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

by mystiroakey Wed 11 Dec 2013, 3:38 pm

"Rugby Union is too complicated to understand to attract a mass audience in the first place."

which is the problem for union fans..

because otherwise league or NFL could overtake rugby and kill it.

Off course the reality is it isnt to complicated and by far the best form, but if union doesn't progress(as at the moment it is by far the biggest global rugby type game) others will over take

by mystiroakey Wed 11 Dec 2013, 3:39 pm

TJ wrote:We can argue the PRL don't want to grow rugby simply by looking at their actions. Football may have more participants but eh gulf between a small eliet and the rest both at international and club level is growing. You would see a AP with 4 or 6 competitive clubs, same in the French league and no one else in the NH able to compete - thats what has happened in football

but the world game(international ) isnt!!

this is the irony you fail to add up!

The international game is getting closer and closer

by Sin é Wed 11 Dec 2013, 3:40 pm

mystiroakey wrote:Ok geoff- so how are we going to grow the game in other nations..

One way is just let it happen in a capitalist approach as we have seen in football. It has grown and grown. It has naturally occured

The way we do things in rugby is very different as we know, but how do we help these other nations out,

we need European cups instead of 6 nations each year.

We need to do something surely!

I mean its all good trying to geta moral high gorund(of which i am not- growing the game is a knock on effect of making more money and expanding the global reach).

But you cant argue that the PRL dont want to grow the game and it will kill rugby if you have no alternative to actually grow rugby.

Because it seems to me all the unions just want the best deals for themselves as well as the PRL does, the difference is that the later incorporates a global approach.

I think the IRB are doing a great job developing 7s which is more likely to attract people to it than the 15 man game.

by Poorfour Wed 11 Dec 2013, 3:41 pm

One last try...

I got rubbished for saying that the PRL has modelled some of its thinking on NFL, but I still think it's true. Different sports, different markets, different measures but the salary cap and the distribution of income by the PRL come from the same thinking as the draft in NFL: the competitiveness and the success of the league is important enough to constrain the clubs that could spend more.

The PRL has also agreed the EPS (which supports international rugby by giving England access to players outside of international windows and also a say in their careers) and the EQP and academy credits systems, both of which favour the development of homegrown English talent. It has an effective working relationship with the RFU. And it has suggested a tournament format that includes a third tier for developing nations.

Their motivation is probably still ultimately profit, and no doubt they would like rugby to be closer to football in terms of the revenue it can command. But there is also a lot to suggest that they recognise the importance of growing the game overall if they want to generate profits at club level - and no hard evidence that they want to do otherwise [1]. Club rugby and international rugby need each other in a way that football has long since left behind. IIRC, English club attendances dropped after the RWC 2011 performance.

If you are worried about the club game in one country damaging things for the rest of the game, why is there so little said about France? The FFR and LNR don't get on and resort to blackmailing each other every time contracts have to be renewed, the Top 14 schedule puts pressure on the global season, the Top 14 salary cap makes life harder for everyone (including the French clubs).

And yet it seems that Celtic unions and fans would rather side with France than England. Why is that?

[1] Apart from analogy to football and Fly's ability to read McCafferty's mind, that is.

by mystiroakey Wed 11 Dec 2013, 3:41 pm

Sin é wrote:
mystiroakey wrote:Ok geoff- so how are we going to grow the game in other nations..

One way is just let it happen in a capitalist approach as we have seen in football. It has grown and grown. It has naturally occured

The way we do things in rugby is very different as we know, but how do we help these other nations out,

we need European cups instead of 6 nations each year.

We need to do something surely!

I mean its all good trying to geta moral high gorund(of which i am not- growing the game is a knock on effect of making more money and expanding the global reach).

But you cant argue that the PRL dont want to grow the game and it will kill rugby if you have no alternative to actually grow rugby.

Because it seems to me all the unions just want the best deals for themselves as well as the PRL does, the difference is that the later incorporates a global approach.

I think the IRB are doing a great job developing 7s which is more likely to attract people to it than the 15 man game.

like 20/20 in cricket,

nopt sure how either form is going to work for the main formats of the game..

they are becoming different sports, not development sports

by Poorfour Wed 11 Dec 2013, 3:43 pm

One last try...

I got rubbished for saying that the PRL has modelled some of its thinking on NFL, but I still think it's true. Different sports, different markets, different measures but the salary cap and the distribution of income by the PRL come from the same thinking as the draft in NFL: the competitiveness and the success of the league is important enough to constrain the clubs that could spend more.

The PRL has also agreed the EPS (which supports international rugby by giving England access to players outside of international windows and also a say in their careers) and the EQP and academy credits systems, both of which favour the development of homegrown English talent. It has an effective working relationship with the RFU. And it has suggested a tournament format that includes a third tier for developing nations.

Their motivation is probably still ultimately profit, and no doubt they would like rugby to be closer to football in terms of the revenue it can command. But there is also a lot to suggest that they recognise the importance of growing the game overall if they want to generate profits at club level - and no hard evidence that they want to do otherwise [1]. Club rugby and international rugby need each other in a way that football has long since left behind. IIRC, English club attendances dropped after the RWC 2011 performance.

If you are worried about the club game in one country damaging things for the rest of the game, why is there so little said about France? The FFR and LNR don't get on and resort to blackmailing each other every time contracts have to be renewed, the Top 14 schedule puts pressure on the global season, the Top 14 salary cap makes life harder for everyone (including the French clubs).

And yet it seems that Celtic unions and fans would rather side with France than England. Why is that?

[1] Apart from analogy to football and Fly's ability to read McCafferty's mind, that is.

by **profitius** Wed 11 Dec 2013, 3:45 pm

http://www.rugbyworld.com/news/blogs/top-14-french-rugbys-continued-in-fighting/?utm_content=buffer40169&utm_source=buffer&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Buffer

Anyone see this article? Among other things it says the LNR have already signed a 4 years deal with the FFR which among other things means they are committed to the HEC

by TJ Wed 11 Dec 2013, 3:51 pm

What evidence is there that the PRL want to expand the game? when do english clubs or the england team play in minor nations? Remeber the PRLs refusal to allow the Fijian players to play in a celebration match?The PRL want what is best for the PRL and that is all. Understand that fact.

Yes france causes some of the same problems for everyone else - but they are kept in check by a strong union. the RFU are unwilling to keep the PRL in check. anyway two wrongs do not make a right

by mystiroakey Wed 11 Dec 2013, 3:52 pm

Profitius

WEll we knew it was a bluff,

we knew the French would play and we all knew the AP teams wouldn't.

Not sure what the big deal is. You cant ever trust what the French say when rugby is talked about

Poor wrote:And yet it seems that Celtic unions and fans would rather side with France than England. Why is that?

I would also like to know.

Again poor your post is flawless, sums up my thoughts with much better english skillz.

by mystiroakey Wed 11 Dec 2013, 3:54 pm

TJ wrote:What evidence is there that the PRL want to expand the game? when do english clubs or the england team play in minor nations? Remeber the PRLs refusal to allow the Fijian players to play in a celebration match?The PRL want what is best for the PRL and that is all. Understand that fact.

Yes france causes some of the same problems for everyone else - but they are kept in check by a strong union. the RFU are unwilling to keep the PRL in check. anyway two wrongs do not make a right

thats where the money is-

the prl are clubs looking to earn money- they need a larger global reach for that to happen, the RFU is a union and cares about the national team, they try and play the games that will not only earn them the most money but more importantly the best test

not sure you understand the difference between the PRL and the RFU mate!

by broadlandboy Wed 11 Dec 2013, 3:55 pm

You say under the PRL proposal that no new pro clubs would stand a chance. Well under ERC we have seen a reduction in top tier clubs in all Rabo Unions apart from Ireland to fit in with ERC places

by AsLongAsBut100ofUs Wed 11 Dec 2013, 3:58 pm

broadlandboy wrote:You say under the PRL proposal that no new pro clubs would stand a chance. Well under ERC we have seen a reduction in top tier clubs in all Rabo Unions apart from Ireland to fit in with ERC places

Simply not true. The two Scottish pro sides that have fallen by the wayside had nothing to do with ERC places whatsoever

by TJ Wed 11 Dec 2013, 4:01 pm

mystiroakey wrote:
TJ wrote:What evidence is there that the PRL want to expand the game? when do english clubs or the england team play in minor nations? Remeber the PRLs refusal to allow the Fijian players to play in a celebration match?The PRL want what is best for the PRL and that is all. Understand that fact.

Yes france causes some of the same problems for everyone else - but they are kept in check by a strong union. the RFU are unwilling to keep the PRL in check. anyway two wrongs do not make a right

thats where the money is-

the prl are clubs looking to earn money- they need a larger global reach for that to happen, the RFU is a union and cares about the national team, they try and play the games that will not only earn them the most money but more importantly the best test

not sure you understand the difference between the PRL and the RFU mate!

Evidence of the PRL wanting to expand the game please - not platitudes on paper. real actions. You claim the PRL want to expand the game. I say this is bogus and gave some pointers. Now come on - if the PRL ant to expand the game ( not the same as expanding their market) then show us something concrete they have done!

by geoff998rugby Wed 11 Dec 2013, 4:02 pm

What would I do

Internationally
Make the 2nd tier of the 6N an annual event.
Then have a play off between the bottom team of the 1st tier and the top team of the 2nd tier.
Some sort of parachute payment for the 1st tier team to cover International loses.
(There is no point killing Professioanl rugby in Scotland or Italy whilst boosting it in Rumania and Georgia)
All 6N countries play at least 1 AI against a 2nd tier team. This could be outside the AI window with weaker first tier teams, with Unions agreeing no more than x players from a particular club

Club/Provincial/League level
Enforced salary caps
Minimum number of players from the country the team plays in
Guaranteed places in the second tier of European competition for a country with a full professional league (I think it is a farce Georgia and Russia do not have teams im Amlin)
Scrap the +1 for the HC from a play off place and make it a +1 for the winners of the 2nd tier of European competition. So essentially 6/6/7+1 as outlined by the Union at the end of October but the +1 being different.
Targetted programs of support for those countries in the 6N 2nd tier who do not have fully professional leagues - currently Portugal, Spain, Belgium

Do all that and we wil be making real steps to expand the game at both a national and a local level without letting clubs dictate and players just gravitating to the big bucks clubs.

Bit of a fag packet job but you get the idea

by SecretFly Wed 11 Dec 2013, 4:03 pm

mystiroakey wrote:there is a reason why we all drink coke, there is a reason why we all use microsoft OS's and buy apple phones.

there is a reason why the CL is the best cup in the world, there is a reason why the PL is the best sporting league in the world.

understand the way business works and of the back we also get quality.

There is a reason why nations export and import

And I couldn't give a f**k about any of them except rugby Wink

The way you talk about 'success' in money terms Mystir, well, if the money success of your favourite club is all that would make you drool then perhaps the reason for sport really has died.

I know the biggest events in sport have mostly all become Disney events - all razzle, dazzle, fireworks and a bloody new stadium built for every event shyte! But can you really tell me the actual 'sport' involved in let's say the last football world cup was anything you'd remember for the rest of your life in terms of quality?

I seem to recall Spain do a lot of this: Pass to him, pass to him, pass to him, pass to him, lose the ball, get it back,pass to him, pass to him, closer to the goal, pass to him, pass to him, pass to him, moving away from the goal, pass to him, pass to him, cigarette break, pass to him, pass to him, closer to goal again, pass to him, pass it back, pass it on!, pass it over!!!, pass it back!!!!!!!!, pass it over his head!!!!!!!!!!!, pass it on!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! pass it, pass it, pass it, pass it, pass it, pass it GOAL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Thank Christ for that - they could'a done all that in just two passes!

Oh but the WC show Did make a profit - success all round then.

by SecretFly Wed 11 Dec 2013, 4:05 pm

broadlandboy wrote:You say under the PRL proposal that no new pro clubs would stand a chance. Well under ERC we have seen a reduction in top tier clubs in all Rabo Unions apart from Ireland to fit in with ERC places

Explain that one in more detail if you could, broadland boy?

by **Notch** Wed 11 Dec 2013, 4:07 pm

TJ wrote:
mystiroakey wrote:
TJ wrote:What evidence is there that the PRL want to expand the game? when do english clubs or the england team play in minor nations? Remeber the PRLs refusal to allow the Fijian players to play in a celebration match?The PRL want what is best for the PRL and that is all. Understand that fact.

Yes france causes some of the same problems for everyone else - but they are kept in check by a strong union. the RFU are unwilling to keep the PRL in check. anyway two wrongs do not make a right

thats where the money is-

the prl are clubs looking to earn money- they need a larger global reach for that to happen, the RFU is a union and cares about the national team, they try and play the games that will not only earn them the most money but more importantly the best test

not sure you understand the difference between the PRL and the RFU mate!

Evidence of the PRL wanting to expand the game please - not platitudes on paper. real actions. You claim the PRL want to expand the game. I say this is bogus and gave some pointers. Now come on - if the PRL ant to expand the game ( not the same as expanding their market) then show us something concrete they have done!

PRLs idea of expanding the game is a lot of people in upcoming rugby countries wearing the replica shirts of various English club sides and paying to watch their rugby, and bringing in the few top players from that country if they are good.

It doesn't have much to do with building sustainable professional structures that can allow them to keep their best players, and in terms of international rugby they don't care at all except to be a bit annoyed if they have to release players.

by AsLongAsBut100ofUs Wed 11 Dec 2013, 4:07 pm

Poorfour wrote:One last try...

I got rubbished for saying that the PRL has modelled some of its thinking on NFL, but I still think it's true. Different sports, different markets, different measures but the salary cap and the distribution of income by the PRL come from the same thinking as the draft in NFL: the competitiveness and the success of the league is important enough to constrain the clubs that could spend more.

The PRL has also agreed the EPS (which supports international rugby by giving England access to players outside of international windows and also a say in their careers) and the EQP and academy credits systems, both of which favour the development of homegrown English talent. It has an effective working relationship with the RFU. And it has suggested a tournament format that includes a third tier for developing nations.

Their motivation is probably still ultimately profit, and no doubt they would like rugby to be closer to football in terms of the revenue it can command. But there is also a lot to suggest that they recognise the importance of growing the game overall if they want to generate profits at club level - and no hard evidence that they want to do otherwise [1]. Club rugby and international rugby need each other in a way that football has long since left behind. IIRC, English club attendances dropped after the RWC 2011 performance.

If you are worried about the club game in one country damaging things for the rest of the game, why is there so little said about France? The FFR and LNR don't get on and resort to blackmailing each other every time contracts have to be renewed, the Top 14 schedule puts pressure on the global season, the Top 14 salary cap makes life harder for everyone (including the French clubs).

And yet it seems that Celtic unions and fans would rather side with France than England. Why is that?

[1] Apart from analogy to football and Fly's ability to read McCafferty's mind, that is.

Well, more like two last tries!! Wink

Nobody 'rubbished' your NFL comparison, merely pointed out its weaknesses and disagreed with you - that's what forums like this are for. The PRL does many things well for the pro game in England (some of which you have listed above, some of which if we're honest are not worth much, ie academy credits), but there are many things wrong with its operation too. It is far from a perfect beast. It is to its credit that they offered up a competition structure which enfranchised the clubs of tier two nations - how truly practical the suggestion was is another matter altogether tho. I hope that the ERC or its successor organisation pursue a similar objective.

You are right to say that the LNR should be considered in the same light - I have no desire to see with club organisation, either separately or together, have control over pan-European club competition tho. Sure they should have a say, but not control (and in reality, that is all that remains in dispute with the PRL alone - note that the LNR are back 'in'). I have no great wish to see the SRU side with the LNR, it just so happens that they are, for the time being, sat on the same side of the table - who knows how long that will last. I do care about the state of the game in smaller, less wealthy countries, tho in general, and remain committed to the view that certain proposals will only serve to do it long-lasting, probably irrevocable, damage. Lastly, I don't want rugby to be anything like professional football.

by geoff998rugby Wed 11 Dec 2013, 4:11 pm

+1 Notch

by Dubbelyew L Overate Wed 11 Dec 2013, 4:12 pm

TJ wrote:What evidence is there that the PRL want to expand the game? when do english clubs or the england team play in minor nations? Remeber the PRLs refusal to allow the Fijian players to play in a celebration match?The PRL want what is best for the PRL and that is all. Understand that fact.

Yes france causes some of the same problems for everyone else - but they are kept in check by a strong union. the RFU are unwilling to keep the PRL in check. anyway two wrongs do not make a right

This season, London Irish have played in Portugal and Newcastle in Romania. is that what you mean? Or perhaps the Churchill Cup, for many years organised and funded (thanks to Sky) by RFU, until the IRB international schedule took over? Or Saracens affiliations to clubs worldwide? Or PRL's organisation and funding of the World Club 7's this summer? Or, indeed, the proposed 3rd tier in PRL/LNR's now defunct RRC proposals? Or AP clubs taking fixtures abroad (sometimes unsuccessfully)?

by HammerofThunor Wed 11 Dec 2013, 4:12 pm

geoff998rugby wrote:What would I do

Internationally
Make the 2nd tier of the 6N an annual event. It already is isn't it? It's a two year long, home and away competition, I think
Then have a play off between the bottom team of the 1st tier and the top team of the 2nd tier.I would do it over two years
Some sort of parachute payment for the 1st tier team to cover International loses.(There is no point killing Professioanl rugby in Scotland or Italy whilst boosting it in Rumania and Georgia)[gasp of horror]But you're just effectively ring-fencing aren't you. Makes sense
All 6N countries play at least 1 AI against a 2nd tier team. This could be outside the AI window with weaker first tier teams, with Unions agreeing no more than x players from a particular club

Club/Provincial/League level
Enforced salary caps How would you account for Central Contracts? Good luck getting one the French would agree to without being irrelevant to the rest. Note that the Scottish salary budget is the same as the Englihs base salary cap (note including academy allowance and Marquee)
Minimum number of players from the country the team plays in No problem with that, but the French would never agree
Guaranteed places in the second tier of European competition for a country with a full professional league (I think it is a farce Georgia and Russia do not have teams im Amlin) Fair
Scrap the +1 for the HC from a play off place and make it a +1 for the winners of the 2nd tier of European competition. So essentially 6/6/7+1 as outlined by the Union at the end of October but the +1 being different. Again, fair
Targetted programs of support for those countries in the 6N 2nd tier who do not have fully professional leagues - currently Portugal, Spain, Belgium Do you mean financial? Or some sort of buddy/twinning type thing?

Do all that and we wil be making real steps to expand the game at both a national and a local level without letting clubs dictate and players just gravitating to the big bucks clubs.

Bit of a fag packet job but you get the idea

by SecretFly Wed 11 Dec 2013, 4:14 pm

[quote="AsLongAsBut100ofUs"]

Poorfour wrote:One last try...

I got rubbished for saying that the PRL has modelled some of its thinking on NFL, but I still think it's true. Different sports, different markets, different measures but the salary cap and the distribution of income by the PRL come from the same thinking as the draft in NFL: the competitiveness and the success of the league is important enough to constrain the clubs that could spend more.

The PRL has also agreed the EPS (which supports international rugby by giving England access to players outside of international windows and also a say in their careers) and the EQP and academy credits systems, both of which favour the development of homegrown English talent. It has an effective working relationship with the RFU. And it has suggested a tournament format that includes a third tier for developing nations.

Their motivation is probably still ultimately profit, and no doubt they would like rugby to be closer to football in terms of the revenue it can command. But there is also a lot to suggest that they recognise the importance of growing the game overall if they want to generate profits at club level - and no hard evidence that they want to do otherwise [1]. Club rugby and international rugby need each other in a way that football has long since left behind. IIRC, English club attendances dropped after the RWC 2011 performance.

If you are worried about the club game in one country damaging things for the rest of the game, why is there so little said about France? The FFR and LNR don't get on and resort to blackmailing each other every time contracts have to be renewed, the Top 14 schedule puts pressure on the global season, the Top 14 salary cap makes life harder for everyone (including the French clubs).

And yet it seems that Celtic unions and fans would rather side with France than England. Why is that?

[1] Apart from analogy to football and Fly's ability to read McCafferty's mind, that is.

I'd say the answer to that one was that the English slept with the French first. We don't like getting into bed with Used goods?

You might put your question this way; "Why are we the enemy when we had France hold you down as we stabbed you?" Emmmmmmmmm - why indeed.

On the other point about McCaff...he made the analogy to football...and the American popcorn brand. I didn't have to use mind control to get that out of him... Spock's mind control gig can be tiring so I was glad he just came out and said it.

by TJ Wed 11 Dec 2013, 4:18 pm

Dubbelyew L Overate wrote:
TJ wrote:What evidence is there that the PRL want to expand the game? when do english clubs or the england team play in minor nations? Remeber the PRLs refusal to allow the Fijian players to play in a celebration match?The PRL want what is best for the PRL and that is all. Understand that fact.

Yes france causes some of the same problems for everyone else - but they are kept in check by a strong union. the RFU are unwilling to keep the PRL in check. anyway two wrongs do not make a right

This season, London Irish have played in Portugal and Newcastle in Romania. is that what you mean? Or perhaps the Churchill Cup, for many years organised and funded (thanks to Sky) by RFU, until the IRB international schedule took over? Or Saracens affiliations to clubs worldwide? Or PRL's organisation and funding of the World Club 7's this summer? Or, indeed, the proposed 3rd tier in PRL/LNR's now defunct RRC proposals? Or AP clubs taking fixtures abroad (sometimes unsuccessfully)?

Exactly the sort of thing I mean ( london Irish games especially). Does Saracens actually do anything but take players? i don't know.

Its not much is it. Scotland played in the pacific islands this year. Cost us money not made us any I guess - but made us a lot of friends and helped the island nations. Glasgow released Matowalo for the fijian game - and it was at a cost to them - but the PRL refused to let fijians go. But it is nice to hear about some positive things even tho they are not a huge amount and certainly do not match the rhetoric

by mystiroakey Wed 11 Dec 2013, 4:18 pm

TJ wrote:
mystiroakey wrote:
TJ wrote:What evidence is there that the PRL want to expand the game? when do english clubs or the england team play in minor nations? Remeber the PRLs refusal to allow the Fijian players to play in a celebration match?The PRL want what is best for the PRL and that is all. Understand that fact.

Yes france causes some of the same problems for everyone else - but they are kept in check by a strong union. the RFU are unwilling to keep the PRL in check. anyway two wrongs do not make a right

thats where the money is-

the prl are clubs looking to earn money- they need a larger global reach for that to happen, the RFU is a union and cares about the national team, they try and play the games that will not only earn them the most money but more importantly the best test

not sure you understand the difference between the PRL and the RFU mate!

Evidence of the PRL wanting to expand the game please - not platitudes on paper. real actions. You claim the PRL want to expand the game. I say this is bogus and gave some pointers. Now come on - if the PRL ant to expand the game ( not the same as expanding their market) then show us something concrete they have done!

not sure if you have a really bad comprehension issue TJ
]
but try and read what i have repeated over and over again.

Take your time,

I haven't once said the PRL want to expand the game- I have said its a knock on effect from expanding there global reach.

by mystiroakey Wed 11 Dec 2013, 4:19 pm

SecretFly wrote:
mystiroakey wrote:there is a reason why we all drink coke, there is a reason why we all use microsoft OS's and buy apple phones.

there is a reason why the CL is the best cup in the world, there is a reason why the PL is the best sporting league in the world.

understand the way business works and of the back we also get quality.

There is a reason why nations export and import

And I couldn't give a f**k about any of them except rugby

The way you talk about 'success' in money terms Mystir, well, if the money success of your favourite club is all that would make you drool then perhaps the reason for sport really has died.

I know the biggest events in sport have mostly all become Disney events - all razzle, dazzle, fireworks and a bloody new stadium built for every event shyte! But can you really tell me the actual 'sport' involved in let's say the last football world cup was anything you'd remember for the rest of your life in terms of quality?

I seem to recall Spain do a lot of this: Pass to him, pass to him, pass to him, pass to him, lose the ball, get it back,pass to him, pass to him, closer to the goal, pass to him, pass to him, pass to him, moving away from the goal, pass to him, pass to him, cigarette break, pass to him, pass to him, closer to goal again, pass to him, pass it back, pass it on!, pass it over!!!, pass it back!!!!!!!!, pass it over his head!!!!!!!!!!!, pass it on!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! pass it, pass it, pass it, pass it, pass it, pass it GOAL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Thank Christ for that - they could'a done all that in just two passes!

Oh but the WC show Did make a profit - success all round then.

well you have just shown your self up for not appreciating quality football and you have no idea what the best method of defence is.

by TJ Wed 11 Dec 2013, 4:22 pm

mystiroakey wrote:

I haven't once said the PRL want to expand the game- I have said its a knock on effect from expanding there global reach.

right - so please explain how this miracle could happen. You think African boys wearing sarcens shirts and paying to watch AP matches will suddenly mean more pro players in african nations? I'd love to hear how this will work. It hasn't in football - indeed the opposite is true

by mystiroakey Wed 11 Dec 2013, 4:25 pm

TJ wrote:
mystiroakey wrote:

I haven't once said the PRL want to expand the game- I have said its a knock on effect from expanding there global reach.

right - so please explain how this miracle could happen. You think African boys wearing sarcens Poopie and paying to watch AP matches will suddenly mean more pro players in african nations? I'd love to hear how this will work. It hasn't in football - indeed the opposite is true

The most inaccurate post of the year.

It couldn't be more flawed

But thanks it made me laugh.

by geoff998rugby Wed 11 Dec 2013, 4:26 pm

Hammer thanks for comments.

All I was trying to illustrate was that there are real avenues that could be persuade to widen the game in Europe.

As you intermate the probable show stopper are the big clubs in France and England, who are already too powerful and would block such moves.
Sadly, for me , that is the root cause of our current malaise not withstanding the fact that the Unions do deserve a kick up the backside for being too conservative in progressing.

by TJ Wed 11 Dec 2013, 4:27 pm

So actually you have no reasoning behind this at all. You make assertions you shold be able to explain them. Using the example of football I can see the opposite is true - so please explain how

I haven't once said the PRL want to expand the game- I have said its a knock on effect from expanding there global reach.

will work.
can you?

by SecretFly Wed 11 Dec 2013, 4:28 pm

Mystir, that wasn't quality football...that was shyte passing itself off as quality football. That was a joke; especially given that the opposition most times were never strong enough for the the pass, pass, pass snooze, pass game to be needed. Great footballers no doubt!...snooze inducing football.

If you think that's classic football, then it's you who have a short memory of what real classic football looks like.

But anyway, the point is BEST is relative. You think it means big money (PL), I say it means most exciting stuff on a field.

Oh and my team play one of Europe's best methods of defence Wink

by Dubbelyew L Overate Wed 11 Dec 2013, 4:28 pm

TJ wrote:
Dubbelyew L Overate wrote:
TJ wrote:What evidence is there that the PRL want to expand the game? when do english clubs or the england team play in minor nations? Remeber the PRLs refusal to allow the Fijian players to play in a celebration match?The PRL want what is best for the PRL and that is all. Understand that fact.

Yes france causes some of the same problems for everyone else - but they are kept in check by a strong union. the RFU are unwilling to keep the PRL in check. anyway two wrongs do not make a right

This season, London Irish have played in Portugal and Newcastle in Romania. is that what you mean? Or perhaps the Churchill Cup, for many years organised and funded (thanks to Sky) by RFU, until the IRB international schedule took over? Or Saracens affiliations to clubs worldwide? Or PRL's organisation and funding of the World Club 7's this summer? Or, indeed, the proposed 3rd tier in PRL/LNR's now defunct RRC proposals? Or AP clubs taking fixtures abroad (sometimes unsuccessfully)?

Exactly the sort of thing I mean ( london Irish games especially). Does Saracens actually do anything but take players? i don't know.

Its not much is it. Scotland played in the pacific islands this year. Cost us money not made us any I guess - but made us a lot of friends and helped the island nations. Glasgow released Matowalo for the fijian game - and it was at a cost to them - but the PRL refused to let fijians go. But it is nice to hear about some positive things even tho they are not a huge amount and certainly do not match the rhetoric

I don't think there has been much rhetoric about growing the game from PRL, in the sense of broadening the scope. There has been here on 606, much of it from me. PRL have talked about growing financially, and there was that 3rd tier proposal, but they've been very quiet about that. If you can provide any links that prove me wrong, I'll happily retract.

by Poorfour Wed 11 Dec 2013, 4:29 pm

TJ wrote:What evidence is there that the PRL want to expand the game? when do english clubs or the england team play in minor nations? Remeber the PRLs refusal to allow the Fijian players to play in a celebration match?The PRL want what is best for the PRL and that is all. Understand that fact.

Yes france causes some of the same problems for everyone else - but they are kept in check by a strong union. the RFU are unwilling to keep the PRL in check. anyway two wrongs do not make a right

The evidence is in proposing a 3rd tier of European competition - which is a meaningful action given what they can control. Probably it's about building viewer bases and therefore revenues from the 3rd tier nations, but the side effect would be developing the game (and the money to do that has to come from somewhere).

They can't control when the England team play a minor nation (though I would argue that - until the Trinations became the RC - the RFU did more than most to give Argentina, a nation without even a professional domestic league, regular game time), and there isn't much opportunity in the schedule for club-vs-country games though individual clubs have done that. Quins, for example, gave Samoa a warm-up game before the 2007 RWC and, IIRC, the Samoan union kept the gate receipts.

I don't have the bee in the bonnet over Fiji-Barbarians that you do, TJ. It may have been their 100th match, but it was against the Barbarians and outside the international window. NH clubs didn't release many players for the BaaBaas either. And why should they? Suppose a club released a player and lost a game that they could have won because of it, and that game led to relegation, or missing out on the HEC or playoffs? That would affect a whole squad's careers for the sake of tradition.

I am a fan of the Barbarians as they once were, but today's setup is a shadow of that. It's a throwback to an amateur era that hasn't been properly thought through in the modern professional era. It either needs a proper slot in the international window, or it will eventually die.

by TJ Wed 11 Dec 2013, 4:31 pm

Dubbelyew L Overate

fair enough. dunno who said what now.

by TJ Wed 11 Dec 2013, 4:37 pm

Poorfour - I merely use the Fijian barbarians match as an example of the difference in attitude that belies the crys from some quarters of the PRL being magnanimous and wanted to expand the game. this shows their actions do not match this rhetoric.

It could have cost Glasgow - Matwalo is a crucial player for them. But they let him go anyway because its the right thing to do. The prl refused to let any fijians play. Its indicative of the attitude. Only the PRL matters to the PRL

by HammerofThunor Wed 11 Dec 2013, 4:38 pm

geoff998rugby wrote:Hammer thanks for comments.

All I was trying to illustrate was that there are real avenues that could be persuade to widen the game in Europe.

As you intermate the probable show stopper are the big clubs in France and England, who are already too powerful and would block such moves.
Sadly, for me , that is the root cause of our current malaise not withstanding the fact that the Unions do deserve a kick up the backside for being too conservative in progressing.

Thing is the clubs in England and France are on a completely different level. In England all the clubs aim for an average limit of foreign players to 8 (most have less than this) per match day squad. This is the same as the current limit in Wales (for the whole squad in that case). So not that much different. The salary cap is comparable to the Scottish playing budget and is less than the Regions were spending before they pulled the purse strings shut (been there done that not going into it again). No idea how much the Irish spend on their squad or how to consider salary caps but it's not going to be that different. The only English guys who want to push the salary cap are (you guessed it) Wray and Craig and they're kept at bay by everyone else.

So over all I think a reasonable agreement could be met across all the British and Irish areas. But in France? Not a chance.

by Dubbelyew L Overate Wed 11 Dec 2013, 4:47 pm

geoff998rugby wrote:Hammer thanks for comments.

All I was trying to illustrate was that there are real avenues that could be persuade to widen the game in Europe.

As you intermate the probable show stopper are the big clubs in France and England, who are already too powerful and would block such moves.
Sadly, for me , that is the root cause of our current malaise not withstanding the fact that the Unions do deserve a kick up the backside for being too conservative in progressing.

Geoff, you made excellent suggestions, as did Hammer. I'd add a European Cup in lieu of 6N once in a 4 year cycle (or perhaps twice).

I disagree with your showstopper, though. I think it's 6N and ERC that have been stifling European growth, and, with respect to ERC, Lapasset does too (damn this Euromess for making me agree with a Frenchman). The individual Unions do not have a responsibility to grow the game outside their borders, their responsibility is to the game within their borders and 6N and ERC reflect that introspection. IRB has the responsibility to grow the game globally, and FIRA-AER, presumably, for growing in Europe. FIRA-AER are effectively handicapped by 6N and ERC ringfencing the professional game at international and club level respectively.

It's encouraging that FIRA-AER may be foisted upon us, because it promises the prospect of encouraging the broadening and growth of the game across Europe. There is fine balance to be struck, though, between sustaining established professionalism, and feeding that growth.

by HammerofThunor Wed 11 Dec 2013, 4:54 pm

I'm willing for england to take a hit in order to grow the game outside of the 6 Nations.

Regarding club rugby, it should either be the 'best' teams or it should have representatives from all across Europe. Currently it's neither.

Also, I believe one of the better Russian sides is based quite close to Mongolia. Proper European rugby Shocked

by mystiroakey Wed 11 Dec 2013, 4:57 pm

SecretFly wrote:Mystir, that wasn't quality football...that was shyte passing itself off as quality football. That was a joke; especially given that the opposition most times were never strong enough for the the pass, pass, pass snooze, pass game to be needed. Great footballers no doubt!...snooze inducing football.

If you think that's classic football, then it's you who have a short memory of what real classic football looks like.

But anyway, the point is BEST is relative. You think it means big money (PL), I say it means most exciting stuff on a field.

Massive falacy there SF-

The PL is the most exiting league out there.

I have no idea why you keep bringing money in to this. I haven't once said it should all be about money- IF you would like to quote me on this or be honest and admit you are just lieing that would help the debate more along.

and spains quality, although not up to the spectacle of the PL is of the highest quality you could think of. Luckily there are many other teams with other philosophies of playing the game, like germany and brazil and argentina that dont just provide quality but also high levels of entertainment.

by TJ Wed 11 Dec 2013, 5:03 pm

The premier league is the highest quality? the most exciting? I don't think so. an awful lot of mediocre football. I

by mystiroakey Wed 11 Dec 2013, 5:08 pm

"The premier league is the highest quality?"

who said that??

can you stop putting words in other s mouths- Its becoming ridiculous

Its the most exiting yes.

Your head is in the clouds if you think it isnt.

Great league, and worldly recognised AS THE the most exiting league in the world,

quality not quite up there with teams like bayen or Madrid but overall there is much more competition throughout the league. The leagues in germany and spain are heavily front loaded.

by Poorfour Wed 11 Dec 2013, 5:14 pm

TJ wrote:Poorfour - I merely use the Fijian barbarians match as an example of the difference in attitude that belies the crys from some quarters of the PRL being magnanimous and wanted to expand the game. this shows their actions do not match this rhetoric.

It could have cost Glasgow - Matwalo is a crucial player for them. But they let him go anyway because its the right thing to do. The prl refused to let any fijians play. Its indicative of the attitude. Only the PRL matters to the PRL

That's a weak argument, though, TJ. Well done Glasgow (though no threat of relegation or not qualfying for Europe makes it a different situation from that of most AP teams), but it's one isolated incident where "wanting to expand the game" would be actively detrimental to the teams' own interests, for little actual benefit to Fiji. That's very different from a strategic commitment to help develop the game more widely.

by TJ Wed 11 Dec 2013, 5:17 pm

TJ wrote:So actually you have no reasoning behind this at all. You make assertions you shold be able to explain them. Using the example of football I can see the opposite is true - so please explain how
I haven't once said the PRL want to expand the game- I have said its a knock on effect from expanding there global reach.
will work.
can you?

This mystri?
Can you explain how this will work.

by TJ Wed 11 Dec 2013, 5:17 pm

Poorfour wrote:
TJ wrote:Poorfour - I merely use the Fijian barbarians match as an example of the difference in attitude that belies the crys from some quarters of the PRL being magnanimous and wanted to expand the game. this shows their actions do not match this rhetoric.

It could have cost Glasgow - Matwalo is a crucial player for them. But they let him go anyway because its the right thing to do. The prl refused to let any fijians play. Its indicative of the attitude. Only the PRL matters to the PRL

That's a weak argument, though, TJ. Well done Glasgow (though no threat of relegation or not qualfying for Europe makes it a different situation from that of most AP teams), but it's one isolated incident where "wanting to expand the game" would be actively detrimental to the teams' own interests, for little actual benefit to Fiji. That's very different from a strategic commitment to help develop the game more widely.

It is indicative tho isn't it. That could have been a fantasic celebration of fijian rugby but the PRL ruined it

by mystiroakey Wed 11 Dec 2013, 5:19 pm

TJ wrote:
TJ wrote:So actually you have no reasoning behind this at all. You make assertions you shold be able to explain them. Using the example of football I can see the opposite is true - so please explain how
I haven't once said the PRL want to expand the game- I have said its a knock on effect from expanding there global reach.
will work.
can you?

This mystri?
Can you explain how this will work.

the more people that are introduced to a sport and watch sport the more people on the back of that play the sport.

its at a base level of logic and shouldn't need to be explained

by R!skysports Wed 11 Dec 2013, 5:20 pm

mystiroakey wrote:
SecretFly wrote:Mystir, that wasn't quality football...that was shyte passing itself off as quality football. That was a joke; especially given that the opposition most times were never strong enough for the the pass, pass, pass snooze, pass game to be needed. Great footballers no doubt!...snooze inducing football.

If you think that's classic football, then it's you who have a short memory of what real classic football looks like.

But anyway, the point is BEST is relative. You think it means big money (PL), I say it means most exciting stuff on a field.

Massive falacy there SF-

The PL is the most exiting league out there.

I have no idea why you keep bringing money in to this. I haven't once said it should all be about money- IF you would like to quote me on this or be honest and admit you are just lieing that would help the debate more along.

and spains quality, although not up to the spectacle of the PL is of the highest quality you could think of. Luckily there are many other teams with other philosophies of playing the game, like germany and brazil and argentina that dont just provide quality but also high levels of entertainment.

this is a myth promoted by the media, who are selling the PL - so hardly a fair judge

they used to say it was the best quality too, until it was shown to be a terrible brand of kick it long and then kick the player :-)

by TJ Wed 11 Dec 2013, 5:24 pm

mystiroakey wrote:
TJ wrote:
TJ wrote:So actually you have no reasoning behind this at all. You make assertions you shold be able to explain them. Using the example of football I can see the opposite is true - so please explain how
I haven't once said the PRL want to expand the game- I have said its a knock on effect from expanding there global reach.
will work.
can you?

This mystri?
Can you explain how this will work.

the more people that are introduced to a sport and watch sport the more people on the back of that play the sport.

its at a base level of logic and shouldn't need to be explained

That makes sense only at the amatuer level 0 and even then its very thin if it applies at all.

Now come on - some real explanation as to how this will advance the pro game? It sounds very much like the trickle down effect beloved of the right wing that is shown to be utter nonsense.

so come on - you have made this assertion - and have merely asserted again. Now explain how it can work.

by mystiroakey Wed 11 Dec 2013, 5:39 pm

Riskysports wrote:
mystiroakey wrote:
SecretFly wrote:Mystir, that wasn't quality football...that was shyte passing itself off as quality football. That was a joke; especially given that the opposition most times were never strong enough for the the pass, pass, pass snooze, pass game to be needed. Great footballers no doubt!...snooze inducing football.

If you think that's classic football, then it's you who have a short memory of what real classic football looks like.

But anyway, the point is BEST is relative. You think it means big money (PL), I say it means most exciting stuff on a field.

Massive falacy there SF-

The PL is the most exiting league out there.

I have no idea why you keep bringing money in to this. I haven't once said it should all be about money- IF you would like to quote me on this or be honest and admit you are just lieing that would help the debate more along.

and spains quality, although not up to the spectacle of the PL is of the highest quality you could think of. Luckily there are many other teams with other philosophies of playing the game, like germany and brazil and argentina that dont just provide quality but also high levels of entertainment.

this is a myth promoted by the media, who are selling the PL - so hardly a fair judge

they used to say it was the best quality too, until it was shown to be a terrible brand of kick it long and then kick the player :-)

nope no myth- just an opinion from the majority of people that watch football.

your last comment shows you haven't watch a pl game in about 20 years,.

Serious drivel being posted on here- You dont even watch the sport and you come up wiuth this dross.

by thebandwagonsociety Wed 11 Dec 2013, 5:40 pm

Sweet, we are through another 1,000+ posts and still no sign of any poster here being swayed in any way.

Can we stick a fork in this thread already and come back to it when something further actually develops?

Or alternatively, how would you summize the last 1000 posts in a single post ?

by mystiroakey Wed 11 Dec 2013, 5:42 pm

TJ wrote:
mystiroakey wrote:
TJ wrote:
TJ wrote:So actually you have no reasoning behind this at all. You make assertions you shold be able to explain them. Using the example of football I can see the opposite is true - so please explain how
I haven't once said the PRL want to expand the game- I have said its a knock on effect from expanding there global reach.
will work.
can you?

This mystri?
Can you explain how this will work.

the more people that are introduced to a sport and watch sport the more people on the back of that play the sport.

its at a base level of logic and shouldn't need to be explained

That makes sense only at the amatuer level 0 and even then its very thin if it applies at all.

Now come on - some real explanation as to how this will advance the pro game? It sounds very much like the trickle down effect beloved of the right wing that is shown to be utter nonsense.

so come on - you have made this assertion - and have merely asserted again. Now explain how it can work.

All you do is assert.

Its for you to prove that the PL's global reach has reduced the number of pro teams.

That is the most deluded assertion ever made on any forum ever .

Tou win the award TJ. And the sad thing is i think you actually believe it!!

Its you that needs to explain how it works. But there is no point me asking you- Because you cant explain it. Its nonsense

by mystiroakey Wed 11 Dec 2013, 5:53 pm

There are 200 TOP pro leagues out ther- Yes that s right 200(TOP) pro football leagues.

Imagine if the PL didn't exist there would clearly be 10000000 instead. laughing

by Sponsored content