway by the FFR. They seem to regard the PRL's stance as snubbing their offer.

by ulster_on_the_up Mon 09 Dec 2013, 03:29

Europe - Possible proposal for an amiable solution:

So far, the ERC have made a proposal that meet some of the demands of the English and French including qualification meritocracy and the division of money. However some sticking points still remain and the English clubs refuse to compete, below I have outlined a proposal I think might allow a possible agreement over a European cup competition.

Firstly, the ERC remains, however:

A Sub committee will oversee commercial aspects where club and union reps can tender the tv deals as-well as sponsorship for the competition, for this each club receives a vote each, union run teams receive a vote per team entered. All monies raised are pooled and re – distributed as detailed in the new ERC accord - split evenly amongst teams through the unions/professional bodies.

The Celtalians are allowed to enter either their ‘A’ teams or some of the teams from their internal leagues (AIL, Welsh Prem, Scottish League Championship, Super 10) into the new 2nd/ 3rd tier Euro tournaments. This will allow better experience to an extended group of players from these nations and closer standard opposition to teams from other Euro nations that would compete, (of-coarse it will give their respective Unions/ slash bodies a bigger share of the pot and more votes, but they have entered more teams so this is only fair.)

To stop whining from some parts of Europe Wink

, the PRL impose a match day squad cap (allowing teams within the Jeff to still be competitive on the pitch against eachother), but no overall squad cap, allowing teams to have bigger squads with higher priced players (this allows them to be more competitive with the French financially in Europe and affords them the opportunity to rest/rotate players like ‘other’ European teams).

A European squad cap is imposed – high enough to keep the French interested, low enough to allow the slightly less wealthy teams to be competitive.

Finally, ERC headquarters remain in Dublin – but offices are located in the Basement of the Swiss Embassy.

Thoughts?

by niwatts Mon 09 Dec 2013, 05:06

French vision for European rugby will give pathway for progression

France want the creation of a Uefa-style body that will ultimately lead to a second tier Six Nations

So, the English Premiership went into a Euro rugby battle with the French as their only allies; I guess nobody in their strategic command does history then.

Gleeful crowing from non-English rugby participants and fans within European Club Rugby has accompanied what they have presented as a volte face by the French clubs who, they say, have turned their back on a proposed Rugby Champions Cup and warmly returned to the ERC fold. The lazy and reflexive use of the pre-fix arrogant has accompanied the word English in nearly every Celtic article on this matter.

Actually the French have made a far more provocative claim for their stance openly admitting that it is merely the precursor for plans to overhaul the way club rugby is run in Europe.

The French Federation de Rugby (FFR) and its clubs have been rowing for years about control of the clubs, with the former resorting to using an ancient French law to purloin the latters’ vote in ERC matters.

What has not been given much notice is that the FFR has, for many years, had close links with Fira, the body which represents the smaller nations of European rugby.

This is evidenced by the fact that in the seventies and eighties France alone annually played Romania, then the leading minor international European team.

Fira has long complained, with good reason, that the Six Nations is a closed shop, as are the club tournaments that underpin it.

Paul Goze, president of the Ligue Nationale de Rugby, the body made up of the clubs in the top two divisions in France, has said that the French want a Uefa-style body, based in Geneva, to run European club rugby and remove the elitist approach of the Six Nations Committee.

It is on this basis that the French have said they will play one more year in the Heineken Cup.

The choice of Switzerland as opposed to Dublin is not just for tax reasons; it is to remove the physical proximity of European club rugby from the International Rugby Board and the Six Nations Committee (both based in Dublin) and especially the Irish influence about which the French and English have complained for many years.

The Irish, especially their tame media, hysterically denounce any move away from this convenient arrangement as greedy, knowing full well that their influence will dissipate if this geographical link is severed.

What is most appealing about the French vision is that it will include a determined pathway for other Unions and their clubs to progress up the ladder.

Moreover, and this is what many of the Six Nations Committee fear, it will make the creation of a second tier Six Nations inevitable.

The monetary and playing strength of Unions like Russia should not be underestimated and in a competent, democratic structure they should not be feared either. Alas, we do not live in such an egalitarian rugby world.

European rugby needs all its Unions and clubs, including the English, in its competitions and a clearly mapped progression route like football.

So, the English have played their hand and appear to have lost. The English game cannot go for long without a meaningful step between domestic and international rugby and if Premiership rugby Chief Mark McCafferty does not have a plan B the English have planned and executed their strategy badly.

They have a pot of BT money but no apparent way of properly exploiting it.

That said; Sky will not be happy that the English market, which is by far their largest subscriber base, will be hit by no English presence in their key club rugby product.

The English Premiership should not be held solely culpable for the present unsatisfactory situation. A competent governing body would not have allowed this to happen.

The changes to qualification and monetary distribution offered by the Unions through ERC only came because of the English and French clubs giving proper notice under the previous tournament agreement.

To pretend otherwise, as the Celtic Unions are now doing, is simply dishonest.

They could and should have been offered earlier and had they been we probably wouldn’t be in this unholy mess.

Goze has said that in future the Heineken Cup would be run commercially by the leagues, by which he means the clubs and that “If the unions do not concede that, there will be no competition.”

This should be read in conjunction with the opaque tag-on paragraph which was in the statement from Dublin last month that “The common aim is to move eventually towards the integration of European competitions within an all-encompassing European rugby framework.”

What the hell that means is anybody’s guess but anyone who views the present dispute without understanding this background, and the desire of the cosy elite to remain cosy, is naive.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/european-rugby/10504828/French-vision-for-European-rugby-will-give-pathway-for-progression.html

by ulster_on_the_up Mon 09 Dec 2013, 05:35

I don't buy into this whole influence by proximity thing.

What if the Swiss have a go at pro rugby - where do we move it to then?

To be fair Switzerland is a great choice as a neutral venue......

Hang on, isn't that the country that borders France, and isn't Geneva that city that lies in the FRENCH cultural region of Switzerland chin

by HammerofThunor Mon 09 Dec 2013, 07:29

ulster_on_the_up wrote:I don't buy into this whole influence by proximity thing.

What if the Swiss have a go at pro rugby - where do we move it to then?

To be fair Switzerland is a great choice as a neutral venue......

Hang on, isn't that the country that borders France, and isn't Geneva that city that lies in the FRENCH cultural region of Switzerland

Good point. It should definitely stay in Ireland.

by ulster_on_the_up Mon 09 Dec 2013, 07:45

To clarify, I don't think it particularly matters where it is based as I can't believe it has any bearing on how the organisation is run.

I just think it cheeky that the French think that location does have an effect on governance so decide to put it somewhere where the assumed effect would benefit them.

by TJ Mon 09 Dec 2013, 07:54

The telegraph article starts with a racist slur and is obviously from a prl mouthpiece.

Disgraceful

by ulster_on_the_up Mon 09 Dec 2013, 08:11

TJ wrote:The telegraph article starts with a racist slur and is obviously from a prl mouthpiece.

Disgraceful

Yes, large swathes of the article are just spiteful bile, I decided not to comment on this as its not worthy of discussion. However, what do you make of the rest of the article - the hearsay, not the insight-less commentary that makes up the other chunk of the piece?

by TJ Mon 09 Dec 2013, 08:29

Rest of it? Nothing new. The french made it clear they considered agreeing HC another year was only transitional and this was agreed in principle by the rest.

A comprehensive review seems reasonable. I am not against widening goverance at all. I am against giving clubs too much power. We now have a year to come up with something sensible. Something that balances the conflicting demands of all and protects the smaller. Hopefully the PRL and RFU will be involved in this and I am not wedded to the ERC.

Goze - a busted flush and a clown

by geoff998rugby Mon 09 Dec 2013, 09:01

The Irish, especially their tame media, hysterically denounce any move away from this convenient arrangement as greedy, knowing full well that their influence will dissipate if this geographical link is severed.

Well that a complete and utter lie for a start.

by whocares Mon 09 Dec 2013, 09:06

ulster_on_the_up wrote:I don't buy into this whole influence by proximity thing.

What if the Swiss have a go at pro rugby - where do we move it to then?

To be fair Switzerland is a great choice as a neutral venue......

Hang on, isn't that the country that borders France, and isn't Geneva that city that lies in the FRENCH cultural region of Switzerland

ha, very funny, keep on the good work. love it when the the "holier than thou" Anglo Celt brigade gets offended by the possibility of moving the european competition HQ from their zone of influence thumbsup

I couldnt give a flying f*** about the location as long as the organisation sole role is to look after the interest of the competition and not get influenced by the local neighbouring unions.

you can move it to Zurich or Vladivostok if that makes you day, Geneva is actually further away from Paris than London.

by maestegmafia Mon 09 Dec 2013, 09:21

whocares wrote:
ulster_on_the_up wrote:I don't buy into this whole influence by proximity thing.

What if the Swiss have a go at pro rugby - where do we move it to then?

To be fair Switzerland is a great choice as a neutral venue......

Hang on, isn't that the country that borders France, and isn't Geneva that city that lies in the FRENCH cultural region of Switzerland

ha, very funny, keep on the good work. love it when the the "holier than thou" Anglo Celt brigade gets offended by the possibility of moving the european competition HQ from their zone of influence I couldnt give a flying f*** about the location as long as the organisation sole role is to look after the interest of the competition and not get influenced by the local neighbouring unions.

you can move it to Zurich or Vladivostok if that makes you day, Geneva is actually further away from Paris than London.

Paris is almost half way between London and Geneva.

by whocares Mon 09 Dec 2013, 09:25

maestegmafia wrote:
whocares wrote:
ulster_on_the_up wrote:I don't buy into this whole influence by proximity thing.

What if the Swiss have a go at pro rugby - where do we move it to then?

To be fair Switzerland is a great choice as a neutral venue......

Hang on, isn't that the country that borders France, and isn't Geneva that city that lies in the FRENCH cultural region of Switzerland

ha, very funny, keep on the good work. love it when the the "holier than thou" Anglo Celt brigade gets offended by the possibility of moving the european competition HQ from their zone of influence I couldnt give a flying f*** about the location as long as the organisation sole role is to look after the interest of the competition and not get influenced by the local neighbouring unions.

you can move it to Zurich or Vladivostok if that makes you day, Geneva is actually further away from Paris than London.
Paris is almost half way between London and Geneva.

London 2h30 by train
Geneva 3h (train gets pretty slow towards the end) thumbsup

anyway why are we discussing this in a rugby thread, I dont think it's that relevant Smile

by TJ Mon 09 Dec 2013, 09:34

So - to move the conversation on away from the bilious. future structures.
Just looking at playing structures and trying to find something fair for all.

Aims:
entertaining cup with good TV value that everyone gets a stake in.
Middle ranking teams (say Edinburgh) fear losing any games with the top teams and really need a shot at the big time every year. Top teams really don't want to play mismatches agaisnt small teams and fear a crowded calendar. Small teams want a shot at some meaningful games they could win and a chance to dream of the big time

My preferred option is a 32 team tournament that splits into cup, bowl and sheild comps but it does have the issue of mismatches and I doubt Leicester (say) would really want to go and play some minor (say Romanian) team away in a mismatch. Expensive as well.

So how about

Top 16 (or 12??) teams (from the previous year) get a bye into the final stages. You can have some limited national protection in this say 2 french / english 1 each the rest.

Next 24 teams play a qualifying tournament early in the season putting 8 teams into the top comp. pools of 3 play each other once everyone gets one home and one away game. Winners go thru remaining 16 teams then play off a trophy. this includes everyone who can scrape a team together - Romania, Georgia, Spain, Russia etc. 40 teams in total ( or 36)

So the 16 byes and the next 8 then play off - groups of 3 home and away. top 8 straight knockout, next 8 play off for rankings for following year / trophy

Obviously you can adjust numbers and formats of the stages.

?????

Everyone gets meaningful games, its a meritocracy, everyone gets a chance to win the whole tournament every year( so answering my concerns of dropping down the tiers never to recover!)

I don't think anyone ends up playing too many games either. No one would play more than the winners now unless someone from the qualifying comp won.

by ulster_on_the_up Mon 09 Dec 2013, 09:37

Whocares,

My point is that the ERC is not influenced anymore by the IRFU than any of the other Unions (I'll grant you it has some influence being a member and all). The only evidence people seem to have to the contrary is based on proximity, as I said:

ulster_on_the_up wrote:To clarify, I don't think it particularly matters where it is based as I can't believe it has any bearing on how the organisation is run.

I just think it cheeky that the French think that location does have an effect on governance so decide to put it somewhere where the assumed effect would benefit them.

by whocares Mon 09 Dec 2013, 09:48

I get your point but there is nothing cheeky in the french position : they see switzerland as a real neutral location while dublin isnt neutral enough for them for the ERC to "evolve" from its current boundary (whatever that means). proximity should not be minimised, there is a lot of lobbying going on in those circles and the french have always felt mistreated in the past ... although I agree that there is no evidence of such collusion to happen regularly and the above mentionned article sometimes borders on libel.

by maestegmafia Mon 09 Dec 2013, 10:06

whocares wrote:I get your point but there is nothing cheeky in the french position : they see switzerland as a real neutral location while dublin isnt neutral enough for them for the ERC to "evolve" from its current boundary (whatever that means). proximity should not be minimised, there is a lot of lobbying going on in those circles and the french have always felt mistreated in the past ... although I agree that there is no evidence of such collusion to happen regularly and the above mentionned article sometimes borders on libel.

It is a well used but very brash line often supplanted by French rugby. Is it also aimed at the six nations and IRB too?

by Irish Londoner Mon 09 Dec 2013, 10:08

"This is evidenced by the fact that in the seventies and eighties France alone annually played Romania, then the leading minor international European team."
Doesn't mention that this was because France entered a team into the FIRA nations cup - which they won seven out of the eight played - you might as well credit the growth of rugby in the USA to the home nations for sending teams to the Churchill Cup.
Incidentally Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Italy have all played more games against Romainia than England.

by SecretFly Mon 09 Dec 2013, 11:30

whocares wrote:I get your point but there is nothing cheeky in the french position : they see switzerland as a real neutral location while dublin isnt neutral enough for them for the ERC to "evolve" from its current boundary (whatever that means). proximity should not be minimised, there is a lot of lobbying going on in those circles and the french have always felt mistreated in the past ... although I agree that there is no evidence of such collusion to happen regularly and the above mentionned article sometimes borders on libel.

Mistreated in what way? Let the French spell it out - there are too many hunches passing off as ready evidence in this debate.

Just what particularly did the French feel they were being mistreated on? That mostly everyone else spoke in English? The French seem to mistrust anything that speaks English but you can't blame English speakers for that - many of us just can't speak French; that's just how it is. So maybe the French always feel the little jokes going down in corridors are all secretly directed at them?

It can't be in structural terms as their participatory numbers have gone up from three in the beginning to six now. How else could a contest be orcestrated to go against them, as with those six sides they then themselves have to do the work on the field? That's their business.

Perhaps it's that suspicion that was doing the rounds a few years ago that somehow refs were helping along certain teams at the expense of the French sides? If that is/was the accusation then out with it - the French should say so officially in public.

A hunch and a feeling isn't good enough to say ERC based in Dublin is a loaded dice in favour of certain sides over others. And certainly an ERC based in Geneva isn't a guarantee that any favouritism would end. My faith in the 'neutrality' of Switzerland wouldn't be at all high, given how they've propped up a myriad of dubious investors with dubious sources of income and no-name accounts over the decades. Highest bidder bluffs might work there much better than they allegedly work in Dublin. Wink

by quinsforever Mon 09 Dec 2013, 12:27

funny article. certainly no more one-eyed than neil Francis or Gerry Thornley's regular missives to be fair, albeit with a different eye.

if there is no advantage to ireland, the irfu or irish club rugby of having the ERC in Dublin, then why does anyone care? france aren't requesting it be moved to France.

if the transition will be to a UEFA style tournament then it is pretty certain that the supervisory body will be moved away from any of the 6N countries. being in the same building as the 6N organisation obviously is not conducive to a "grow-the-game-beyond-the-6N" mentality, which is clearly a founding principle of FIRA-AER.

if that is the price of getting everyone back in a proper european competition then who would resist?

by SecretFly Mon 09 Dec 2013, 12:43

I don't care that it moves... I care that others seem to care that it moves.
So you ask yourself 'why do they care?'
If they have nothing to worry about, why do they want it moved?
If they have something to worry about, spell it out.
If they want it moved closer to them, why?

If it's going to be moved, move it to Norway. Move it to Madrid. Move it to Warsaw.

Geneva is where too many smart suits do dubious business under a nice sky and expensive wine. No, there is nothing 'neutral' about anything that happens in 'Neutral' Switzerland.

And again - another price? My God, the demands and prices for cooperation shift like the Atlantic winds.
It's about meritocracy.
It's about voting rights.
It's about TV money.
It's about not giving in.
It's about the crooked ERC.
It's about tax haven Ireland.
It's about meritocracy.
It's about voting rights........

It's always about somethin except the word that never gets mentioned in polite Genevan circles - power. Wink

by broadlandboy Mon 09 Dec 2013, 12:45

Unfortunately perception is often stronger than reality

by SecretFly Mon 09 Dec 2013, 12:48

...and power is stronger than both, as all parties know only too well - thus the fight.

by Guest Mon 09 Dec 2013, 12:54

quinsforever wrote:funny article. certainly no more one-eyed than neil Francis or Gerry Thornley's regular missives to be fair, albeit with a different eye.

if there is no advantage to ireland, the irfu or irish club rugby of having the ERC in Dublin, then why does anyone care? france aren't requesting it be moved to France.

if the transition will be to a UEFA style tournament then it is pretty certain that the supervisory body will be moved away from any of the 6N countries. being in the same building as the 6N organisation obviously is not conducive to a "grow-the-game-beyond-the-6N" mentality, which is clearly a founding principle of FIRA-AER.

if that is the price of getting everyone back in a proper european competition then who would resist?

Or you could ask if there's no advantage to the French then why should they care? Moving away from the 6N mentality sounds reasonable, but moving away to what? FIRA or French? The French couldn't ask it to be moved to France as they couldn't justify such a move, but the next best thing would be to have it moved to their border. It might be viewed as a symbolic gesture of where the power of European rugby rests. With the French. Lapasset, Camou, Goze and how much influence do the French have in FIRA? Genuine question.

by Sin é Mon 09 Dec 2013, 13:12

Don't Switzerland have a football team?

http://www.sudouest.fr/2013/12/09/chacun-a-fini-par-y-mettre-du-sien-1253538-5103.php

Interview with Camou (part of it translated down here).

You advocate for the creation of a real European federation which would be responsible for organizing the European Cups . Why ?

The European crisis has unveiled a general problem of governance. It was now an international competition run by commercial companies. This system is breathless . It is to build a world with 140 federations, without closing in on itself, with other ambitions than just financial concerns. But it seems to me that in football, the UEFA manages national team competitions but also clubs , including a Champions League has another dimension that our European Cup . I think all clubs meet there .

You fought against the draft Rugby Champions Cup to defend the Celts. But a European Cup without English is it viable?

She has already taken place (note: 1998-1999). Should we give in to ultimatums some whatever their financial power ? Do not forget history, with which we build , and all the European Cup is the Irish provinces. It was they who led the popular fervor in this competition.

Do you think it is still possible to find a way with the English?

Yes, if there is good will . But it was better to lance the boil rather than procrastinate today's problems are also the problems of yesterday .

Edit: Camou is not happy with the English!

In recent weeks the relationship between the two bodies have deteriorated due to the European Cup. This will leave he traces ?

I do not think so. But I want the French rugby in France and speaks French . This negotiation has been infested by foreign interventions (note: English) and English problems.

Maybe Camou wants to get as far away as possible from London, not Dublin!

by Guest Mon 09 Dec 2013, 13:14

My suggestion would be to install FIRA in Dublin and then sit back and watch what happens.......

The eventual war hasn't even got going yet!

by Intotouch Mon 09 Dec 2013, 13:21

I am deeply suspicious of the choice of Switzerland as a location for the ERC.

They wouldn't have to publish any budgets/ expenditure/ accounts any more. This would make it far too open for corruption.

by Sin é Mon 09 Dec 2013, 13:23

Recwatcher wrote:My suggestion would be to install FIRA in Dublin and then sit back and watch what happens.......

The eventual war hasn't even got going yet!

In fairness, as a small nation and a reputation for being fair and looking out for the underdog, Dublin isn't a bad spot to base it.

Most the problems are coming from England & France (the two big boys in the club). The Scots, Irish & Italians were prepared to compromise all along.

by Guest Mon 09 Dec 2013, 13:31

A simple question - who do the Unions think they should play against in a euro competition if the French and English club owners hadn't put their money where their mouth is unlike the Union/administrator employees ?

To hold out for the status quo using arcane statute or head in the sand for so long hasn't done anyone any favours. The stage has been set now for this to run and run.

by broadlandboy Mon 09 Dec 2013, 13:37

Sin é if they were so willing to compromise all along how come it took PRL/LNR giving notice,18 months passing & the prospect of a rival competition before they did?

by lostinwales Mon 09 Dec 2013, 13:40

broadlandboy wrote:Sin é if they were so willing to compromise all along how come it took PRL/LNR giving notice,18 months passing & the prospect of a rival competition before they did?

Cant underestimate the bad feeling that (lack of) process creates - even if the final position is close to what the PRL/LNR wanted - its all just far too late.

by Sin é Mon 09 Dec 2013, 13:42

broadlandboy wrote:Sin é if they were so willing to compromise all along how come it took PRL/LNR giving notice,18 months passing & the prospect of a rival competition before they did?

Because we know that the PRL didn't want compromise in the first place, they wanted to take over the running of the competition.

France didn't have the same issues with the timing of the signing of the agreement. Look at how delayed the French and Welsh Unions own agreements were with their clubs.

This harping on about the negotiations taking so long is just an excuse from the PRL to try and hide the evidence of their own greed.

by SecretFly Mon 09 Dec 2013, 13:56

Give it all to FIFA and the immortal Blatter! Now there's a nice sort of man with street cred in public speaking and shafting little people with a smile Wink

Join football and rugby under one confederation like some of the French clubs do - a Combined Sports Super World Body! And throw in a few of the WWHWWCPBABs...(that's boxing federations, for the acronym bleary eyed folks! Wink

) Now there's a mucho bucks deal that even McCafferty couldn't dream up but I can, coz I'm ambitious.

by mystiroakey Mon 09 Dec 2013, 13:58

I think rugby would have more chance joining up with Women's darts tbh mate

by Sponsored content