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

by Neutralee Thu 24 Jul 2014, 6:16 pm

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?

by Sin é Wed 08 Oct 2014, 6:59 pm

Poorfour wrote:
It should be a doddle. Sin e and Fly have been fond of telling us that the Irish teams are the major commercial draw for the European comps, and with a larger stage for your domestic games you should be coining it in...

Yes they are. You may have noticed that most teams move games against the Irish teams to larger stadium. That means they coin it, not us.

by quinsforever Wed 08 Oct 2014, 7:24 pm

Business schools can charge what potential applicants feel confident in their ability to repay once they move in to a job.

For the average academy player I would say that confidence is zero. Hence the academies would immediately be empty, or all players would flock to the club that could afford to pay academy players.

by Dubbelyew L Overate Wed 08 Oct 2014, 7:45 pm

Sin é wrote:
Poorfour wrote:
It should be a doddle. Sin e and Fly have been fond of telling us that the Irish teams are the major commercial draw for the European comps, and with a larger stage for your domestic games you should be coining it in...

Yes they are. You may have noticed that most teams move games against the Irish teams to larger stadium. That means they coin it, not us.

I hadn't noticed that, mostly because it's not true.

by **LondonTiger** Wed 08 Oct 2014, 8:21 pm

to be fair Sarries and Saints have moved knock out matches against Irish 9and French0 clubs to bigger grounds. That of course was actually due to the minimum capacity rules that were in place.

by whocares Wed 08 Oct 2014, 8:56 pm

Sin é wrote:
Poorfour wrote:
It should be a doddle. Sin e and Fly have been fond of telling us that the Irish teams are the major commercial draw for the European comps, and with a larger stage for your domestic games you should be coining it in...

Yes they are. You may have noticed that most teams move games against the Irish teams to larger stadium. That means they coin it, not us.

Valid for Munster (remember racing playing them in SDF 2 seasons ago) to a certain extent in France and that's because everyone and his dog knows they have a lot travelling fans. That's it really. Besides doesnt the visiting team gets a share of the ticket sales net proceeds? (For QF and SF games).

by Dubbelyew L Overate Wed 08 Oct 2014, 9:19 pm

whocares wrote:
Sin é wrote:
Poorfour wrote:
It should be a doddle. Sin e and Fly have been fond of telling us that the Irish teams are the major commercial draw for the European comps, and with a larger stage for your domestic games you should be coining it in...

Yes they are. You may have noticed that most teams move games against the Irish teams to larger stadium. That means they coin it, not us.

Valid for Munster (remember racing playing them in SDF 2 seasons ago) to a certain extent in France and that's because everyone and his dog knows they have a lot travelling fans. That's it really. Besides doesnt the visiting team gets a share of the ticket sales net proceeds? (For QF and SF games).

Racing home pool games in 2012-13:

RM92 v Munster, Stade de France - attendance 21,102
RM92 v Edinburgh, Stade Yves-du-Manoir - attendance 6,873
RM92 v Saracens, Stade de la Beaujoire - attendance 35,085

by whocares Wed 08 Oct 2014, 10:33 pm

Yeah didnt work out well that move into SDF but that's because their Parisian fans are so fickle that they get better attendance in non rugby cities thanks to the novelty factor. Next home game will be in Le Mans for instance.

by Sin é Wed 08 Oct 2014, 10:37 pm

Dubbelyew L Overate wrote:
whocares wrote:
Sin é wrote:
Poorfour wrote:
It should be a doddle. Sin e and Fly have been fond of telling us that the Irish teams are the major commercial draw for the European comps, and with a larger stage for your domestic games you should be coining it in...

Yes they are. You may have noticed that most teams move games against the Irish teams to larger stadium. That means they coin it, not us.

Valid for Munster (remember racing playing them in SDF 2 seasons ago) to a certain extent in France and that's because everyone and his dog knows they have a lot travelling fans. That's it really. Besides doesnt the visiting team gets a share of the ticket sales net proceeds? (For QF and SF games).

Racing home pool games in 2012-13:

RM92 v Munster, Stade de France - attendance 21,102
RM92 v Edinburgh, Stade Yves-du-Manoir - attendance 6,873
RM92 v Saracens, Stade de la Beaujoire - attendance 35,085

Back in 2006, Bourgoin took Munster to Geneva* to play and got 16K at the game. For Leicester that same season they got 7,200.

*First professional game of rugby played in Switzerland.

Just for the record, its only in the KO stage do teams get a cut on the home gate (thats because there is not a return fixture).

by Exiledinborders Wed 08 Oct 2014, 11:02 pm

All these arguments about Irish teams are silly. I agree the three big Irish teams have added a lot commercially and in a rugby sense to the competition. I am sure the PRL and the LNR would agree.

The PRL/LNR proposal for more equal representation from each league would still have seen hese three teams competing each year assuming they are in the top seven teams in the PRO12 which they should be easily capable of doing. I know that the PRO12 have complicated matter by not using a straightforward qualification system but that is not the fault of the PRL or LNR.

The truth is that previously some poor teams were in what is supposed to be top level rugby. These were mostly from the Pro12 as is shown by the teams coming fourth in their pool over the last three years:
Pro12 - 12 fourth places
Top14 - 4 fourth places
AP - 2 fourth places

These poor teams will be better off in the Challenge Cup rather than getting thrashed in the Champions Cup. I would not want London Welsh or Newcastle in the top competition so why would I want Treviso.

by Dubbelyew L Overate Wed 08 Oct 2014, 11:23 pm

Sin é wrote:
Dubbelyew L Overate wrote:
whocares wrote:
Sin é wrote:
Poorfour wrote:
It should be a doddle. Sin e and Fly have been fond of telling us that the Irish teams are the major commercial draw for the European comps, and with a larger stage for your domestic games you should be coining it in...

Yes they are. You may have noticed that most teams move games against the Irish teams to larger stadium. That means they coin it, not us.

Valid for Munster (remember racing playing them in SDF 2 seasons ago) to a certain extent in France and that's because everyone and his dog knows they have a lot travelling fans. That's it really. Besides doesnt the visiting team gets a share of the ticket sales net proceeds? (For QF and SF games).

Racing home pool games in 2012-13:

RM92 v Munster, Stade de France - attendance 21,102
RM92 v Edinburgh, Stade Yves-du-Manoir - attendance 6,873
RM92 v Saracens, Stade de la Beaujoire - attendance 35,085

Back in 2006, Bourgoin took Munster to Geneva* to play and got 16K at the game. For Leicester that same season they got 7,200.

*First professional game of rugby played in Switzerland.

Just for the record, its only in the KO stage do teams get a cut on the home gate (thats because there is not a return fixture).

Back in 2012, Saracens took RM92 to King Baudouin Stadium, Brussels* to play and got 18,212 at the game. For Edinburgh that same season, they got 5,673.

"First professional game of rugby played in Belgium.

The Irish teams, barring Connacht (though they're not too shabby) are amongst the attractive draws in Europe, but not uniquely so. "Most" teams i.e. the majority, do not shift games to higher capacity venues for Irish teams - it's the exception rather than the rule, and do the same for opposition from other nations

My own experience, from Exeter, is that "Jonny Wilkonson's Toulon", reigning Euro Champions sold out Sandy Park in a matter of hours. The previous year, Leinster, also reigning Euro Champions at the time, didn't sell out.

Of course, it may be that the English and French crowds were so disgusted by the obfuscation of IRFU in the Euromess negotiations that they voted with bums on sofas rather than bums on seats - I couldn't possibly say.

by BigTrevsbigmac Thu 09 Oct 2014, 7:43 am

Exiledinborders wrote:All these arguments about Irish teams are silly. I agree the three big Irish teams have added a lot commercially and in a rugby sense to the competition. I am sure the PRL and the LNR would agree.

The PRL/LNR proposal for more equal representation from each league would still have seen hese three teams competing each year assuming they are in the top seven teams in the PRO12 which they should be easily capable of doing. I know that the PRO12 have complicated matter by not using a straightforward qualification system but that is not the fault of the PRL or LNR.

The truth is that previously some poor teams were in what is supposed to be top level rugby. These were mostly from the Pro12 as is shown by the teams coming fourth in their pool over the last three years:
Pro12 - 12 fourth places
Top14 - 4 fourth places
AP - 2 fourth places

These poor teams will be better off in the Challenge Cup rather than getting thrashed in the Champions Cup. I would not want London Welsh or Newcastle in the top competition so why would I want Treviso.

It really is a simple as that Exiled. There is a lot of wasted 'hot air' & energy finding problems when the competition is about to start & all the interested parties, 'finally' agreed on the best way forward.

by quinsforever Thu 09 Oct 2014, 8:24 am

ERC apologists have the useful skills of being able to ignore facts, deny logic and deny the inevitability of change.

Given those skills, they are never going to get behind the new tourny. And any piece of news or development will be spun as a failure of the evil PRL empire.

Cue evil sounding darth vader music

by LordDowlais Thu 09 Oct 2014, 9:27 am

HammerofThunor wrote:Not particularly no. McCaw, Carter, O'Brien, Healy, etc these of the sort they'd be looking for if money was no option. Some of the lower clubs might go for the odd player to try and compete on the cheap.

If those players were on the market, everybody would be after them, and not everybody can have them, when they are gone, you move onto the next best international standard player.

by HammerofThunor Thu 09 Oct 2014, 10:27 am

And there is a long long list before you get down to Lee, Patchell and Webb.

by Sin é Thu 09 Oct 2014, 12:43 pm

Dubbelyew L Overate wrote:
Sin é wrote:
Dubbelyew L Overate wrote:
whocares wrote:
Sin é wrote:
Poorfour wrote:
It should be a doddle. Sin e and Fly have been fond of telling us that the Irish teams are the major commercial draw for the European comps, and with a larger stage for your domestic games you should be coining it in...

Yes they are. You may have noticed that most teams move games against the Irish teams to larger stadium. That means they coin it, not us.

Valid for Munster (remember racing playing them in SDF 2 seasons ago) to a certain extent in France and that's because everyone and his dog knows they have a lot travelling fans. That's it really. Besides doesnt the visiting team gets a share of the ticket sales net proceeds? (For QF and SF games).

Racing home pool games in 2012-13:

RM92 v Munster, Stade de France - attendance 21,102
RM92 v Edinburgh, Stade Yves-du-Manoir - attendance 6,873
RM92 v Saracens, Stade de la Beaujoire - attendance 35,085

Back in 2006, Bourgoin took Munster to Geneva* to play and got 16K at the game. For Leicester that same season they got 7,200.

*First professional game of rugby played in Switzerland.

Just for the record, its only in the KO stage do teams get a cut on the home gate (thats because there is not a return fixture).

Back in 2012, Saracens took RM92 to King Baudouin Stadium, Brussels* to play and got 18,212 at the game. For Edinburgh that same season, they got 5,673.

"First professional game of rugby played in Belgium.

The Irish teams, barring Connacht (though they're not too shabby) are amongst the attractive draws in Europe, but not uniquely so. "Most" teams i.e. the majority, do not shift games to higher capacity venues for Irish teams - it's the exception rather than the rule, and do the same for opposition from other nations

My own experience, from Exeter, is that "Jonny Wilkonson's Toulon", reigning Euro Champions sold out Sandy Park in a matter of hours. The previous year, Leinster, also reigning Euro Champions at the time, didn't sell out.

Of course, it may be that the English and French crowds were so disgusted by the obfuscation of IRFU in the Euromess negotiations that they voted with bums on sofas rather than bums on seats - I couldn't possibly say.

When Saracens did the trip to Racing Metro (La Beaujoire) they got 35,000. Cool

(double what Saracens got).

Stade Francais have been playing in Belgium for years, so it wasn't the first pro game in Belgium. laughing

I'd imagine if Brian O'Driscoll was coming 'home' to Ireland for another club, you would sell out fairly quickly.

Mind you even Johnny & Saracens (down the road) in Toulon v Saracens didn't sell out the Millenium stadium for the final last season (67K). (Must be all Irish fans were peed off with the carry-on of the PRL & LNR) Wink

Munster v Biarritz in 2006 - 74K, Munster v Toulouse 2008 - 74K and no Brian O'Driscoll playing for a French team.

by MichaelT Thu 09 Oct 2014, 2:03 pm

Sin é wrote:

When Saracens did the trip to Racing Metro (La Beaujoire) they got 35,000. (double what Saracens got).

What does this mean?

Sin é wrote:
Mind you even Johnny & Saracens (down the road) in Toulon v Saracens didn't sell out the Millenium stadium for the final last season (67K). (Must be all Irish fans were peed off with the carry-on of the PRL & LNR)

Didn't Saracens have another final in Twickenham the week after selling out at 82k? Ever think that fans were choosing the final down the road instead of the one that would include travel, maybe accommodation and ticket? In 2012 Leinster got to HC final and Pro 12. HC final 82k and Pro 12 18.5k, Pro 12 final in Dublin in the RDS. If Irish fans so great, why wasn't a bigger stadium chosen?

Sin é wrote: Munster v Biarritz in 2006 - 74K, Munster v Toulouse 2008 - 74K and no Brian O'Driscoll playing for a French team.

Does this not give further proof their fans care much more about the Euro Competition than anything else? Munster attendances at Thomond Park last season increased by about 50% for Euro games as opposed to Pro 12. Leicester with a similar capacity actually had a small decrease for European games.

I don't normally comment on here, just read, but these figures just give further proof to me that European games define the season for the Irish teams. Its part of the season for everyone else.

by Dubbelyew L Overate Thu 09 Oct 2014, 3:44 pm

Sin é wrote:Stade Francais have been playing in Belgium for years, so it wasn't the first pro game in Belgium.

Wasn't Stade's only game in Belgium snowed off, so didn't actually happen?

There was Belgium v Argentina as a warmup for RWC2007, but, whilst there were professional players on the pitch, I'm not sure the game itself could be called professional.

by HammerofThunor Thu 09 Oct 2014, 3:49 pm

MichaelT wrote:Does this not give further proof their fans care much more about the Euro Competition than anything else? Munster attendances at Thomond Park last season increased by about 50% for Euro games as opposed to Pro 12. Leicester with a similar capacity actually had a small decrease for European games.

Does that include the games in Cork? They move games around the Province and Musgrave has a smaller capacity.

Nice post by the way, you should do it more often. Always good to hear from new people.

by MichaelT Thu 09 Oct 2014, 4:31 pm

HammerofThunor wrote:
MichaelT wrote:Does this not give further proof their fans care much more about the Euro Competition than anything else? Munster attendances at Thomond Park last season increased by about 50% for Euro games as opposed to Pro 12. Leicester with a similar capacity actually had a small decrease for European games.

Does that include the games in Cork? They move games around the Province and Musgrave has a smaller capacity.

Nice post by the way, you should do it more often. Always good to hear from new people.

Thanks. Its just for Thomond Park, not really fair to include the Musgrave Park games - as you say the capacity is smaller. That's also why I did average and not total attendance. 16k to a little over 24k.

I copied and pasted the season from each website into Excel and learnt the Averageifs formula. Not really relevant but I was proud of myself.

by HammerofThunor Thu 09 Oct 2014, 6:08 pm

Always good to learn new skills. I always get a warm glow when I figure out how to simplify something in Excel.

by Poorfour Thu 09 Oct 2014, 6:47 pm

HammerofThunor wrote:

Always good to learn new skills. I always get a warm glow when I figure out how to simplify something in Excel.

If you ask nicely I'll show you how to turn any Excel formula into an ...IF() formula - http://www.cpearson.com/excel/ArrayFormulas.aspx

by Sin é Thu 09 Oct 2014, 9:40 pm

MichaelT wrote:
Sin é wrote:

When Saracens did the trip to Racing Metro (La Beaujoire) they got 35,000. (double what Saracens got).
What does this mean?

That all the 'fans' were French.

Sin é wrote:
Mind you even Johnny & Saracens (down the road) in Toulon v Saracens didn't sell out the Millenium stadium for the final last season (67K). (Must be all Irish fans were peed off with the carry-on of the PRL & LNR)
Didn't Saracens have another final in Twickenham the week after selling out at 82k? Ever think that fans were choosing the final down the road instead of the one that would include travel, maybe accommodation and ticket? In 2012 Leinster got to HC final and Pro 12. HC final 82k and Pro 12 18.5k, Pro 12 final in Dublin in the RDS. If Irish fans so great, why wasn't a bigger stadium chosen?

Crickey, Irish supporters have to get on a plane or boat to go to these matches - you can drive down the road or get a train.

Sin é wrote: Munster v Biarritz in 2006 - 74K, Munster v Toulouse 2008 - 74K and no Brian O'Driscoll playing for a French team.
Does this not give further proof their fans care much more about the Euro Competition than anything else? Munster attendances at Thomond Park last season increased by about 50% for Euro games as opposed to Pro 12. Leicester with a similar capacity actually had a small decrease for European games.

I don't normally comment on here, just read, but these figures just give further proof to me that European games define the season for the Irish teams. Its part of the season for everyone else.

Do you have any idea of the population of Limerick? Do you have any idea of the population of Munster and the distances involved in travelling to Limerick or how long it can take. Added to that the employment rate in Limerick is one of the highest in the country there is huge migration to Dublin and UK from Munster. Peter Cloghesey Bar & Nightclub closed during the week with huge losses.

The reason why you will get a spike for European games is supporters return a couple of times a year. Its not possible to go to every game.

What can I say if Irish supporters prefer the Heineken Cup to the Pro12 - perhaps because we have won the Pro12 a fair bit and the Heineken Cup is more of a challenge. You are trying to make a virtue of having lower standards and less ambition

by Cyril Thu 09 Oct 2014, 10:07 pm

Why are Munster supporters not bothering with the Pro12 any more?

Recent reports suggest a big decrease in home game support. Let's hope they get back on board for the Rugby Champions Cup!

by Sin é Fri 10 Oct 2014, 12:49 am

Cyril wrote:Why are Munster supporters not bothering with the Pro12 any more?

Recent reports suggest a big decrease in home game support. Let's hope they get back on board for the Rugby Champions Cup!

There are a couple of problems actually - one is GAA season has just finished and two Munster teams were involved in the hurling & football final. The hurling went to a replay. This makes it expensive to be a sports supporter from Munster at this time of the year.

Secondly, the economic situation in the south west of Ireland isn't as good as in the east coast. A lot of people have moved east (and further afield) for work. This makes it very difficult to get to Limerick on a Friday night (which really, really does not suit a club with province wide provincial support because its impossible to get to Limerick (or Cork) in time.

(The new tv deal for the Pro12 means that there is only one game a weekend on a Saturday on Sky).

by thebandwagonsociety Fri 10 Oct 2014, 1:48 pm

Hmmm - strange that Munster have to defend a drop in attendances even though it is still a high figure compared to most clubs.

Isn't Top14 average 14.3k and Jeff 12.8k. Munster/Leinster/Ulster would compare favourably to those averages. But the Pro12 has a lot of work to do (it is a young league and early days compared to the history of the other leagues) with an average of 8.2k

by ScarletSpiderman Fri 10 Oct 2014, 2:32 pm

Sin é wrote:
Cyril wrote:Why are Munster supporters not bothering with the Pro12 any more?

Recent reports suggest a big decrease in home game support. Let's hope they get back on board for the Rugby Champions Cup!

There are a couple of problems actually - one is GAA season has just finished and two Munster teams were involved in the hurling & football final. The hurling went to a replay. This makes it expensive to be a sports supporter from Munster at this time of the year.

Secondly, the economic situation in the south west of Ireland isn't as good as in the east coast. A lot of people have moved east (and further afield) for work. This makes it very difficult to get to Limerick on a Friday night (which really, really does not suit a club with province wide provincial support because its impossible to get to Limerick (or Cork) in time.

(The new tv deal for the Pro12 means that there is only one game a weekend on a Saturday on Sky).

No I know why, it is because they haven't won anything for a while......pretty sure that is the reason

by Sin é Fri 10 Oct 2014, 2:44 pm

ScarletSpiderman wrote:
Sin é wrote:
Cyril wrote:Why are Munster supporters not bothering with the Pro12 any more?

Recent reports suggest a big decrease in home game support. Let's hope they get back on board for the Rugby Champions Cup!

There are a couple of problems actually - one is GAA season has just finished and two Munster teams were involved in the hurling & football final. The hurling went to a replay. This makes it expensive to be a sports supporter from Munster at this time of the year.

Secondly, the economic situation in the south west of Ireland isn't as good as in the east coast. A lot of people have moved east (and further afield) for work. This makes it very difficult to get to Limerick on a Friday night (which really, really does not suit a club with province wide provincial support because its impossible to get to Limerick (or Cork) in time.

(The new tv deal for the Pro12 means that there is only one game a weekend on a Saturday on Sky).

No I know why, it is because they haven't won anything for a while......pretty sure that is the reason

Munster have won the Pro12 twice in the last 6 years (and as recently as 10-11 season). I'd also rate getting to two Heineken Cup semis as being fairly decent. Only 1 club in 24 (now 20) can win that and to make the top 4 in Europe two years running is a decent return.

by HammerofThunor Fri 10 Oct 2014, 3:17 pm

Sin é wrote:Munster have won the Pro12 twice in the last 6 years (and as recently as 10-11 season). I'd also rate getting to two Heineken Cup semis as being fairly decent. Only 1 club in 24 (now 20) can win that and to make the top 4 in Europe two years running is a decent return.

According to some winning it is all that matters (not you, or me). Last four certainly is an achievement and one they should be proud of. Personally I think getting to the quarters is an achievement, after that knock out rugby is a funny beast.

by HammerofThunor Fri 10 Oct 2014, 3:20 pm

thebandwagonsociety wrote:Hmmm - strange that Munster have to defend a drop in attendances even though it is still a high figure compared to most clubs.

Isn't Top14 average 14.3k and Jeff 12.8k. Munster/Leinster/Ulster would compare favourably to those averages. But the Pro12 has a lot of work to do (it is a young league and early days compared to the history of the other leagues) with an average of 8.2k

Ulster doesn't compare favourably to those averages, don't they average 10k? They do compare favourably with most of the teams in the premiership though.

But it wasn't about defending a drop off was it? It was about Munster having higher attendences for the European Cup over the Pro12 and Leicester having higher attendances for the Premiership than Europe. Just highlighting different priorities for the fans (although a big part of this may be away fans rather than home fans)

by MichaelT Fri 10 Oct 2014, 3:29 pm

Sin é wrote:

Do you have any idea of the population of Limerick? Do you have any idea of the population of Munster and the distances involved in travelling to Limerick or how long it can take. Added to that the employment rate in Limerick is one of the highest in the country there is huge migration to Dublin and UK from Munster. Peter Cloghesey Bar & Nightclub closed during the week with huge losses.

The reason why you will get a spike for European games is supporters return a couple of times a year. Its not possible to go to every game.

What can I say if Irish supporters prefer the Heineken Cup to the Pro12 - perhaps because we have won the Pro12 a fair bit and the Heineken Cup is more of a challenge. You are trying to make a virtue of having lower standards and less ambition

Lower standards/ less ambition? I was trying to be diplomatic and acknowledge the different attitudes towards different competitions in each country, but I see you're only interested in your own opinion and making smart comments. Good for you. Personally I would never put a cup competition over the league, but I imagine thats a culture thing.

As far as knowing Limerick is concerned, I do. I lived there for 4 years and am very familiar with the city. I live elsewhere in Ireland now but have gone back a couple of times this year. Lots of great memories of watching matches in Souths and the Locke Bar and the the Lions tour 2009 in Sextons. As for Cloghessys, never a fan after they turned off God Save the Queen in the first Croke Park match in 2007 and played God Save Ireland over the speakers instead. Thought that was completely unnecessary. But I suppose it is a shame it has closed for the people that went there.

by thebandwagonsociety Fri 10 Oct 2014, 5:34 pm

HammerofThunor wrote:
thebandwagonsociety wrote:Hmmm - strange that Munster have to defend a drop in attendances even though it is still a high figure compared to most clubs.

Isn't Top14 average 14.3k and Jeff 12.8k. Munster/Leinster/Ulster would compare favourably to those averages. But the Pro12 has a lot of work to do (it is a young league and early days compared to the history of the other leagues) with an average of 8.2k

Ulster doesn't compare favourably to those averages, don't they average 10k? They do compare favourably with most of the teams in the premiership though.

But it wasn't about defending a drop off was it? It was about Munster having higher attendences for the European Cup over the Pro12 and Leicester having higher attendances for the Premiership than Europe. Just highlighting different priorities for the fans (although a big part of this may be away fans rather than home fans)

10k would be the very very low end of attendance in an entire season. I think last season is about 12k but then the new stands didn't come on line until during the season and their capacity went from 13ish up to over 16k.

You are very correct in that Pro12 gets sweet FA away fans at games in general. You could put them on the same flight as the team in most cases.

Leicester have a great following. I presume most games (both Jeff and Europe) would be 90-95% capacity.

by HammerofThunor Fri 10 Oct 2014, 6:02 pm

thebandwagonsociety wrote:10k would be the very very low end of attendance in an entire season. I think last season is about 12k but then the new stands didn't come on line until during the season and their capacity went from 13ish up to over 16k.

You are very correct in that Pro12 gets sweet FA away fans at games in general. You could put them on the same flight as the team in most cases.

Leicester have a great following. I presume most games (both Jeff and Europe) would be 90-95% capacity.

Spot on. Just looked at the last season and the average is more lik 13k, maybe 14k (didn't calculate it, just an approximation) and there was only one in the 10k. I was way way off.

by malky1963 Sat 11 Oct 2014, 8:25 am

thebandwagonsociety wrote:Hmmm - strange that Munster have to defend a drop in attendances even though it is still a high figure compared to most clubs.

Isn't Top14 average 14.3k and Jeff 12.8k. Munster/Leinster/Ulster would compare favourably to those averages. But the Pro12 has a lot of work to do (it is a young league and early days compared to the history of the other leagues) with an average of 8.2k

As you say it is still a young league so it is pleasing to see attendances continuing to move ahead.

Pro12 total for the first 5 rounds this year is 253,117 - up 17% on last year.
The comparative AP total is 346,074 - down 1%.

Obviously it is still early days and the make up of the games (eg the Pro12 total includes a very big crowd at the Aviva last week) will have an effect - still very encouraging.

by Sin é Sat 11 Oct 2014, 11:34 am

Bruce Craig ....

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2014/oct/10/champions-cupbruce-craig-bath-european-club-tournament

It seems the RFU are paying the new chumps cup 5m to stage it in Twickers Smile

Oh, and the French are the baddies in all of this ....
Well, the latest Entente Cordiale didn't last long.

Its going to be some fun when Craig gets his way for 32 man match day squads Very Happy

by Exiledinborders Sat 11 Oct 2014, 7:52 pm

Sin é wrote:Bruce Craig ....

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2014/oct/10/champions-cupbruce-craig-bath-european-club-tournament

It seems the RFU are paying the new chumps cup 5m to stage it in Twickers

Oh, and the French are the baddies in all of this ....
Well, the latest Entente Cordiale didn't last long.

Its going to be some fun when Craig gets his way for 32 man match day squads

I see the ant-PRZl crew are changing track. Up till a couple of weeks ago they were telling us that the new competition woukd be a financial disaster. Now that the PRL have shown that they were right in saying that ERC were not maximising income they have changed tack.

Regarding the comments regarding the French Craig is correct. Craig's problem is not with LNR but with FFR and Bernard Lapasset at IRB.

by Portnoy's Complaint Sun 12 Oct 2014, 9:34 am

malky1963 wrote:
thebandwagonsociety wrote:Hmmm - strange that Munster have to defend a drop in attendances even though it is still a high figure compared to most clubs.

Isn't Top14 average 14.3k and Jeff 12.8k. Munster/Leinster/Ulster would compare favourably to those averages. But the Pro12 has a lot of work to do (it is a young league and early days compared to the history of the other leagues) with an average of 8.2k

As you say it is still a young league so it is pleasing to see attendances continuing to move ahead.

Pro12 total for the first 5 rounds this year is 253,117 - up 17% on last year.
The comparative AP total is 346,074 - down 1%.

Obviously it is still early days and the make up of the games (eg the Pro12 total includes a very big crowd at the Aviva last week) will have an effect - still very encouraging.

RaboDirect PRO12 13/14 Home attendance
Clubs AVG Total HIG LOW
Leinster 19,824 198,240 51,700 14,400
Ulster 12,987 129,872 14,000 10,693
Munster 12,334 123,337 20,646 6,248
Cardiff Blues 9,452 103,971 30,411 5,063
Gwent Dragons 8,369 83,689 30,411 3,916
Ospreys 8,089 80,889 13,201 5,089
Scarlets 7,218 64,963 14,796 5,675
Connacht 4,758 52,340 7,210 3,850
Glasgow Warriors 5,229 52,293 7,417 3,904
Edinburgh Reivers 4,382 48,203 10,125 3,000
Benetton Treviso 3,761 37,609 4,981 2,720
Zebre 2,059 20,591 5,000 1,050
Total 8,164 995,997

Aviva Premiership 13/14 Home attendance
Clubs AVG Total HIG LOW
Leicester Tigers 22,487 247,357 24,000 19,723
Harlequins 18,750 206,249 74,827 11,453
Saracens 15,426 169,689 83,889 7,126
London Wasps 14,165 155,811 62,637 5,275
London Irish 14,097 155,070 62,637 5,614
Gloucester 14,015 154,160 16,121 12,531
Northampton Saints 13,036 143,391 13,475 12,205
Bath 11,900 130,897 12,200 11,132
Exeter Chiefs 8,967 98,637 10,542 7,033
Worcester Warriors 7,956 87,518 11,852 6,214
Sale Sharks 6,384 70,223 10,092 5,372
Newcastle Falcons 5,135 56,482 7,073 4,134
Total 12,693 1,675,484

French Top 14 13/14 Home attendance
Clubs AVG Total HIG LOW
Begles-Bordeaux 19,557 254,243 33,043 6,534
Toulon 18,589 241,653 38,800 12,330
Clermont Auvergne 17,074 221,965 17,792 15,036
Stade Francais 17,037 221,485 63,075 7,483
Toulouse 16,355 212,621 18,838 13,234
Bayonne 13,961 181,498 22,138 10,008
Grenoble 13,074 169,960 19,778 7,366
Montpellier 12,596 163,743 15,268 9,896
Perpignan 11,608 150,904 17,491 9,477
Racing CF 11,510 149,633 35,342 6,109
Brive 11,084 144,092 13,979 7,404
Biarritz 10,049 130,643 13,550 8,139
US Oyonnax 8,725 113,421 11,303 7,294
Castres 8,556 111,224 9,908 7,404
Total 13,555 2,467,085

http://rugby.statbunker.com/ for what it's worth. In the past it has been shown to be wrong in detail* but it provides a handy guide.

*e.g. It's easy to detect which sides apparently played only 10 home games by these figures - That's typically Statbunker

And at least it's a direct, attributable source unlike other figures being posted here.

by quinsforever Sun 12 Oct 2014, 10:31 am

Good info PC

I wonder what % of capacity that represents. I get the feeling the top14 regularly fills most of its stadia.

by asoreleftshoulder Sun 12 Oct 2014, 12:26 pm

Exiledinborders wrote:
Sin é wrote:Bruce Craig ....

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2014/oct/10/champions-cupbruce-craig-bath-european-club-tournament

It seems the RFU are paying the new chumps cup 5m to stage it in Twickers

Oh, and the French are the baddies in all of this ....
Well, the latest Entente Cordiale didn't last long.

Its going to be some fun when Craig gets his way for 32 man match day squads

I see the ant-PRZl crew are changing track. Up till a couple of weeks ago they were telling us that the new competition woukd be a financial disaster. Now that the PRL have shown that they were right in saying that ERC were not maximising income they have changed tack.

Regarding the comments regarding the French Craig is correct. Craig's problem is not with LNR but with FFR and Bernard Lapasset at IRB.

How were they right?The ERC never had the chance to have a bidding war between Sky and BT since BT weren't around when the earlier TV deals were done.The PRL men who were on the ERC board know this but are lying to give the impression that this money was there all along for the ERC to just pick up off the ground.It's deceitful and insulting to the intelligence but that's par for the course with these people.

by HammerofThunor Sun 12 Oct 2014, 1:19 pm

How do you know BT didn't approach ERC and were turned away due to the 'special' relationship with Sky? A TV deal was being discussed around the time notice was given and that could well have been the catalyst that caused the initial split.

There have been comments going back years that some in the English game felt there was more money out there but the ERC rep said they didn't think there was. If you're going to assume things there are plenty of ways to go.

by asoreleftshoulder Sun 12 Oct 2014, 2:01 pm

HammerofThunor wrote:How do you know BT didn't approach ERC and were turned away due to the 'special' relationship with Sky? A TV deal was being discussed around the time notice was given and that could well have been the catalyst that caused the initial split.

There have been comments going back years that some in the English game felt there was more money out there but the ERC rep said they didn't think there was. If you're going to assume things there are plenty of ways to go.

It's pretty simple,the PRL have thrown every bit of dirt at the ERC that they could.If this had happened they would definitely have let us all know.There were PRL members on the ERC board so they would have this kind of information.

The comments in the English game have been shown to be rubbish,they have been incapable of getting more money from anywhere except BT.Since BT is only a very new source of income that wasn't previously available then ERC can't be blamed for missing out on money that wasn't there.

Now I'm not claiming ERC were perfect and got the absolute maximum that they could,I'm just showing that the new EPRC haven't done any better for all their bluff and bluster.

by HammerofThunor Sun 12 Oct 2014, 2:20 pm

A bit early to say that isn't it? The competition was only sorted a few months before the start of the season. The French TV rights were delayed due to issues around the league rights. And yet still it seems to have made about as much (if not more) than the previous year. As I've said before I'd wait until the end of the season before making any claims about how much money it'll generate.

As for the PRl talking about TV negotiations, they wouldn't say anything if they're covered by confidentiality agreements, which you would they would be. As for dirt, have they really thrown that much? They just said they weren't maximising the revenue and were out of touch.

by malky1963 Sun 12 Oct 2014, 2:30 pm

Portnoy's Complaint wrote:
malky1963 wrote:
thebandwagonsociety wrote:Hmmm - strange that Munster have to defend a drop in attendances even though it is still a high figure compared to most clubs.

Isn't Top14 average 14.3k and Jeff 12.8k. Munster/Leinster/Ulster would compare favourably to those averages. But the Pro12 has a lot of work to do (it is a young league and early days compared to the history of the other leagues) with an average of 8.2k

As you say it is still a young league so it is pleasing to see attendances continuing to move ahead.

Pro12 total for the first 5 rounds this year is 253,117 - up 17% on last year.
The comparative AP total is 346,074 - down 1%.

Obviously it is still early days and the make up of the games (eg the Pro12 total includes a very big crowd at the Aviva last week) will have an effect - still very encouraging.

RaboDirect PRO12 13/14 Home attendance
Clubs AVG Total HIG LOW
Leinster 19,824 198,240 51,700 14,400
Ulster 12,987 129,872 14,000 10,693
Munster 12,334 123,337 20,646 6,248
Cardiff Blues 9,452 103,971 30,411 5,063
Gwent Dragons 8,369 83,689 30,411 3,916
Ospreys 8,089 80,889 13,201 5,089
Scarlets 7,218 64,963 14,796 5,675
Connacht 4,758 52,340 7,210 3,850
Glasgow Warriors 5,229 52,293 7,417 3,904
Edinburgh Reivers 4,382 48,203 10,125 3,000
Benetton Treviso 3,761 37,609 4,981 2,720
Zebre 2,059 20,591 5,000 1,050
Total 8,164 995,997

Aviva Premiership 13/14 Home attendance
Clubs AVG Total HIG LOW
Leicester Tigers 22,487 247,357 24,000 19,723
Harlequins 18,750 206,249 74,827 11,453
Saracens 15,426 169,689 83,889 7,126
London Wasps 14,165 155,811 62,637 5,275
London Irish 14,097 155,070 62,637 5,614
Gloucester 14,015 154,160 16,121 12,531
Northampton Saints 13,036 143,391 13,475 12,205
Bath 11,900 130,897 12,200 11,132
Exeter Chiefs 8,967 98,637 10,542 7,033
Worcester Warriors 7,956 87,518 11,852 6,214
Sale Sharks 6,384 70,223 10,092 5,372
Newcastle Falcons 5,135 56,482 7,073 4,134
Total 12,693 1,675,484

French Top 14 13/14 Home attendance
Clubs AVG Total HIG LOW
Begles-Bordeaux 19,557 254,243 33,043 6,534
Toulon 18,589 241,653 38,800 12,330
Clermont Auvergne 17,074 221,965 17,792 15,036
Stade Francais 17,037 221,485 63,075 7,483
Toulouse 16,355 212,621 18,838 13,234
Bayonne 13,961 181,498 22,138 10,008
Grenoble 13,074 169,960 19,778 7,366
Montpellier 12,596 163,743 15,268 9,896
Perpignan 11,608 150,904 17,491 9,477
Racing CF 11,510 149,633 35,342 6,109
Brive 11,084 144,092 13,979 7,404
Biarritz 10,049 130,643 13,550 8,139
US Oyonnax 8,725 113,421 11,303 7,294
Castres 8,556 111,224 9,908 7,404
Total 13,555 2,467,085

http://rugby.statbunker.com/ for what it's worth. In the past it has been shown to be wrong in detail* but it provides a handy guide.

*e.g. It's easy to detect which sides apparently played only 10 home games by these figures - That's typically Statbunker

And at least it's a direct, attributable source unlike other figures being posted here.

I assume the bold bit is directed at me and acknowledge that I failed to put the sources which were the Pro12 and AP websites.

by asoreleftshoulder Sun 12 Oct 2014, 2:32 pm

HammerofThunor wrote:A bit early to say that isn't it? The competition was only sorted a few months before the start of the season. The French TV rights were delayed due to issues around the league rights. And yet still it seems to have made about as much (if not more) than the previous year. As I've said before I'd wait until the end of the season before making any claims about how much money it'll generate.

As for the PRl talking about TV negotiations, they wouldn't say anything if they're covered by confidentiality agreements, which you would they would be. As for dirt, have they really thrown that much? They just said they weren't maximising the revenue and were out of touch.

Come on if the best retort you can give is to argue about the legalities of a highly unlikely hypothetical situation then you're clutching at straws.Do you really think the ERC would turn down millions of Euro just because they have a 'special' relationship with Sky.Surely you can see how ridiculous that sounds?

by TJ Sun 12 Oct 2014, 3:14 pm

Still argueing. How about this to argue over.

Alternative structure for the european cup

39 team entry
9 top teams from 3 leagues get bye
Remaining 30 teams play off match tightly seeded
15 winners go thu with 9 byes to 24 team top tourney
6 groups of 4. 6 winners plus two best losers knockout for cup

Play out a bowl for the 16 teams who don't go thru - straightknockout
shield from the teams knocked out before the final stages.

Advantages
Every team gets a chance at the big time every year.
Meaningful games for everyone at all stages
Chance at silverware for smaller teams
Room for a small expansion in numbers

Disadvantages -
Teams not getting a bye would have one more game on the way to a final
Potential for mismatches in the first round

by HammerofThunor Sun 12 Oct 2014, 3:22 pm

Asoreleftshoulder, I answered speculation with speculation. And you answered speculation with an attempt to twist it to the ridiculous. ERC may well have not entertained the idea of shared rights. They may have also shared the view of a lot of people on here, better safe than sorry. Both of those views would have kept the, from discussing with BT.

TJ, the only rel difference for that and he current is that the playoffs are the leagues. Every team already has a chance at the big time every year. The games would be as meaningful as they are now. You've said you won't even go and watch your own team in the current competition so why would you go see them play for the bowl? Again, the small teams current have a chance at silver ware (one, again, you have decided not to bother with at all). Any competition has room for expansion. So what benefit does your suggestion have over the current one.

by TJ Sun 12 Oct 2014, 3:31 pm

Teams in the lower part of the leagues don't get a chance every year at the big time and teams in lower leagues don't ever get a chance.

I think it would create a bigger "buzz" around the bowl and shield.

Its more meritocratic as we know the best teams will rise.

Every team has a chance at the big prise every year Even minnows

by asoreleftshoulder Sun 12 Oct 2014, 3:34 pm

HammerofThunor wrote:Asoreleftshoulder, I answered speculation with speculation. And you answered speculation with an attempt to twist it to the ridiculous. ERC may well have not entertained the idea of shared rights. They may have also shared the view of a lot of people on here, better safe than sorry. Both of those views would have kept the, from discussing with BT.

TJ, the only rel difference for that and he current is that the playoffs are the leagues. Every team already has a chance at the big time every year. The games would be as meaningful as they are now. You've said you won't even go and watch your own team in the current competition so why would you go see them play for the bowl? Again, the small teams current have a chance at silver ware (one, again, you have decided not to bother with at all). Any competition has room for expansion. So what benefit does your suggestion have over the current one.

Eh no,you are the one that came up with the ridiculous idea that the ERC turned down millions of Euros just because they have a 'special' relationship with Sky.

I answered another posters false assertion that the PRL had somehow been right to accuse the ERC of failing to maximise revenues.You then made up this mad scenario where the ERC said no thanks to big money simply because they were happy enough with what Sky gave them.

by HammerofThunor Sun 12 Oct 2014, 4:35 pm

I don't think I ever said that did I? If ERC never entered discussions with BT then have hven't turned anything down. The reason there has been a big increase in money is the shared TV rights. There have been plenty of comments on here about how that is Poopie and if the ERC felt the same way it would never be discussed would it? If they're happy with the amount Sky have been paying and they didn't want to risk going with a new sports broadcaster then it would all make perfect sense. But you keep piling that straw up if you wish.

by asoreleftshoulder Sun 12 Oct 2014, 4:42 pm

HammerofThunor wrote:I don't think I ever said that did I? If ERC never entered discussions with BT then have hven't turned anything down. The reason there has been a big increase in money is the shared TV rights. There have been plenty of comments on here about how that is Poopie and if the ERC felt the same way it would never be discussed would it? If they're happy with the amount Sky have been paying and they didn't want to risk going with a new sports broadcaster then it would all make perfect sense. But you keep piling that straw up if you wish.

Okay you made up a ridiculous hypothetical situation and now that I've pointed out how foolish it is you'll just keep avoiding engaging with me on it. clap

by HammerofThunor Sun 12 Oct 2014, 4:49 pm

How am I not engaging with you?

Do you not agree that the ERC may have refused to consider shared TV rights for the UK and Ireland?

Do you not agree that the ERC may have refused to move to a new broadcaster for a relatively small increase in money?

Do you not agree that complaints about the ERC being too conservative could indicate either of the two events possible?

You said that BT didn't deal with the ERC, I'm trying to give potential events where they did. Nothing I have said it's ridiculous (IMO), and if anything could easily have been the catalyst for the English and French to give notice, since they all would have happened around the same time.

by Sponsored content