Europe wide governing body

Hi my first post here and I've been looking into the way that Rugby Union is governed in Europe and internationaly. Currently there isn't a Europe wide governing body similar to other sports. FIRA do a great job of looking at grassroots but is it time for a body to look at the international and club level tournaments. Your input would be greatly appreciated. Cheers

cdm

With the on-going uncertainties about the Heineken Cup or whatever it will be in a year or two, it's certainly an interesting topic, but one that is likely to see a few tempers flare.

All things indicate a new body will be set up as part of the 'Peace in Our Time' deal which will probably be announced after the Six Nations... we hope.

More integration between different bodies would be one of the main priorities the French seem to have had in this whole farce, with a French man in charge in an office in continental Europe

Putin wants it all moved to Crimea................ and we all know what he's like when he gets an idea into his head.

Wont work.

In football, all clubs are privately owned. And club football dominates international football economically. There is no such thing as central contracting for example.

In rugby, England and France's clubs are never going to agree to having their futures dictated by an organisation of unions. Obviously the rest of the unions would like it because they view club rugby as a subordinated supporter of their respective national games. And England and France's leagues generate 75% of the global revenue for club league competition, which explains why the other unions want as much of that action as possible. But that's precisely why it wont happen.

Until all countries have a similar setup of club v union ownership, there is ZERO scope for a single body overseeing all aspects of club and national competitions.

I just worry that they make 75% of revenue but there can't be much scope for future growth in only those leagues. Eventually it will stagnate and they will need to do more to increase revenue. They can't do this long term without expanding into other markets. It's all well and good keeping the status quo for now and keeping themselves ahead of the game but I can't see it as any more than shortsightedness. Do they really not want the playing power and financial power of other countries?

the ONLY real growth in club rugby is in France and England. it's the Rabo which is struggling economically. And in % terms there is a lot more room for rugby to grow in England and France than Wales or Ireland. That's one reason why Bt and Canal+ have just signed much bigger club TV deals.

The shortsightedness, and i agree with you, is in anyone trying to perpetuate the status quo, but at the moment that's pretty much 6Nations Ltd and ERC Ltd (ie these two organisations run cartels which favours the smaller 6N rugby playing nations). If you want to break open the status quo, get rid of 6Nations Ltd and ERC. But its never going to happen. Camou (FFR president) had to back down on his pet FIRA project.

But dont blame the clubs of England and France for the status quo - they were the ones trying to force change on ERC.

Oh no your absolutely right maybe scraping the 6 nationsLtd would help create a pathway for other nations. And like you said Rugby is usually top down from internationals as opposed to football where the clubs have most money and power. Currently there is no pathway to elite competitions in Europe. If there was, it would benefit most unions on Europe and that would filter down to help create more structured domestic Rugby.

unfortunately its just never going to happen. irfu, wru, sru and fir are spending all the money they get, so i dont think they would accept any reorganisation of international rugby that saw them get less money. and 6Nations is one country one vote.

it's a really tricky problem.

and by the way apologies if i appear a bit strident. these issues have been much batted around on the Heineken Cup civil war threads, and my diplomacy is probably on a par with Putin's on this particular theme.

welcome to 606v2!

Again its a strange issue with the Heineken cup but Rugby is still young in terms of professionalism. All sports leagues worldwide have big shake ups in their pasts and Rugbys may be on the verge. But it's more of the international side I think needs sorting out better. International rugby is great but can't remain a closed shop at the top forever.

What would you suggest? Increase the size of the 6Ns?

No necessarily because you would have to go to eight really I don't think 7 is good in a sporting sense or business sense as bye weeks for teams boss a hard sell. 6 is a great number especially for an annual tournament, maybe a promotion relagation match between teams bottom of 6N and wonders of ENC.

Thats winners of ENC. Damn predictive text

I think we should be looking to increase the size of the international window Sin.

An extra week in the November series which is set aside solely for games between European nations who are part of the Six Nations and European nations who are not. This will give us info on how ready we are to expand the Six Nations. Of course if we do that it will probably lead to needing to expand the international window in the New Year... Thats what I think we SHOULD be doing- it'll be war trying to get it through because a lot of Unions will still try and arrange fixtures outside the window and the English and French clubs will cry havoc about it.

But we need to give other nations a fair chance to climb the ladder. Italy were invited into the Six Nations partially because they played three test matches against Ireland in three years... and won them all. It was clear that at that point they were as good as the lower-ranked sides in the Six Nations based on their results.

How will we know if the likes of Georgia are as good as Scotland or Italy if we don't get them playing each other on a regular basis? And we can't take away the games which make the unions financially viable either, so as far as I see it longer test windows are the only solution to the 'cosy cartel' criticism.

Why increase the international window? Why not decrease the times that Teir 1 teams play each other? Why not say a Tier 1 team can only play against one other Tier 1 team in the summer/autumn international windows? Leave 6 Nations/Rugby Championship alone for now until other teams are competitive.

Because of travelling - just not worthwhile going to NZ or Aus for 1 test game. Same applies to SH teams travelling north for the autumn internationals.

By the way, an emerging Ireland & SA team played in the Tiblisi tournament last summer. I think tournaments like this are good.

Also, I think the intention is (for Ireland anyway) to play an emerging nation in the autumn every year. I think Romania maybe the one this coming autumn.

Its not as if the emerging nations are ignored. Ireland was in USA & Canada last summer, Wales were in Japan I think. England used to organise the Churchill Cup. Considering the limited amount of time, I don't think they are being totally neglected.

Notch wrote:I think we should be looking to increase the size of the international window Sin.

An extra week in the November series which is set aside solely for games between European nations who are part of the Six Nations and European nations who are not. This will give us info on how ready we are to expand the Six Nations. Of course if we do that it will probably lead to needing to expand the international window in the New Year... Thats what I think we SHOULD be doing- it'll be war trying to get it through because a lot of Unions will still try and arrange fixtures outside the window and the English and French clubs will cry havoc about it.

But we need to give other nations a fair chance to climb the ladder. Italy were invited into the Six Nations partially because they played three test matches against Ireland in three years... and won them all. It was clear that at that point they were as good as the lower-ranked sides in the Six Nations based on their results.

How will we know if the likes of Georgia are as good as Scotland or Italy if we don't get them playing each other on a regular basis? And we can't take away the games which make the unions financially viable either, so as far as I see it longer test windows are the only solution to the 'cosy cartel' criticism.

I'd agree with the extra game in the autumn - think all boats would rise with that. Tier 1 countries could get to try out less experienced players. Letting them into the 6Ns would just be soul destroying for them - look at how long it has taken Italy to be anyway competitive.

NH Tier 1 teams tend to only play one SH tier 1 team in the Summer IW(playing the same team 2 or 3 times). SH Tier 1 teams tend to play several NH tier 1 teams in the Autumn IW(playing each team only once). If restricted to only playing 1 Tier 1 team on a tour they could play them 2 or 3 times & also play teams from below Tier 1, either in the Tier 1 host nation or as travel is relatively short in Europe going to other non tier 1 nations(as playing "lesser" nations would not have to play all their best players giving some a rest & others a chance)

The playing of the same team 2 or 3 times is fairly recent (2012 to be exact). World Rugby would be broke if these tours didn't take place. They are recipical tours to the AIs, when the SH teams tour up here and won't be touched.

What I do think might work is a Northern Hemisphere Cup the year of the Lions maybe for starters which would give countries like Italy etc. a chance to win it because all the top players will be on the Lions. I'd call it a Northern Hemisphere cup so as to include Canada & USA and let France tour which ever team the Lions are not playing so that they don't go broke.

Im starting to like the idea of a European or hemisphere cup more and more. You have to be careful though as it may be overshadowed by the lions tour. I would most like to see a pathway from the enc to the 6n and Pacific nations cup to the rugby championship.

cdm86 wrote:Im starting to like the idea of a European or hemisphere cup more and more. You have to be careful though as it may be overshadowed by the lions tour. I would most like to see a pathway from the enc to the 6n and Pacific nations cup to the rugby championship.

Unlikely in either case - the turkeys won't vote for Christmas, dropping out of the 6Ns or RC would be a financial disaster for whoever it happened to, not just in terms of ticket sales, but sponsorship, TV funding, player retention the whole package - this wouldn't just apply to 6N sides, the impact on Argentina who are just finding their feet in the RC would be massive if they were pushed striaght back out again. This isn't just about the lower ranked sides either, France finished last in the 6Ns last year could you really see them dropping down to play Georgia and Spain, even if only for a season?

Also growing a sport is a very slow process, the sport has to first take root domestically at some level where club (amateur or professional) rugby is sustainable and there is an appetitie for international games not as a novelty (e.g. the differnence between the one off NFL game at Wembley and the attendances when they tried to launch NFL in Europe)  then that's the tipping point.

I do agree that a European Cup in an Lions year featuring everyone (with the 6Ns putting out mix of A team and U20 players) would be a good idea and held in the right place could get good TV/crowds.

Some really good points there irish londoner. Maybe a clear pathway is too soon from a financial standpoint even with a playoff match. The ICC in cricket is adopting a playoff for test status soon. I think a teir 1 needs to pay a teir2/3 nation at least once a year though to get the ball rolling. Just have to keep an eye on the irbs international season plans and hopefully that provides some good framework for all.