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?

Yeah I just dont see it. This isnt something to help international teams for me otherwise people would be calling it to be stacked in favour of Italian and Scottish teams rather than their share. Its sport its competition. 3 leagues whos the best not just giving a place to a team while feasibly not giving a better team in the same league a chance.

I know the background Sin but to me it makes no sense to reward a team for performing worse just because they re a different nationality. I agree it would be different if each nation had their own full league. Still think the rugby will be good and I ll be glad when it all kicks okk.

One thing that feels wierd about the seedings in the Euro Cup is the current tiering being based on you finishing league position. When the Pro12 Jeff and Top14 all have knock-out rounds at the end of their seasons to get to a grand final and champion, then the focus of the league is to finish in those playoff berths surely and this can allow nuances to arise. If the first two places get home knockout games then is there really that much pressure, or from the other side of the fence should there be that much reward in the final table position or should it be adjusted for ultimate league finishing position (ie. finalist, semifinalist, wildcard/playoff round)?

This is my general jist of the current Euro Cup and I'm open for correction/clarification.

I thought it was only the league winners who were seeded to keep them apart. Was that changed?

As European rugby’s new dawn arrives off-field battles for control are set to continue
‘The Irish are very pragmatic. They realised what they’d had couldn’t last for ever’
Gerry Thornley
Rugby Correspondent

At last, the darned rugby. After the protracted off-field rifts, both local and European, threats and more threats, the belated heads of agreement on the new way forward and all the difficulties which the new European Champions Cup has experienced, the first week of the actual tournament couldn’t come quickly enough.

The rugby itself always spoke better than those who ran the game, and that hasn’t changed, despite the emergence of new rulers. Given the latter contain the new school of bully boy capitalists – who now seemingly rule the world, never mind sports – this is hardly surprising.

Any doubts therefore that the truce reached between the Anglo- French club rulers and the politicos in the Unions and Federations was anything more than decidedly uneasy have been dispelled, even before a ball has been kicked, by the latest musings of Bruce Craig – the multi-millionaire who bought Bath in 2010 and seemingly thinks he bought the game as well.

The Guardian, traditionally regarded as something of a left-wing paper in times’ past, worshipped at his altar last Saturday in what should be compulsive reading for anyone in the International Rugby Board or any Union or Federation (none more so than the IRFU) lest they be in any doubt that Craig regards the Champions Cup as his valedictory creation and that, as the headline says, this is only “the start” of his quest to transform the game to his way of thinking.

Craig held court “in his tasteful study overlooking the front lawns of his stately home-turned-training ground” which is described as the “spectacular 18th-century mansion he has transformed into the most striking training base in sport.”

In a world where money is the sole criterion, Craig claims the new tournaments are a success before a ball has been kicked by citing the new organisers’ mantra “we’ve just achieved an increase of 60 per cent on TV rights alone.” This is on the premise that “the entire revenue of ERC was €4 7million,” which is at odds with an ERC statement last year claiming that “ERC’s annual revenues growing from €14 million per annum in 1999 to €54 million in 2014”.

This is also despite there being only one commercial partner instead of the intended five; fewer television viewers, if more money, with the advent of BT Sport and beIN Sport; delayed fixture announcements and the distinct possibility that the logistically flawed move from the ERC’s old Dublin headquarters to the Swiss canton of Neuchatel next year will more than double the administrative costs.

Commercial partners
One ventures that in a year’s time much of the Cup’s teething problems, including the other four commercial partners, will be resolved. Indeed, one doesn’t doubt that “our turnover”, projects Craig, will exceed €100 million per year in four years’ time. Chillingly, he asserts: “When we say we’re going to do something, we do it.”

One always suspected that the English and French club owners resented Ireland’s successes in the Heineken Cup, even if they helped to swell their attendances and the pro- file of the tournament, as well as the head offices being in Dublin – hence, in part, the move to Neuchatel.

To the notion that the new landscape will work against the Irish teams, Craig says: “The Irish are very pragmatic. They realised what they’d had couldn’t last for ever. If they’d have been on the other side they’d have been raising blue hell.” If Irish rugby is a little paranoid about the new world order, comments like that justify the feeling, and there’s little doubt Craig’s view of the “national evolution of sport” will see the Celtic and Italian game weaken, and the southern hemisphere’s too.

Increased revenue
That Bath are losing €2-3 million per year is somehow everyone else’s fault, not theirs. With their increased TV revenue shares though, the leading Anglo-French clubs will assume even more muscle and power, with the international game and the game’s governors, the IRB, next in their line of fire.

“If you look at who controlled European rugby for the last 10 years it was actually the French,” says Craig, though for years the RFU was the English clubs’ main bugbearer. “I waged that war against the French and they always thought I didn’t have a chance.”

Craig accuses the Unions and the IRB of “self-interest” and of “protecting their own interests, not looking at what’s best for rugby,” which is laughable given the IRB and their Federations and Unions look after amateur, under-age and global rugby in both the developed and under-developed game, as opposed to one club or one league.

In any event “that victory (sic) over the French Federation has paved the way for Craig’s next target” according to the Guardian, namely “a global season”. This would be achieved by doing away with the June test window, with test rugby occurring in both hemispheres in October and November. Summer rugby in Europe, notably in France, could, suggests Craig – wait for it – be achieved with 32-man match-day squads. The reduced game time, he also claims, would enable clubs to play twice a week.

You couldn’t make this stuff up.

Of course, further reducing the test schedule to facilitate the expansion of the club game (in reality the Premiership and Top 14) would also weaken the Unions and Federations further, while concentrating power and money even further in the Top 14 and Premiership. But then power and money was all this battle ever was about.

“We haven’t even started yet,” warns Craig, chillingly again. Indeed. The only problem with multi-millionaires believing in their own power is that, alas, increasingly and sadly they are being proved right. Rugby should start being afraid. Very afraid.

http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/as-european-rugby-s-new-dawn-arrives-off-field-battles-for-control-are-set-to-continue-1.1962240?page=2

Craig basically wants to turn rugby into soccer. He wants wealthy owners to dictate the running of the game and the unions begging for the release of players etc. A world where the rich clubs become richer and the poor struggle to survive. Rich leagues become richer and the poor fall behind.


From Orwell's 1984

“Power is not a means; it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship.”

Craig likes provocative statements. And he is confrontational. He's the rugby owners equivalent of Brian Moore as a player.

But he is not stupid. Neither was/is Moore.

Would rather read Craig's amusing statements than get them 3rd hand re-quoted, with added bitterness, by Goebbels Thornley.

PRL won. Not Craig. They are not the self same thing.

quinsforever wrote:Craig likes provocative statements. And he is confrontational. He's the rugby owners equivalent of Brian Moore as a player.

But he is not stupid. Neither was/is Moore.

Would rather read Craig's amusing statements than get them 3rd hand re-quoted, with added bitterness, by Goebbels Thornley.

PRL won. Not Craig. They are not the self same thing.

Here you go.


Champions Cup is just the start for ambitious Bath owner Bruce Craig
With the launch of Europe’s new club competition, Bath’s driven owner now has the global calendar in his sights


   Robert Kitson

       The Guardian, Friday 10 October 2014 16.38 BST
       Jump to comments (29)

Bruce Craig Bruce Craig outside Bath's new training facility in an 18th-century Somerset mansion. Photograph: SWNS for the Guardian

No wonder Bruce Craig looks quietly satisfied. His Bath side are riding high and sunshine bathes the spectacular 18th-century mansion he has transformed into the most striking training base in sport. Three years after secretly registering the “Champions Cup” as the putative title of a new club-run European tournament, the latest phase of his oval-shaped vision starts next week. Lay a white cat on his lap and he could be a Bond character eyeing world domination.

That is pretty much how some perceive him anyway. Sitting in his tasteful study overlooking the front lawns of his stately home-turned-training ground it is obvious that thinking big has never been Craig’s problem. His views on how professional rugby union is heading in the next 10 or 20 years – “We haven’t even started yet” – are unashamedly ambitious.

A global calendar, International Rugby Board “self-interest”: he still has many more battles to fight. Shining white knight or hard-nosed multimillionaire? Either way, he tends to get what he wants.

But first the figures. Those who faced down the old Heineken Cup’s organisers believe they have been vindicated before a ball is even kicked in the new European Champions Cup. Already fresh television deals for the revised 20-team tournament will yield €57m annually for the next four years. “The entire revenue of ERC was €47m,” Craig says.

“We’ve just achieved an increase of 60% on TV rights alone. In four years’ time our overall turnover will exceed €100m per year. I don’t think, I know. When we say we’re going to do something, we do it.”

In other words, Craig believes everyone will benefit from the recast competition, particularly once the five main partner sponsors – currently only Heineken have climbed aboard – are signed up. Each is being asked to pay around €4m, with the Rugby Football Union having guaranteed €5m to stage this season’s final. Within 12 months, predicts Craig, annual revenue will have topped €80m with international television rights still to be fully maximised.

Not everyone in rugby will applaud, arguing such progress comes at the price of marginalising less affluent teams and regions and makes life harder, for example, for the Irish provinces. Craig – who made his money in pharmaceutical logistics – sheds precious few tears: “The Irish are very pragmatic. They realised what they’d had couldn’t last for ever. If they’d have been on the other side they’d have been raising blue hell.”

But what about Wales and Scotland, or the less wealthy English clubs? Won’t they be priced out of the increasingly shiny-shoed, meritocratic professional game? Craig insists not. “It’s not like an oil sheikh or an oligarch coming in and saying: ‘Well, the salary cap is now going to be £150m.’ When that happens the whole thing goes to pot. I think there’s natural evolution in everything. Look at the Orrells and Richmonds in English rugby. Things change. Look at the old French powerhouses: Béziers, Colomiers, Dax, Pau, Agen … professional rugby has changed all that. Club competitions might become more global.”

The French-speaking Craig also argues the whole professional club game would have fallen in on itself had his two-year quest for fiscal freedom failed. “We would certainly not have continued playing. There just wasn’t a viable future for what we are doing.” Bath currently lose £2-3m per year; Craig reckons they could break even in two years’ time now their share of the Euro gateau is bigger. He is visibly proud to have taken on France’s rugby politicians in their own powerful salons and won.

“If you look at who controlled European rugby for the last 10 years it was actually the French. I waged that war against the French and they always thought I didn’t have a chance. They didn’t realise that, for me, this was the most important thing. When I look at the self-interest in some of the unions and the administrative structures of the IRB I just think it’s a real shame. They’re protecting their own interests, not looking at what’s best for rugby.”

That victory has cleared the way for his next priority: the global calendar. Craig is adamant Test and club rugby will not be played in tandem beyond 2019 when the current international schedule agreement expires. “It won’t be a matter of us being dictated to and told when, where and how [we can play]. The English and French leagues will have to be consulted because the players are contracted to the clubs.”

For the global season, Craig’s solution is straightforward. The Six Nations stays where it is, followed by Premiership and European club games from mid-March to early October. The June Test window would disappear, with Test rugby in both hemispheres occurring in late October and November.

Summer rugby? Typically, Craig regards that “sacred cow” as ripe for slaughter and has similarly radical views on how to protect his players from injury. “You could actually play more games by increasing the size of match-day squads to 32 players rather than 23. If players are on the field for fewer minutes they wouldn’t absorb as much punishment as they do today. If you do that you could play two games per week. That would allow you to condense the season. We already have a squad of 50 so the wage bill would stay the same. It’s a different way of looking at it, isn’t it?”

Craig’s efforts to upscale the professional game do not end there. A Bath sevens team competing in Hong Kong and European finals staged in Amsterdam or Barcelona within two or three years are other bubbling ideas.

Soon enough, he thinks, the gap between the grandest French and English clubs may even start to reverse. Critics of the decision allowing Premiership clubs to sign a big overseas name outside the salary cap are, he feels, being short-sighted. “I don’t want an inordinate number of foreign players coming into England. But if we could get a Quade Cooper, a James O’Connor, a Duane Vermeulen, a Richie McCaw and a Dan Carter into the Premiership it would just add huge excitement and make the English game stronger.”

Next week’s new European dawn, in short, really is just the start. As the sun pours through his study windows, bathing the master of the house in its golden rays, Bruce Almighty admits he will experience a similar inner glow when Harlequins and Castres kick off next Friday. “In 15 to 20 years, 50,000 people might want to watch Bath every weekend. Who knows? There might be different views on what’s best for rugby but history will show that what we’ve got now is far superior to what we had. I think we’ll see, once the rugby starts, how much stronger it’s going to be.”

50,000 to watch bath every weekend ?!
How many people live in this town to start with?

Not if this is anything to go by:

Guardian Breakdown wrote:Saracens announced on Wednesday that Clermont – who were entitled to 20% of the tickets in the 10,000 capacity Allianz Stadium – had only sold 33 and said the French club would exceed that number in their official entourage. “The lack of response is surprising,” was the view on the home club’s website. Not quite a brave new dawn.

Given what Saracens did to Clermont last time you can't really blame the fans for not wanting to travel.

They're probably fearing annother massacre.

Cyril wrote:Given what Saracens did to Clermont last time you can't really blame the fans for not wanting to travel.

They're probably fearing annother massacre.

Clermont fans are not fairweather fans. Apart from anything else, they are playing well this year.

Sin é wrote:

Cyril wrote:Given what Saracens did to Clermont last time you can't really blame the fans for not wanting to travel.

They're probably fearing annother massacre.

Clermont fans are not fairweather fans. Apart from anything else, they are playing well this year.

They weren't anywhere near good enough last season. Two one-sided semi-finals last season.

Cyril wrote:

Sin é wrote:

Cyril wrote:Given what Saracens did to Clermont last time you can't really blame the fans for not wanting to travel.

They're probably fearing annother massacre.

Clermont fans are not fairweather fans. Apart from anything else, they are playing well this year.

They weren't anywhere near good enough last season. Two one-sided semi-finals last season.

Well, this season they are. Take the French out of France and they are very beatable.

Sin é wrote:

Cyril wrote:

Sin é wrote:

Cyril wrote:Given what Saracens did to Clermont last time you can't really blame the fans for not wanting to travel.

They're probably fearing annother massacre.

Clermont fans are not fairweather fans. Apart from anything else, they are playing well this year.

They weren't anywhere near good enough last season. Two one-sided semi-finals last season.

Well, this season they are. Take the French out of France and they are very beatable.

Which is what I was saying.

“The Irish are very pragmatic. They realised what they’d had couldn’t last for ever. If they’d have been on the other side they’d have been raising blue hell.”

He's a Hoot 'ol Craig.

In other words:

"Gotta stop the Irish winnin'.  Winnin' is a thing that can't be allowed last forever if it's not us doing it.  That was embarrassin' so ...well, like, in order to expand the game to the moons of Jupiter, that Irish winnin' of things by the Irish had to be stamped out by good business practice and a classy mind for the future financial diamonds of world rugby, like wot I got.  
"So we had to invent the rules to knock the Irish out of the competitions, see - that was the genius of it.  Give 'em one entry by right and that's them f**ked.  Quick - painless...like you'd do a sick dog.  Business has to be cruel when you need to invent a fair system to swing the big favours our way.

I'm bloomin' marvelous... I'm crafty, good lookin', I'm a silver-fox charmer, gotta big house and got the mind of a genius....... and...................."

...........and stop, Craig.  Just start winnin' things and we might start to believe you can spit tobacco as far as you say you can.

Cyril wrote:

Sin é wrote:

Cyril wrote:

Sin é wrote:

Cyril wrote:Given what Saracens did to Clermont last time you can't really blame the fans for not wanting to travel.

They're probably fearing annother massacre.

Clermont fans are not fairweather fans. Apart from anything else, they are playing well this year.

They weren't anywhere near good enough last season. Two one-sided semi-finals last season.

Well, this season they are. Take the French out of France and they are very beatable.

Which is what I was saying.

Even at that, Munster gave Toulon a better game in the South of France than Sarries gave Toulon on their own doorstep.

26-6 to Toulon is a onsided affair ok. At least Munster managed to score a try against Toulon (24-16) unlike either Toulon against Munster or Sarries against Toulon in the final.

SecretFly wrote:“The Irish are very pragmatic. They realised what they’d had couldn’t last for ever. If they’d have been on the other side they’d have been raising blue hell.”

Can someone explain to me what this is all about?

What couldn't last?

Winnin'...................................

Winnin' doesn't last when you're Irish.
Winnin' doesn't last when you're green.
Gotta change the rules,
Gotta find new tools,
Gotta kick the Paddies in the spleen.

And that's the first verse of my entry for our National Song Contest.

I think 'My lovely horse' is better.

Sin é wrote:

SecretFly wrote:“The Irish are very pragmatic. They realised what they’d had couldn’t last for ever. If they’d have been on the other side they’d have been raising blue hell.”

Can someone explain to me what this is all about?

What couldn't last?

Mmm sounds like the old ERC - what problem I don't see a problem?

Years later there is a solution & thank goodness it starts tonight

BigTrevsbigmac wrote:

Sin é wrote:

SecretFly wrote:“The Irish are very pragmatic. They realised what they’d had couldn’t last for ever. If they’d have been on the other side they’d have been raising blue hell.”

Can someone explain to me what this is all about?

What couldn't last?

Mmm sounds like the old ERC - what problem I don't see a problem?

Years later there is a solution & thank goodness it starts tonight

But it was no advantage having the ERC based in Ireland to any Irish team. In fact, if anything it worked against the Irish teams - only two finals in Ireland, Munster only got two home semis out of about 10 (and they were both against Leinster) so may as well have been away from home.

Don't knock it 'till you hear the complete song Bathman.   The chorus will be a true 12 point emotionaliser, big-voice-melodrama special sung by a sweet callín ......with a beard... for the winnin' ingredient.

Bath is innit to win'it
Bath is innit to give it a go
Craig has said it's about his team,
Bath are ready to have the cream,
Let's hope the slippy soap don't spoil his dream.

Does this new comptition have an official site btw? The one I'm getting doesn't look too official

You mean this one?

http://www.epcrugby.com/europeanrugbychampionscup/index.php

It's funny how there is that weird split between "Brand NEW Competition" and "Clermont aiming to end their Champions Cup Hoodoo". Do all teams have hoodoos or none?

Craig's quote referred to the uneven split of monies in favour of the Irish teams. They got approximately 3x per team compared to what AP teams got from ERC

quinsforever wrote:Craig's quote referred to the uneven split of monies in favour of the Irish teams. They got approximately 3x per team compared to what AP teams got from ERC

Wasn't that the same for the Welsh, Italians & Scots, not just the Irish? It didn't do them much good

Sin é wrote:

quinsforever wrote:Craig's quote referred to the uneven split of monies in favour of the Irish teams. They got approximately 3x per team compared to what AP teams got from ERC

Wasn't that the same for the Welsh, Italians & Scots, not just the Irish? It didn't do them much good

It read to me like a response to a question so I'm guessing he was asked about the Irish (for some reason).

(EDIT: and I think the Scots and Italians got about 6 times what each English club got).

Indeed.

Wouldn't be a very good quote if he had said it about the Scots, welsh or Italian club sides though!

Sin é wrote:

quinsforever wrote:Craig's quote referred to the uneven split of monies in favour of the Irish teams. They got approximately 3x per team compared to what AP teams got from ERC

Wasn't that the same for the Welsh, Italians & Scots, not just the Irish? It didn't do them much good

It was the unions that received the money not the clubs. It was a union run competition.

No, it was run by ERC, a company, and had shareholders who were unions and clubs.

quinsforever wrote:No, it was run by ERC, a company, and had shareholders who were unions and clubs.

The clubs were not shareholders (the FFR gave 50% of their shares to LNR).

HammerofThunor wrote:You mean this one?

http://www.epcrugby.com/europeanrugbychampionscup/index.php

It's funny how there is that weird split between "Brand NEW Competition" and "Clermont aiming to end their Champions Cup Hoodoo".  Do all teams have hoodoos or none?

No that's more like the real thing now, Hammer. Thanks.

But yeah that is interesting, will sides let their 'records' from the old contest - that is now dead and buried - cross over to a new contest?

Surely it's undoable as different conditions apply. Toulon can't use the three in a row blurb if they win this year ..... sorry LNR, but if you wanted a new competition, you got one - plus a whole new 'history' that goes with it, beginning this weekend and no sooner.

Does LNR represent clubs? Yes

There ERC had shareholders who are clubs as well as unions

And that's not even to talk about votes, which PRL had too.

The whole problem for you Irish who got upset and are still upset about the changes that happened to ERC is that you still think the HC was a union run competition.

I'm glad that we won't have to have that debate going forwards.

The money was given to the unions to distribute anyway they wanted and the English choose to distribute it evenly to the 12 clubs. That is why they got less money.

I'm more than ready to embrace this new comp (I just got tickets to the Leinster Wasps match). I still call it the HC but thats just out of habit.

quinsforever wrote:Does LNR represent clubs? Yes

There ERC had shareholders who are clubs as well as unions

And that's not even to talk about votes, which PRL had too.

The whole problem for you Irish who got upset and are still upset about the changes that happened to ERC is that you still think the HC was a union run competition.

I'm glad that we won't have to have that debate going forwards.

Will IRFU be part of the running of the new event?   Yes, they will be - they own four of the 'clubs' in one of the three competing leagues.  Will the WRU fund certain Welsh club players through a 'central contracts' arrangement that will ensure they have an active role in Welsh regional fortunes in Europe?  Yes - they will.

Just because the Unions in France and England have given control to Clubs in their respective spheres of influence doesn't mean that 'Union' will not be involved in the running of the European competition.  They will.  So it's innacurate to say the new competition is now exclusively the preserve of clubs any more than it was accurate to say the HEC was exclusively the preserve of Unions.  
It's a simplification of reality to make a point, quins - but it's an inaccurate point by virtue of the simplicity used.

I never said anything about the new competition in terms of who is running it. Just that this one and the HC were not Union-run.

And just as the 12 English clubs in Europe decided they didn't like the division of monies, so they walked off and started their own competition because ERC thought they were bluffing.

Would agree that the ERC organisational structure was definitely Union-biased (down to votes), Celtic biased (again down to votes and location in Ireland according to the French) and status-quo-biased, which is in the end what killed it. But not Union-run

quinsforever wrote:Does LNR represent clubs? Yes

There ERC had shareholders who are clubs as well as unions

And that's not even to talk about votes, which PRL had too.

The whole problem for you Irish who got upset and are still upset about the changes that happened to ERC is that you still think the HC was a union run competition.

I'm glad that we won't have to have that debate going forwards.

Shareholding (from duedil.com)
Owned Value Detail
Irish Rugby Football Union
16.67% 2,117.09 EUR 1,667.00 × 1.27 EUR Ordinary
Rugby Football Union
16.67% 2,117.09 EUR 1,667.00 × 1.27 EUR Ordinary
Scottish Rugby Union Plc
16.67% 2,117.09 EUR 1,667.00 × 1.27 EUR Ordinary
Welsh Rugby Union Ltd
16.67% 2,117.09 EUR 1,667.00 × 1.27 EUR Ordinary
Federazione Italiana Rugby
16.66% 2,115.82 EUR 1,666.00 × 1.27 EUR Ordinary
8.66% 1,099.82 EUR 866.00 × 1.27 EUR Ordinary
Ligue Nationale De Rugby
8.00% 1,016.00 EUR 800.00 × 1.27 EUR Ordinary

The clubs were not shareholders. The LNR had a small shareholding.

Therefore clubs were shareholders

quinsforever wrote:Therefore clubs were shareholders

Nope. The LNR were shareholders.

quinsforever wrote:I never said anything about the new competition in terms of who is running it. Just that this one and the HC were not Union-run.

And just as the 12 English clubs in Europe decided they didn't like the division of monies, so they walked off and started their own competition because ERC thought they were bluffing.
Would agree that the ERC organisational structure was definitely Union-biased (down to votes), Celtic biased (again down to votes and location in Ireland according to the French) and status-quo-biased, which is in the end what killed it. But not Union-run

They were bluffing though...they didn't start their own competition.  They talked long and hard about it - about going against ERC, the RFU even the IRB.  Going it alone heroically was even on the cards.  
The others, in their turn, and equally bullishly, talked long and hard about their alternative (European competition without PRL sides)
But in the end, the RFU (Unions lads ) needed peace and needed their 12 clubs playing in Europe. So end-of-days talks happened and agreements happened and the result was a mix'n'match of what the 12 English clubs wanted (total media control by their buddies BT) and bits and pieces of what other people wanted - money divisions, etc etc; and bits that people didn't want - Sky interference and dilution of representation.  
This competition isn't the bluff that worked it's another agreement between Unions and Clubs, run by Unions and clubs (this time with a bias firmly on the Privately run Clubs side!) to get things moving into the new year.  It will be killed off again by Unions or Clubs if either don't like the results down the line.  It's an agreement entered into that can again be walked out of should necessity require it down the line.  It's a 'Peace in our time for Now' conclusion. That's all.

quinsforever wrote:Does LNR represent clubs? Yes

There ERC had shareholders who are clubs as well as unions

And that's not even to talk about votes, which PRL had too.

The whole problem for you Irish who got upset and are still upset about the changes that happened to ERC is that you still think the HC was a union run competition.

I'm glad that we won't have to have that debate going forwards.

What is my problem Quins? It might be the changes... or it might be sweeping generalisations based on someones nationality.

quinsforever wrote:I never said anything about the new competition in terms of who is running it. Just that this one and the HC were not Union-run.

And just as the 12 English clubs in Europe decided they didn't like the division of monies, so they walked off and started their own competition because ERC thought they were bluffing.

Would agree that the ERC organisational structure was definitely Union-biased (down to votes), Celtic biased (again down to votes and location in Ireland according to the French) and status-quo-biased, which is in the end what killed it. But not Union-run

We will know who is running the competition when M. Boudjellal & Nigel Craig decide they want Armitage playing for Bath for the season up to the world cup after all even though he has already played for Toulon.  

We will see who is running the new competition when one of the French players gets cited and a long ban for something like gouging or a spear tackle.

The French would argue they were always handed longer bans than players from the English speaking nations. Not sure it's true mind, but they would argue it anyway!

thebandwagonsociety wrote:

quinsforever wrote:Does LNR represent clubs? Yes

There ERC had shareholders who are clubs as well as unions

And that's not even to talk about votes, which PRL had too.

The whole problem for you Irish who got upset and are still upset about the changes that happened to ERC is that you still think the HC was a union run competition.

I'm glad that we won't have to have that debate going forwards.

What is my problem Quins? It might be the changes... or it might be sweeping generalisations based on someones nationality.

e

It would be nice if an Irish poster popped his head above the parapet and showed support for the new competitions.

BigTrevsbigmac wrote:

thebandwagonsociety wrote:

quinsforever wrote:Does LNR represent clubs? Yes

There ERC had shareholders who are clubs as well as unions

And that's not even to talk about votes, which PRL had too.

The whole problem for you Irish who got upset and are still upset about the changes that happened to ERC is that you still think the HC was a union run competition.

I'm glad that we won't have to have that debate going forwards.

What is my problem Quins? It might be the changes... or it might be sweeping generalisations based on someones nationality.

e

It would be nice if an Irish poster popped his head above the parapet and showed support for the new competitions.

You got what you wanted. Do we (Irish) have to like it as well

Sin é wrote:

BigTrevsbigmac wrote:

thebandwagonsociety wrote:

quinsforever wrote:Does LNR represent clubs? Yes

There ERC had shareholders who are clubs as well as unions

And that's not even to talk about votes, which PRL had too.

The whole problem for you Irish who got upset and are still upset about the changes that happened to ERC is that you still think the HC was a union run competition.

I'm glad that we won't have to have that debate going forwards.

What is my problem Quins? It might be the changes... or it might be sweeping generalisations based on someones nationality.

e

It would be nice if an Irish poster popped his head above the parapet and showed support for the new competitions.

You got what you wanted. Do we (Irish) have to like it as well

I was just hoping that maybe you didn't speak for all the Irish folk.

BigTrevsbigmac wrote:

Sin é wrote:

BigTrevsbigmac wrote:

thebandwagonsociety wrote:

quinsforever wrote:Does LNR represent clubs? Yes

There ERC had shareholders who are clubs as well as unions

And that's not even to talk about votes, which PRL had too.

The whole problem for you Irish who got upset and are still upset about the changes that happened to ERC is that you still think the HC was a union run competition.

I'm glad that we won't have to have that debate going forwards.

What is my problem Quins? It might be the changes... or it might be sweeping generalisations based on someones nationality.

e

It would be nice if an Irish poster popped his head above the parapet and showed support for the new competitions.

You got what you wanted. Do we (Irish) have to like it as well

I was just hoping that maybe you didn't speak for all the Irish folk.

I am speaking as a Welshman, and the whole layout of this new competition sucks @rse, I have stayed off this thread for a bit as it was just going around in circles, but for the French and English to be guaranteed 6 places every season and the rest just one is bollox, the English teams still wont win anyway, I still cannot look beyond the big spending French sides, and when they are dominating for the next few seasons, the PRL clubs will grizzle again about fairness, and they want a change, firstly when the Irish teams were dominating, it was because they could rest players in the league and that was not fair, especially when Edinburgh got to the S/F, and now it will be because they are not allowed to spend as much as the French, this will not end until the big money men are running rugby to their own ends.

Leagues not nations!

No 7&1/2 wrote:Leagues not nations!

Well, if the RFU decide to split their money evenly between 12 clubs, even though only half are in the HC why should that interfere in how many teams each union has to represent them in the HC ? This is all about power, and it will not end well in England either, trust me, the big money men will want to run their clubs like the big spending French before long, and the English league will end up just like the French one, and the national team will then go the same way as France.