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

by mystiroakey Wed Dec 11, 2013 4:38 pm

First topic message reminder :

"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 HammerofThunor Sun Dec 15, 2013 2:45 pm

Munchkin wrote:
Notch wrote:
Munchkin wrote:
broadlandboy wrote:Imagine if instead of rushing the Sky deal ERC had taken time to look at other options.

How do you know they didn't? What other options were available?

Sky deal was signed after the BT deal- so BT were out of the market by the time that deal was signed. Also, BT didn't approach the ERC they approached PRL.

Why would they approach the ERC and the PRL for rights to European games? They tried to go around the ERC to avoid a bidding war with SKY. PRL saw a chance to try and take control of European rugby and it's blown up into the current mess.

True, and it also begs the question of what McCafferty was doing as commercial chairman of the ERC?

When was that?

http://www.ercrugby.com/erc/about/commercial_sub_committee.php

by quinsforever Sun Dec 15, 2013 2:47 pm

irish rugby is getting crushed between ffr and prl/rfu (who as ritchie says, and i have been saying for months, actually get along well).

time to strap on the nuts and make a decision. shackle yourselves to camou and his hidden agenda (shared with Lapasset) to have FIRA-AER take over the HC, and hope that LNR staying involved after a year.

or take the risk that RFU and welsh regions will form a great league and leave rabo hosed.

strikes me that the only outcome irfu can positively influence is going with Ritchie and 6N. The FFR agenda of FIRA-AER will ultimately be the worst outcome for IRFU

by Guest Sun Dec 15, 2013 2:53 pm

HammerofThunor wrote:
Munchkin wrote:
Notch wrote:
Munchkin wrote:
broadlandboy wrote:Imagine if instead of rushing the Sky deal ERC had taken time to look at other options.

How do you know they didn't? What other options were available?

Sky deal was signed after the BT deal- so BT were out of the market by the time that deal was signed. Also, BT didn't approach the ERC they approached PRL.

Why would they approach the ERC and the PRL for rights to European games? They tried to go around the ERC to avoid a bidding war with SKY. PRL saw a chance to try and take control of European rugby and it's blown up into the current mess.

True, and it also begs the question of what McCafferty was doing as commercial chairman of the ERC?

When was that?

http://www.ercrugby.com/erc/about/commercial_sub_committee.php

I don't know when it was, and the link you provide fails to enlighten. I'm asking if ERC were so inept, as McCafferty seems to suggest, then what was he doing as commercial chairman of ERC? His own attitude towards ERC comes back to bite him.

by HammerofThunor Sun Dec 15, 2013 2:56 pm

And I'm asking when was McCafferty commercial chairman of the ERC?

by andyi Sun Dec 15, 2013 2:56 pm

I'm not Ian bloody Ritchie. He's one the the jokers who can't agree what time it is!!

It was just a suggestion. If BT or Sky won't share, then that's their problem. Stuff em both I say!
Right now BT have nothing and Sky arn't losing anything under my proposal.

by broadlandboy Sun Dec 15, 2013 2:56 pm

Because ERC signed an exclusive deal with SKY for rights that they didnt have(PRL's) making it nigh on impossible for PRL to return. If they had waited they could have either sold rights to BT or their rights(not PRL's) to Sky, making it possible for PRL to return. Not very good buisiness sense to sign a deal that excludes nearly a third of your participants

by Sin é Sun Dec 15, 2013 3:02 pm

espn wrote:Profile

Mark McCafferty became the chief executive of the Premier Rugby Association in 2005.

Premier Rugby is the body that governs the 12 Guinness premiership clubs, and as such is at the very core of rugby in England.

Recent divides in the "club v country" debate have only served to emphasise the sway that the group has in the professional game, with the recent world record attendance for club games at Twickenham also highlighting their importance.

McCafferty succeeded Howard Thomas in 2005, having previously enjoyed success in the consumer sector. After spending the early part of his career with Midland Bank he spent eleven years with the Thomas Cook group.

Following this McCafferty joined Avis, where he remained until leaving in 2003 to pursue private investments.

His appointment in 2005 left the door open to improve the commercial footprint of the Guinness Premiership, with his expertise in branding being an important part of his suitability for the job.

A lucrative new deal with Guinness and new levels of exposure from Sky have been hallmarks of the success of Premier Rugby in exploiting the gains to be had in the modern, professional era.

Under McCafferty the Guinness Premiership has gone from strength to strength, despite criticisms from certain quarters over the influx of foreign players and the immovable stance employed over international commitments.

McCafferty also serves as commercial chairman of the ERC, the body that governs the Heineken Cup and European Challenge Cup.

http://www.espn.co.uk/premiership/rugby/player/79580.html

by Guest Sun Dec 15, 2013 3:03 pm

quinsforever wrote:irish rugby is getting crushed between ffr and prl/rfu (who as ritchie says, and i have been saying for months, actually get along well).

time to strap on the nuts and make a decision. shackle yourselves to camou and his hidden agenda (shared with Lapasset) to have FIRA-AER take over the HC, and hope that LNR staying involved after a year.

or take the risk that RFU and welsh regions will form a great league and leave rabo hosed.

strikes me that the only outcome irfu can positively influence is going with Ritchie and 6N. The FFR agenda of FIRA-AER will ultimately be the worst outcome for IRFU

I don't really trust the French just yet, because I don't really know how the FIRA proposal is supposed to work. As for who to trust more? Anyone over PRL.
This FIRA proposal is the vision of Lapasett, and by extension the IRB. I guess that it is a response to the growing threat posed by groups such as PRL/LNR, and so at the very least they have the interest of rugby union at heart.

by Guest Sun Dec 15, 2013 3:05 pm

HammerofThunor wrote:And I'm asking when was McCafferty commercial chairman of the ERC?

Then why post the link? Sin e has provided some info for you in that regard.

by quinsforever Sun Dec 15, 2013 3:06 pm

Munchkin wrote:
quinsforever wrote:irish rugby is getting crushed between ffr and prl/rfu (who as ritchie says, and i have been saying for months, actually get along well).

time to strap on the nuts and make a decision. shackle yourselves to camou and his hidden agenda (shared with Lapasset) to have FIRA-AER take over the HC, and hope that LNR staying involved after a year.

or take the risk that RFU and welsh regions will form a great league and leave rabo hosed.

strikes me that the only outcome irfu can positively influence is going with Ritchie and 6N. The FFR agenda of FIRA-AER will ultimately be the worst outcome for IRFU

I don't really trust the French just yet, because I don't really know how the FIRA proposal is supposed to work. As for who to trust more? Anyone over PRL.
This FIRA proposal is the vision of Lapasett, and by extension the IRB. I guess that it is a response to the growing threat posed by groups such as PRL/LNR, and so at the very least they have the interest of rugby union at heart.

and what makes you think that is in any way good for the IRFU?

by quinsforever Sun Dec 15, 2013 3:09 pm

Munchkin wrote:
HammerofThunor wrote:And I'm asking when was McCafferty commercial chairman of the ERC?

Then why post the link? Sin e has provided some info for you in that regard.

yes but sin e's info is as usual, undated and out of date.

bouscatel is chair of the commercial sub-committee. mccafferty hasnt been there for a while.

and yes mccafferty having been there is exactly how the prl know how rubbish and uncommercial the ERC is.

by Guest Sun Dec 15, 2013 3:10 pm

andyi wrote:I'm not Ian bloody Ritchie. He's one the the jokers who can't agree what time it is!!

It was just a suggestion. If BT or Sky won't share, then that's their problem. Stuff em both I say!
Right now BT have nothing and Sky arn't losing anything under my proposal.

I was kidding with you. Personally, I think it would be great if SKY, and BT, could sort this mess out between them, and they might yet do so, but I believe it would have to be BT which agrees to tear up the present PRL contract, and have them sign a new one. I would love them to get into a bidding war, but it's well passed that being possible now.

by Guest Sun Dec 15, 2013 3:13 pm

quinsforever wrote:
Munchkin wrote:
quinsforever wrote:irish rugby is getting crushed between ffr and prl/rfu (who as ritchie says, and i have been saying for months, actually get along well).

time to strap on the nuts and make a decision. shackle yourselves to camou and his hidden agenda (shared with Lapasset) to have FIRA-AER take over the HC, and hope that LNR staying involved after a year.

or take the risk that RFU and welsh regions will form a great league and leave rabo hosed.

strikes me that the only outcome irfu can positively influence is going with Ritchie and 6N. The FFR agenda of FIRA-AER will ultimately be the worst outcome for IRFU

I don't really trust the French just yet, because I don't really know how the FIRA proposal is supposed to work. As for who to trust more? Anyone over PRL.
This FIRA proposal is the vision of Lapasett, and by extension the IRB. I guess that it is a response to the growing threat posed by groups such as PRL/LNR, and so at the very least they have the interest of rugby union at heart.

and what makes you think that is in any way good for the IRFU?

The bits in bold.

by Sin é Sun Dec 15, 2013 3:17 pm

broadlandboy wrote:Because ERC signed an exclusive deal with SKY for rights that they didnt have(PRL's) making it nigh on impossible for PRL to return. If they had waited they could have either sold rights to BT or their rights(not PRL's) to Sky, making it possible for PRL to return. Not very good buisiness sense to sign a deal that excludes nearly a third of your participants

Signing the deal with Sky was the buffer that prevented McCaff and co taking control of European rugby. The ERC (in other words, the Unions) outfoxed the PRL.

by quinsforever Sun Dec 15, 2013 3:21 pm

the age old anyone but england mantra. tis what i thought.

well the best of luck to you jumping into bed with camou and lapasset.

i trust the english and welsh clubs to do what is in their best interests.

by Sin é Sun Dec 15, 2013 3:25 pm

quinsforever wrote:
Munchkin wrote:
HammerofThunor wrote:And I'm asking when was McCafferty commercial chairman of the ERC?

Then why post the link? Sin e has provided some info for you in that regard.
yes but sin e's info is as usual, undated and out of date.

bouscatel is chair of the commercial sub-committee. mccafferty hasnt been there for a while.

and yes mccafferty having been there is exactly how the prl know how rubbish and uncommercial the ERC is.

McCafferty was the chair of the Commerical Committee which is a fairly powerful position to be in. More than likely they got rid of him when they saw how rubbish he was.

Interesting that they then installed the President of Toulouse as Chair. Also having guys like Mick Dawson (quadrupled Leinster's income over the last few years) on the board, so its obvious they were using people who were successful at running/generating money.

Interestingly, Mick Dawson made a comment that the only way to make money is to be successful on the pitch. He also said there wasn't a whole pile of sponsorship or media money out there.

by quinsforever Sun Dec 15, 2013 3:25 pm

Sin é wrote:
broadlandboy wrote:Because ERC signed an exclusive deal with SKY for rights that they didnt have(PRL's) making it nigh on impossible for PRL to return. If they had waited they could have either sold rights to BT or their rights(not PRL's) to Sky, making it possible for PRL to return. Not very good buisiness sense to sign a deal that excludes nearly a third of your participants

Signing the deal with Sky was the buffer that prevented McCaff and co taking control of European rugby. The ERC (in other words, the Unions) outfoxed the PRL.

rubbish. ERC wrote its own death warrant. Because english clubs are much more important to european rugby than the ERC. hence why they are history even if Camou and Lapasset keep the lapdog unions onside.

by Sin é Sun Dec 15, 2013 3:26 pm

quinsforever wrote:the age old anyone but england mantra. tis what i thought.

well the best of luck to you jumping into bed with camou and lapasset.

i trust the english and welsh clubs to do what is in their best interests.

I trust the English clubs will do what is best for themselves. They couldn't give a Poopie about the Welsh clubs and will dump them as soon as they don't need them.

by Guest Sun Dec 15, 2013 3:28 pm

quinsforever wrote:the age old anyone but england mantra. tis what i thought.

well the best of luck to you jumping into bed with camou and lapasset.

i trust the english and welsh clubs to do what is in their best interests.

Ah don't play that old card. I didn't mention England, and it would be great to have the clubs play in next years tournament. I would fully support Richie if I believed he was acting in the interests of Rugby Union, but I don't believe he is. I do believe he is acting in the interests of PRL, and possibly engaged in a face saving effort.

by **Notch** Sun Dec 15, 2013 3:29 pm

With all due respect, right now it seems like a choice between the shark and the wolf.

by quinsforever Sun Dec 15, 2013 3:29 pm

Sin é wrote:
quinsforever wrote:the age old anyone but england mantra. tis what i thought.

well the best of luck to you jumping into bed with camou and lapasset.

i trust the english and welsh clubs to do what is in their best interests.

I trust the English clubs will do what is best for themselves. They couldn't give a Poopie about the Welsh clubs and will dump them as soon as they don't need them.

an anglo welsh league wouldnt be a 1 year deal. would be for 5 years or so. and during that time it will become a permanent fixture if it happens as all clubs will see the value. wouldnt want to be stuck in the rabo though. that really would be the end of 6N professional rugby (in at least 2 countries) that Ritchie is hinting at.

by Guest Sun Dec 15, 2013 3:30 pm

quinsforever wrote:
Sin é wrote:
broadlandboy wrote:Because ERC signed an exclusive deal with SKY for rights that they didnt have(PRL's) making it nigh on impossible for PRL to return. If they had waited they could have either sold rights to BT or their rights(not PRL's) to Sky, making it possible for PRL to return. Not very good buisiness sense to sign a deal that excludes nearly a third of your participants

Signing the deal with Sky was the buffer that prevented McCaff and co taking control of European rugby. The ERC (in other words, the Unions) outfoxed the PRL.
rubbish. ERC wrote its own death warrant. Because english clubs are much more important to european rugby than the ERC. hence why they are history even if Camou and Lapasset keep the lapdog unions onside.

by quinsforever Sun Dec 15, 2013 3:33 pm

Munchkin wrote:
quinsforever wrote:the age old anyone but england mantra. tis what i thought.

well the best of luck to you jumping into bed with camou and lapasset.

i trust the english and welsh clubs to do what is in their best interests.

Ah don't play that old card. I didn't mention England, and it would be great to have the clubs play in next years tournament. I would fully support Richie if I believed he was acting in the interests of Rugby Union, but I don't believe he is. I do believe he is acting in the interests of PRL, and possibly engaged in a face saving effort.

of course he is acting in the interests of english rugby. he makes that precise statement. how is that confusing?

you said "As for who to trust more? Anyone over PRL." PRL=all english professional clubs. so you trust anyone over the english clubs. pretty clear ABE in the sphere of club rugby that we are talking about currently.

by quinsforever Sun Dec 15, 2013 3:35 pm

Munchkin wrote:
quinsforever wrote:
Sin é wrote:
broadlandboy wrote:Because ERC signed an exclusive deal with SKY for rights that they didnt have(PRL's) making it nigh on impossible for PRL to return. If they had waited they could have either sold rights to BT or their rights(not PRL's) to Sky, making it possible for PRL to return. Not very good buisiness sense to sign a deal that excludes nearly a third of your participants

Signing the deal with Sky was the buffer that prevented McCaff and co taking control of European rugby. The ERC (in other words, the Unions) outfoxed the PRL.
rubbish. ERC wrote its own death warrant. Because english clubs are much more important to european rugby than the ERC. hence why they are history even if Camou and Lapasset keep the lapdog unions onside.

confused again? ok, ask yourself which is more indispensable, ERC (an administrative body) or English Clubs, in the HC?

or, ask youself, which is going to still exist in 18 months time, ERC or English clubs?

get it now?

by Guest Sun Dec 15, 2013 3:41 pm

quinsforever wrote:
Munchkin wrote:
quinsforever wrote:the age old anyone but england mantra. tis what i thought.

well the best of luck to you jumping into bed with camou and lapasset.

i trust the english and welsh clubs to do what is in their best interests.

Ah don't play that old card. I didn't mention England, and it would be great to have the clubs play in next years tournament. I would fully support Richie if I believed he was acting in the interests of Rugby Union, but I don't believe he is. I do believe he is acting in the interests of PRL, and possibly engaged in a face saving effort.
of course he is acting in the interests of english rugby. he makes that precise statement. how is that confusing?

you said "As for who to trust more? Anyone over PRL." PRL=all english professional clubs. so you trust anyone over the english clubs. pretty clear ABE in the sphere of club rugby that we are talking about currently.

Who said I was confused about that? I did view Richie' interview. The RFU are part, and parcel, of rugby union, and they themselves under the umbrella of IRB. That's were their loyalties should rest. Not as subservient to PRL.
That's your take on who PRL are. Yes the clubs under their control are English, but I'm talking about the PRL as an umbrella group, and not specifically the clubs. Not all who follow the clubs favour the PRL stance. Are those English fans also 'anyone but England'?

by Guest Sun Dec 15, 2013 3:46 pm

quinsforever wrote:
Munchkin wrote:
quinsforever wrote:
Sin é wrote:
broadlandboy wrote:Because ERC signed an exclusive deal with SKY for rights that they didnt have(PRL's) making it nigh on impossible for PRL to return. If they had waited they could have either sold rights to BT or their rights(not PRL's) to Sky, making it possible for PRL to return. Not very good buisiness sense to sign a deal that excludes nearly a third of your participants

Signing the deal with Sky was the buffer that prevented McCaff and co taking control of European rugby. The ERC (in other words, the Unions) outfoxed the PRL.
rubbish. ERC wrote its own death warrant. Because english clubs are much more important to european rugby than the ERC. hence why they are history even if Camou and Lapasset keep the lapdog unions onside.

confused again? ok, ask yourself which is more indispensable, ERC (an administrative body) or English Clubs, in the HC?

or, ask youself, which is going to still exist in 18 months time, ERC or English clubs?

get it now?

Confused at how you can get things so wrong, quins. The ERC is European rugby union at this point, and made up of the various unions, and includes the clubs umbrella groups - PRL/LNR/RRW. Even if ERC was to be dropped in favour of 6Ns, it will remain to be run by more or less the same people.
Anywho, this is getting silly. Things to do, and Rugby Union to watch. Laters.

by mystiroakey Sun Dec 15, 2013 3:47 pm

No it isn't munchkin the ERC is just a admin body.

by Sin é Sun Dec 15, 2013 3:50 pm

quinsforever wrote:
Munchkin wrote:
quinsforever wrote:
Sin é wrote:
broadlandboy wrote:Because ERC signed an exclusive deal with SKY for rights that they didnt have(PRL's) making it nigh on impossible for PRL to return. If they had waited they could have either sold rights to BT or their rights(not PRL's) to Sky, making it possible for PRL to return. Not very good buisiness sense to sign a deal that excludes nearly a third of your participants

Signing the deal with Sky was the buffer that prevented McCaff and co taking control of European rugby. The ERC (in other words, the Unions) outfoxed the PRL.
rubbish. ERC wrote its own death warrant. Because english clubs are much more important to european rugby than the ERC. hence why they are history even if Camou and Lapasset keep the lapdog unions onside.

confused again? ok, ask yourself which is more indispensable, ERC (an administrative body) or English Clubs, in the HC?

or, ask youself, which is going to still exist in 18 months time, ERC or English clubs?

get it now?

Yea, English clubs won't be playing in the Heineken Cup in 18 months time. so the ERC will be irrelevant to them.

by quinsforever Sun Dec 15, 2013 3:54 pm

he usually disappears after making a factual howler.

ERC are a "convener". the company itself is worth nothing. it is a shell company that rugby clubs and unions ascribe their TV rights to in order to arrange a tournament. and that's all they do.

How can anyone claim that "The ERC is European rugby union". That is arrogant, delusional, innacurate and naive. There is no such thing as "European rugby union". there are international european competitions, not limited to the 6N, and club competitions, only 2 of which are organised by ERC. If you killed ERC today, and set something else up tomorrow, precisely no-one would notice, aprt from JP Lux's wife who would have to put up with his whining at home!

by quinsforever Sun Dec 15, 2013 3:57 pm

Sin é wrote:
quinsforever wrote:
Munchkin wrote:
quinsforever wrote:
Sin é wrote:
broadlandboy wrote:Because ERC signed an exclusive deal with SKY for rights that they didnt have(PRL's) making it nigh on impossible for PRL to return. If they had waited they could have either sold rights to BT or their rights(not PRL's) to Sky, making it possible for PRL to return. Not very good buisiness sense to sign a deal that excludes nearly a third of your participants

Signing the deal with Sky was the buffer that prevented McCaff and co taking control of European rugby. The ERC (in other words, the Unions) outfoxed the PRL.
rubbish. ERC wrote its own death warrant. Because english clubs are much more important to european rugby than the ERC. hence why they are history even if Camou and Lapasset keep the lapdog unions onside.

confused again? ok, ask yourself which is more indispensable, ERC (an administrative body) or English Clubs, in the HC?

or, ask youself, which is going to still exist in 18 months time, ERC or English clubs?

get it now?

Yea, English clubs won't be playing in the Heineken Cup in 18 months time. so the ERC will be irrelevant to them.

wow, so even if the unions still stick with ERC and exclude RFU and PRL (big IF), you are saying that Camou and Lapasset will backtrack on their commitments to replacing the ERC by 2015 with something that will be explicitly acceptable to the english clubs?

go back and read Lapasset and Camou's and LNR's statements about ERC being replaced, and English clubs being critical.

picard

by Sin é Sun Dec 15, 2013 4:11 pm

Lapasset needs the support of all the other unions (including SH ones). I'd imagine the SH Unions would not be happy about a Uefa style organisation running rugby in the NH. What do they do, set up a UEFA Soutern Hemisphere.

The difference with soccer is that the world game is controlled by Europe. The SH are perhaps even more influential with regard to rugby. The only thing that keeps Europe having any sort of a say is because of the revenues generated by the 6Nations.

by quinsforever Sun Dec 15, 2013 4:16 pm

IRB only gets to say yes or no to what is proposed to them as regards international club competitions.

so SH unions have about the same amount of say in NH club rugby as you do. zippo.

everyone gets a say in the IRB. do you think it's about how many world cups have been won? even ireland gets a 2 votes so its obviously not that.

by Sin é Sun Dec 15, 2013 4:28 pm

So, the Chairman of the IRB wants to set up a UEFA type organisation and it will happen, yet the IRB will only get to say yes or no Headscratch

Lappassat was also voted in by the SH Unions - i.e., he is their chair as well. Setting up a Uefa type organisation is a structural change to the IRB - you can be sure all the Unions will have their say on it and I don't see the SH Unions going for it as it would make the NH far too powerful (money means power).

by TJ Sun Dec 15, 2013 4:39 pm

broadlandboy wrote:Because ERC signed an exclusive deal with SKY for rights that they didnt have(PRL's) making it nigh on impossible for PRL to return. If they had waited they could have either sold rights to BT or their rights(not PRL's) to Sky, making it possible for PRL to return. Not very good buisiness sense to sign a deal that excludes nearly a third of your participants

and the PRL did worse - they sold the rights to a competition that does not exist and that rights to other teams games they did not have the right to do.

by Sin é Sun Dec 15, 2013 4:43 pm

... and the RFU signed off on the sale of the rights to Sky, whereas the RFU didn't even know that the PRL had sold the English team games to BT!

by quinsforever Sun Dec 15, 2013 4:51 pm

Sin é wrote:So, the Chairman of the IRB wants to set up a UEFA type organisation and it will happen, yet the IRB will only get to say yes or no

Lappassat was also voted in by the SH Unions - i.e., he is their chair as well. Setting up a Uefa type organisation is a structural change to the IRB - you can be sure all the Unions will have their say on it and I don't see the SH Unions going for it as it would make the NH far too powerful (money means power).

yup, that's why Camou has to do it. Lapasset can only say yes or no. is there confusion where you are on the powers of IRB in relation to club rugby?

by quinsforever Sun Dec 15, 2013 4:52 pm

Sin é wrote:... and the RFU signed off on the sale of the rights to Sky, whereas the RFU didn't even know that the PRL had sold the English team games to BT!

complete BS. 100% complete and utter lie.

by TJ Sun Dec 15, 2013 4:54 pm

Really quins? I think you will find it correct. The RFU did not know of the BT deal ahead of time and were at the ERC meeting that agreed the sky deal. dunno if they voted for it

by quinsforever Sun Dec 15, 2013 5:01 pm

They could not sign off or not sign off. It was done by a committee. RFU's opinion was completely irrelevant. If this complete lie had any truth to it then someone might have claimed that the PRL games had been sold to SKY by the RFU. but no-one has. It's a complete lie. how could RFU contractually sign the PRL up to a contract that they had already given notice to withdraw from?

by quinsforever Sun Dec 15, 2013 5:03 pm

sin e saying "signed off on" is the kind of utter ridiculous nonsense i have come to expect from someone who cannot ever make an objective statement on this topic. really gets my goat.

to say "signed off on" implies some kind of contractual obligation, of which there clearly was none as far as RFU and PRL are concerned.

by TJ Sun Dec 15, 2013 5:03 pm

Its simply not a lie. the RFU were a party to the ERC sky deal.

by quinsforever Sun Dec 15, 2013 5:06 pm

TJ wrote:Its simply not a lie. the RFU were a party to the ERC sky deal.

no they weren't.

ERC were party to the SKY deal, and could only sell those rights that they had been granted by the respective unions. AND until a new participation agreement was created and signed up to covering 2015- onwards, ERC had No, ZERO, ZIPPO, ZILCH TV rights over english clubs.

to claim otherwise is ridiculous. this is why the RFU didnt need to "sign off on anything". they were not covered in the new contract. they couldnt have been BECAUSE THE ENGLISH CLUBS WERE OUT!

by quinsforever Sun Dec 15, 2013 5:08 pm

TJ, that's like saying if you and sin e were in the room, would you be party to the contract. absolutely not, as you had nothing to offer up into the contract. same with RFU

by **Rugby Fan** Sun Dec 15, 2013 5:09 pm

Notch wrote:
Munchkin wrote:
broadlandboy wrote:Imagine if instead of rushing the Sky deal ERC had taken time to look at other options.

How do you know they didn't? What other options were available?

Sky deal was signed after the BT deal- so BT were out of the market by the time that deal was signed.

You can sign more than one deal.

by TJ Sun Dec 15, 2013 5:11 pm

Quins - spin it any way you want - the fact remains the RFU did not know about the BT deal beforehand and were a party to the Sky deal - which is not for PRL games but for the HC - whether england are in it or not

by Sin é Sun Dec 15, 2013 5:12 pm

According to the CEO of the ERC (Derek McGrath):

But of course his heartbeat raised and alarm bells went off when it emerged that Premiership Rugby had come up with a unilateral deal with BT. Premiership Rugby had been on the ERC board that had agreed the last TV rights deal with Sky.

“We began to get whispers 48 hours before a board meeting that something might be happening (between Premiership Rugby and BT) and I made contact with the (English) RFU immediately because obviously they would need to be approving any contract in order for it to be official. They had no knowledge or approval of those developments. Then when it was announced, they rang me immediately to say again, they did not know and did not approve.
http://www.irishexaminer.com/sport/columnists/kieran-shannon/walking-the-tightrope-246109.html

by quinsforever Sun Dec 15, 2013 5:29 pm

completely, 100% irrelevant. RFU had no rights to offer up. Nothing. So they probably said at the time, well done ERC looks like a great contract, now you just have to deal with the fact that at the moment there are no english or french clubs in ERC

by quinsforever Sun Dec 15, 2013 5:31 pm

Sin é wrote:According to the CEO of the ERC (Derek McGrath):

But of course his heartbeat raised and alarm bells went off when it emerged that Premiership Rugby had come up with a unilateral deal with BT. Premiership Rugby had been on the ERC board that had agreed the last TV rights deal with Sky.

“We began to get whispers 48 hours before a board meeting that something might be happening (between Premiership Rugby and BT) and I made contact with the (English) RFU immediately because obviously they would need to be approving any contract in order for it to be official. They had no knowledge or approval of those developments. Then when it was announced, they rang me immediately to say again, they did not know and did not approve.
http://www.irishexaminer.com/sport/columnists/kieran-shannon/walking-the-tightrope-246109.html

well, well, well. the RFU obviously approve now don't they. so guess macgrath was once again misinformed, and maybe shouldnt be putting words into the mouths of other unions in newspaper interviews or he's going to look like a numpty....oh dear, bit late.

by Sin é Sun Dec 15, 2013 5:34 pm

The numptys here are the PRL and RFU - both sitting out in the cold, flailing around trying to destroy everything that they can't control.

Sad really.

and Quinns - worth noting that the Ireland players are signing up to play in Ireland. BBC were convinced that Donnacha Ryan was going to sign for London Irish. Well, he isn't. He is staying in Munster as is Conor Murray.

by TJ Sun Dec 15, 2013 5:51 pm

quinsforever wrote:completely, 100% irrelevant. RFU had no rights to offer up. Nothing. So they probably said at the time, well done ERC looks like a great contract, now you just have to deal with the fact that at the moment there are no english or french clubs in ERC

the French clubs are in.

The RFU agreed the sky deal

the RFU knew nothing of the BT deal

This is the truth of the matter quins - no matter how you spin it its the PRL that are the numpties without any competition to play in because of their own greed and stupidity

by Sponsored content