What Is Going On In Wales Pt.2

Following on from the old thread -: https://www.606v2.com/t50378-what-the-hell-is-going-on-in-wales
 

Intotouch wrote:Hello knowledgeable Welsh friends. I've read some extraordinary things lately about the war between the regions and the union in Wales, but being an outsider, and not following this closely for years I'm not sure what's real and what's nonsense. Can someone please help clarify a few things for me?

1. I read that the WRU have a deal with the regions that they will each be given the same amount of money annually by the union for the next five years. This was interpreted by some as the union deciding to slowly let the regions go bust so they can set up new regions that they would own. Is this really the case?  It sounds completely crazy to me! Wouldn't this be a disaster in Welsh rugby and couldn't they try to buy the regions instead since they have more money now? Could this really be a plan?

2. The WRU is making a profit and with the millenium stadium paid off should have plenty of money to splash about in the future. (Or do they?) As they won't give more money to the regions this suggests that they want the regions to founder (see above).

3. Although the WRU pay millions to the regions annually they have little or no say in how they are run so are deeply frustrated with the regions. Also the regions can't stand the WRU even though they're keeping them afloat. Is this true and why?

4. The WRU offered central contracts to the players in the regions but the regions rejected this. Even though they would have a smaller wage bill if it went ahead. Why?
The regions have the lowest salary cap in Europe and keep losing their best players. But the regions won't let the WRU pay the internationals out of a central contract. As players have to be released anyway to play for Wales I don't see why the clubs wouldn't be delighted to do this. Are they afraid that they would lose them to too many training camps? I don't follow the logic of this. If the WRU paid the players then surely the regions would be able to keep more of their best players playing in Wales which surely would benefit them as they'd have stronger teams. Again I don't get why this is such a problem.

(Please don't include the possible move to the AP on this thread. It's being debated elsewhere.)

The original thread hit 1,000+ posts without descending into a bicker-fest, let's try to keep this thread going in the same manner.

BBC wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b03pzy4k

Episode 1 of 4 -: JAN 14th 22:35

Duration: 30 minutes

The first in a series which follows the Welsh rugby region through one of the most turbulent periods in the history of the domestic game. The series has gone behind the scenes at the Scarlets to show the challenges of keeping a professional rugby region going, especially in difficult economic times.

In the first programme, after a run of defaults, the Scarlets have to win two games to keep their league play-off hopes alive, while the star international players are away playing for Wales in the Six Nations. Meanwhile, the club has to look at different ways of raising revenue

Looks like the beeb are finally getting a bit more on the fence regarding the RRW/WRU fight now

A light hearted interlude before the debating begins

I have the pleasure of playing rugby at Leicester University
At the time the star man was Jeff Herdman - Welsh fans should remember him.

One story he has told

He recalls a Swansea-Llanelli clash when the first scrum broke up to reveal the Llanelli loosehead and the Swansea tighthead hammering lumps out of each other on the floor to the delight of the crowd.

When the referee sprinted over to try to stop it, the loosehead looked up and came out with: "Bugger of ref - this is nothing to do with you."

I found a paragraph that I don't really follow on the Guardian article below:http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2014/jan/05/wru-welsh-regions

"the regions who will consider reporting the union to the International Rugby Board if they find that any of their players have been approached without their written permission, which is required under the regulations."

Can anyone please explain to me how this works? If a club or province or whoever needs written permission from a club to approach any player there with an offer of work how does anyone get this permission? Surely they'd just say no to all and sundry and the player would be stuck where he was indefinitely. I don't get it. Also why would the IRB stop a player from receiving an offer of work from someone?

Hammerofthunor, the FFRs suggestion of setting up regional sides is far from an off the cuff comment. I read about this as a serious proposal many years ago now, and it is something that pops up regularly from FFR officials. It is something that many there would love to have done from what I gather from interviews going back over a long period. Given a reason and an opportunity I wouldn't put it past them.

The FFR also needed to bribe and threaten their clubs this year to keep them in line, with club directors storming out of meetings, meetings cancelled etc. Hardly dissimilar from the Welsh situation. As far as I know the tv money in Wales also goes to the union who then distribute it to the regions.

The bigger concern from that article for me, regarding central contracts

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2014/jan/05/wru-welsh-regions wrote:The WRU is understood to be ready to offer better terms in some cases, aiming to recoup some of the outlay by sub-contracting the players to the regions or clubs in England for part of the season.

So they will be willing to take players that the regions are trying to sign, pay them more, and then send them over the bridge to play. That is not really caring, but I guess it is sharing.

IntoTouch -: I think the players are not meant to have talked contracts with anyone prior to the start of Jan without the regions being informed. So maybe the regions are saying that if they can prove the Union were in talks with Warburton and Co. prior to new years day, that the union were being a bit naughty and underhanded, and against the rules.

Intotouch wrote: "the regions who will consider reporting the union to the International Rugby Board if they find that any of their players have been approached without their written permission, which is required under the regulations."

.

Isn't there something about this only being true up to the 31st December provided the player is out of contract the coming summer i.e. a player can be approach directly if they are in the last 6 months of their contract.

I know in England they can't approach players of another English club before the 6 months before the end of the contract (which seem to run to 1st July each year). But I was under the impression that was only for players based in England. And also, suposedly they CAN talk to the players agent who can talk to the player. Which makes the whole thing a bit pointless. If the same thing is true in Wales AND the WRU directly apporached players then they are fools. But from the Supporters/RRW meeting minutes it sounds like they only have 3rd hand info on this and are any players going to take this to the IRB when they're, by definition, wanting to play international rugby?

Intotouch wrote:I found a paragraph that I don't really follow on the Guardian article below:http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2014/jan/05/wru-welsh-regions

"the regions who will consider reporting the union to the International Rugby Board if they find that any of their players have been approached without their written permission, which is required under the regulations."

Can anyone please explain to me how this works? If a club or province or whoever needs written permission from a club to approach any player there with an offer of work how does anyone get this permission? Surely they'd just say no to all and sundry and the player would be stuck where he was indefinitely. I don't get it. Also why would the IRB stop a player from receiving an offer of work from someone?

Hammerofthunor, the FFRs suggestion of setting up regional sides is far from an off the cuff comment. I read about this as a serious proposal many years ago now, and it is something that pops up regularly from FFR officials. It is something that many there would love to have done from what I gather from interviews going back over a long period. Given a reason and an opportunity I wouldn't put it past them.

The FFR also needed to bribe and threaten their clubs this year to keep them in line, with club directors storming out of meetings, meetings cancelled etc. Hardly dissimilar from the Welsh situation. As far as I know the tv money in Wales also goes to the union who then distribute it to the regions.

happy new year all. have been away 2 weeks and seems like a lot has happened! or not happened depending which way you look at it.

intotouch - i think the point about france is that the relationship between ffr and clubs is moving in a positive direction now that longer player release, an elite squad, and limits on elite squad games per season have been negotiated. camou is clearly a deranged dictator that the lnr have no choice but to put up with. however he will be gone next year, and the lnr have the ability and visibility to renegotiate their new tv deal, so it's going to be quiet there for a while. whereas in wales, the situation has never, ever been worse, and may already have been stretched beyond breaking point.

also, it's hard to compare france and wales when the epicenters of power in each country are opposite. LNR generates at least 5x the money of FFR (who dont even have a stadium). in wales WRU who own their own stadium, also make the lions share of all revenue in welsh rugby.

seems to me that the WRU cant afford central contracts. isnt that what the PWC report also concluded?

and haven't the WRU just come back on friday with an "improved" participation agreement offer?

that definitely smells like the WRU recognising that they cant afford the financial gambit of bankrupting the regions. the WRU would effectively have to shoulder all the losses of any new regions as there is no chance of "benefactors" after this debacle. and those would plunge the WRU into the red, especially given the significant costs involved in any ensuing legal fights, setting up new clubs, negotiating stadium availability, etc, etc. hard to see how this will do anything but throw welsh national and club rugby into the financial dark ages.

apologies if this has all be stated before, but i couldnt go back and read all the posts of the last 2 weeks!

It has finally happened someone has finally done the Hitler parody

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CHqsJggq_wM

http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/welsh-players-face-club-versus-country-dilemma-1.1645849

Why the hell are the regions opposing this? The WRU pay the salaries of the players and sub-contract them to the regions. When the regions have the contracts themselves they don't have access to those players in international windows anyway, or for the controversial fourth autumn test, so why on earth would they resist keeping players in Wales with someone else picking up the bill?

The players want to stay in Wales. The regions don't view it as economical to offer the money they need under the PA. The Union offers to contract the players itself and the regions dig in their heels... what do they expect, the WRU to just fork over extra money without keeping Welsh players in Wales?

No wonder the WRU want rid of them! Thats about as blockheaded as it gets!

Notch, the reason the regions oppose central contracts is partially down to how the contracts will be paid, which I believe would be from the money that the regions are getting already. So realistically the regions would still be feeling a hit in their pockets for the players, and arguably more as the union would possibly offer more to the players (as the guardian article claims), and the regions would have no control over the players at all. So even though it appears that the union would be stepping in an paying for players to play at the region, and being the hero of the hour, they would actually be robbing the regions (seeing as it is the regions who earn the money from the Rabo/HEC) in order to use that money to pay for players who the regions will have even more restricted access to.

It is far more of a complex situation than the WRU and their pawns in the media make out.

If it was as simple as the WRU contracting the best players (with so far unseen money) and renting them to the Regions on 2/3 year subcontracts then I think they would jump at the chance. As SS has already said this was not what was proposed by the WRU when they looked at Central Contracts.

The key finding from the PWC report was that there was a significant funding gap between the what the Regions get (including self generated income) and what they need to spend to compete with the Irish, Scottish and English (I'm discounting the French for now). It said there were various ways for that funding gap to be closed (currently the Regions are working on chopping player salaries, which results in a drop in performance) but primarily that they had to work together (which has failed). The other options are benefactors (not sustainable), WRU (don't have the money) or increased attendences (long term).

abundantly clear to me that the WRU cant afford to pay central contracts for all key welsh players in wales if that means being competitive with what they get offered in england and france. that's why those central contracts are paid with money taken from somewhere else, ie directly from region's pockets.

the numbers just dont add up. and thats obviously why the regions are baulking.

love the hitler video.

If the current circa £4m from TV/competitions and participation agreement is not enough to fund the current squads and pay for international players to stay, then reducing that funding to pay for central contracts will just mean that the regions struggle to pay for the rest of the squad's wages. Growing crowds is an obvious answer to getting more money into the regions to 'top up' their available funding, but that's not going to happen by the end of the season when players contracts are being renewed, if at all (crowds the same or similar pre- and post-regionalism).

Yes but on the flip side you shouldnt have a system where a players value is increased if he isnt up for welsh selection. There are countless examples where the regions try to sign players purely based on if they are fringe players for wales. Blues going after Turnbull from the Scarlets for example. Unless they offer him more he wont leave the Scarlets. So what happens if therefore the Blues pay more for Turnbull than say a current international forward gets. There needs to be a clear structure because having a free for all market isnt helping the regions with salary costs either.

The Hitler video wasnt that good compared to other ones. A bit stupid infact

whereas if it had been about the "pieman" it would have been hilarious?   

Welshmushroom wrote:Yes but on the flip side you shouldnt have a system where a players value is increased if he isnt up for welsh selection.  There are countless examples where the regions try to sign players purely based on if they are fringe players for wales.  Blues going after Turnbull from the Scarlets for example.  Unless they offer him more he wont leave the Scarlets.  So what happens if therefore the Blues pay more for Turnbull than say a current international forward gets.  There needs to be a clear structure because having a free for all market isnt helping the regions with salary costs either.

Josh possibly going to the Blues has less to do with cash and more to do with game time in his preferred position. He is a blindside, but covers anywhere from 4-8. The Scarlets are well stocked in all positions. Barclay, Shingler, McGog in the back row arguably ahead of him, with Timpani, Dan Thomas and Sion Bennett just behind him. As locks there are Earle, Ball, Snyman and Kelly ahead of him too. At the Blues, given Petorious and Copland are going and Warburton is likely to go, only Navidi in the back row, Josh is likely to not only start but be a key player. As much of a fan of his as I am, and really want him to stay, it is in his best interest, especially for pushing for more caps, if he goes.

quinsforever wrote:whereas if it had been about the "pieman" it would have been hilarious?   

Another personal attack...

You need to get over me  

Steffan wrote:The Hitler video wasnt that good compared to other ones. A bit stupid infact

No doubt there will be a counter Hitler or Darth Vader parody making RRW and the regions out to be fools who draw out proposals in crayon soon enough.

Guys let's not ruin what has been over 1,000 decent posts with the needless school playing ground stuff. Let's leave that to Roger Lewis, Stuart Gallagher, and the journos.

ScarletSpiderman wrote:Guys let's not ruin what has been over 1,000 decent posts with the needless school playing ground stuff.  Let's leave that to Roger Lewis, Stuart Gallagher, and the journos.

I got nothing against that Quins guy. As far as im concerned done nothing to upset him so dont know what his problem is with me. Agreed lets leave it to other people  

1000+ decent posts and then Quinsy returns from Xmas break!

  

Steffan wrote:The Hitler video wasnt that good compared to other ones. A bit stupid infact

Agreed they have become a bit boring now

Casartelli wrote:1000+ decent posts and then Quinsy returns from Xmas break!

  

I know, crazy coincidence.

geoff999rugby wrote:

Steffan wrote:The Hitler video wasnt that good compared to other ones. A bit stupid infact

Agreed they have become a bit boring now

This is true, however they tend to also be a barometer of public opinion, so to speak. You know when someone has more or less become a plan to villen when they get a Hitler/Darth Vader YouTube clip.

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

geoff999rugby wrote:

Steffan wrote:The Hitler video wasnt that good compared to other ones. A bit stupid infact

Agreed they have become a bit boring now

This is true, however they tend to also be a barometer of public opinion, so to speak.  You know when someone has more or less become a plan to villen when they get a Hitler/Darth Vader YouTube clip.

Not sure that 2000 views on youtube suggests that the weight of public opinion is even interested.

Even the regions still get more than that at a home game.

Any Welsh speakers on here?
If so would any be kind enough to translate the Gareth Davies (Drags chief) pre match interview at the Os/Scarlets game on Friday night? I believe that among other stuff, he said some WRU board members were willing to talk to the regions. Got this info from Scarletfever.
The interview begins yur at 2m35sec after the advert.
http://www.s4c.co.uk/clic/e_level2.shtml?series_id=514966383
Smashing.

1000+ decent posts. pull the other one. repetitive and entrenched maybe.

and steffan, i play the ball not the man. nothing personal in satirising a post.

Notch wrote:http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/welsh-players-face-club-versus-country-dilemma-1.1645849

Why the hell are the regions opposing this?

I believe the following explanation still applies unless something has changed in recent days.
From the RRW website......

"The WRU have offered to centrally contract the international players. Why not just do that instead?

The PWC report categorically stated that: “Centrally contracting the National Squad will not address the fundamental structural funding gap…”

Despite the idea being dismissed by the report they themselves helped to commission, the WRU have ignored that expert opinion to continue peddling a line in the media about central contracts.

Central contracts in themselves will not solve the problem of the player drain. The proposals made by the WRU to RRW on August 12th 2013 would have simply seen a limited number of central contracts funded by the removal of existing payments to the Regions; there was no further detail and no indication of where the additional revenue needed would come from. It was the financial version of rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic whilst she sank."

https://www.606v2.com/t50642-regional-rugby-wales-faqs
http://www.welshregions.com/q-a/

Its pretty obvious that one way or another the pro-clubs are gonna come out of this smelling of roses and it a better position than ever before. Another 10 years of Cardiff, Llanelli, Swansea and Newport laughing at everyone else in Welsh rugby so it seems

This is what I was trying to get at previously Dave. The WRU wanted to centrally contract, say, 30 players with the money that currently pays for 120 (or 4 squads). That in itself would wipe the regions out.

Steffan wrote:Its pretty obvious that one way or another the pro-clubs are gonna come out of this smelling of roses and it a better position than ever before. Another 10 years of Cardiff, Llanelli, Swansea and Newport laughing at everyone else in Welsh rugby so it seems

To be fair the been article about Ponty being willing to step up if required didn't really make them seem particularly willing to offer anything better. So its a case of regions, that some class as clubs, or clubs being 'promoted' and remaining clubs. The regions are 10 years down the road of pulling in punters etc, and the clubs are 10 years down the road of having a chip on their shoulder. Trying to be impartial the former sounds the more likely to be able to compete with the big boys.

Steffan wrote:Its pretty obvious that one way or another the pro-clubs are gonna come out of this smelling of roses and it a better position than ever before. Another 10 years of Cardiff, Llanelli, Swansea and Newport laughing at everyone else in Welsh rugby so it seems

I really don't think the regions are laughing at anyone. That's a pretty paranoid view. In fact, I'd say that the regions are pretty fed up right now and some investors/owners were/are thinking of jacking it all in. Some have certainly suggested so in the past.

was interested to hear on scrumv that there are approx 1,000 people employed in the 4 regions setups in some shape or form.

probably explains why WRU is backtracking on nuking the regions. given that total region avg home attendance is c20k, this would be a PR nightmare to send the regions to the wall. WRU needs the regions to sign the PA as much as the regions need the support and revenues that come from the PA.

nigel davies comments. interesting as he worked for WRU way back.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/25626215

Its a bit annoying how he babbles on to basically say that he wants a British and Irish league right at the end of the article

Casartelli wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

geoff999rugby wrote:

Steffan wrote:The Hitler video wasnt that good compared to other ones. A bit stupid infact

Agreed they have become a bit boring now

This is true, however they tend to also be a barometer of public opinion, so to speak.  You know when someone has more or less become a plan to villen when they get a Hitler/Darth Vader YouTube clip.

Not sure that 2000 views on youtube suggests that the weight of public opinion is even interested.

Even the regions still get more than that at a home game.

Those are linked views aren't they? The video is only available through being linked to it I think.

Interestingly RRW and Peter Thomas in particular share the view the WRU have failed them because the lack of ability to receive equal commercial deals as the French and English are receiving.

My understanding is that population plays a key attribute in commercial TV deals. France are 21 times the size of Wales while England are 19 times our size. Surely Wales will never be able to demand the same kind of TV deals? The only exception is if you have a dominant team which performs globally. The All Blacks for example because they win all the time and are a leading brand in world rugby have been able to broker mega TV deals. But for that to happen they had to be the best side in world rugby. Regionally Wales have been nowhere near a dominating force in European rugby so I really don't see how Thomas or RRW can have this view?

The way I understand it, the WRU already have better TV deals in place for regional rugby than Ireland have for the provinces. Given they are bigger and better performing than welsh teams surely that points to a job well done for the WRU or am I missing something?

Didn't they say that the Scots had negotiated a better deal than us too, and they're on TV a lot less (in terms of BBC league coverage)?

The Scots get signifiacntly more than the regions (each team) for Europe. The English and French get signifiacntly more for their domestic competitions. Once more the Welsh are in a rock and hard place. Of course they could do what the Scots do as get rid of a region...but if the new European money is split by team (which is what was supposed to be happening) thier cup would go down too.

Welshmushroom wrote:Interestingly RRW and Peter Thomas in particular share the view the WRU have failed them because the lack of ability to receive equal commercial deals as the French and English are receiving.  

My understanding is that population plays a key attribute in commercial TV deals.  France are 21 times the size of Wales while England are 19 times our size.  Surely Wales will never be able to demand the same kind of TV deals?  The only exception is if you have a dominant team which performs globally.  The All Blacks for example because they win all the time and are a leading brand in world rugby have been able to broker mega TV deals.  But for that to happen they had to be the best side in world rugby.  Regionally Wales have been nowhere near a dominating force in European rugby so I really don't see how Thomas or RRW can have this view?

The way I understand it, the WRU already have better TV deals in place for regional rugby than Ireland have for the provinces.  Given they are bigger and better performing than welsh teams surely that points to a job well done for the WRU or am I missing something?

England have 19 times the population but England have more teams to finance. It might point to four teams being too many for Wales.

England have 12 in AP plus a few others towards the top of the Championship running something like proper pro teams. On an equivalent population basis that would mean Wales could justify one or possibly two teams. One would be nonsense but illustrates that perhaps four is too many. Perhaps two plus a development side?

quinsforever wrote:was interested to hear on scrumv that there are approx 1,000 people employed in the 4 regions setups in some shape or form.

.

If true that is a massive inefficiency that needs addressing.

Ulster do not employ anything like 250 people - not even half

geoff998rugby wrote:

quinsforever wrote:was interested to hear on scrumv that there are approx 1,000 people employed in the 4 regions setups in some shape or form.

.

If true that is a massive inefficiency that needs addressing.

Ulster do not employ anything like 250 people - not even half

 
I think you would be surprised at how quick you can get up to that many staff.
 
Scarlets backroom staff -: 18 (coaches, analysts and physios) http://www.scarlets.co.uk/eng/rugby/backroom.php
Scarlets first team squad -: 47 (players registered to Scarlets only, not players used from Llandovery, Carm Quins or Llanelli) http://www.scarlets.co.uk/eng/rugby/people.php
 
So that is 65 people purely to do with the playing side of things.
 
Then there are-:
people in the shop and in the ticket office, including full time and match day staff (at a guess about 2 or three full time in each and another 2 or 3 extra for match day)
car parking attendants and security for match day (about 5-10 in car park, god knows in security)
turnstyles people (at a guess that is 8 even for a low turn out game, think there are 20-24 tyrnstyles so need to be manned for big games)
people working in the barn bar (normal 3 to 6)
people working in the barn food store (normal 2 to 4)
people working in the club bar (not too sure how many not allowed in)
people working in the 9-3 bar (not sure how many not allowed in)
people working in the south stand bar (normally 3-6, but doubles when both bars are opened)
people working in the south stand food stand (normally 3-6, but doubles when both are opened)
people working in the north stand bar (normally 3-6, but doubles when both bars are opened)
people working in the north stand food stand (normally 3-6, but doubles when both are opened)
people selling programmes (usually 3 or 4)
people working in the red room in town (never gone not sure how many)
 
So I make that at least another 100 providing services inside the stadium itself for match day.  So we are up to 165+ already.
 
But then I have forgotten the likes of-:
Groundsmen
Kit boys
Ball Boys
Mascott
Community Team
PR Team
Non Rugby Events Team (Darts music)
Sound engineers for the PA system
Tommo the announcer and his backup team
Electricians & Plumbers to keep the place ticking over
Cleanners for the bogs/bars etc
Programme design and printing
 
And there are more, still doing work directly for the region.  On top of these there are the other, indirect jobs such as the burger van parked at the side of the road outside the stadium, the extra staff taken on for pubs (especially the new one near the stadium) for the extra trade etc.
 
I reckon if you went through and thought about Ulster and who is actually there, playing staff, coaches and all the lad that wipes up when you miss the toilet, you would be surprised by how many people it takes.


p.s. the regions say they employ 1,000 a year, but if a turnstyle operator jacks in and another takes up the job then that will be another person who has been employed by the region, so two people employed even though it is only one job, and one person at a time.

Not only that but these are going as inflated as possible. If they gave free tickets to some kids for handing out flyers they'd probably be counted.

ScarletSpiderman nearly all of those non playing positions you refer to are contracted out to third parties (notably the bars) and those individuals are not dependant on Ulster for employment.


Program sellers are voluntary and usually tied in with collecting money for charity.
Our playing staff is 5 less than yours and our backroom staff is also smaller

So jobs that would go if Ulster went would be a lot lot less

Geoff, forgive me if I am wrong, but the regions claimed to be responsible for around (or was it over) 1,000 jobs directly and indirectly. So the likes of programme vendors, printers etc, bar staff would count. I guess it is just a case of semantics, but if the regions went to the wall those people would be out of jobs as there would be no need for bar staff (agency or otherwise).

I accept Ulster may have smaller backroom staff and playing squad, however I still reckon that if you look at the direct employment, and the indirect employment (agency staff and all that) Ulster's rugby side are probably responsible for a fair few people's employment.

So you're not counting the jobs that are subcontracted out as jobs? They may not be directly employed by Ulster but they're still depentnant on Ulster for their job to exist.