London Welsh to possibly sue the premiership??

Does anyone think they would get anywhere??

http://www.planetrugby.co.uk/story/0,25883,3823_9527300,00.html

Its not that they dont have a point, but there are so many questions about how they are organised in themselves, and how keen they seem to be to blame everyone else for problems of their own making.

The comments after that article have some interesting information. It seems that LW have one of the biggest playing staff in the league. I would guess a lot are not being paid huge wages, but still..

The biggest problem seems to be that the way in which they are currently being run is just such a long way from what English rugby needs.

Not sure they will get anywhere but I agree that the current system is a sham.

Good for them. They rightly challenged the ridiculous Jeff entry criteria and this is another farce that needs to go.

HKC I guess the funding issue is unfair but there needs to be some entry criteria.

LW bringing this up now just smacks of sour grapes for their failure so far in the AP.

Blaming the PRL for their own failings is pretty low.

They are not the only club guilty of moaning but they are one of the only ones to attack the PRL on such a regular basis.

LW are always winging and blaming others. They need to man up and build a succesful club. Look at Exeter, they have made their way at their own pace without all the mud slinging. Worcester Warriors although having recently got relegated have also built up a succesful club with a purpose built RUGY stadium a solid support base of around 7-8k and a succesful business model.

wrfc1980 wrote:LW are always winging and blaming others. They need to man up and build a succesful club. Look at Exeter, they have made their way at their own pace without all the mud slinging. Worcester Warriors although having recently got relegated have also built up a succesful club with a purpose built RUGBY stadium a solid support base of around 7-8k and a succesful business model.

They also would get significantly more than London Welsh if they get back in the premiership. Not sure how much they get now they're in the Championship, wouldn't be surprised if it's more than London Welsh get now.

They also lose a lot of money so I'm not sure they've really got a successful business model.

This is excellent news. These sort of things do need challenging and it's good if it happens before the next round of negotiations between the clubs and the union. Even if it just clarifies that the current set-up is legal.

Not particularly fond of anything about LW but the rules are unfair and desperately need challenging. If we're going for relegation over ring-fencing (as I believe we should) you can't use lopsided money distribution to create an artificial ring-fence. I'd like to go much further to narrow the gap in funding between the 2 leagues, in fact I'd love to go as far as incorporating the Championship within the PRL and distributing all central money equally. English teams would fall even further behind in European rugby but 2 strong domestic leagues would be great, and you'd also open up the possibility of an FA cup style tournament without it being one sided and potentially dangerous as it would be now.

I can see exactly where they area coming from, however wasn't it the same last time they were up in the Prem? They didn't make a huge song and dance about it then, so why do it now?

The funding is unfair, though the flip side is the long term clubs have spent a lot of money to create the current situation and the arrivistes of London Welsh want to cash in on others' efforts.

The coorect solution is for PRL to take over the running of the championship and fund it properly so that more clubs have the chance to do what Exeter did and build a sustainable club.

Three reasons why Welsh should get less money.
1) They are not shareholders because they did not set up the league and take the risks. If you form a business you expect to get the rewards not share them with others.
2) As they have been in the league less time they have contributed less to its success.
3) They do not actively seek to develop English players who will feed into England system leading to national success thereby helping fund RFU who in turn help fund PRL. A successful England team also produces bigger crowds and more interest in rugby in England again increasing PRL income.  London Welsh are involved in development of players for a competitor thereby positively harming English rugby. http://www.wru.co.uk/eng/development/ministomillennium/player/exiles/index.php.

Exiledinborders wrote:Three reasons why Welsh should get less money.
1) They are not shareholders because they did not set up the league and take the risks. If you form a business you expect to get the rewards not share them with others.
2) As they have been in the league less time they have contributed less to its success.
3) They do not actively seek to develop English players who will feed into England system leading to national success thereby helping fund RFU who in turn help fund PRL. A successful England team also produces bigger crowds and more interest in rugby in England again increasing PRL income.  London Welsh are involved in development of players for a competitor thereby positively harming English rugby. http://www.wru.co.uk/eng/development/ministomillennium/player/exiles/index.php.

1) Did they have the opportunity?
2) Bit of a vicious circle here.
3) Don't they? Quite a few English players. Do you mean they don't have an academy? Are these set out by the RFU in the EPS agreement with the PRL? In which case can they set up an academy or would they be treading on someone else's toes? London Wasps cover Oxfordshire. And the link didn't work. I had a look at the website but couldn't find the sort of thing you suggested.

yes the funding issue is a big challenge. but this now smacks of sour grapes after a shocking start to the season and what looks in hindsight like a shocking recruitment drive over the summer

few observations:
- nothing has changed in the rules/financial terms. LW knew what they were before they hired all their players and support staff.
- i personally think the only way a team can get promoted and stay there is if they really tap into quality young development players (like Exeter who are fed into by all the Cornish schools and teams) from the area of to have a quality academy that attracts them.
- lets be honest, LW were not fancied to beat Bristol in the playoffs, that was a bit of an upset. The panic player recruitment over the summer shows that LW mgmt didnt expect it either!

I have a soft spot for LW as my rugby coach when i was at school moonlighted as their 1st XV coach in the early 80s. But they are unrecognisable after the latest batch of panic signings.

It takes a long time for a team to come together. you cant hire 25 people and expect understanding to arrive at the same time as they do!

If they win in court, will they have to repay last seasons parachute payment? Or was it OK for them to get more central funding than 10 of the other 11 championship teams?

It does seem that London Welsh are deflecting attention from their failures and would indeed still be failing if they had the same funding but all the same are absolutely correct that all top-flight teams should get the same core funding to try and create a more level playing field.

I think that those two things do not contradict themselves at all.

London Welsh have attributed to their own situation in my eyes.

They were promoted with a strong "team" that had a powerful pack etc. Their decision not to stick with that side and simply add a few quality players to key positions was disaterous. (Im not complaing as a falcons fan)

Last time they were up they were suing the prem...its becoming a bit boring.

It all comes from the top and i think they're not lead well. I think there are other clubs i would prefer to be in the prem with academies, strong goals for their clubs...business plans etc.

Worcester being one of them. But i also think Bristol should have been up and the play off system is a joke for the championship.

Notch is correct - the funding set-up is a mess and LW are a mess.

Just a quick few questions:-

Why isn't the funding the same for everybody in the league ?

Aren't there specifications to be able to get promotion into the top flight of English rugby ?

If so how the feck have London Welsh managed to be allowed into the top flight in the first place, if they do not have academies and the what not ?

There are various elements to the fundng:

1) RFU generic funding - flat to all 12
2) RFU Academy funding - flat to the 14 clubs assigned academy regions (not LW but includes Leeds Yorkshire Carnegie, Bristol and Worcester)
3) Direct payments for players in EPS (£40k poer player according to the info around Steffon armitage)
4) Payments for fielding a minimum number of EQPs

5) PRL generated income (commercial sponsors TV etc). This is the main area of concern as here we get into who is and isn't a PRL shareholder.


Specifications for entry. These did exist but were relaxed after LW went to court last time. That has been done to death - but for the long term health of rugby the decision was wrong, but it was anti-competitive.


They do not have an academy because:

a) the RFU assigned the academy regions
b) They do not have the infrastructure or will to support one.

LondonTiger wrote:There are various elements to the fundng:

1) RFU generic funding - flat to all 12
2) RFU Academy funding - flat to the 14 clubs assigned academy regions (not LW but includes Leeds Yorkshire Carnegie, Bristol and Worcester)
3) Direct payments for players in EPS (£40k poer player according to the info around Steffon armitage)
4) Payments for fielding a minimum number of EQPs

5) PRL generated income (commercial sponsors TV etc). This is the main area of concern as here we get into who is and isn't a PRL shareholder.


Specifications for entry. These did exist but were relaxed after LW went to court last time. That has been done to death - but for the long term health of rugby the decision was wrong, but it was anti-competitive.


They do not have an academy because:

a) the RFU assigned the academy regions
b) They do not have the infrastructure or will to support one.

Well if that is the case, than they should not have been allowed into the top flight in the first place.

The legal ruling was that the rules that prevented them entry were uncompetitive.

There should be a reward for on field performance, but in what is still a fledgling pro sport there should be entry criteria.

I quite like the RL system for entry to super League. Clubs have to meet minimum standards off the pitch as well as on, and are then guaranteed 3 seasons in the top flight. This can of course mean there are seasons with no relegation/promotion.

LondonTiger wrote:The legal ruling was that the rules that prevented them entry were uncompetitive.

There should be a reward for on field performance, but in what is still a fledgling pro sport there should be entry criteria.

I quite like the RL system for entry to super League. Clubs have to meet minimum standards off the pitch as well as on, and are then guaranteed 3 seasons in the top flight. This can of course mean there are seasons with no relegation/promotion.

In some ways that is a terrific idea, but you do need to be able to kick a team that is effectively taking the urine

LondonTiger wrote:The legal ruling was that the rules that prevented them entry were uncompetitive.

There should be a reward for on field performance, but in what is still a fledgling pro sport there should be entry criteria.

I quite like the RL system for entry to super League. Clubs have to meet minimum standards off the pitch as well as on, and are then guaranteed 3 seasons in the top flight. This can of course mean there are seasons with no relegation/promotion.

They've scrapped that haven't they?

http://www1.skysports.com/rugby-league/news/12204/9163567/super-league-blake-solly-promotes-re-structure-including-return-of-relegation

EDIT: Actually that's quite interesting. After a certain point the top 8 of the league break off to continue to aim for the playoffs. The bottom four enter a similar system with the top 4 from the league below. Then the top 4 from that competition will be in the top league to following year. So, if applied to union, the bottom 4 from the Jeff and the top 4 from the championship would playoff to find the best four. With the funding difference between them at the minute it would be a bit difficult I'd think but it's still interesting.

Must be a good idea then, if my flanker-less cousins have scrapped it

Might be my naivety coming through here, but isn't there an opposite equivalent to the parachute money for promoted teams?

"Londown Welsh, will you ever not stop your taking the p-iss and stop moaning all the time ever so much and just live with the system!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

London Welsh should take that advice onboard and rename themselves instantly.   Let's say..........emmmmm............. London Wasps?  Oh no that's taken by some other outfit that's from Coventry.

London.......emmmmmmmm.... Whingers.  No, no.... too descriptive.

London Warblers?

London Warblers.  Nature analogy, bird analogy, no Welsh connection in the minds.

"London Warblers...............those lads got a point about the unfairness, sure enough.  I'm on their side!  Clubs gotta stand up for themselves."

HoT - woudl be interesting if we did at least increase the funding to the Championship.

I'm generally against the idea of ring-fencing but I could be convinced that professional rugby could/should be ring-fenced, with licenses, to make sure they're getting the infrastructure in place early, rather than just spending on players.

There are many ways it could be done after this point, confrence system like the NFL (this may be difficult with the uneven spread of teams around the country). A simple two league system (12 teams or 10?) with promotion and relegation as normal (but run by the PGB with equal representation from all the clubs). Or another.

SecretFly wrote:"Londown Welsh, will you ever not stop your taking the p-iss and stop moaning all the time ever so much and just live with the system!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

London Welsh should take that advice onboard and rename themselves instantly.   Let's say..........emmmmm............. London Wasps?  Oh no that's taken by some other outfit that's from Coventry.

London.......emmmmmmmm.... Whingers.  No, no.... too descriptive.

London Warblers?

London Warblers.  Nature analogy, bird analogy, no Welsh connection in the minds.

"London Warblers...............those lads got a point about the unfairness, sure enough.  I'm on their side!  Clubs gotta stand up for themselves."

Have you had one too many knocks to the head? lol

Me?

I'm only observing, Nathan.

Only observing the attitudes expressed

nathan wrote:

SecretFly wrote:"Londown Welsh, will you ever not stop your taking the p-iss and stop moaning all the time ever so much and just live with the system!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

London Welsh should take that advice onboard and rename themselves instantly.   Let's say..........emmmmm............. London Wasps?  Oh no that's taken by some other outfit that's from Coventry.

London.......emmmmmmmm.... Whingers.  No, no.... too descriptive.

London Warblers?

London Warblers.  Nature analogy, bird analogy, no Welsh connection in the minds.

"London Warblers...............those lads got a point about the unfairness, sure enough.  I'm on their side!  Clubs gotta stand up for themselves."

Have you had one too many knocks to the head? lol

btw should be: 'Oxford Welsh/ Whingers / Warblers, Waterboys, other Ws words'.... delete to taste.

well... next season their gonna be replaced by bristol welsh

...so will join Gloucester Welsh

I think Gloucester will gradually shif to be Gloucester Austrirish

Hammer, We are very near the border, always handy for spot of pillaging... well under the last coach anyway.
Used to be French stars under St Andre, then Jocks under Redpath, now Welsh (legacy of prev coach), maybe you are right about what happens next under Humphries.

HammerofThunor wrote:I think Gloucester will gradually shif to be Gloucester Austrirish

Nope..., it'll be Gloucester Boks. Humphries likes his SAs

Surprised the discrepancy between the top and bottom sides' shares is so little. Some difference is inevitable, it is a meritocracy not a "let's split everything evenly even though some clubs have earnt a bit more"cracy. It's harder for new sides to make it but they have, Exeter alone backing that up

If Bristol had come up they would have had more than London Welsh got. Not sure how that is a meritocracy.

I wasn't actually aware that's how the system worked - it does seem a bit silly.

God, this word Meritocracy ain't half pleased with itself in the last year or so.  Spent all its life wishing and hoping for fame and getting crap all.  Played video games and ate take-away food in its dingy flat.  Felt the world of hope slipping away..............................UNTIL one day; a guy gets on the phone and says he'd be very interested in having a chat and there might be a job in it that paid well......

I'm glad to see Meritocracy finally got his break.  But he's getting co-cky now and needs a little slapping to put his ego back in its box.  It feels like he might be trying to take over the World!.

George Carlin wrote:I wasn't actually aware that's how the system worked - it does seem a bit silly.

Not 100% but...

Three different 'shares' in the PRL, I think, A, B and S (not sure which way round they are but)

1) Each of the 12 teams in the premiership this year have an equal number of A shares.
2) B shares are gained by spending time in the premiership, and lost by being out of the premiership. I think that after 5 years you've either lost all your B shares or gained them all.
3) S shares are owned by 13 teams and were given out when the PRL was formed. Recently Exeter bought Leeds' S shares. I think Bristol and Worcester are the other owners of these shares (as well as the 11 premiership teams, excluding London Welsh). I think there is some clause that once a team has spent a certain number of years they have the option to buy the shares from someone relegated, but again, not 100%

From The Rugby Paper:

Aviva Premiership payments for July 1 – Sept 1 2014

More than £1m: Gloucester, Newcastle, London Irish and Sale
Circa £900,000: Wasps, Exeter
Between £820-£880,000: Harlequins, Leicester, Saracens and Bath
Circa £770,000: Northampton
Circa; £350,000: London Welsh

Outside Premiership

Circa £900,000: Worcester
Circa: £650,000: Bristol


http://www.therugbypaper.co.uk/featured-post/19054/exclusive-london-welsh-may-sue-premiership-rugby-over-giant-gap-in-funding/

From the Torygraph:

"Funding for promoted clubs has been a source of contention in recent years. The distribution of funding to Premiership clubs is through a mechanism of three types of shares, A, B and P, designed to reward the clubs who have invested most into the value of the tournament and give clubs security to raise loans even if they are relegated.

All 12 Premiership clubs get B shares automatically but clubs must be in the league for two seasons before they earn the right to purchase P shares, which are the most lucrative, from the club who have been relegated to the championship.

A club also accrue five A shares for each consecutive season in the Premiership to a maximum of 30 and the club purchasing P shares at the market value can also purchase A shares at that point.

Exeter are the last side to have been promoted from the Championship who purchased P shares, for £5 million from Leeds Carnegie.

As London Welsh possess only B shares, they receive significantly less than, for example, Leicester but will also benefit from a parachute payment if they are relegated to the Championship next season."


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/premiership/11206854/MP-demands-probe-into-cartel-funding-of-Premiership-clubs-which-discriminates-against-promoted-teams.html

So I got all my letters mixed up. A and B were switched and S was P. And it's 6 years to max out the A shares, not 5. But the jist was right.

interesting stuff. didnt know all the details of various share classes. LW will get nowhere by suing. the rules were clearly understood and transparent to all who run team in Jeff and Championship. the fact LW made a monumental hash of their offseason player and staff recruitment is entirely their own lookout.

What I find ridiculous are those posters who defended the equal split of European money between the 12 AP teams as being fair, now equally defend the unequal spilt from the AP as being fair - hypocrites.

The Great Aukster wrote:What I find ridiculous are those posters who defended the equal split of European money between the 12 AP teams as being fair, now equally defend the unequal spilt from the AP as being fair - hypocrites.

+1

Where were these people when the war on Europe was at it's peak ?

Has anyone defended it as fair? Pretty much everyone has said that it is unfair. Some have given the reasons why it's the case.

Quite a few comments about Welsh being whingers (mostly from how they came up last year).

Quins,

LW will get nowhere by suing. the rules were clearly understood and transparent to all who run team in Jeff and Championship.

You mean like how they knew the minimum entry criteria for the Premiership a few years ago? I'm pretty sure they got those clearly understood and transparent rules changed.

The Great Aukster wrote:What I find ridiculous are those posters who defended the equal split of European money between the 12 AP teams as being fair, now equally defend the unequal spilt from the AP as being fair - hypocrite s.

I have so far only found one person who deems the current payment system to be fair.  If you care to look up you will see most say it is unfair. The biggest losers however are not London Welsh - but the 10 champioship clubs who get bugger all.


to paraphrase notch - the payment system is unfair and London Welsh are a bunch of whinging crybabies.

LondonTiger wrote:

The Great Aukster wrote:What I find ridiculous are those posters who defended the equal split of European money between the 12 AP teams as being fair, now equally defend the unequal spilt from the AP as being fair - hypocrite  s.

I have so far only found one person who deems the current payment system to be fair.  If you care to look up you will see most say it is unfair. The biggest losers however are not London Welsh - but the 10 champioship clubs who get bugger all.


to paraphrase notch - the payment system is unfair and London Welsh are a bunch of whinging crybabies.

I agree.