Anyone think the new pan european tournament looks a little... lopsided?

First topic message reminder :

Just had a look at the groups, and well it looks less like a representitive tournament than PRL/LNR invitational.

Now i'm not having a go, or have any vested interest, but surely so many games every year involving either 2 English teams or 2 french teams playing each other in the group stage detracts from the competition.

I prefer a tournament that has Europes and rugbys interest in mind, and like this tournament less now I know it's an elitist version of a once great spectacle.

What is wrong with allowing 2 Scottish teams, 2 Italian teams and maybe Spanish, Russian national representitives?

No 7&1/2 wrote:It has to be about leagues and not nations otherwise you would have more from the RABO over the English and French making 1 league more attractive to sponsors etc. Excitement comes from new match ups so 2 teams from the Aviva is as novel as 2 from rabo if you truely were neutral.

Your only considering things from a purely media and small minded perspective...

What is the potential audience in mainland europe, Scandenavia or Russia? It could be pretty huge, if only the game could grow there, and with elitism running the main competition it will definately not grow in those places!

Your looking at it from a tournament to represent 3 leagues POV, I am looking at it from a european and potentially global POV. I'm saying for a european tournament to be european it has to allow as many competitive teams from as many countries as possible to participate. Looking at the Rabo as 1 league is disrespecfull to the 4 nations who compete in it, and in reality 4 nations should be better represented than just 2!

I'm not saying the Rabo should dominate the tournament, I'm saying nobody should dominate the tournament, and for that to happen equal shares of the tournament should be alloted to every european nation that wants to compete.

I would have also like to have seen 1 of 2 things happen, either a champions league style situation where 6 teams, the top team from each nation went into a 'best of the best' style comp, or a seeding situation where every european team gets seeded based on their league standings, and everyone is forced to play a qualifier, and then put into the 1st or 2nd competition based on that. Either way there is competitiveness at league and european level, and if 1 nations club dominates it's on merit and not a hissy fit.

Neutralee wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:It has to be about leagues and not nations otherwise you would have more from the RABO over the English and French making 1 league more attractive to sponsors etc. Excitement comes from new match ups so 2 teams from the Aviva is as novel as 2 from rabo if you truely were neutral.

Your only considering things from a purely media and small minded perspective...

What is the potential audience in mainland europe, Scandenavia or Russia? It could be pretty huge, if only the game could grow there, and with elitism running the main competition it will definately not grow in those places!

Your looking at it from a tournament to represent 3 leagues POV, I am looking at it from a european and potentially global POV. I'm saying for a european tournament to be european it has to allow as many competitive teams from as many countries as possible to participate. Looking at the Rabo as 1 league is disrespecfull to the 4 nations who compete in it, and in reality 4 nations should be better represented than just 2!

I'm not saying the Rabo should dominate the tournament, I'm saying nobody should dominate the tournament, and for that to happen equal shares of the tournament should be alloted to every european nation that wants to compete.

I would have also like to have seen 1 of 2 things happen, either a champions league style situation where 6 teams, the top team from each nation went into a 'best of the best' style comp, or a seeding situation where every european team gets seeded based on their league standings, and everyone is forced to play a qualifier, and then put into the 1st or 2nd competition based on that. Either way there is competitiveness at league and european level, and if 1 nations club dominates it's on merit and not a hissy fit.

Your grossly over estimating the level of Rugby Union in Europe outside the 6Ns as a whole. There are only 3 MAJOR professional leagues in the whole of Europe. Then you have some fledgling pro leagues in Russia, Italy and Georgia but they are at a standard below the second tier in France.

Where is this massive European TV audience? There is very little interest in watching essentially 6Ns Club Rugby in places like Scandinavia, Germany and Spain etc.

Football rules Europe by a country mile but then there are established sports such as Basketball, Handball and Ice Hockey which already have Pan European identity and are very strong in certain regions.

If you follow a CL style qualification format you would end up with the same teams as we have now. The minnows would just get knocked out by the TOP14/AP/PRO12 teams.

andyi wrote:

Neutralee wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:It has to be about leagues and not nations otherwise you would have more from the RABO over the English and French making 1 league more attractive to sponsors etc. Excitement comes from new match ups so 2 teams from the Aviva is as novel as 2 from rabo if you truely were neutral.

Your only considering things from a purely media and small minded perspective...

What is the potential audience in mainland europe, Scandenavia or Russia? It could be pretty huge, if only the game could grow there, and with elitism running the main competition it will definately not grow in those places!

Your looking at it from a tournament to represent 3 leagues POV, I am looking at it from a european and potentially global POV. I'm saying for a european tournament to be european it has to allow as many competitive teams from as many countries as possible to participate. Looking at the Rabo as 1 league is disrespecfull to the 4 nations who compete in it, and in reality 4 nations should be better represented than just 2!

I'm not saying the Rabo should dominate the tournament, I'm saying nobody should dominate the tournament, and for that to happen equal shares of the tournament should be alloted to every european nation that wants to compete.

I would have also like to have seen 1 of 2 things happen, either a champions league style situation where 6 teams, the top team from each nation went into a 'best of the best' style comp, or a seeding situation where every european team gets seeded based on their league standings, and everyone is forced to play a qualifier, and then put into the 1st or 2nd competition based on that. Either way there is competitiveness at league and european level, and if 1 nations club dominates it's on merit and not a hissy fit.

Your grossly over estimating the level of Rugby Union in Europe outside the 6Ns as a whole.  There are only 3 MAJOR professional leagues in the whole of Europe. Then you have some fledgling pro leagues in Russia, Italy and Georgia but they are at a standard below the second tier in France.

Where is this massive European TV audience? There is very little interest in watching essentially 6Ns Club Rugby in places like Scandinavia, Germany and Spain etc.

Football rules Europe by a country mile but then there are established sports such as Basketball, Handball and Ice Hockey which already have Pan European identity and are very strong in certain regions.

If you follow a CL style qualification format you would end up with the same teams as we have now. The minnows would just get knocked out by the TOP14/AP/PRO12 teams.

I think your totally missing the point,

I said 'potential' audience, which is of course huge, however making the euro comp more elite doesn't help tap into that! There are only 3 major proffesional leagues, but there is also a european wide tournament, of which different nations and teams would apply more funds and effort if there was an avenue to succeed.

Your right of course, small clubs would get knocked out in the early rounds for the bigger clubs, but the tournament wouldn't look the same or even feel the same. If English teams dominated it would be on merit, similarly if Rabo or T14 teams dominated, however the key would be the smaller clubs exposure to the bigger clubs on a regular basis, and if a nation saw fit to invest in a club or structure the pathway would be there for success, not a capped appearance in a competition that the other major clubs only partially contested.

Allow europe to be a competition in which any club who succeeds could make the big stage and we would see the game grow europe wide, the investment grow europe wide, and the interest grow europe wide.

Or we could just reduce the tournament more, so only the major English and French clubs would get exposure due to viewing figures, and ensure the 2 powerhouses dominate through exclusivity.

Are you aware that Tblisi could qualify for the Challenge Cup? The first time a Georgian team has had a sniff of involvement. The new set up gives a pathway to any team (that takes part in the qualification competition run by Rugby Europe (new name for FIRA-AER)) can qualify for the Champions Cup? Where as previously they had to be invited. If these teams get into the Challenge Cup, and are competitive, then the whole things needs to be rearranged. Hopefully the running of the qualification competition with give Rugby Europe the experience it needs to eventually take over the running the of the whole thing.

But we're moving in the right direction for these teams (having open qualification).

If you want to grow the game you ensure the big well known teams are almost guaranteed a place and bill it as the elite. You don t get interest watching teams get 80 points past them with no reply. if teams from different nations club together they represent that 1 league as the Barclays Premiership does.

Neutralee wrote:

andyi wrote:

Neutralee wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:It has to be about leagues and not nations otherwise you would have more from the RABO over the English and French making 1 league more attractive to sponsors etc. Excitement comes from new match ups so 2 teams from the Aviva is as novel as 2 from rabo if you truely were neutral.

Your only considering things from a purely media and small minded perspective...

What is the potential audience in mainland europe, Scandenavia or Russia? It could be pretty huge, if only the game could grow there, and with elitism running the main competition it will definately not grow in those places!

Your looking at it from a tournament to represent 3 leagues POV, I am looking at it from a european and potentially global POV. I'm saying for a european tournament to be european it has to allow as many competitive teams from as many countries as possible to participate. Looking at the Rabo as 1 league is disrespecfull to the 4 nations who compete in it, and in reality 4 nations should be better represented than just 2!

I'm not saying the Rabo should dominate the tournament, I'm saying nobody should dominate the tournament, and for that to happen equal shares of the tournament should be alloted to every european nation that wants to compete.

I would have also like to have seen 1 of 2 things happen, either a champions league style situation where 6 teams, the top team from each nation went into a 'best of the best' style comp, or a seeding situation where every european team gets seeded based on their league standings, and everyone is forced to play a qualifier, and then put into the 1st or 2nd competition based on that. Either way there is competitiveness at league and european level, and if 1 nations club dominates it's on merit and not a hissy fit.

Your grossly over estimating the level of Rugby Union in Europe outside the 6Ns as a whole.  There are only 3 MAJOR professional leagues in the whole of Europe. Then you have some fledgling pro leagues in Russia, Italy and Georgia but they are at a standard below the second tier in France.

Where is this massive European TV audience? There is very little interest in watching essentially 6Ns Club Rugby in places like Scandinavia, Germany and Spain etc.

Football rules Europe by a country mile but then there are established sports such as Basketball, Handball and Ice Hockey which already have Pan European identity and are very strong in certain regions.

If you follow a CL style qualification format you would end up with the same teams as we have now. The minnows would just get knocked out by the TOP14/AP/PRO12 teams.

I think your totally missing the point,

I said 'potential' audience, which is of course huge, however making the euro comp more elite doesn't help tap into that! There are only 3 major proffesional leagues, but there is also a european wide tournament, of which different nations and teams would apply more funds and effort if there was an avenue to succeed.

Your right of course, small clubs would get knocked out in the early rounds for the bigger clubs, but the tournament wouldn't look the same or even feel the same. If English teams dominated it would be on merit, similarly if Rabo or T14 teams dominated, however the key would be the smaller clubs exposure to the bigger clubs on a regular basis, and if a nation saw fit to invest in a club or structure the pathway would be there for success, not a capped appearance in a competition that the other major clubs only partially contested.

Allow europe to be a competition in which any club who succeeds could make the big stage and we would see the game grow europe wide, the investment grow europe wide, and the interest grow europe wide.

Or we could just reduce the tournament more, so only the major English and French clubs would get exposure due to viewing figures, and ensure the 2 powerhouses dominate through exclusivity.

My point is that Rugby isn't European wide though!!!

It's the Chicken and the Egg.

If you have a competition with lots of teams from different countries, you'd end up with half a dozen decent sides and a load of pub teams. No one would be interested in that in Rugby countries let alone the ones with no interest already. Sponsors and Broadcasters wouldn't want to touch it and it would just die!

You have to have the elite competition to draw the interest and hope that the 3rd tier competition can expand until it competitive enough to justify increasing the 2nd one. But's lets be honest here, part of the original argument for change was that the Amlin (which had more minnows than the new format) was rubbish and full of one sided hammerings.

Rugby needs to grow a lot lot more in Europe before we can start thinking about copying the CL format!

Growth of the game outside it's bases in Europe is going to take a long time (and probably a lot of money), if you look at Italy and how their teams are still developing at the top level it's going to take a long time for quality club teams to emerge in other places - maybe initially they could invite the European minnows to enter as a national side "Presidents XV", type of thing which would give the game some exposure whilst not putting an individual club in the mire of a cricket score.
Who knows they might even give some of the lower end ERC sides a bit of a scare.
Just dropping in half a dozen clubs from the rest of Europe to act as whipping boys would not help the game develop.

Neutralee wrote:Not a great attraction to the new tournament - We've moved the final to Twickenham and 80% of fixtures involve English teams

Full-on is starting to show himself.

Cyril

For the 8th time, please dude just rugby!

Andy / 7.5

The point is that no matter how bad the local teams are, a Russian team losing by 80 points would attract far more interest than a French team in Russia.

There is no better pathway for success, the winners of the 2nd tier comp do not participate in the big boy comp the following season, so even if a Russian/Georgian/Romanian/Spanish/German team were to win the Challenge cup the best they could hope for is to return to the challenge cup via a qualifier! How does that benefit them?

So your telling me if a Russian club came to prominence and reached a semi final of the challenge cup, followed by a challenge cup win the PRL/LNR would be happy to relinquish a spot for them to be allowed entry? How exactly would that work.

I think theres an confusion between growing the fanbase of an elite team/league and growing the game, they are definately 2 seperate issues.

As it stands there is no european tournament, and the 6 nation tournament there was has just been forced to condence into a 3 league tournament benefiting the 2 powerhouses, it is literally England, France and friends, this is not good for global rugby.

Neutralee wrote:Cyril

For the 8th time, please dude just rugby!

If you're going to post idiotic bile like you've done with all your previous accounts expect to be called on it.

To be fair you re wrong GE and playing Russian teams would mean fewer fans and less sponsorship. What you re proposing should beleft for internationals which even attract people like you from the other side of the world.

No 7&1/2 wrote:To be fair you re wrong GE and playing Russian teams would mean fewer fans and less sponsorship. What you re proposing should beleft for internationals which even attract people like you from the other side of the world.

fewer fans and less sponsorship for French and English clubs, however after a period of growth and possibly success it would mean far greater fans and sponsorship in Russia and overall.

You do have a point, internationals are the big pull, but there are 2 pretty hefty issues with it:

1) Post RWC 2015 the PRL are going to want a peice of the international market, and the French clubs are doing a pretty good job of hamstringing smaller nations to not be able to be competitive, so the international game may struggle soon.

2) Without an club momentum where exactly are the likes of Russia going to get the numbers to play, how will they develop a love for the game, and what will they do for the next few years while the national team struggles?

I don't think international success is an option for the likes of Russia, but a club team entered into a euro comp, with a bit of success would be very beneficial.

I know i'm being a bit soppy, but the thought of renaming our stadia to whatever the sponsor tell us to, the idea of 15 minute intervals for sponsors ad's, and the thought that any rich oil baron could swoop in buy a club, then buy success are not what I want to see, I'd like to see the game grow globally first, be totally inclusive.

There are a million stories within rugby about the big guy helping the little guy, courage and honour, all that seems to be lost with this commercialism!

If a team wins the Challenge Cup it doesn't automatically qualify for the Champions, but it does make them eligible for the 20th spot play-offs.  If the team is good enough they can make the elite competition.

There were 18 years of the old Amlin Cup with clubs from outside the 6N struggling against bottom half league clubs from the 6N who fielded 2nd string/academy sides, where 50-100 point margins were common. They need to improve more significantly at that lower level over the course of the current eight year deal.

I don't think he is ghost. I think he is TJ

Jenifer McLadyboy wrote:I don't think he is ghost. I think he is TJ

This is getting pretty tedious now!

It is tedious.

No 7&1/2 wrote:It is tedious.

Tell me about it, 4 different people I've been called now!

Why can t you go back to GE anyway? Is the name banned?

It's not TJ. He's still posting and was just passionate about what he thought (even if I completely disagreed with him on a lot). I think he did get a second account at one point and it was "TJ2". Not like other posters who keep changing, pretending to be something other than they are until the mask fully slips and they fall back on their previous persona.

Neutralee wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:It is tedious.

Tell me about it, 4 different people I've been called now!

Really? Who were the other 2?

Theres TJ, a Ghost, GE, and another guy I didn't catch name of and can't be bothered going to find.

I'm not sure what the fascination is, but I promise you I am none of the guys you think I am, if you want to re read my posts I am critical and objective about all tier 1 nations, I do have some issues with club rugby at present, of which I've probably become a little paranoid about, but I will in general call it like it is.

You've got to admire the effort.

Jenifer McLadyboy wrote:I don't think he is ghost. I think he is TJ

NOpe = not me - I only have one log in and am happy for my views to be seen under that name

HammerofThunor wrote:It's not TJ. He's still posting and was just passionate about what he thought (even if I completely disagreed with him on a lot). I think he did get a second account at one point and it was "TJ2". Not like other posters who keep changing, pretending to be something other than they are until the mask fully slips and they fall back on their previous persona.

I did do that simply to get the attention of the mods to return under my old name after a short ban

The entente cordiale didn't last long .....   

Can't wait to read Paul Rees take on this!

Leading French figures propose O’Driscoll as president of EPCR

Player has not been approached and role with new club body would conflict with punditry work
Brian O’Driscoll: former Ireland captain would be a compromise candidate to fill new position of president in the newly-formed EPCR (European Professional Club rugby). Photograph: Cathal Noonan/Inpho

Such are the heightened tensions between the warring factions in European club rugby including now, it seems, the one-time Anglo-French axis, that leading figures in the French Federation (FFR) and Ligue Nationale de Rugby (LNR) are advocating a compromise Celt to fill the vacancy of president in the newly-formed EPCR (European Professional Club rugby), namely the unlikely figure of Brian O’Driscoll.

Eight weeks out from the first weekend of the new European competitions – the European Rugby Champions Cup and Challenge Cup – the absence of a president to replace Jean-Pierre Lux, is but one of many problems facing the fledgling EPCR. They have also still to elect a chairman of their board of directors, while the body’s director general, Jacques Pinaud, is based alone in the organisation’s de facto new offices in Neuchâtel, Switzerland.

Vacuum
In an ironic twist, such has been the vacuum in the day-to-day running of the European competitions that EPCR have had to sub-contract the 16 or 17 staff in the European Rugby Cup Ltd (ERC) offices in Dublin – who oversaw the Heineken Cup’s huge growth – to effectively run the tournaments for the coming season. It also now transpires that leading English figures in Premiership Rugby (PRL) would prefer the new body’s head office to be in London rather than a remote tax haven in Switzerland, and to have a British president.

Wary of the English clubs gaining too much power and control, the French want a non-Anglo compromise candidate as EPCR’s new president. Ideally wanting a recently-retired player, they regard the 141-times capped ex-Irish, Lions and Leinster captain O’Driscoll as the perfect fit.

Pierre Camus, president of the FFR, is believed to be particularly keen on this idea, as might be Rene Fontes, the LNR representative on the EPCR executive committee along with the other vice-presidents, Bruce Craig (PRL) and Paul McNaughton (Pro 12).

The latter would assuredly be well disposed to the idea of O’Driscoll as president, but the player himself assuredly would not be of a mind to become part of rugby’s political landscape. Apparently O’Driscoll has not been approached yet; besides which, his impending role as a pundit on BT Sport’s coverage of the new tournaments would assuredly be in conflict with such a role.

Eight weeks away from the onset of the new European and Challenge Cups, more pressing still is the absence of any television deal in France following the decision by the Autorité de la Concurrence, the French competition authority, to rule that the deal between LNR and Canal+ for coverage of the Top 14, worth €350 million over five years, was illegal.

Television rights
Although the Canal+ deal will remain in situ for the coming season, and the LNR have until January to put it out to tender again, not for the first time in their history domestic matters may be concentrating French minds more than pan-European affairs. The LNR had been looking for €27m per year for French TV rights to the new competitions, a lofty target in light of the previous €15m per year deal secured by ERC.

Furthermore, although Heineken are expected to renew their association with Europe’s premier club competition, despite the much trumpeted announcement in mid-June that distribution giants X1X had won the tender process to sell commercial rights for the new tournaments, no commercial partners have been signed up.

http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/leading-french-figures-propose-o-driscoll-as-president-of-epcr-1.1900764#.U_LvC_XaK2I.twitter

Well that seems to comfirm the 27M was per year, suggesting the UK and Ireland rights were £28M per year not over 4 years. Add that to Heineken and it's £32M per year. Take out £20M for the Pro12 and that leaves £6M left for the clubs.  I think they got £9M previously so if they can get another £6M from additional sponsorship, additional TV rights, tickets from finals(?) then they'll break even on previous years (edit: even if they don't they'd still be £6M up from previous deals due to Premiership BT deal).

Although I don't understand all the stuff about Anglo-French alliances as though anything has changed.  The FFR were always against chance and they're the ones backing the celtic president.  It then goes on to say that the LNR, PRL and PRO12 "might" agree.

So all that says is that the FFR have proposed BOD as president and the PRL would have preferred it if the competition was organised from London (I'm pretty sure this was talked about during the negotiations so not really a revelation).  Another nothing article.

You seem to have forgotten that 3 competitions have to organised (and Amlin are not sponsoring the comp). What about merit payments, prize money?

Turnover in 2012 for the ERC was 51,669,416m Euro.

According to that article the LNR and FFR are backing a Celtic President.

Such are the heightened tensions between the warring factions in European club rugby including now, it seems, the one-time Anglo-French axis, that leading figures in the French Federation (FFR) and Ligue Nationale de Rugby (LNR) are advocating a compromise Celt to fill the vacancy of president in the newly-formed EPCR (European Professional Club rugby), namely the unlikely figure of Brian O’Driscoll.

edit: the bottom line is that the French don't trust the English and the English don't trust the French.
A match made in heaven.   

So we could have an organisation run by an Irishman, based in Switzerland run by people from Dublin who ran the organisation that it replaced?

Sin é wrote:You seem to have forgotten that 3 competitions have to organised (and Amlin are not sponsoring the comp). What about merit payments, prize money?

Turnover in 2012 for the ERC was 51,669,416m Euro.

According to that article the LNR and FFR are backing a Celtic President.

Such are the heightened tensions between the warring factions in European club rugby including now, it seems, the one-time Anglo-French axis, that leading figures in the French Federation (FFR) and Ligue Nationale de Rugby (LNR) are advocating a compromise Celt to fill the vacancy of president in the newly-formed EPCR (European Professional Club rugby), namely the unlikely figure of Brian O’Driscoll.

edit: the bottom line is that the French don't trust the English and the English don't trust the French.
A match made in heaven.   

It says "it seems" and then backs this up with FFR sugesting BOD and the LNR "might" go along with it (along with the PRO12 and PRL reps). There is nothing of substance there whatsoever and if it was a Guardian article you would have been all over it calling "cowpat". Such double standards.

As for the money, the ERC made a complete turnover of £42M (using current exchange rate). The new competitions have £32M just from a single sponsor and the UK and Ireland broadcast rights. French rights haven't gone for £27M, all they need to go for is £10M and it'll meet the previous levels. Given the Wee weeing about done by the celtic unions, leaving it a last minute job to organise, I don't think that's too bad. Certainly plenty of room to grow.

Look, the ERC operated in the Euro zone. Why don't you just stick to Euros? The new competition has not moved to London just yet and the payments are probably going to be made in either Euros or Swiss Francs next season.

The new arrangement requires that the Pro12 countries are guaranteed 20m, which would leave the LNR & PRL 22m between them (minus the merit payments, prize money, admin costs, setting up costs in Switzerland etc. etc).

I do think the Guardian and Rugby Paper have gone awfully quite about all of this. They used to have a lot to say about it.

Yeah, it would be the same as it was before. They got about £9M between the clubs previously (and I'll use whatever currency I like, the £ is there to make it obvious). So if the competition makes as much as last year everyone will get the same (that's what the €20M collar was). If it makes more in the future it'll all go to the French and English until it makes >€60M. All seems reasonable, right? I mean you'll (general, not specific) be laughing if it makes less than the £42M previously made.

And maybe the other papers have other stuff to talk about because not much is happening on the Europe front at the moment? I mean, there's been a decent amount of coverage on the World Cup and stuff on the gear up to the new Premiership season. I'd prefer the. Writing about rugby stuff rather than making an article about the PRL preferring the competitions were run from England (like they said a year ago   ) or that the FFR unofficially suggested Brian O'Driscoll act as president (I mean seriously WTF?).

Back when the Paul Rees was talking Poopie and pulling stuff out of his arse you were complaining all the time. Why not now? Because it's an
Irish article and fits your agenda?

..

A bit more info. Looks like a French tv deal is sorted.

Organisers hope to complete French TV deal for Champions Cup
European Professional Club Rugby aim to announce deal by end of this week or next week
Andy Irvine: regarded as a contender for the role of EPCR independent chairman or president. Photograph: Getty Images

Andy Irvine: regarded as a contender for the role of EPCR independent chairman or president. Photograph: Getty Images

Gerry Thornley

First published: Wed, Sep 10, 2014, 01:00

Five weeks away from the opening round of the inaugural European Rugby Champions Cup, the newly-assembled tournament organisers European Professional Club Rugby (EPCR) are hopeful that many of the missing links in the new tournament will fall into place pending completion of a deal for French television coverage.

Much like the emergence of BT Sport into British sports previously broadcast by Sky Sports, this will see the Qatari-owned beIN Sports continue their encroachment on a domain previously dominated by Canal+ in France after last week’s announcement of a four-year deal for the Champions Cup.

EPCR are endeavouring to complete their coverage of the Champions Cup by dint of a deal with France TV which will most probably see just one Champions Cup match, and perhaps one Challenge Cup match, broadcast per week on the French terrestrial television. They hope to announce this deal by the end of this week or next week.

With the beIN Sport deal believed to be worth €17 million per annum, the inclusion of France TV should bring in more than €20 million per year for television coverage in France. This is short of the reputed asking price for the new European Champions Cup of €27 million per year, albeit more than the €15 million previously raised by ERC, while also short of the joint deal with BT and Sky for televising matches in Britain and Ireland which is reputedly worth €31 million per year.

Television deals
Significantly though, the completion of the television deals ought to make it more feasible for commercial partners to come on board given EPCR can now more accurately estimate how many viewers they will have each weekend.

BeIN Sport, which broadcasts Ligue 1 and the Champions League in France, has 1.5 to 2 million subscribers (some way less than the nine million subscribers with Canal+), which might equate to audiences for live Champions Cup matches of 4-500,000 based on a 25 per cent subscribers watching the game.

But, akin to the reduced audience figures with the less established BT Sport, with whom Premiership Rugby have gambled their all, this is the policy favoured by the Bath owner Bruce Craig, who makes up the executive committee of EPCR along with fellow vice-presidents Paul McNaughton (representing the Pro 12), and Rene Fontes (Top 14). It may also smooth muddied waters between LNR (Ligue nationale de rugby) and beIN Sport following the decision by a French court of arbitration to side with beIN Sport in declaring LNR’s deal €350 million deal over five years for coverage of the Top 14 to be illegal.

The EPCR is also still searching for an independent chairman or president, which had seen the utterly unlikely candidature of Brian O’Driscoll included in the shortlist. The more realistic contenders now are Andy Irvine, Hugo MacNeill and the well-connected Etienne de Villiers, who has served as a director with BBC World, Disney Entertainment, the ATP and Saracens.*

With the advent of the French TV deals being completed, the organisers hope to unveil some of new commercial partners with so far only the outgoing title sponsors, Heineken, set to come on board.

Five weeks out from the first round, there remains no sign of a new trophy (or a resolution as to what will happen with the old one), a match ball, refereeing kit, kick-off times and dates for rounds three and four of the pool stages in December.

*Independent chair my a***.  

For the record, the other 2 are not independent either. Irvine was a former chair of SRU.

HammerofThunor wrote:

Sin é wrote:You seem to have forgotten that 3 competitions have to organised (and Amlin are not sponsoring the comp). What about merit payments, prize money?

Turnover in 2012 for the ERC was 51,669,416m Euro.

According to that article the LNR and FFR are backing a Celtic President.

Such are the heightened tensions between the warring factions in European club rugby including now, it seems, the one-time Anglo-French axis, that leading figures in the French Federation (FFR) and Ligue Nationale de Rugby (LNR) are advocating a compromise Celt to fill the vacancy of president in the newly-formed EPCR (European Professional Club rugby), namely the unlikely figure of Brian O’Driscoll.

edit: the bottom line is that the French don't trust the English and the English don't trust the French.
A match made in heaven.   

It says "it seems" and then backs this up with FFR sugesting BOD and the LNR "might" go along with it (along with the PRO12 and PRL reps). There is nothing of substance there whatsoever and if it was a Guardian article you would have been all over it calling "cowpat". Such double standards.

As for the money, the ERC made a complete turnover of £42M (using current exchange rate).  The new competitions have £32M just from a single sponsor and the UK and Ireland broadcast rights.  French rights haven't gone for £27M, all they need to go for is £10M and it'll meet the previous levels. Given the Wee weeing about done by the celtic unions, leaving it a last minute job to organise, I don't think that's too bad.  Certainly plenty of room to grow.

Thornley seems to be very sure in that article that BOD was shortlisted.

From his figures it seems that the French tv deals combined will be worth 20m EURO.

The ERC deal would have gone up if the PRL hadn't pulled the stunt they did. What is delaying all the deals is the lack of a French tv deal and that is down purely to the PRL's partner in crime, the LNR who made a dogs dinner out of their own tv deal.

edit: Thornley has the UK & Ireland tv deal at 31m EURO.

what is delaying the French TV deal is the EPCR greedyness. although the big bit is done with BeIN (bad news for french viewers who already had to subscibie to C+ for top14), there is still the one game per round that free to air france television wants but apparently cannot afford to pay. LNR own tv deal for the t14 is an entirely separate issue...

I get the impression that the LNR are negotiating the EPCR deal as it was the bloke (Gause?) from LNR who has said previously that negotiations were slow/delayed by the court case over the Top 14 tv rights.

So now there will be less people in Britain, Ireland and France watching the European Cup. Would it be better in the long run to get less money and have these matches free to air?

My two favourite sports by far are rugby and hurling. And with both, I've always thought that if more people just saw them they'd love them and want to see more. Rugby is a brilliant game to watch and more exposure might lead to greater profits in the future.

I also have another gripe. The European Cup is finishing way earlier. I believe this was a sop to the French who want the last month dedicated to their beloved Top 14. But if we're serious about the European Cup as the elite competition, shouldn't it's final be the last game of the season, the pinnacle, the climax, no matter what the French think?

Heineken not signed up as a Sponsor.

Champions Cup will begin next month despite no main sponsorship deal
Nick Purewal

Published 18/09/2014 | 20:01

1 Comments
Share

Mark McCafferty, CEO of Premiership Rugby.

The inaugural Champions Cup will kick off next month without all its major sponsors in place, one of the new European competition's key architects has admitted.

Share
Go To

European rugby bosses are yet to sign off any main-partner deals, just four weeks before the replacement for the Heineken Cup gets underway.

Premiership Rugby chief executive Mark McCafferty, instrumental in helping form Europe's new set-up, said not all five main partner deals will be complete when the competition kicks off on October 17.

Governing body European Professional Club Rugby (EPCR) is thought to be unfazed about entering the new era with deals still to be done thanks to record TV revenues that form the competition's financial bedrock.

"The highest value priority for the new tournaments has been the TV deals," McCafferty told Press Association Sport.

"These will now generate more than Euro 220million over the next four years which will be about Euro 55million per annum and a 60 per cent increase.

"This now gives EPCR a very strong platform from which to bring in the partner sponsors.

"Not all will be on board by this season's tournament launch, but it is essential to the vision for EPCR that it partners with multinational brands which share its long-term vision for the success of European club rugby."

Heineken had been expected to complete terms on a major sponsorship deal for the new tournament, but Press Association Sport understands a number of glitches have delayed a deal deemed straightforward last month.

Negotiations also remain ongoing to thrash out the finer details of television rights deals to broadcast the competition in both France and Italy.

New European bosses have been aiming to switch the tournament's sponsorship profile and follow the model employed by football's Champions League.

The Champions Cup will forego a title sponsor in favour of five official partners.

It is understood however, that no sponsorship deals have yet been ratified, despite the tournament starting when Harlequins host Castres at The Stoop on October 17.

Competition planning is now at least two months behind regular schedule.

The record-breaking British broadcast deal for a right-sharing between BT Sport and Sky will effectively underwrite this year's tournament.

Competition chiefs are confident the British deal, and lucrative global terms, can safeguard the financial interests of all varying national club bodies.

A four-year deal has been struck in principle for the Qatari-owned beIN Sports to broadcast Champions Cup action in France.

Euro chiefs cannot sign off this contract however without first completing a compromise agreement to allow France TV to screen one Champions Cup match a week on terrestrial television.

New governing body EPCR has succeeded European Rugby Cup (ERC) in running the continent's top club competition.

The new body has had to outsource the running of the Champions Cup back to Dublin-based ERC this season however.

EPCR bosses were left red-faced after failing to compose a new body of staff in their new Neuchatel base in time to assume total tournament governance for the 2014/15 campaign.

French and English clubs spent two years battling for change in Europe to create a new tournament based on equality in qualification processes and to boost overall revenues.

Once a truce had been brokered between BT Sport and Sky, the successor to the Heineken Cup was finalised.
- See more at: http://www.independent.ie/sport/rugby/champions-cup-will-begin-next-month-despite-no-main-sponsorship-deal-30598355.html#sthash.orrVXVJf.dpuf

So the whole thing hangs on the vagarities of TV money? It's a good job all this is about selling broadband and not about sport.

there's already more money being distributed with the few RV deals they have signed.

that means sorting France, Italy, and getting their "main sponsrs" sorted out will be even more cash for all participants.

if you're irish you read that as all negative and an indictment of EPCR

if you're objective you would probably say best hold off until imcoming sponsors can see the total advertising value and channel selection of all TV coverage, before signing those deals. Heineken for example get ZERO value from french advertising as alcohol advertisment is not allowed on TV and hence its referred to as the H Cup there.

yes there are a few teething issues, but the tournament is taking place, and there's already more money, with more to come.

quinsforever wrote:
if you're objective you would probably say best hold off until imcoming sponsors can see the total advertising value and channel selection of all TV coverage, before signing those deals. Heineken for example get ZERO value from french advertising as alcohol advertisment is not allowed on TV and hence its referred to as the H Cup there.

To be objective requires two eyes. The poster i assume you refer to (cannot be sure as his posts are now blanked out for the sake of my sanity and temper) is perhaps the most one-eyed figure since Harold in 1066.

Losing a free to air game in France would be bad to promote this competition over here and I doubt sponsors will enjoy BeIn sport as much as French national TV on a saturday afternoon. Let's face it, without the free to air games this competition would have never took off here and I doubt everyone will subscribe to BeIn now (i wont and will have to look for dodgy streams).

LondonTiger wrote:

quinsforever wrote:
if you're objective you would probably say best hold off until imcoming sponsors can see the total advertising value and channel selection of all TV coverage, before signing those deals. Heineken for example get ZERO value from french advertising as alcohol advertisment is not allowed on TV and hence its referred to as the H Cup there.

To be objective requires two eyes. The poster i assume you refer to (cannot be sure as his posts are now blanked out for the sake of my sanity and temper) is perhaps the most one-eyed figure since Harold in 1066.

Better to have one eye than none as seems to be the problem in your case. In the land of the blind the one eyed man is king...

quinsforever wrote:there's already more money being distributed with the few RV deals they have signed.
that means sorting France, Italy, and getting their "main sponsrs" sorted out will be even more cash for all participants.

if you're irish you read that as all negative and an indictment of EPCR

if you're objective you would probably say best hold off until imcoming sponsors can see the total advertising value and channel selection of all TV coverage, before signing those deals. Heineken for example get ZERO value from french advertising as alcohol advertisment is not allowed on TV and hence its referred to as the H Cup there.

yes there are a few teething issues, but the tournament is taking place, and there's already more money, with more to come.

So far the money is 28K + possibly 20m from France = 48m. 20m to PRO12 leaves 18m between France & England.

Canal+ had about 8m subscribers. BeIN has about 1m. That means the advertising/sponsorship will be worth less as there will be fewer viewers.

Heineken would get some value from Heineken Sponsorship as in its a way to beam in TV advertising hoarding for example from other countries, match officials attire, etc. etc. There would also be some worth in corporate entertainment to French suppliers.

55m eur per year from TV is approximately £44 which would be a 60percent increase. And £20m for pro12 and £24m for prl and lnr, with the 5 core commercial sponsors yet to be announced. All good news on the commercial front then as far as I can see. The next additional £16m in revenues will be shared between prl and lnr to get to the 1/3 per league.

Maybe prl clubs will be able to keep up with the Irish spending on player salaries after all

"Governing body European Professional Club Rugby (EPCR) is thought to be unfazed about entering the new era with deals still to be done thanks to record TV revenues that form the competition's financial bedrock.

"The highest value priority for the new tournaments has been the TV deals," McCafferty told Press Association Sport.

"These will now generate more than Euro 220million over the next four years which will be about Euro 55million per annum and a 60 per cent increase."

I'm afraid its any sponsor yet to be found.

The TV deals so far are SKY/BT euro28m for UK & Ireland. BeIN Euro 17m.

= Euro 47 million per annum for the UK, Ireland & France for next 4 years. It seems BeIN are not keen on letting FTA tv one programme a round.

Heinken have pulled out seemingly and they have no sponors whatsoever. Added to that, they have gone for BeIN who have very few subscribers in France (about 1 million in comparision to Canal+ who have 8 times as many as they have.

This will reduce the value of any sponorships.

So which is it sin e, the bad maths of your last post or the bad maths of the one before? Cause I'm getting confused about the maths, but more importantly why you have more up to date and accurate information than mccafferty in the quote I posted which was from sept 18th?

Maybe because it's £28m for bt/sky and EUR17m for Bein?

We, and Scotland , still have sterling.

quinsforever wrote:Maybe because it's £28m for bt/sky and EUR17m for Bein?

We, and Scotland , still have sterling.

Irish papers are the only ones reporting anything, so they are reporting in Euros.

irish times wrote:With the beIN Sport deal believed to be worth €17 million per annum, the inclusion of France TV should bring in more than €20 million per year for television coverage in France. This is short of the reputed asking price for the new European Champions Cup of €27 million per year, albeit more than the €15 million previously raised by ERC, while also short of the joint deal with BT and Sky for televising matches in Britain and Ireland which is reputedly worth €31 million per year.

British & Irish deal Sky/BT deal is worth 31m Euro (not 28 as I thought).

Don't forget this tv deal will be for 4 years and the running costs of the tournament (merit payments) need to be factored is as well as the PRO12 teams getting their 20m (sterling)  as well as well as the new Swiss office costing 35% extra to what the Dublin office cost (which was about 2m per annum for staff etc).[/quote]
[/quote]

From Midi Olympic (via Gavin Mortimor twitter):

gavin mortimer @gavinmortimer7 · 2h

M.O rips into Rugby Champions Cup, 27 days before competition kicks off. A deal still hasn't been agreed with France Televisions to show one free match a weekend.

As for sponsors, M.O alleges Heineken have signed a 4m euro a year deal, compared to the 10m annual deal in previous seasons

M.O says that BeIN Sport got the European rights in France for 15m euros a season, 10m a season less than BT & Sky paid for UK rights

---

So that would suggest that the BT/Sky deal is 25m EURO
BeIN = 15m EURO
Heineken = 4m Euro

Total raised to date = 44m EURO (a month before the comp. begins).

PRO12 teams get 20m STG (25m EUR) leaves about 8 million each for French & English clubs (when you take into account admin costs, merit payments etc).