'Pointless' Challenge Cup unsustainable - Jackman

First topic message reminder :


Interesting comments by Grenoble coach Barnard Jackman about the Challenge Cup - just reinforces what we thought the French clubs' attitude to this non-competition is - give fringe players a run-out while the first team is rested for the Top 14

quinsforever wrote:i would prefer the 6/6/6 and winners of both comps get a free spot.

but scrapping the playoff works just fine.

Is that because it's about leagues not unions?

Cos you see...

...

...I think it's about unions and not leagues.

HammerofThunor wrote:Yeah, scrap the play off. 6 from T14, 6 from Jeff, 7 from Pro12 and the Challenge Cup winner. 20 teams.

You still need a provision for when the Challenge Cup winner has already qualified by league position. Which I expect to happen most years. The clubs in each competition shuffles pretty much every year. The three English sides that topped their Challenge Cup pools last year are all in the Champions this year. Just handing the last place over to the next ranked club from the winner's league isn't good enough.

Just pull them from the normal qualification. So if Edinburgh win, Glasgow would automatically qualify as the best Scottish team, even if they finished in the league below Edinburgh.

Notch wrote:

quinsforever wrote:i would prefer the 6/6/6 and winners of both comps get a free spot.

but scrapping the playoff works just fine.

Is that because it's about leagues not unions?

Cos you see...

...

...I think it's about unions and not leagues.

And every union should be entitled to enter half their teams

How's the theories going?

Hmmm, let me see.............................
what?.....................................
how?................................
are you for real?????..............
6?.....................
If one team wins, the other team should qualify??.................


Still in the doldrums guys!  Report Card: Must Improve!

Notch wrote:

quinsforever wrote:i would prefer the 6/6/6 and winners of both comps get a free spot.

but scrapping the playoff works just fine.

Is that because it's about leagues not unions?

Cos you see...

...

...I think it's about unions and not leagues.

Aren't the competitions about individual teams, 15 players against 15 on the pitch (well, 15 at the start of each game), not Unions, not leagues?

So, make the qualifying team-based and solely on performance in Europe. Worst 4 Champions Cup pool bottomers get demoted to Challenge Cup next season, replaced by Challenge semi-finalists. Next worst Championers play off against Challenger losing quarterfinalists home and away on semi and final weekends.

If teams don't prioritise Europe sufficiently, they end up in the Challenge Cup and probably stay there until they do. Adds bite to the closing games of the Champion pools, doesn't do much for the Challenge, and the big drawback is that the leagues lose the mid-table scramble for 6th, 7th or 8th places.

Dubbelyew L Overate wrote:
So, make the qualifying team-based and solely on performance in Europe. Worst 4 Champions Cup pool bottomers get demoted to Challenge Cup next season, replaced by Challenge semi-finalists. Next worst Championers play off against Challenger losing quarterfinalists home and away on semi and final weekends.

If teams don't prioritise Europe sufficiently, they end up in the Challenge Cup and probably stay there until they do. Adds bite to the closing games of the Champion pools, doesn't do much for the Challenge, and the big drawback is that the leagues lose the mid-table scramble for 6th, 7th or 8th places.

Mucho Ideology problemos there, Dubbleyew.  Namely, your ideas run right in the face of PRL goals and you'd be getting a stinking letter from McCafferty if you go public on the idea.

4 Challenge Cup calibre sides ain't worth diddly squat to the ERCC....thus why a bunch of them were dropped in the first place - remember?  "Get thee to Amlin ye useless shower of c**ts - and Yay, never darken our elite doorstep again"  The eejits of the bottom of the Leagues were well and truly snookered by their superiors and now you suggest they're re-promoted back almost instantly?

The second highlight makes a fool of supposedly the Greatest Evil - placing Europe priorities above that of League.  Leagues are what make the fans happy - good Leagues are supposedly the ideal, 'bad' Leagues were encouraged to be 'good' ones, Pro12 was supposedly fixed now that teams would have to try in them, making them much more dynamic and competitive.  But suddenly - that's now to be frowned on and the Munster and Leinster way of total loyalty to Europe is the way forward?

Let me see how all this would theoretically work:
Well, it would be a bit of a see-saw of sorts as initiially to be in ERCC you must do well in your League.  Now, in your scenario the 4 best Challenge Cup particpants get promoted to ERCC automatically without having to prioritise League.  So they sit back at the bottom of their respective Leagues the following year (because that's where they usually sit even when for them they are playing their best rugby) and hold all their ammo back for the ERCC (sounding very old school Pro12 here and sounding quite unleague-like in a meritocratic sense)
Meanwhile, the four sides that were in ERCC by virtue of them trying hard in their Leagues, they get downgraded to the Challenge Cup regardless of endeavour in League, and so their priority in that following year would be what?  Try hard in their League to get into the ERCC by that route (which they are capable of and would be meritocratic) or also wait it out through League and prioritise Challenge Cup to get into ERCC that way?
So theoretically you then have the potential for 8 lazy teams in any League, waiting for Europe to begin to see where they'll be in Europe the following year.

Hardly the beautiful plan outlined by the PRL/LNR combo?

Confusingly wrong thread

LondonTiger wrote:

Notch wrote:

quinsforever wrote:i would prefer the 6/6/6 and winners of both comps get a free spot.

but scrapping the playoff works just fine.

Is that because it's about leagues not unions?

Cos you see...

...

...I think it's about unions and not leagues.

And every union should be entitled to enter half their teams

Ah, but then Ulster might miss out.

HammerofThunor wrote:Just pull them from the normal qualification. So if Edinburgh win, Glasgow would automatically qualify as the best Scottish team, even if they finished in the league below Edinburgh.

That amounts to a similar process as the one which I said wasn't a good enough solution (in fact worse, as the bottom placed PRO12 side could end up qualifying), pretty much taking it back to the old unmerited Amlin fiddle that the organisers wanted to get away from in the first place.

I think Gloucester will win the Challenge this year, I also think they'll finish in the top 6.  Our 7th placed team automatically qualifying and benefiting on the back of Gloucester's achievements is not merited qualification in relation to similar placed sides from the other leagues.

The only issue that needs to be addressed with the current system is making certain the Challenge Cup winner is guaranteed reward.  The Challenge Cup winner should get the 20th place, but if they've already qualified by league position, that's when there should be the play-off system.  This would take place during the league play-offs, so it's not like the sides would have anything better to do, in fact most clubs would be happy for the extra game income.

hawalsh wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:Just pull them from the normal qualification. So if Edinburgh win, Glasgow would automatically qualify as the best Scottish team, even if they finished in the league below Edinburgh.

That amounts to a similar process as the one which I said wasn't a good enough solution (in fact worse, as the bottom placed PRO12 side could end up qualifying), pretty much taking it back to the old unmerited Amlin fiddle that the organisers wanted to get away from in the first place.

I think Gloucester will win the Challenge this year, I also think they'll finish in the top 6.  Our 7th placed team automatically qualifying and benefiting on the back of Gloucester's achievements is not merited qualification in relation to similar placed sides from the other leagues.

The only issue that needs to be addressed with the current system is making certain the Challenge Cup winner is guaranteed reward.  The Challenge Cup winner should get the 20th place, but if they've already qualified by league position, that's when there should be the play-off system.  This would take place during the league play-offs, so it's not like the sides would have anything better to do, in fact most clubs would be happy for the extra game income.

actually, it is. the league should get rewarded that puts in the best effort and has the strongest teams in the Amlin.

I utterly disagree. The competition is meant to be about the best 20 clubs. The 3 next best placed sides from each league fighting it out is a much better way to judge which is best than just handing it to one of them because a club above them has performed well. European competitions have consistently proven that how good clubs at the top of a league are is no guarantee of the quality lower down. The new competions were created with the idea that places must be earnt by the individual clubs, that has to be followed through.

what it says is that the AP is stronger (if glouc win the Amlin) and therefore no need for the playoff place as the AP deserves the 7th spot for winning the Amlin.

or substitute league and team of choice as its not about the AP or Glaws in particular.

and at least this way has the big advantage of simple elegance. rather than a maybe/maybe not playoff if the winner of the amlin has already qualified via their domestic competition, arrangement

you are wrong to suppose it's about the "best 20 clubs". if it were always the "best 20 clubs" then we wouldnt get Glaws winning the amlin and qualifying by dint of league position in the same year.

if we had a crystal ball and knew who the best 20 clubs would be next year then we could put them into the competition. but we dont, so my mechanism (or hammer's as he proposed it above) is at least as likely to lead to the "best 20 clubs of next season" as your simple playoff between 8 (in rabo), 7 (AP) and 7 (LNR)

It's not elegance, it's a nepotistic fudge.  How one team performs is not indicative of the league.  If you truly believed that if the Challenge Cup winner has already qualified then the last spot should just go to the 'stronger' league based on the performance of its better sides, then you would give it to the league that produced the Champions winner, not the Challenge.

The competition rewards individual sides (not leagues) for their performance from the previous season (the latest time by which teams can realistically be comparatively judged).  If you don't agree with that, then there is no point in giving the 20th spot to the Challenge Cup winner anyway.

quinsforever wrote:

hawalsh wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:Just pull them from the normal qualification. So if Edinburgh win, Glasgow would automatically qualify as the best Scottish team, even if they finished in the league below Edinburgh.

That amounts to a similar process as the one which I said wasn't a good enough solution (in fact worse, as the bottom placed PRO12 side could end up qualifying), pretty much taking it back to the old unmerited Amlin fiddle that the organisers wanted to get away from in the first place.

I think Gloucester will win the Challenge this year, I also think they'll finish in the top 6.  Our 7th placed team automatically qualifying and benefiting on the back of Gloucester's achievements is not merited qualification in relation to similar placed sides from the other leagues.

The only issue that needs to be addressed with the current system is making certain the Challenge Cup winner is guaranteed reward.  The Challenge Cup winner should get the 20th place, but if they've already qualified by league position, that's when there should be the play-off system.  This would take place during the league play-offs, so it's not like the sides would have anything better to do, in fact most clubs would be happy for the extra game income.

actually, it is. the league should get rewarded that puts in the best effort and has the strongest teams in the Amlin.

What is a league?

It's a round robin format competition. Apparently in some places it's also a cross border, round robin competition.

But the cross border but doesn't matter as far as allocation of spots in the HC and division of money is concerned. At least not any more

hawalsh wrote:It's not elegance, it's a nepotistic fudge.  How one team performs is not indicative of the league.  If you truly believed that if the Challenge Cup winner has already qualified then the last spot should just go to the 'stronger' league based on the performance of its better sides, then you would give it to the league that produced the Champions winner, not the Challenge.

The competition rewards individual sides (not leagues) for their performance from the previous season (the latest time by which teams can realistically be comparatively judged).  If you don't agree with that, then there is no point in giving the 20th spot to the Challenge Cup winner anyway.

lets be honest. the qualification process as is, is the absolute definition of a fudge. was the inelegant bastard child of an ugly, angry compromise.

i have always always believed that the format should have been 6/6/6 with 2 freebie spots that dont come out of a league's auto spots, for the winners of both competitions. have said so for 18months.

quinsforever wrote:what it says is that the AP is stronger (if glouc win the Amlin) and therefore no need for the playoff place as the AP deserves the 7th spot for winning the Amlin.

No it doesn't. It says Gloucester are stronger than the others in the Amlin. If all the English teams in the Champions Cup finished with the lowest points possible would it mean that the AP is the strongest because Gloucester were better than they were last year.

Hawalsh, that makes a lot of sense. Challenge Cup winner goes through unless they qualify via the league, in which case there is a playoff.

yes it does. whichever team didnt make it into the top 6 of their league last year, that wins the Amlin the following year, is just as strong evidence of the strength of a league over a rolling 2 year period as a static snapshot at a single point in time.

if you choose to focus on the end of year snapshot thats up to you. my view on relative league strength is equally valid in a tournament which effectively runs over two years (qualifcation and then the competition is a 2 year rolling process)

quinsforever wrote:

hawalsh wrote:It's not elegance, it's a nepotistic fudge.  How one team performs is not indicative of the league.  If you truly believed that if the Challenge Cup winner has already qualified then the last spot should just go to the 'stronger' league based on the performance of its better sides, then you would give it to the league that produced the Champions winner, not the Challenge.

The competition rewards individual sides (not leagues) for their performance from the previous season (the latest time by which teams can realistically be comparatively judged).  If you don't agree with that, then there is no point in giving the 20th spot to the Challenge Cup winner anyway.

lets be honest. the qualification process as is, is the absolute definition of a fudge. was the inelegant bastard child of an ugly, angry compromise.

i have always always believed that the format should have been 6/6/6 with 2 freebie spots that dont come out of a league's auto spots, for the winners of both competitions. have said so for 18months.

Something not being perfect is no reason to make it even less so.

Attributing spots to both winners doubles the issues of rewarding leagues instead of clubs when those winners would already have qualified by league position, resulting in lesser clubs riding their coattails instead of earning things for themselves in comparison to similar league ranking and potentially better clubs from the other leagues.

HammerofThunor wrote:

quinsforever wrote:what it says is that the AP is stronger (if glouc win the Amlin) and therefore no need for the playoff place as the AP deserves the 7th spot for winning the Amlin.

No it doesn't. It says Gloucester are stronger than the others in the Amlin. If all the English teams in the Champions Cup finished with the lowest points possible would it mean that the AP is the strongest because Gloucester were better than they were last year.

Hawalsh, that makes a lot of sense. Challenge Cup winner goes through unless they qualify via the league, in which case there is a playoff.

hawalsh wrote:

quinsforever wrote:

hawalsh wrote:It's not elegance, it's a nepotistic fudge.  How one team performs is not indicative of the league.  If you truly believed that if the Challenge Cup winner has already qualified then the last spot should just go to the 'stronger' league based on the performance of its better sides, then you would give it to the league that produced the Champions winner, not the Challenge.

The competition rewards individual sides (not leagues) for their performance from the previous season (the latest time by which teams can realistically be comparatively judged).  If you don't agree with that, then there is no point in giving the 20th spot to the Challenge Cup winner anyway.

lets be honest. the qualification process as is, is the absolute definition of a fudge. was the inelegant bastard child of an ugly, angry compromise.

i have always always believed that the format should have been 6/6/6 with 2 freebie spots that dont come out of a league's auto spots, for the winners of both competitions. have said so for 18months.

Something not being perfect is no reason to make it even less so.

Attributing spots to both winners doubles the issues of rewarding leagues instead of clubs when those winners would already have qualified by league position, resulting in lesser clubs riding their coattails instead of earning things for themselves in comparison to similar league ranking and potentially better clubs from the other leagues.

so you think a one off playoff match between two teams in different leagues (or three different leagues over two matches as is currently proposed) is a better measure of the relative strength and commitment to European competitions than who has won them in the past?

and do you really think in the AP or top14 that there is much of a gap between 6 and 7 in the league? thats pretty arrogant.

as of now (you seem to like snapshots)
2014 glaws in 6th are 1 point ahead of Quins in 7th
2013 sale 6th were 8 points ahead of wasps in 7th, and it is sale who are getting scrubbed (wasps should have beaten Leinster)
2012 exeter 6th 6 points ahead of Bath 7th
2011 sale 6th 3 points ahead of LI 7th

my point being, there is very very little difference in quality between 6th and 7th in the AP, so to say as you did "lesser clubs riding their coattails" is offensive to put it mildly. so Glaws have a semi decent start to the season and suddenly everyone is riding on your coattails? get real.

the only way to compare leagues will be in 2 or 3 years time when the HC has settled down and we can see how the different leagues (and clubs with guaranteed spots by virtue of their union) perform against each other. you obviously missed these discussions the first time around, but myou should probably take a look at www.eurorugby.com and get a feel for how they rank teams across leagues before you get overexcited about Glaws.

deleted

So what should happen if Buceresti (or Rovigo or any of the future minnow qualifiers) win the Challenge Cup?

Hypothetical now, but in 5 years time....?

what this whole discussion is missing is that the PRL and LNR, in exchange for giving the Rabo their sacrosanct 7th auto-spot, wanted a playoff which they were confident they would win. And they will 9/10 times given the relative strength of the leagues and the home advantage as its currently set up.

therefore, there is absolutely no way on this earth that the PRL or LNR are going to give up the playoff that is loaded in their favour in place of a spot to a potential Amlin winner from the Pro12.

anyone who doesnt see that needs their head examined. any appeals to what "should" be are pointless as we live in the real world.

How hard is this to understand? Use the current qualifying and simply replace the last qualifying team by League position with the Challenge winner if they haven't already qualified. If they have already qualified then all places are already filled.

So for example Amlin winners Northampton had already qualified by their league position, therefore no change to the teams that qualified.

If on the other hand Worcester had won the Amlin last year then they would have qualified for the ERCC and the lowest qualified team from their league would have lost out - in last year's case Wasps. The logic is that it's harder to win the Amlin than finish last of the qualifiers - therefore completely meritorious.

Never going to happen. Because a pro 12 side is statistically as realistically very unlikely to win the Amlin.

It's easy to understand your point.

And easy to say no. Which is what AP and top14 clubs would do

quinsforever wrote:Never going to happen. Because a pro 12 side is statistically as realistically very unlikely to win the Amlin.

Why not?

Edinburgh got to the semi-finals of the real thing in 2012 and are going well. Connacht have been in several quarter-finals over the years. If the French don't start taking it seriously comes the semis etc. I think there are a few teams that are in with a shout.

I suppose it's not the Amlin anymore. I propose we go back to calling it the Parker Pen Challenge. I wasn't interested before... but now you've said that a Pro12 side can't win it...

Damn, thats some clever reverse psychology!

just numbers. 3 pro12 sides in the amlin with a shot (2 welsh 1scots, apols connacht and whichever italian side appears each year)

5 AP sides (london welsh cac the rest competitive-ish)
8 LNR sides

so 13 out of 16 sides with a shot in the Amlin are AP or top14 sides. thats why they wont agree for the Amlin winner to displace one of their automatic qualifiiers.

they might do if the pro12 scraps its 7th automatic spot though in the interests of quid pro quo

quinsforever wrote:just numbers. 3 pro12 sides in the amlin with a shot (2 welsh 1scots, apols connacht and whichever italian side appears each year)

So. Seeing as you appear to be pouring scorn on Connacht and Zebre do you think London Welsh and Newcastle are any better?

quinsforever wrote:
5 AP sides (london welsh cac the rest competitive-ish)
8 LNR sides

so 13 out of 16 sides with a shot in the Amlin are AP or top14 sides. thats why they wont agree for the Amlin winner to displace one of their automatic qualifiiers.

French sides patently don't give a shyte so that leaves 6 sides, 3 Pro12 and 3 Prem

quinsforever wrote:

they might do if the pro12 scraps its 7th automatic spot though in the interests of quid pro quo

Hold on. having been bent over and rogered by PRL you are now suggesting that we give them a bj and be thankful that we are permitted to? Yer a good laugh son.

Jenifer McLadyboy wrote:

quinsforever wrote:just numbers. 3 pro12 sides in the amlin with a shot (2 welsh 1scots, apols connacht and whichever italian side appears each year)

So. Seeing as you appear to be pouring scorn on Connacht and Zebre do you think London Welsh and Newcastle are any better?

quinsforever wrote:
5 AP sides (london welsh cac the rest competitive-ish)
8 LNR sides

so 13 out of 16 sides with a shot in the Amlin are AP or top14 sides. thats why they wont agree for the Amlin winner to displace one of their automatic qualifiiers.

French sides patently don't give a shyte so that leaves 6 sides, 3 Pro12 and 3 Prem

quinsforever wrote:

they might do if the pro12 scraps its 7th automatic spot though in the interests of quid pro quo

Hold on. having been bent over and rogered by PRL you are now suggesting that we give them a bj and be thankful that we are permitted to? Yer a good laugh son.

what i think about LW is all over another thread. its not positive. Newcastle i have a soft spot for for family and wilko reasons. but no they arent a real threat.

Jenifer McLadyboy wrote:

quinsforever wrote:just numbers. 3 pro12 sides in the amlin with a shot (2 welsh 1scots, apols connacht and whichever italian side appears each year)

So. Seeing as you appear to be pouring scorn on Connacht and Zebre do you think London Welsh and Newcastle are any better?

quinsforever wrote:
5 AP sides (london welsh cac the rest competitive-ish)
8 LNR sides

so 13 out of 16 sides with a shot in the Amlin are AP or top14 sides. thats why they wont agree for the Amlin winner to displace one of their automatic qualifiiers.

French sides patently don't give a shyte so that leaves 6 sides, 3 Pro12 and 3 Prem

quinsforever wrote:

they might do if the pro12 scraps its 7th automatic spot though in the interests of quid pro quo

Hold on. having been bent over and rogered by PRL you are now suggesting that we give them a bj and be thankful that we are permitted to? Yer a good laugh son.

actually, the old arrangement was an irish-scots-welsh-italian spit roast that was being given the the AP and top14 teams.

so now everyone is standing on their own waggling the willies at each other

seems fair to me

and france have 6 winners
england 10 winners
and rabo 2 winner

of the Amlin

and that was with the parachuting in 2nd placed pool teams in the HC or whatever the arrangement was

so to say the french have zero interest would be TOTAL BS!

quinsforever wrote:just numbers. 3 pro12 sides in the amlin with a shot (2 welsh 1scots, apols connacht and whichever italian side appears each year)

5 AP sides (london welsh cac the rest competitive-ish)
8 LNR sides

so 13 out of 16 sides with a shot in the Amlin are AP or top14 sides. thats why they wont agree for the Amlin winner to displace one of their automatic qualifiiers.

they might do if the pro12 scraps its 7th automatic spot though in the interests of quid pro quo

I suppose thats true. I do think Pro12 sides will inevitably be more of a presence now though.

quinsforever wrote:so to say the french have zero interest would be TOTAL BS!

Do keep up old chap. This is a thread about the French OPENLY ADMITTING that they have no interest.

quinsforever wrote:
actually, the old arrangement was an irish-scots-welsh-italian spit roast that was being given the the AP and top14 teams.

so now everyone is standing on their own waggling the willies at each other

seems fair to me

You know sometimes I think you actually believe that. Even you can't have drunk that much PRL Kool-aid.

quinsforever wrote:
what i think about LW is all over another thread. its not positive. Newcastle i have a soft spot for for family and wilko reasons. but no they arent a real threat.

Connacht aren't a threat mainly because they are focusing on the League this year in an attempt to get all 4 provinces into the "ICBINTHC" Cup

So we agree then that only 6 clubs are in any danger of winning this. Not sure if the pools work out so that 4 of them can be in the semis.

Jenifer McLadyboy wrote:

quinsforever wrote:
what i think about LW is all over another thread. its not positive. Newcastle i have a soft spot for for family and wilko reasons. but no they arent a real threat.

Connacht aren't a threat mainly because they are focusing on the League this year in an attempt to get all 4 provinces into the "ICBINTHC" Cup

So we agree then that only 6 clubs are in any danger of winning this. Not sure if the pools work out so that 4 of them can be in the semis.

Thats why no-one is a "threat". You can't be a threat in a competition that doesn't matter. The French wanted the competition beaten back, and the competition is of course the European competition- which provides a distraction to the Top14.

The other side of it is a Final is a Final is a Final.

I had a tremendous time at the European Cup finals in 1999 and 2012, and the Pro12 final in 2013. I remember 1999 a little more fondly than the later two which bloody hurt at the time but as an experience, its something to be really proud of and it's really an awesome day out.

Jenifer McLadyboy wrote:

quinsforever wrote:so to say the french have zero interest would be TOTAL BS!

Do keep up old chap. This is a thread about the French OPENLY ADMITTING that they have no interest.

Isn't Jackman an Irish fella?

Actually, having had a look at the pools. Newcastle look like progressing and none of the Pro 12 bar Embra do. So it is very hard to see past an English winner of the Comp.

English teams ALWAYS try in Europe. Even if they are out of contention they never roll over. You have to admire them for it. Particularly in contrast to the French.

French comp has more than a century of history and the super long season there is so attritional that it mitigates the prioritization over the Amlin

Dubbelyew L Overate wrote:

Jenifer McLadyboy wrote:

quinsforever wrote:so to say the french have zero interest would be TOTAL BS!

Do keep up old chap. This is a thread about the French OPENLY ADMITTING that they have no interest.

Isn't Jackman an Irish fella?

He sure is. And an all round good guy to boot.

Representing a French team (He just signed a new contract up to 2017)

Notch wrote:

Jenifer McLadyboy wrote:

quinsforever wrote:
what i think about LW is all over another thread. its not positive. Newcastle i have a soft spot for for family and wilko reasons. but no they arent a real threat.

Connacht aren't a threat mainly because they are focusing on the League this year in an attempt to get all 4 provinces into the "ICBINTHC" Cup

So we agree then that only 6 clubs are in any danger of winning this. Not sure if the pools work out so that 4 of them can be in the semis.

Thats why no-one is a "threat". You can't be a threat in a competition that doesn't matter. The French wanted the competition beaten back, and the competition is of course the European competition- which provides a distraction to the Top14.

The other side of it is a Final is a Final is a Final.

I had a tremendous time at the European Cup finals in 1999 and 2012, and the Pro12 final in 2013. I remember 1999 a little more fondly than the later two which bloody hurt at the time but as an experience, its something to be really proud of and it's really an awesome day out.

Unfortunately a lot of the Amlin finals have looked poorly attended and, well, pointless.

Jenifer McLadyboy wrote:

Dubbelyew L Overate wrote:

Jenifer McLadyboy wrote:

quinsforever wrote:so to say the french have zero interest would be TOTAL BS!

Do keep up old chap. This is a thread about the French OPENLY ADMITTING that they have no interest.

Isn't Jackman an Irish fella?

He sure is. And an all round good guy to boot.

Representing a French team (He just signed a new contract up to 2017)

So this thread is about an Irish fella representing one French team reported by Irish media that "There is no real benefit for us unless we go and win it" and ""It's a great opportunity to give guys game time.", and this after the first 2 rounds in which his team was the only French team to lose 2 Challenge Cup games.

So do his comments openly admit no interest, or is there a bit of interest?

Do his opinions on the attitude of other French teams (all of whom have won at least one Challenge Cup game and are in contention) mean that the French as a whole have no interest?

Will his opinions expressed at the early stages of pool games be relevant to the knockout stages should Grenoble, or other French teams reach them?

quinsforever wrote:and maybe the pro12 unions shouldnt have been so quick to veto the 20th spot in the top tier going to the winner of the Amin. after all, PRl and LNR were strongly in favour.

quinsforever wrote:And easy to say no. Which is what AP and top14 clubs would do

Make up your mind!
One minute you're saying the PRL and LNR are strongly in favour of having a spot for the winner of the Challenge Cup and the next you're saying they would say no.

Jenifer McLadyboy wrote:

quinsforever wrote:so to say the french have zero interest would be TOTAL BS!

Do keep up old chap. This is a thread about the French OPENLY ADMITTING that they have no interest.

just because its a thread about it doesnt mean its true you know. in fact if dowlas says its true then that alone should give pause for thought

The Great Aukster wrote:

quinsforever wrote:and maybe the pro12 unions shouldnt have been so quick to veto the 20th spot in the top tier going to the winner of the Amin. after all, PRl and LNR were strongly in favour.

quinsforever wrote:And easy to say no. Which is what AP and top14 clubs would do

Make up your mind!
One minute you're saying the PRL and LNR are strongly in favour of having a spot for the winner of the Challenge Cup and the next you're saying they would say no.

that kind of deliberate misquoting without context will get you banned.

apologise, or re-quote in context, or i will make one of the moderators get you to do it

aukster you really are a bit boring. everything i post you try to have a go at. move on. the european rugby debate certainly has.