Doing the maths on the HC pool stages, the following conclusions may (or may not) be able to be drawn

First topic message reminder :

Assigning 1 point for 1st in group, 2 for 2nd in group, 3 for 3rd and 4 for 4th, gives the following averages by league. Lower score is better.

Rabo 2.73

top14 2.42

AP 2.17

So in spite of the irish provinces topping 3 groups, that was still not enough to avoid the rabo being by far the weakest HC participant on average. And surprisingly, the league with the best average showing was the AP.

Make of it what you will. But i got bored of snide remarks from certain posters about how the english sides might as well not have bothered as no-one would miss them, so decided to do the maths.

don't think that was me. would be hard to imagine how anyone might prove that. i appreciate the vote of confidence in my ability to use statistics selectively to bolster even the most outrageous claims though.   

world cups - fail
average winning record - fail
other silverware - fail

england aren't as bad at football as most rugby doomsday scenario folk allege. football is just, as andyi highlights above, globally extremely competitive. i think england have probably done about as well as they deserved to given the talent and teams they have had.

Mods, can we officially mark this thread with a photo of Graham Chapman as the Major? It has gotten silly.

I admit I submitted a post earlier, but I retract it. It's absolutely pointless to try to prove the relative merits of different nations based on a limited set of results from a distinctly lumpy playing field.

Poorfour wrote:Mods, can we officially mark this thread with a photo of Graham Chapman as the Major? It has gotten silly.

I admit I submitted a post earlier, but I retract it. It's absolutely pointless to try to prove the relative merits of different nations based on a limited set of results from a distinctly lumpy playing field.

How apt with the HEC final being played at the Millennium Stadium   

quinsforever wrote:don't think that was me. would be hard to imagine how anyone might prove that. i appreciate the vote of confidence in my ability to use statistics selectively to bolster even the most outrageous claims though.   

world cups - fail
average winning record - fail
other silverware - fail

england aren't as bad at football as most rugby doomsday scenario folk allege. football is just, as andyi highlights above, globally extremely competitive. i think england have probably done about as well as they deserved to given the talent and teams they have had.

It's a shame you didn't see it. You would have liked it. Like you he assigned a system of points but it included success per head of population into the system of points assignation that influenced the win/ loss ratio. There was something else too. Anyway after all the maths, there it was. When this system was applied to other as well nations England was shown to be the world's most successful soccer team. All perfectly logically and mathematically worked out. It was impressive.

I've no idea what you mean by most rugby doomsday scenario folk. Do a lot of rugby people try to suggest football is dying in England or something? I thought it was still huge there.

The Great Aukster wrote:

quinsforever wrote:

The Great Aukster wrote:If the point of this thread is to compare the three leagues then it should only be those games involving the top six teams in each league that are relevant. Therefore it is only those games involving Ulster, Leinster, Ospreys, Glasgow, Scarlets and Munster that should be considered for the P12 and also excluding games involving Perpignan who finished 7th in the T14.

Looking at total match points (including TBPs and LBPs) the points are:
Home v Away
P12 v AP : 13 v 14
AP v P12 : 7 v 21
so thats a total of 34 for the P12 against a total of 21 for the AP.

P12 v T14 : 15 v 11
T14 v p12 : 16 v 14
Total p12 is 29 and T14 is 27

AP v T14 : 16 v 13
T14 v AP : 18 v 11
Total AP 27 and T14 is 31

Comparing like for like with the top six teams from each league and the matches where they played each other, the Rabo Pro12 league comes out well ahead of the Aviva Prem and a bit ahead of the top 14.

are you kidding?

firstly you want to pick the top 6 rabo teams after you see how they do? yes, i'd like to to do that too if i were comparing leagues. secondly, even allowing you to pick retrospectively, the rabo doesnt come ahead of anyone. you are either lying or rubbish at numbers.

No, just comparing the top 6 teams from all three leagues seems the fairest way to "show the strength of each league's entrants". With regard to the numbers I'll expect either proof that I'm 'lying' or an apology.

Quinsforever,

A whole day has passed and you've provided nothing to back up your assertion that I'm either lying or rubbish with numbers. I'll take that as an affirmation that I'm neither lying nor rubbish with numbers. Thanks for that.

Don't worry about the apology, it's a man thing.

Cyril wrote:

Poorfour wrote:Mods, can we officially mark this thread with a photo of Graham Chapman as the Major? It has gotten silly.

I admit I submitted a post earlier, but I retract it. It's absolutely pointless to try to prove the relative merits of different nations based on a limited set of results from a distinctly lumpy playing field.

How apt with the HEC final being played at the Millennium Stadium   

Somewhere...
In a land not so far away,
A land of choirs and dragons and creatures known as Davies,
The Saint's 'somebody just committed a heinous anti-Welsh hate crime' sense is tingling   

The Great Aukster wrote:

The Great Aukster wrote:

quinsforever wrote:

The Great Aukster wrote:If the point of this thread is to compare the three leagues then it should only be those games involving the top six teams in each league that are relevant. Therefore it is only those games involving Ulster, Leinster, Ospreys, Glasgow, Scarlets and Munster that should be considered for the P12 and also excluding games involving Perpignan who finished 7th in the T14.

Looking at total match points (including TBPs and LBPs) the points are:
Home v Away
P12 v AP : 13 v 14
AP v P12 : 7 v 21
so thats a total of 34 for the P12 against a total of 21 for the AP.

P12 v T14 : 15 v 11
T14 v p12 : 16 v 14
Total p12 is 29 and T14 is 27

AP v T14 : 16 v 13
T14 v AP : 18 v 11
Total AP 27 and T14 is 31

Comparing like for like with the top six teams from each league and the matches where they played each other, the Rabo Pro12 league comes out well ahead of the Aviva Prem and a bit ahead of the top 14.

are you kidding?

firstly you want to pick the top 6 rabo teams after you see how they do? yes, i'd like to to do that too if i were comparing leagues. secondly, even allowing you to pick retrospectively, the rabo doesnt come ahead of anyone. you are either lying or rubbish at numbers.

No, just comparing the top 6 teams from all three leagues seems the fairest way to "show the strength of each league's entrants". With regard to the numbers I'll expect either proof that I'm 'lying' or an apology.

Quinsforever,

A whole day has passed and you've provided nothing to back up your assertion that I'm either lying or rubbish with numbers. I'll take that as an affirmation that I'm neither lying nor rubbish with numbers. Thanks for that.

Don't worry about the apology, it's a man thing.

how about you're just rubbish with numbers?

as per your miscalculation of average positions even with top 6 rabo. i really shouldn't highlight it as it improves the rabo top 6 performance, even while displaying your rubbishness with numbers. go back and redo the average position for rabo teams....trying to help you out here  

but statistically speaking you should pick your 6 before the competition starts, rather than picking the best 6 of 11 retrospectively. that's also a contributory factor to your rubbishness with numbers. it's called survivor bias in the academic journals i follow.

quinsforever wrote:but statistically speaking you should pick your 6 before the competition starts, rather than picking the best 6 of 11 retrospectively. that's also a contributory factor to your rubbishness with numbers. it's called survivor bias in the academic journals i follow.

... as I indeed did according to good statistical practice. Have you tried to assimilate any of the information you've read is these "academic journals".

Obviously this has to be simplified for you. The top 6 from the AP are the six teams who finished in the top six positions of the AP last year. Therefore the sensible thing is to compare them to the top six teams who finished in the top six positions of the P12 last year, and the top six teams who finished who finished in the top six positions in the T14 last year.

I didn't pick the teams - they were decided last year as any statistician would have realised. If you want to prove that my figures are wrong then feel free to do your own calculations or is that beyond you?

Thanks for the acknowledgement that you were wrong about me lying.

BTW my proclivity with numbers is neither here nor there, it's the numbers themselves that are either rubbish or not. Again to simplify them for you, here are just the match points (including BPs) from this year's pool stages for the matches involving both AP and P12 teams.

Top 6 (from league last year) Pro12: 34 points v AP: 21 points
Rest of Pro12: 7 points v AP: 43 points

I'm sure a man with as much faith in his numerical analysis abilities as you could prove them to be rubbish in a matter of minutes?

Good luck with that.

Personally I prefer my stats ex-ante rather than ex-post!

The Great Aukster wrote:

beshocked wrote:

The Great Aukster wrote:

beshocked wrote:quinsforever

Another way of doing it.....

Saints 11 tries
Exeter 11 tries
Sarries 29 tries
Quins 12 tries
Leicester 16 tries
Gloucester 13 tries

92 tries for the AP

Tries against

Saints - 10
Exeter - 14
Sarries - 5
Quins - 12
Leicester - 9
Gloucester - 10

60 tries conceded

32 + tries for the AP.


Irish are +22 in tries scored I think

+9 for Leinster
-13 for Connacht
+13 for Ulster
+13 for Munster


Welsh are -19

French are +15 I think

-5 for the Scots

-46 tries for the Italians

If you add the Pro12 all together.......

Pro12 -  -48

AP - +32

Top 14 - +15

... and if you adjust the figures to only consider the games between the top 6 teams in each league:

Pro12 - 0
AP -  -6
T14 - +6

... explains a lot... er... what was your point again!

Why adjust it to the top 6 teams in each league? There are 11 Pro12 sides in the HC. The stats reflect that.

Plus if you talk about top 6 teams in each league - surely Bath would be in that yet they are not in the HC this season.

My point is that the Pro12 as a whole is -48 tries.

Very poor in comparison to the AP and Top 14.

Taking out games as you suggest would be foolish as we are talking about the HC - all 24 teams taking part.

Why restrict it to the top 6 teams?
1. It would be an honest attempt to discuss the relative strength of each league's entrants.
2. The top six teams are based on last year's league position so why would Bath be in the HEC?
3. Your tries system is obviously fundamentally flawed if you consider more than the top six teams.

The Pro12 have 11 teams so two teams in most pools. They have to play each other. In your system the same tries scored for also count in the tries against in matches solely involving the P12 teams. So in pool 5 for example Ulster scored 7 tries to nil against Treviso at home and 4 tries to nil away. This counts in your system as 11 for the P12 and 11 against i.e. zero. OTOH Leicester scored 4-0 at home to Treviso and 4-1 away so in your system counts as 8 tries for the AP and 1 against.
Comparable teams in the P12 and AP against the same opposition should read +11 v +7 rather than -7 v +7.

1.You cannot talk about the relative strength of each league's entrance if you don't include all sides taking part in the HC.
2. Bath are currently 3rd in the AP and if English sides did take part in the HC next season, Bath would probably be there. They are stronger than both Exeter and Gloucester in my opinion.
3. Why? If you just include the "top" 6 sides it becomes flawed. I wouldn't call Gloucester a top 6 side. They were last season but their form has dipped considerably.


Also the Amlin Challenge Cup has 6 English sides in the quarter finals! London Irish were also unlucky to miss out (41 tries though!)

To me these results show what is obvious :-) the irish and the french produce the best teams, the english and the middle of the rabo produce the middle ranked teams, the bottom of the Rabo is cannon fodder. The one interesting one is that the Rabo is less polarised ie more even than the AP looking at the league results but this is not reproduced in the HC.

So that shows that the "non top 6" rabo clubs add noting except "variety" to the cup, something thats been painfiuly obvious for years.
It also suggests that either the Rabo is a hugely divided league (not reflected in the table) or the "haves" tend to concentrate on the HC.
That said the success of the Irish provinces in the HC has been remarkable in the last few seasons since the big two became a big three.
Yet again we see a number of French clubs trying and an equal number simply not bothering, especially away from home.

Is there anything in this seasons competition we didnt know already or expect to happen?


None of the Jeff clubs have disgraced themselves in the HC this year, but I cant see a serious contender to win. Again nothing we didnt expect before the season started really.

One thing I have noticed thats changed in attitude is toward the number of Welsh clubs qualifying for the later stages. This year a big zero. When that happened a few years back there was much gnashing and wailing (and a fair outpouring of abuse from the local wums), now it seems fairly accepted. The decline of the Welsh regions from potential challengers to also rans seems to be fairly accepted now.
Also looking at the groups they pulled this year their actual results werent bad, certainly not worse than can be expected given the decline in resources and player drain ...not just the exodus of wales stars but also a drop in the quality of foreign mercenaries.. Tough year for them.


This yet again shows the problems we have with the HC.
Only two nations offer serious challengers year in year out, with a third making up the numbers in the knock outs. A number of teams have no business in the cup at all other than to give it the veneer of a pan european competition. A bunch of others only show a passing interest. And finally the draw of groups can be grossly unfair at times.
Its still entirely preferable to the second tier cup though which just seems to be a procession of lower table Jeff clubs putting cricket scores on amateurs from places that used to be good at rugby.

The weaker Rabo teams did better this year  on the whole - especially the scots. The other thing it says to me is 5/5/8+2 would be the best numbers for entrants. No drop in quality to loose 1 english, one french, 2 rabo teams

TJ sorry but that's rubbish.

The top English sides are better than the middle ranked Pro12 sides.

E.g. I can't remember the last time Saracens lost to a Pro12 side in European competitions that wasn't Leinster of Munster. Certainly been more than 6 years! Though I will delve into history if I can....... found it.... a loss to Ulster in 2005-6 (our record vs Ulster is 4-1 I should add....  though I do expect it to be 4-2 when it's April. )


really? The Scots did better? I thought the Glasgow fans were saying that this was going to be their year in the HC with a potential quarter final up for grabs.

Why should the English and French drop a spot?

My counter offer is 6,6,8. Why you ask? You know why - Ulster,Munster and Leinster carry the rest of the Pro12 on their broad shoulders when it comes to European rugby.

beshocked, I'll take your 6+6+8 provided that the winner of the Heino and the winner of the Amlin (automatic qualifiers for the following year's Heino) come out of that league's allocation.

The Scots teams did better this year than usual (ignore Edinbokke's run to the semi-final two seasons ago which was abnormal) - 2 wins for Glasgow and 3 for Edinbokke is better than normal

beshocked wrote:

The Great Aukster wrote:

beshocked wrote:

The Great Aukster wrote:

beshocked wrote:quinsforever

Another way of doing it.....

Saints 11 tries
Exeter 11 tries
Sarries 29 tries
Quins 12 tries
Leicester 16 tries
Gloucester 13 tries

92 tries for the AP

Tries against

Saints - 10
Exeter - 14
Sarries - 5
Quins - 12
Leicester - 9
Gloucester - 10

60 tries conceded

32 + tries for the AP.


Irish are +22 in tries scored I think

+9 for Leinster
-13 for Connacht
+13 for Ulster
+13 for Munster


Welsh are -19

French are +15 I think

-5 for the Scots

-46 tries for the Italians

If you add the Pro12 all together.......

Pro12 -  -48

AP - +32

Top 14 - +15

... and if you adjust the figures to only consider the games between the top 6 teams in each league:

Pro12 - 0
AP -  -6
T14 - +6

... explains a lot... er... what was your point again!

Why adjust it to the top 6 teams in each league? There are 11 Pro12 sides in the HC. The stats reflect that.

Plus if you talk about top 6 teams in each league - surely Bath would be in that yet they are not in the HC this season.

My point is that the Pro12 as a whole is -48 tries.

Very poor in comparison to the AP and Top 14.

Taking out games as you suggest would be foolish as we are talking about the HC - all 24 teams taking part.

Why restrict it to the top 6 teams?
1. It would be an honest attempt to discuss the relative strength of each league's entrants.
2. The top six teams are based on last year's league position so why would Bath be in the HEC?
3. Your tries system is obviously fundamentally flawed if you consider more than the top six teams.

The Pro12 have 11 teams so two teams in most pools. They have to play each other. In your system the same tries scored for also count in the tries against in matches solely involving the P12 teams. So in pool 5 for example Ulster scored 7 tries to nil against Treviso at home and 4 tries to nil away. This counts in your system as 11 for the P12 and 11 against i.e. zero. OTOH Leicester scored 4-0 at home to Treviso and 4-1 away so in your system counts as 8 tries for the AP and 1 against.
Comparable teams in the P12 and AP against the same opposition should read +11 v +7 rather than -7 v +7.

1.You cannot talk about the relative strength of each league's entrance if you don't include all sides taking part in the HC.
2. Bath are currently 3rd in the AP and if English sides did take part in the HC next season, Bath would probably be there. They are stronger than both Exeter and Gloucester in my opinion.
3. Why? If you just include the "top" 6 sides it becomes flawed. I wouldn't call Gloucester a top 6 side. They were last season but their form has dipped considerably.


Also the Amlin Challenge Cup has 6 English sides in the quarter finals! London Irish were also unlucky to miss out (41 tries though!)

Beshocked,

You seem to be forgetting that ALL the AP sides in the HEC are there because of their performance LAST SEASON. That is how they qualify!

Honestly who cares how the AP teams qualify. its up to your union and league to decide that. Drop the league to six teams and they all qualify if you want. Everyone is happy.

Alasbut100ofus fair enough but I thought Glasgow had aspirations of a quarter final. I suppose it's how high you raise the bar. Yes I would agree with that.

MrsP of course I know that but because English sides have to qualify for the HC every season some sides will miss out.

GunsGerms you know that is unworkable - why suggest it? Everyone is happy except the 6 sides jettisoned.....

I would like to see more Pro12 sides in the Amlin - it's ridiculous how dominant the English clubs have been in the Amlin this season. It needs a bit more variety.

Beshocked.

If you want to use the HEC to compare the AP to the Pro12 then you can only use the preformance of the top 6 teams as they finished the league last year. That is comparing like with like.

You also seem to be falling into the trap of imagining that the Pro12 select teams for the HEC. That is not the case. At the moment each of 4 Unions, (Irish, Welsh, Scottish and Italian) use the position of their own teams in the Pro12 to decide which teams they send to the HEC the next season. The fact that some unions are selecting from a poorly performing available pool is not the fault of the other unions.

You cannnot compare the performance of the top 6 teams from the AP or Top14 with anything other than the top 6 teams from the Pro12.

MrsP I am not talking about strength of the league. I am talking about the strength of the teams taking part in the HC and how successful they have been.

I know there are 11 sides in the HC from the Pro12.

sounds like you are just trying to cherrypick the stats.

Something you fail to mention is that Munster,Leinster and Ulster did not face the three strongest French teams - Clermont,Toulouse and Toulon. It makes the Irish look better. You could argue they have earned that right but still.....

Munster didn't actually face any strong side. If Quins or Saints for example had swapped there is a good chance they would have topped the pool in my opinion.

You could argue that Saracens were fortunate to have Zebre and Connacht but Toulouse are far stronger than other side in Munster's pool.

5 English sides finished 2nd so there was bound to be English representation in the HC quarter finals - just who those teams were was debatable. Saints being perhaps the most unfortunate.

Luck of the draw can play a huge part - e.g. Leinster missed out on the HC quarter finals last season because they had Clermont in their group.

But Connacht beat a top french team

in a dead rubber group and toulouse still topped their group.

and then sarries stuck 60+ on connacht to qualify as best runner up.

TJ wrote:But Connacht beat a top french team

Doesn't count though. Connacht aren't a top 6 side. Their win is irrelevant right?  According to MrsP and the Great Aukster it doesn't count.

Of course not. Connacht's win over Toulouse will go down as one of the greatest shocks ever in the HC.

Can't cherrypick fixtures. If you are going to include Connacht's win vs Toulouse you must include their other matches too.

beshocked wrote:Something you fail to mention is that Munster,Leinster and Ulster did not face the three strongest French teams - Clermont,Toulouse and Toulon. It makes the Irish look better. You could argue they have earned that right but still.....

(excised)

You could argue that Saracens were fortunate to have Zebre and Connacht but Toulouse are far stronger than other side in Munster's pool.

(excised)

Luck of the draw can play a huge part - e.g. Leinster missed out on the HC quarter finals last season because they had Clermont in their group.

Thats why this exercise should be taken with a large pinch of salt- the best teams collide in the later stages of tournaments so we have no real ability to make assessments until the end of the season. This kind of thing gives us some good insight into what leagues as a whole are under performing and averages but its the quarter-finals, semi-finals and final that will really demonstrate where the best sides hail from.

It's a pretty clear indicator of what countries are doing well but what it tells us about the Pro12 is much more mixed.

Here's what the Pro12 is; a cross-border tournament in which Unions negotiate deals to enter a certain number of teams each, exactly like the current Heineken Cup format as run by ERC. It has more in common with the Heineken Cup than it does with the Aviva Prem in terms of off-field structure and governance whilst the on-field structure is similar to the French and English leagues. This is where I feel most of the confusion about the Pro12 and bunfights about it between fans of different nations arise from.

Just as we can do an analysis of results of the sort done by Quins to find out which countries have been most successful in the initial pool stage (in order; Ireland, England, France, Wales, Scotland, Italy) we can do an analysis to see which leagues have been successful (in order; Aviva Prem, Top14, Pro12)

However, to make sense of this information we have to take into account the differences in governance structure between the leagues. Whilst all English teams in the Aviva Prem fall under the auspices of the RFU and PRL, and therefore the same rules regarding salary caps etc. They all share broadcast income equally, they all have the same cap on their player wage budget- they aren't equal in terms of income, but they start from the same baseline.

The Pro12 has four different unions running things and the regions in the mix there as well. So Wales imposed a salary cap on the regions- the IRFU didn't. The WRU and regions have not been able to agree a structure where they can provide any major financial incentives to keep top-flight internationals in Wales (until recently if you believe the rumours, and thats a limited number of central contracts for top players without regional consent!)- the IRFU has etc. These conditions, these imbalances, are causing a four-tier league. The competitiveness of the Welsh teams in both Europe and the Pro12 is dropping and the competitiveness of the Irish teams in both tournaments is improving. The Italians continue to stagnate at the bottom of the pile and are losing money- hence why they are considering leaving the Pro12 altogether and the Scottish teams are up and down but slowly improving.

The Pro12 is becoming a much less equal league and that is something the Irish provincial fans shouldn't be lulled into a false sense of security about- short term, its great for us to be able to dominate the league, we celebrate our success. But long-term? For instance every year, France and England have a grand final of their domestic competition in their home country. What happens if the Pro12 Grand Final is in Ireland every year? Interest in Italy, Scotland and Wales suffers. Their teams suffer, we begin to dominate more easily. Eventually the standard of our opposition drops and drops.

We see it happening here. From a very early stage in the pools the only candidates for progression were the Irish, French and English. For me, these averages don't show the Pro12 lags behind the other leagues. It shows the gap between the best sides in the league and the bottom sides is growing and more worryingly that the gaps between the Irish sides and the Welsh, Scottish and Italians are growing. It shows that European Professional Club Rugby is splitting into two tiers with the Irish, English and French in one and the Welsh, Scottish and Italians in the other.

The long term questions are very troubling.

beshocked wrote:Of course not. Connacht's win over Toulouse will go down as one of the greatest shocks ever in the HC.

For my money, the greatest shock was Ebbw Vale beating Toulouse in the pre-regional era.

The game in France was the biggest defeat in Heineken Cup history; Toulouse 108-16 Ebbw Vale. Toulouse scored 16 tries! Guess what happened in the return fixture? Yep. Toulouse away day blues have been part of this tournament since the start. The outcome was Toulouse missed out on a home draw, traveled to Ravenhill and were knocked out in the quarter-final in front of vociferous Irish home support.

This year the defeat to Connacht cost them a home draw, they must travel to Thomond Park and play Munster in front of vociferous Irish home support. History repeating itself?

Notch wrote:

beshocked wrote:Something you fail to mention is that Munster,Leinster and Ulster did not face the three strongest French teams - Clermont,Toulouse and Toulon. It makes the Irish look better. You could argue they have earned that right but still.....

(excised)

You could argue that Saracens were fortunate to have Zebre and Connacht but Toulouse are far stronger than other side in Munster's pool.

(excised)

Luck of the draw can play a huge part - e.g. Leinster missed out on the HC quarter finals last season because they had Clermont in their group.

Thats why this exercise should be taken with a large pinch of salt- the best teams collide in the later stages of tournaments so we have no real ability to make assessments until the end of the season. This kind of thing gives us some good insight into what leagues as a whole are under performing and averages but its the quarter-finals, semi-finals and final that will really demonstrate where the best sides hail from.

It's a pretty clear indicator of what countries are doing well but what it tells us about the Pro12 is much more mixed.

Here's what the Pro12 is; a cross-border tournament in which Unions negotiate deals to enter a certain number of teams each, exactly like the current Heineken Cup format as run by ERC. It has more in common with the Heineken Cup than it does with the Aviva Prem in terms of off-field structure and governance whilst the on-field structure is similar to the French and English leagues. This is where I feel most of the confusion about the Pro12 and bunfights about it between fans of different nations arise from.

Just as we can do an analysis of results of the sort done by Quins to find out which countries have been most successful in the initial pool stage (in order; Ireland, England, France, Wales, Scotland, Italy) we can do an analysis to see which leagues have been successful (in order; Aviva Prem, Top14, Pro12)

However, to make sense of this information we have to take into account the differences in governance structure between the leagues. Whilst all English teams in the Aviva Prem fall under the auspices of the RFU and PRL, and therefore the same rules regarding salary caps etc. They all share broadcast income equally, they all have the same cap on their player wage budget- they aren't equal in terms of income, but they start from the same baseline.

The Pro12 has four different unions running things and the regions in the mix there as well. So Wales imposed a salary cap on the regions- the IRFU didn't. The WRU and regions have not been able to agree a structure where they can provide any major financial incentives to keep top-flight internationals in Wales (until recently if you believe the rumours, and thats a limited number of central contracts for top players without regional consent!)- the IRFU has etc. These conditions, these imbalances, are causing a four-tier league. The competitiveness of the Welsh teams in both Europe and the Pro12 is dropping and the competitiveness of the Irish teams in both tournaments is improving. The Italians continue to stagnate at the bottom of the pile and are losing money- hence why they are considering leaving the Pro12 altogether and the Scottish teams are up and down but slowly improving.

The Pro12 is becoming a much less equal league and that is something the Irish provincial fans shouldn't be lulled into a false sense of security about- short term, its great for us to be able to dominate the league, we celebrate our success. But long-term? For instance every year, France and England have a grand final of their domestic competition in their home country. What happens if the Pro12 Grand Final is in Ireland every year? Interest in Italy, Scotland and Wales suffers. Their teams suffer, we begin to dominate more easily. Eventually the standard of our opposition drops and drops.

We see it happening here. From a very early stage in the pools the only candidates for progression were the Irish, French and English. For me, these averages don't show the Pro12 lags behind the other leagues. It shows the gap between the best sides in the league and the bottom sides is growing and more worryingly that the gaps between the Irish sides and the Welsh, Scottish and Italians are growing. It shows that European Professional Club Rugby is splitting into two tiers with the Irish, English and French in one and the Welsh, Scottish and Italians in the other.

The long term questions are very troubling.

I agree with most of that but you would think that being in the HC basically every season would help sides in Wales, Scotland and Italy improve. The Irish have exploited that advantage to brilliant effort, using the profile of being in the HC and the experience to push on, recruit players etc.

I can't understand that with all these inbuilt advantages it's only Ulster,Munster and Leinster who generally make inroads in the HC.

Would be interesting to know the salary cap of the respective clubs in the Pro12.

What wouldve happened if the Rabo teams had to qualify purely on league position?

Dragons instead of Zebre...quality increased

If they were limited to 8 teams on that basis

No Blues (who were the pick of the Welsh) or Edinburgh .. both averagely performing sides

If they were limited to the top 6
No Treviso or Connacht

A straight top 6 qualification wouldnt have lost the competition any serious (ie knock out stages) teams.

But ... then neither would a top 4 qualification form the Jeff or T14.

In the qualification debate its generally the no marks that we are bothered about. Aside from devaluing the competition with joke performances like Connacht Saracens (to counter balance their heroics against Toulouse) it really doesnt matter if its zebre or custard united, all they are denying another team is the opportunity to not have sit through the tedium of the EEC cup.

I think only the Welsh have a formal salary cap, but I don't think anyone has anywhere near as much spending power as the French, and the top English sides have a roughly equivalent budget to the top Irish sides.

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:In the qualification debate its generally the no marks that we are bothered about. Aside from devaluing the competition with joke performances like Connacht Saracens (to counter balance their heroics against Toulouse) it really doesnt matter if its zebre or custard united, all they are denying another team is the opportunity to not have sit through the tedium of the EEC cup.

I was under the impression that the qualification debate had been settled? 20 teams- 6-6-7- plus the winner of some kind of playoff, with the highest placed team from each nation in the Pro12 guaranteed to be in the 7 allocated to that league?

Now we just have to agree on what tournament they're qualifying for... and of course if the Italians do go through with their proposed exit from the Pro12 the qualification debate will be open once again...

Notch wrote:

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:In the qualification debate its generally the no marks that we are bothered about. Aside from devaluing the competition with joke performances like Connacht Saracens (to counter balance their heroics against Toulouse) it really doesnt matter if its zebre or custard united, all they are denying another team is the opportunity to not have sit through the tedium of the EEC cup.

I was under the impression that the qualification debate had been settled? 20 teams- 6-6-7- plus the winner of some kind of playoff, with the highest placed team from each nation in the Pro12 guaranteed to be in the 7 allocated to that league?

Now we just have to agree on what tournament they're qualifying for... and of course if the Italians do go through with their proposed exit from the Pro12 the qualification debate will be open once again...

What happens when the Welsh join the AP though?

  

I think this all started up again when someone (can't remember who) said "haha English teams are rubbish, where's your meritocracy qualification now?". To which the response was "well the top 6 from each league are about equal and the bottom part of the Pro12 are at the bottom of the pools (again) so it makes sense that they go", the response to which was "yeah? stuff you, the English are rubbish".


Or something like that. I might be paraphrasing.

the qualification for next years interim tourney will be based on that Its not set in stone. However the PRL rejecting it has meant that its possible that will have to be revisited and as for future years - I very much doubt the PRL will be offered such a good deal again seeing as they rejected it this time. No one outside of the PRL wanted that qualification - but offered it to keep the PRL onside. If this year is without the english then it will be a 20 team tourney but who knows how it will be divided

Notch wrote:I think only the Welsh have a formal salary cap, but I don't think anyone has anywhere near as much spending power as the French, and the top English sides have a roughly equivalent budget to the top Irish sides.

This is wrong, the Welsh Regions have a self imposed salary cap, which was not imposed by the WRU as you implied in your earlier post, it was set voluntarily by the Regions, to show how the Benefactors had carried Team Wales. It just shows how we are the least supported teams by it's own Union in the major European competitions, it was ironic in the debate on Sunday that the Dodger can NOW identify much more money to channel to the Central Contract issue.

HammerofThunor wrote:I think this all started up again when someone (can't remember who) said "haha English teams are rubbish, where's your meritocracy qualification now?".  To which the response was "well the top 6 from each league are about equal and the bottom part of the Pro12 are at the bottom of the pools (again) so it makes sense that they go", the response to which was "yeah? stuff you, the English are rubbish".


Or something like that. I might be paraphrasing.

 Pretty much I think

 top 6 from each league are not really equal tho are they?  Sarries and tigers only get thruy as best runners up because of having a weak Italian team in their group.    

But do the results show england should have 6 teams on merit?  We all agree losing the worst couple of Rabo teams will not affect the quality too much - how about the bottom couple of english teams - what did Exeter bring to the table that Glasgow did not? ( actually a couple of really good games from them)  Or perpignon - did they deserve to be there?

This years q/f line up shows the meritocracy argument to be weak indeed.  

Only being facetious really - but the PRL cannot use either "we have to flight too hard in our league" or "its too easy for the PRO12" on the back of the QF lineup can they?  the only point really to be drawn from it is the groups with the italians in are the easiest to qualify from and that has worked to the advantage of the AP teams this year.

TJ wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:I think this all started up again when someone (can't remember who) said "haha English teams are rubbish, where's your meritocracy qualification now?".  To which the response was "well the top 6 from each league are about equal and the bottom part of the Pro12 are at the bottom of the pools (again) so it makes sense that they go", the response to which was "yeah? stuff you, the English are rubbish".


Or something like that. I might be paraphrasing.

 Pretty much I think  top 6 from each league are not really equal tho are they?  Sarries and tigers only get thruy as best runners up because of having a weak Italian team in their group.    

But do the results show england should have 6 teams on merit?  We all agree losing the worst couple of Rabo teams will not affect the quality too much - how about the bottom couple of english teams - what did Exeter bring to the table that Glasgow did not? ( actually a couple of really good games from them)  Or perpignon - did they deserve to be there?

This years q/f line up shows the meritocracy argument to be weak indeed.  

Only being facetious really - but the PRL cannot use either "we have to flight too hard in our league" or "its too easy for the PRO12" on the back of the QF lineup can they?  the only point really to be drawn from it is the groups with the italians in are the easiest to qualify from and that has worked to the advantage of the AP teams this year.

TJ you talk so much $%^&. I don't know if it's meant as a poorly thought out joke or you actually believe what you write.

It's irrelevant whether it was Sarries or Tigers as best runners up, 5 English sides finished runners up in their pools. The Italians in the group have worked to the advantage of Sarries and Tigers. I wouldn't say Saints are too pleased they missed out on a 1/4 final.

Exeter have earnt HC rugby through their own merits by actually having to go through a qualification process. Something that is completely alien to Scottish clubs. Perpignan have been poor, true but are unlikely to be in the HC next season anyway.

I am sorry perhaps I should add - if Tigers and Sarries don't deserve to be in the quarter finals then who should replace them?

wayne wrote:

Notch wrote:I think only the Welsh have a formal salary cap, but I don't think anyone has anywhere near as much spending power as the French, and the top English sides have a roughly equivalent budget to the top Irish sides.

This is wrong, the Welsh Regions have a self imposed salary cap, which was not imposed by the WRU as you implied in your earlier post, it was set voluntarily by the Regions, to show how the Benefactors had carried Team Wales. It just shows how we are the least supported teams by it's own Union in the major European competitions, it was ironic in the debate on Sunday that the Dodger can NOW identify much more money to channel to the Central Contract issue.

Thanks for the correction- genuine mistake on my part   

TJ wrote:Only being facetious really

I didn't say sarries and Tigers didn't deserve to go thru did I - I said being in a group with the italian teams worked to their advantage which it clearly did and that tat is the only real conclusion to be drawn. You say 5 ap teams finished runners up in their groups - true. But non won did they to go thru as of right

Oh - and why be offensive? I shall go back to ignoring you I think as you love to take insult where non intended and love to dish out the insults.

Notch wrote:

wayne wrote:

Notch wrote:I think only the Welsh have a formal salary cap, but I don't think anyone has anywhere near as much spending power as the French, and the top English sides have a roughly equivalent budget to the top Irish sides.

This is wrong, the Welsh Regions have a self imposed salary cap, which was not imposed by the WRU as you implied in your earlier post, it was set voluntarily by the Regions, to show how the Benefactors had carried Team Wales. It just shows how we are the least supported teams by it's own Union in the major European competitions, it was ironic in the debate on Sunday that the Dodger can NOW identify much more money to channel to the Central Contract issue.

Thanks for the correction- genuine mistake on my part   

No problem Notch, did you see the debate Sunday if you did what did you think of the Dodgers responses to practically any question he was asked

wayne wrote:

Notch wrote:

wayne wrote:

Notch wrote:I think only the Welsh have a formal salary cap, but I don't think anyone has anywhere near as much spending power as the French, and the top English sides have a roughly equivalent budget to the top Irish sides.

This is wrong, the Welsh Regions have a self imposed salary cap, which was not imposed by the WRU as you implied in your earlier post, it was set voluntarily by the Regions, to show how the Benefactors had carried Team Wales. It just shows how we are the least supported teams by it's own Union in the major European competitions, it was ironic in the debate on Sunday that the Dodger can NOW identify much more money to channel to the Central Contract issue.

Thanks for the correction- genuine mistake on my part   

No problem Notch, did you see the debate Sunday if you did what did you think of the Dodgers responses to practically any question he was asked

The football fans have a chant don't they... "You don't know what you're doing". Not saying he doesn't know but he definitely doesn't project any clear vision other than pimping the test side for all their worth to pay down debt on th national stadium.  Also thought Moffett was hilariously awful. The past and the present of the WRU don't give much hope for the future.

There doesn't seem to be much thought given to what role the regions should play at the outset, we know how alienating and rushed the process of regionalisation was- I think Roger Lewis is a man cleaning up the mess thats been left by his predecessors and doing a very poor job of it tbh.

I still believe the Irish system of Union-controlled teams and central contracts is the best in Europe and allows us to punch way out of our league- but sadly the Welsh missed their window to do something similar and burning down the imperfect mess that exists to start something new is only going to damage the game.

It's not as simple as only going through because they are in your group. Still need to win and pick up those try bonuses.

Toulouse showed how it shouldn't be done by losing to Connacht at home and only scoring 1 try in an away match at Zebre.

You are right they didn't win their pools but all the English sides drew the best sides from France and Ireland. In contrast Ulster,Munster and Leinster avoided Clermont,Toulon and Toulouse. Munster avoided all the toughest sides.

As to why I am being offensive. It's because you are offensive. You spout out comments which make no sense whatsoever.

In my opinion - swap Munster with Sarries or Tigers would have seen Sarries or Tigers topping the pool and getting a home quarter final.

I am not the one resorting to insults or spouting nonsense. When you have to resort to insults it shows you have lost the argument. Byeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

Guys (beshocked, TJ) have you considered using the ignore function?

Click on the name of the poster you wish to ignore, then on their profile page on the right hand side click on the link 'Add to my foes list'.

You will no longer see posts by that user, although if other posters quote them you will still see their contributions.

beshocked wrote:Alasbut100ofus fair enough but I thought Glasgow had aspirations of a quarter final. I suppose it's how high you raise the bar. Yes I would agree with that.

MrsP of course I know that but because English sides have to qualify for the HC every season some sides will miss out.

GunsGerms you know that is unworkable - why suggest it? Everyone is happy except the 6 sides jettisoned.....

I would like to see more Pro12 sides in the Amlin - it's ridiculous how dominant the English clubs have been in the Amlin this season. It needs a bit more variety.

Strange - if you don't have aspirations of a HC 1/4 then why enter.   Bizarre thing to say tbh and makes no sense whatsoever !

quinsforever wrote:you are clearly struggling to understand the very basic maths above so i'll put it in simpler terms for you:

the average rabo team came 2.73 rd in each group

the average top14 team came 2.43 rd in each group

the average AP team came 2.17 th in each group

But considering this is a European competition set up with representatives from each of the 6 Unions, I assume the teams representing the RFU in the competition would still be in first place?

And the AP wants to bring in the Regions considering their position.

HammerofThunor wrote:I think this all started up again when someone (can't remember who) said "haha English teams are rubbish, where's your meritocracy qualification now?".  To which the response was "well the top 6 from each league are about equal and the bottom part of the Pro12 are at the bottom of the pools (again) so it makes sense that they go", the response to which was "yeah? stuff you, the English are rubbish".


Or something like that. I might be paraphrasing.

that is correct hammer. same jibes every time an english side lost to a rabo side, or a rabo side beat a french side. was pretty tiresome to be frank, especially after only rounds 1 and 2 of HC. now that the whole pool stage is over some conclusions can reasonably be drawn.

Notch wrote:Guys (beshocked, TJ) have you considered using the ignore function?

Click on the name of the poster you wish to ignore, then on their profile page on the right hand side click on the link 'Add to my foes list'.

You will no longer see posts by that user, although if other posters quote them you will still see their contributions.

I have - I mistakenly opened one to see if it was worth reading. It wasn't. I did stupidly reply tho.

Well it doesn't really work if you still read their posts TJ (understatement)

Notch wrote:Well it doesn't really work if you still read their posts TJ (understatement)

Yup - my mistake