Half way through the pool stages what do we think of the ERCC?

by Newsilure Fri Dec 12, 2014 12:32 pm

First topic message reminder :

I am a feeling bit disappointed with the European tournaments this year and haven't felt engaged with them a much as with the old Heineken and Amlin.

I think much of my disillusionment is to do with the new TV contracts, I always prefer to watch live rugby but have really enjoyed Heineken weekends over the last decade with usually all 12 Heineken matches and several Amlin ones being on Sky. Admittedly this was pretty useless for those who don't have Sky, or don't have a local pub/club with it, but at least it was all in one place.

Now with there being less matches and with only half the Champions Cup being on Sky, and hardly any of the Challenge cup matches on TV at all, I have been much less engaged with the competition. This morning I was feeling quite cheerful about it being a rugby weekend but having looked at the TV schedule I can see that there is no European rugby on Sky tonight and that tomorrow the match between my own club, the blues, and London Irish isn't being televised Sad

.

by alcoombe Sun Dec 14, 2014 11:09 pm

nth wrote:If some supporters are more interested in a truly European wide competition irrespective of competitiveness, why are the only suggestions for improvements on this thread to increase the number of sides to just one competition, restricting just a couple of clubs from entering, but not adding any additional nations?

The LNR & PRL would never go along with denying revenues to their member clubs they weren't allowed to enter (if one of them was London Welsh they would definitely start legal proceedings), and they're only really interested in finding the best club in Europe at comparative, competitive levels, so just let them go and do their own thing like they wanted to. Then a new competition can be started with everyone else that wants the same thing from Europe, a couple of teams from as many nations as pleases can be added, the Georgians, Russians, Romanians, Spanish, Portugese, Pro D2 and Championship sides would probably be interested as well. If the French & English top sides then get into a salary war buying in more and more foreign talent, they can just be laughed at as their national sides suffer.

If different factions want separate things from the same endeavour and some parties can't put up with what transpires, then walk away, do something different and make it better, continually moaning will just result in interest draining away and the thing crumbling anyway.

Because it hadn't crossed their minds, they don't really believe in the full extent of what they are saying, they only want it as far as it suits them, which isn't some sort of European opportunity for everyone, but just making sure all PRO12 sides get to be in a single competition, with enough French and English clubs to make a nice competition number and their remaining 6 clubs and the rest of Europe can have nothing.

by The Great Aukster Sun Dec 14, 2014 11:39 pm

The ERCC is a good vehicle to aggrandise wealthy club owners and give them a measure of who can pee furthest up a wall.

The fact that it isn't even branded shows how unconcerned its progenitors are about maximising return. ERCC - is that European Rugby Champions Cup or European Rugby Challenge Cup? The ambiguity makes no attempt to differentiate and create an entity the fans can relate to.

With fewer teams the gulf is widened between the haves and the have-nots. The average standard is going to be higher therefore teams have to be totally focused to progress and that means those with the biggest squads can fight on both Cup and League fronts. Those teams who can't afford that depth will have to choose which competition they want to focus on and that will inevitably be the League. What incentive have Treviso to risk key players getting injured in 'faint hope' games against Saints or Racing, when all the importance is on finishing ahead of Zebre?

The biggest problem with the reduced competition is that there is no longer the chance of any romance. Teams meeting from the same league is just more humdrum pseudo league fare without the relegation importance, and the chance of upsets is greatly reduced. The likelihood of a Connacht win over Toulouse or Aironi over Biarritz has all but disappeared.

So all in all the ERCC has delivered pretty much as expected - it's a really good way to see who can buy success by minimising the chance of upsets.

by Nos na Gaoithe Mon Dec 15, 2014 12:14 am

alcoombe wrote:
nth wrote:If some supporters are more interested in a truly European wide competition irrespective of competitiveness, why are the only suggestions for improvements on this thread to increase the number of sides to just one competition, restricting just a couple of clubs from entering, but not adding any additional nations?

The LNR & PRL would never go along with denying revenues to their member clubs they weren't allowed to enter (if one of them was London Welsh they would definitely start legal proceedings), and they're only really interested in finding the best club in Europe at comparative, competitive levels, so just let them go and do their own thing like they wanted to. Then a new competition can be started with everyone else that wants the same thing from Europe, a couple of teams from as many nations as pleases can be added, the Georgians, Russians, Romanians, Spanish, Portugese, Pro D2 and Championship sides would probably be interested as well. If the French & English top sides then get into a salary war buying in more and more foreign talent, they can just be laughed at as their national sides suffer.

If different factions want separate things from the same endeavour and some parties can't put up with what transpires, then walk away, do something different and make it better, continually moaning will just result in interest draining away and the thing crumbling anyway.

Because it hadn't crossed their minds, they don't really believe in the full extent of what they are saying, they only want it as far as it suits them, which isn't some sort of European opportunity for everyone, but just making sure all PRO12 sides get to be in a single competition, with enough French and English clubs to make a nice competition number and their remaining 6 clubs and the rest of Europe can have nothing.

Yeah... great analysis alcoombe. You're the only one who sees things as they really are. Everyone else is just out to con you. We just lie and cheat and try and do everything to stop you straight-up guys from fighting the good honest fight. Shame we can't all be as neutral and open-minded as you. Rolling Eyes

People are concerned because a European club competition between the 6 nations that compete at the highest level in Europe has been transformed so that there's now barely any representation from two of those nations. At the same time there's now such an overwhelming representation for 2 nations that the entire quarter finals could possibly be made up of their teams. That will have knock on effects on the competition and on the sport of rugby. One of those reduced nations has been part of the sport since its very beginning. Comparing that actual regression since just last year (in a competition that has been developing and growing for over a decade) with some half-assed made-up plan (that you just invented) about bringing in teams from 2nd tier nations from the other side of Europe with no professional leagues is hardly plausible.

The PRL teams are more than entitled to do whatever they wish... And I for one do not deny that the old Heineken format was sympathetic to the smaller rugby nations. But please stop trying to make everyone believe that the PRL managers have the broader development of European rugby in mind just as much as those who have been fighting these changes. That's simply not true... no matter what the self-interest of the other nations involved.

by FecklessRogue Mon Dec 15, 2014 2:16 am

Fact is the small nations teams need the Franglo clubs more than the the Franglo clubs need the small nations, because of their much bigger domestic TV audience. So walking away would never happen. We wouldn't want to anyway. In Ireland anyway we love the European Cup probably more than any other nation. How we can take on the best in Europe is how we define ourselves.

I think all the Irish fans complaints about the new tournament is based on the fact that it's controlled by private club owners who don't care about the well being of the European game. The French club owners have shown time and again they don't even care about their own national team let alone anyone else. And the English have openly and publicly threatened their "partners" with financial oblivion.

We're terrified that our teams talent will be stripped by rich French clubs. If Leinster ever produced a team as good as the 2011-2012 version again it would just be dismantled and the O'Briens and O'Driscolls would be running out for Toulon or Toulouse instead. That's the fear. A future controlled by wealthy club owners from France and England will in the end destroy any meaningful challenge from smaller nations with less cash, regardless of the talent they produce.

How could we be expected to happily depend on the benign goodwill of people like Mourad Boudjellal and Bruce Craig to ensure rugby spreads and grows in all nations and isn't stunted and confined to two countries in the future. So that's the fear in Ireland. Although the talent stripping hasn't actually happened. I'd be happy for Mourad Boudjellal fill his team with southern hemisphere stars and contribute zero to French rugby. I'm terrified he'll tear my team apart too.

How the hell did he make so much money making comics anyway?

by FecklessRogue Mon Dec 15, 2014 2:34 am

So when I say I'd like a future where Leinster, Treviso, Ospreys Leicester and Toulon are all in one tournament and have broadly similar budgets it's obviously in Leinsters interests because it protects us from losing our talent to a richer club from a bigger country. But I'd argue a strong Leinster or Ospreys is also in Clermont and Leicesters interests in the long run. It's on that kind of basis that American football has seen such huge growth and become Americas biggest sport as the entire collective cooperates as almost a single business. It doesn't seem many English fans agree with that. I doubt the French give it much thought.

by alcoombe Mon Dec 15, 2014 3:41 am

Nos na Gaoithe wrote:
alcoombe wrote:
nth wrote:If some supporters are more interested in a truly European wide competition irrespective of competitiveness, why are the only suggestions for improvements on this thread to increase the number of sides to just one competition, restricting just a couple of clubs from entering, but not adding any additional nations?

The LNR & PRL would never go along with denying revenues to their member clubs they weren't allowed to enter (if one of them was London Welsh they would definitely start legal proceedings), and they're only really interested in finding the best club in Europe at comparative, competitive levels, so just let them go and do their own thing like they wanted to. Then a new competition can be started with everyone else that wants the same thing from Europe, a couple of teams from as many nations as pleases can be added, the Georgians, Russians, Romanians, Spanish, Portugese, Pro D2 and Championship sides would probably be interested as well. If the French & English top sides then get into a salary war buying in more and more foreign talent, they can just be laughed at as their national sides suffer.

If different factions want separate things from the same endeavour and some parties can't put up with what transpires, then walk away, do something different and make it better, continually moaning will just result in interest draining away and the thing crumbling anyway.

Because it hadn't crossed their minds, they don't really believe in the full extent of what they are saying, they only want it as far as it suits them, which isn't some sort of European opportunity for everyone, but just making sure all PRO12 sides get to be in a single competition, with enough French and English clubs to make a nice competition number and their remaining 6 clubs and the rest of Europe can have nothing.

Yeah... great analysis alcoombe. You're the only one who sees things as they really are. Everyone else is just out to con you. We just lie and cheat and try and do everything to stop you straight-up guys from fighting the good honest fight. Shame we can't all be as neutral and open-minded as you.

People are concerned because a European club competition between the 6 nations that compete at the highest level in Europe has been transformed so that there's now barely any representation from two of those nations. At the same time there's now such an overwhelming representation for 2 nations that the entire quarter finals could possibly be made up of their teams. That will have knock on effects on the competition and on the sport of rugby. One of those reduced nations has been part of the sport since its very beginning. Comparing that actual regression since just last year (in a competition that has been developing and growing for over a decade) with some half-assed made-up plan (that you just invented) about bringing in teams from 2nd tier nations from the other side of Europe with no professional leagues is hardly plausible.

The PRL teams are more than entitled to do whatever they wish... And I for one do not deny that the old Heineken format was sympathetic to the smaller rugby nations. But please stop trying to make everyone believe that the PRL managers have the broader development of European rugby in mind just as much as those who have been fighting these changes. That's simply not true... no matter what the self-interest of the other nations involved.

If that wasn't the case then like nth said -his invention not mine by the way, I think it's nonsense- why didn't anyone suggest it earlier in this topic? If they really believed in their points of European inclusion over close competition it's a logical extension. If the same principals were held throughout the PRO12, why when they came up with the 32 team counterproposal 2 years ago was there no mention of any provision for further European nations, despite them already being involved in the Amlin? I haven't and wouldn't claim any sort of benevolence on the part of the French and English leagues and supporters but that's equally true of the PRO12. Each league is looking out for their members first and little more. There was no reason why it absolutely had to be 32 teams, all the PRO12 and 10 each from the Franglos. If they really wanted a more encompassing European competition with opportunities for all, no matter how unevenly matched, why didn't they make a point of suggesting bigger pools and including more countries or more pools and an extra round of knock-outs? Certainly messy, but if people were really about the greater good of European rugby they would try and make it work. The Franglos wouldn't have wanted a longer competition, but there was equally no chance of them agreeing to some of their teams being excluded. Some may not like the two competition system, but at least it provides for every top tier 6N club, generally placing them against more comparable sides, with greater scope for learning and developing. More sides getting thumped by 11 tries, 67-0, like Treviso were at the weekend is not a particularly useful experience.

You mention concern about a potential overwhelming representation from 2 nations heading into the knock-outs, despite there actually being a huge amount still to play for in some very tight pools, but were you as concerned when for a number of years it was overwhelming French & Irish sides in the knock-outs? There's little difference between the Irish sides this season and last, the reason for them not featuring as strongly this year is more about uncharacteristic underperformance. Next year Sexton will be back with Leinster, Ulster will give a better account of themselves and it'll probably mainly be Irish & French sides in the hunt again.

by **rodders** Mon Dec 15, 2014 10:05 am

FecklessRogue wrote:I think all the Irish fans complaints about the new tournament is based on the fact that it's controlled by private club owners who don't care about the well being of the European game.

Well no my complaints are that the seeding and reduced number of sides has produced some rediculously difficult pools, some of which are essentially wrapped up halfway through. From what I can see we will end up with a lot of dead rubber games in the next few rounds, with many teams with nothing to play for I can see some lopsided results and weakened teams rolled out.

In the previous tournament a lot of the pools went down to the wire with the carrot of the amlin and we also saw more bonus points and upsets in the older format - where the david v golliath aspect of some games often produced a lot of drama and interest, rather than the my budget's bigger than your's mickey waving contest the new tournament has become, a la the champions league.

We're also seeing more intercountry games which takes away the european occaision aspect.

The other issue is the coverage - BTs has been shocking at times. Bath v Montpellier had the occaision of a pre season friendly or B&I cup game and the post match anlysis has been a joke in places - like the interview with Matt O'Connor after the Leinster/ Harlequins game, he rushed down, answered one question and they went off air. Very little in the way of post match interviews - just the motm and a plug for the sponsors.

The scheduling means the coverage overlaps - for example the build up to Ulsters game overlapped with the end of Munster v Clermont - this means you can't enjoy the back to back games the way you could in the past.

Overall this is a very poor imitation of the previous competition - even taking away my personal disappointment of the performances of the Irish sides, it really is hard to get excited about the rest of the competition.

by Exiledinborders Mon Dec 15, 2014 10:31 am

My verdct half way through is:
Champions Cup is better than Heineken because there are less poor teams in it. It is still not perfect as shown by Northampton V Treviso which gives Saints an advantage over teams in other pools. It can't be good for Treviso either who would be better off in Challenge Cup.

Challenge Cup is worse than Amlin because there is no place in next years Champions Cup at stake.

So required improvements are:
Top teams from Pro 12 to qualify and get rid of the top team from each country nonsense.
Six teams from each league plus last years Champions Cup and Challenge Cup Winners.

Funnily enough that is the original PRL/LNR proposal.

by SecretFly Mon Dec 15, 2014 10:37 am

Look.............................. sport is now FLASH...and continuous.

BOREDOM is the biggest No-no in all boardroom chats. Don't bore the fickle audience who can change over in the blink of an eye and will do if you drone on too much. So it's a constant battle for that fickle remote control holding audience.

In big Audience areas of the world, chat has become something that stalls the beginning of the next show to attract the next audience... so there is going to be less and less 'meaningful discussion' and much more one sentence meaningless maxims. "Yeah, no, look, we're disappointed with that result. We expected to do better"

Tasters is all the networks want. Like fine food, all the ingredients but not much to eat. Next dish - another something that looks like art - but it ain't going to fill your stomach either. Wink

by SecretFly Mon Dec 15, 2014 10:45 am

Exiledinborders wrote:
Funnily enough that is the original PRL/LNR proposal.

PRL/LNR also proposed the Franglo Cup. They didn't need any other meddling kids around to cast a vote on that one? But they wanted the rest of us watching too (as we also buy stuff and things that big sponsors might like us to buy Wink

) ............. so with grunts of Merde, they decided it might be best to keep the Lilliput men on side and offer them something.

Anyway, the compromise is something everyone is still trying to mentally correct now with the numbers and letter of which Pool someone should be in if the other side has too many lame ducks!

by **rodders** Mon Dec 15, 2014 10:47 am

Look I'll save you all the bother - who can stop Toulon?

Saracens...no sorry I mean it's Toulouse... oops no it's Saints ..... no Clermont can will do it...

..er actually the answer is non of the above. Sorry. Better luck next season....ah wait Etzebeth is coming...scratch that... see you in couple of years.... Wink

by Nos na Gaoithe Mon Dec 15, 2014 10:53 am

alcoombe wrote:
Nos na Gaoithe wrote:
alcoombe wrote:
nth wrote:If some supporters are more interested in a truly European wide competition irrespective of competitiveness, why are the only suggestions for improvements on this thread to increase the number of sides to just one competition, restricting just a couple of clubs from entering, but not adding any additional nations?

Because it hadn't crossed their minds, they don't really believe in the full extent of what they are saying, they only want it as far as it suits them, which isn't some sort of European opportunity for everyone, but just making sure all PRO12 sides get to be in a single competition, with enough French and English clubs to make a nice competition number and their remaining 6 clubs and the rest of Europe can have nothing.

Yeah... great analysis alcoombe. You're the only one who sees things as they really are. Everyone else is just out to con you. We just lie and cheat and try and do everything to stop you straight-up guys from fighting the good honest fight. Shame we can't all be as neutral and open-minded as you.

People are concerned because a European club competition between the 6 nations that compete at the highest level in Europe has been transformed so that there's now barely any representation from two of those nations. At the same time there's now such an overwhelming representation for 2 nations that the entire quarter finals could possibly be made up of their teams. That will have knock on effects on the competition and on the sport of rugby. One of those reduced nations has been part of the sport since its very beginning. Comparing that actual regression since just last year (in a competition that has been developing and growing for over a decade) with some half-assed made-up plan (that you just invented) about bringing in teams from 2nd tier nations from the other side of Europe with no professional leagues is hardly plausible.

The PRL teams are more than entitled to do whatever they wish... And I for one do not deny that the old Heineken format was sympathetic to the smaller rugby nations. But please stop trying to make everyone believe that the PRL managers have the broader development of European rugby in mind just as much as those who have been fighting these changes. That's simply not true... no matter what the self-interest of the other nations involved.

If that wasn't the case then like nth said -his invention not mine by the way, I think it's nonsense- why didn't anyone suggest it earlier in this topic? If they really believed in their points of European inclusion over close competition it's a logical extension. If the same principals were held throughout the PRO12, why when they came up with the 32 team counterproposal 2 years ago was there no mention of any provision for further European nations, despite them already being involved in the Amlin? I haven't and wouldn't claim any sort of benevolence on the part of the French and English leagues and supporters but that's equally true of the PRO12. Each league is looking out for their members first and little more. There was no reason why it absolutely had to be 32 teams, all the PRO12 and 10 each from the Franglos. If they really wanted a more encompassing European competition with opportunities for all, no matter how unevenly matched, why didn't they make a point of suggesting bigger pools and including more countries or more pools and an extra round of knock-outs? Certainly messy, but if people were really about the greater good of European rugby they would try and make it work. The Franglos wouldn't have wanted a longer competition, but there was equally no chance of them agreeing to some of their teams being excluded. Some may not like the two competition system, but at least it provides for every top tier 6N club, generally placing them against more comparable sides, with greater scope for learning and developing. More sides getting thumped by 11 tries, 67-0, like Treviso were at the weekend is not a particularly useful experience.

You mention concern about a potential overwhelming representation from 2 nations heading into the knock-outs, despite there actually being a huge amount still to play for in some very tight pools, but were you as concerned when for a number of years it was overwhelming French & Irish sides in the knock-outs? There's little difference between the Irish sides this season and last, the reason for them not featuring as strongly this year is more about uncharacteristic underperformance. Next year Sexton will be back with Leinster, Ulster will give a better account of themselves and it'll probably mainly be Irish & French sides in the hunt again.

Sorry alcoombe but as I said: this is a dialogue of the deaf. You unfortunately completely ignored every point I was making and then just proceeded to restate your own preformed fantasy ideas about what's going on in our heads.

1) Straw man argument No.1: "Those worrying about the consequences of this shift think that their teams are all Mother Teresa charity organisations looking out for the poor and needy of world rugby." ...This argument is a nonsense. Every Irish poster already knows that the Pro-12 clubs are fighting for their own interests and existence first and foremost. The question is what and who can enforce some kind of collective compromise that might help the greater number rather than a small but strong lobby. And there have already previously been vigorous arguments even within Irish rugby concerning the direction the sport is heading and the balance regarding "Representation vs Hyper-professionalism". One of which led to the cap on foreign players in certain positions. So Irish club supporters are not a homogenous group (just look at the differing views of the last three Irish posts alone!). Those of us worried about hyper-professionalism winning out in the provinces (and some are more worried than others) will most likely lose that battle as well... precisely because there exist players and management and structures that are quite understandably interested in their own welfare and progress first and believe that they can go it alone with no bad consequences. But none of that complexity makes this larger very actual trend and problem go away - except if you like straw man arguments about your opponents ALL being hypocrites and tricksters.

2) Straw man argument No.2: "If Pro-12 teams aren't radically challenging to overturn all pre-existing European rugby traditions and include teams from Georgia and Romania then they're simply hypocrites." ...It's hard to know where to start with this one its frankly so bizarre. Firstly, there are many like myself who would love to see two Romanian and two Georgian introduced. But that's besides the point - we're the idealists who don't pay the bills. And the whole argument is a complete obfuscatory sham. As i already pointed out, the 6 nations is the actually existing centrifugal force of European rugby. The Euro Cup reflected that and aimed to develop the Pro-12 clubs in those 6 nations in parallel - which are still only a fragile developing force in Scotland and Italy (and even Wales has struggled). To claim that doing away with all that (and completely skewing the balance of 6 nations club teams) is similar to not forging ahead with a fantasy plan to bring in two 2nd tier nations from aross the other side of Europe is disingenuous to say the least.

3) Straw man argument No. 3: "This moaning is all about your teams not doing as well as before. As soon as one of you does well, you'll change your tune. You didn't moan when your lot were doing well! Ha ha." ...As your own post even admits, Irish teams may well do alright (at least for the near future) under this new format. We still have 3 teams (in a now smaller comp). Leinster may well get through and maybe Munster too - and that's in a year they've all played very poorly. So no, it's got really very little to do with that. It's got to do with the nature of the competition itself and with the long-term interest for rugby fans outside England and France. I find it far more boring that Scottish, Welsh and Italian teams (no matter what standard) have been side-lined and now every second game is against another English or French team. I know this is the part that English club supporters don't seem to believe or get. But it simply doesn't feel like a 6 nations competition to the rest of us. It feels like a French-English professional TV league with some peripheral participation. Moreover, your attempt to say that the quarter-finals have always been skewed simply isn't factual:

2013-14 : 3 French, 3 Irish, 2 English
2012-13 : 3 French, 3 English, 2 Irish
2011-12 : 3 Irish, 2 French, 1 English, 1 Scottish, 1 Welsh
2010-11 : 4 French, 2 Irish, 2 English
2009-10 : 4 French, 2 Irish, 1 English, 1 Welsh
2008-09 : 3 English, 2 Welsh, 2 Irish, 1 French
2007-08 : 3 English, 2 Welsh, 2 French, 1 Irish
2006-07 : 3 English, 2 French, 2 Irish, 1 Welsh
2005-06 : 3 English, 3 French, 2 Irish
2004-05 : 3 English, 3 French, 2 Irish

As you can see... while there have been waves and trends... the Heineken Cup bias was very firmly biased in the direction of a broader representation. It was written into the format. The very first quarter finals of the Champions Cup may well end up with all 8 teams being French and English. Even if that doesn't come true... it shows a very clear shift in the future direction and nature of the competition.

Maybe that won't happen. Maybe it will all turn out for the best. It certainly doesn't look anything like that right now... but Fingers Crossed

by Pot Hale Mon Dec 15, 2014 1:52 pm

My guess:

2014-15: Toulon, Toulouse/Glasgow, Clermont/Saracens, Racing/Northampton, Quins/Wasps/Leinster
4 French, 3/4English, I/0 Irish, 1/0 Scottish, 0 Welsh, 0 Italian
2013-14 : 3 French, 3 Irish, 2 English
2012-13 : 3 French, 3 English, 2 Irish
2011-12 : 3 Irish, 2 French, 1 English, 1 Scottish, 1 Welsh
2010-11 : 4 French, 2 Irish, 2 English
2009-10 : 4 French, 2 Irish, 1 English, 1 Welsh
2008-09 : 3 English, 2 Welsh, 2 Irish, 1 French
2007-08 : 3 English, 2 Welsh, 2 French, 1 Irish
2006-07 : 3 English, 2 French, 2 Irish, 1 Welsh
2005-06 : 3 English, 3 French, 2 Irish
2004-05 : 3 English, 3 French, 2 Irish

Not sure about the claim that there will be a lot of dead rubber matches - that means neither side is incentivised. Too early to call them yet. There are definitely some sitting ducks ripe for extracting 5 points - Sale, Castres, Ulster, Montpellier, Treviso and Ospreys - maybe Leicester in there too.

In Pool 1, Sale will be the target for 5 points for Clermont and Munster. Sale are done and dusted. Still a three-way contest though for Round 5. If Sarries beat Munster, then the Munster v Sale match in Round 6 is definitely a dead rubber. If Munster beat Sarries, then Round 6 is going to be very interesting.

Pool 2. all to play for with Quins, Leinster and Wasps all tightly bunched. Castres are the Aunt Sally, but they can be feisty on their home ground. If Quins and Leinster win their round 5 games, then Round 6 is still going to be interesting to see whom comes out on top.

Pool 3. Toulon win their next game and they should be through. Scarlets, Leicester and Ulster likely to take points off each other, with Ulster v Leicester in round 6 a possible dead rubber. Least exciting of the 5 pools.

Pool 4. This is probably more about whether Glasgow or Bath can qualify as runners-up from this group. They're on 10 points a piece. Glasgow have Montpellier in Round 5, and then Bath in Round 6. If Bath lose to Toulouse, then they won't have any skin in the Round 6 game. If Glasgow lose to Montpellier, then Bath v Glasgow is another dead rubber.

Pool 5. A two horse race between Saints and Racing. Ospreys may look to give the Saints a bloody nose in round 5 at home. Racing to extract 5 points from hapless Treviso. Assuming the top two continue their wins, then a royal battle at home for Saints to take top spot in round 6. Ospreys v Treviso would be another dead rubber.

by Exiledinborders Mon Dec 15, 2014 2:40 pm

Nos na Gaoithe wrote:
alcoombe wrote:
Nos na Gaoithe wrote:
alcoombe wrote:
nth wrote:If some supporters are more interested in a truly European wide competition irrespective of competitiveness, why are the only suggestions for improvements on this thread to increase the number of sides to just one competition, restricting just a couple of clubs from entering, but not adding any additional nations?

Because it hadn't crossed their minds, they don't really believe in the full extent of what they are saying, they only want it as far as it suits them, which isn't some sort of European opportunity for everyone, but just making sure all PRO12 sides get to be in a single competition, with enough French and English clubs to make a nice competition number and their remaining 6 clubs and the rest of Europe can have nothing.

Yeah... great analysis alcoombe. You're the only one who sees things as they really are. Everyone else is just out to con you. We just lie and cheat and try and do everything to stop you straight-up guys from fighting the good honest fight. Shame we can't all be as neutral and open-minded as you.

People are concerned because a European club competition between the 6 nations that compete at the highest level in Europe has been transformed so that there's now barely any representation from two of those nations. At the same time there's now such an overwhelming representation for 2 nations that the entire quarter finals could possibly be made up of their teams. That will have knock on effects on the competition and on the sport of rugby. One of those reduced nations has been part of the sport since its very beginning. Comparing that actual regression since just last year (in a competition that has been developing and growing for over a decade) with some half-assed made-up plan (that you just invented) about bringing in teams from 2nd tier nations from the other side of Europe with no professional leagues is hardly plausible.

The PRL teams are more than entitled to do whatever they wish... And I for one do not deny that the old Heineken format was sympathetic to the smaller rugby nations. But please stop trying to make everyone believe that the PRL managers have the broader development of European rugby in mind just as much as those who have been fighting these changes. That's simply not true... no matter what the self-interest of the other nations involved.

If that wasn't the case then like nth said -his invention not mine by the way, I think it's nonsense- why didn't anyone suggest it earlier in this topic? If they really believed in their points of European inclusion over close competition it's a logical extension. If the same principals were held throughout the PRO12, why when they came up with the 32 team counterproposal 2 years ago was there no mention of any provision for further European nations, despite them already being involved in the Amlin? I haven't and wouldn't claim any sort of benevolence on the part of the French and English leagues and supporters but that's equally true of the PRO12. Each league is looking out for their members first and little more. There was no reason why it absolutely had to be 32 teams, all the PRO12 and 10 each from the Franglos. If they really wanted a more encompassing European competition with opportunities for all, no matter how unevenly matched, why didn't they make a point of suggesting bigger pools and including more countries or more pools and an extra round of knock-outs? Certainly messy, but if people were really about the greater good of European rugby they would try and make it work. The Franglos wouldn't have wanted a longer competition, but there was equally no chance of them agreeing to some of their teams being excluded. Some may not like the two competition system, but at least it provides for every top tier 6N club, generally placing them against more comparable sides, with greater scope for learning and developing. More sides getting thumped by 11 tries, 67-0, like Treviso were at the weekend is not a particularly useful experience.

You mention concern about a potential overwhelming representation from 2 nations heading into the knock-outs, despite there actually being a huge amount still to play for in some very tight pools, but were you as concerned when for a number of years it was overwhelming French & Irish sides in the knock-outs? There's little difference between the Irish sides this season and last, the reason for them not featuring as strongly this year is more about uncharacteristic underperformance. Next year Sexton will be back with Leinster, Ulster will give a better account of themselves and it'll probably mainly be Irish & French sides in the hunt again.

Sorry alcoombe but as I said: this is a dialogue of the deaf. You unfortunately completely ignored every point I was making and then just proceeded to restate your own preformed fantasy ideas about what's going on in our heads.

1) Straw man argument No.1: "Those worrying about the consequences of this shift think that their teams are all Mother Teresa charity organisations looking out for the poor and needy of world rugby." ...This argument is a nonsense. Every Irish poster already knows that the Pro-12 clubs are fighting for their own interests and existence first and foremost. The question is what and who can enforce some kind of collective compromise that might help the greater number rather than a small but strong lobby. And there have already previously been vigorous arguments even within Irish rugby concerning the direction the sport is heading and the balance regarding "Representation vs Hyper-professionalism". One of which led to the cap on foreign players in certain positions. So Irish club supporters are not a homogenous group (just look at the differing views of the last three Irish posts alone!). Those of us worried about hyper-professionalism winning out in the provinces (and some are more worried than others) will most likely lose that battle as well... precisely because there exist players and management and structures that are quite understandably interested in their own welfare and progress first and believe that they can go it alone with no bad consequences. But none of that complexity makes this larger very actual trend and problem go away - except if you like straw man arguments about your opponents ALL being hypocrites and tricksters.

2) Straw man argument No.2: "If Pro-12 teams aren't radically challenging to overturn all pre-existing European rugby traditions and include teams from Georgia and Romania then they're simply hypocrites." ...It's hard to know where to start with this one its frankly so bizarre. Firstly, there are many like myself who would love to see two Romanian and two Georgian introduced. But that's besides the point - we're the idealists who don't pay the bills. And the whole argument is a complete obfuscatory sham. As i already pointed out, the 6 nations is the actually existing centrifugal force of European rugby. The Euro Cup reflected that and aimed to develop the Pro-12 clubs in those 6 nations in parallel - which are still only a fragile developing force in Scotland and Italy (and even Wales has struggled). To claim that doing away with all that (and completely skewing the balance of 6 nations club teams) is similar to not forging ahead with a fantasy plan to bring in two 2nd tier nations from aross the other side of Europe is disingenuous to say the least.

3) Straw man argument No. 3: "This moaning is all about your teams not doing as well as before. As soon as one of you does well, you'll change your tune. You didn't moan when your lot were doing well! Ha ha." ...As your own post even admits, Irish teams may well do alright (at least for the near future) under this new format. We still have 3 teams (in a now smaller comp). Leinster may well get through and maybe Munster too - and that's in a year they've all played very poorly. So no, it's got really very little to do with that. It's got to do with the nature of the competition itself and with the long-term interest for rugby fans outside England and France. I find it far more boring that Scottish, Welsh and Italian teams (no matter what standard) have been side-lined and now every second game is against another English or French team. I know this is the part that English club supporters don't seem to believe or get. But it simply doesn't feel like a 6 nations competition to the rest of us. It feels like a French-English professional TV league with some peripheral participation. Moreover, your attempt to say that the quarter-finals have always been skewed simply isn't factual:

2013-14 : 3 French, 3 Irish, 2 English
2012-13 : 3 French, 3 English, 2 Irish
2011-12 : 3 Irish, 2 French, 1 English, 1 Scottish, 1 Welsh
2010-11 : 4 French, 2 Irish, 2 English
2009-10 : 4 French, 2 Irish, 1 English, 1 Welsh
2008-09 : 3 English, 2 Welsh, 2 Irish, 1 French
2007-08 : 3 English, 2 Welsh, 2 French, 1 Irish
2006-07 : 3 English, 2 French, 2 Irish, 1 Welsh
2005-06 : 3 English, 3 French, 2 Irish
2004-05 : 3 English, 3 French, 2 Irish

As you can see... while there have been waves and trends... the Heineken Cup bias was very firmly biased in the direction of a broader representation. It was written into the format. The very first quarter finals of the Champions Cup may well end up with all 8 teams being French and English. Even if that doesn't come true... it shows a very clear shift in the future direction and nature of the competition.

Maybe that won't happen. Maybe it will all turn out for the best. It certainly doesn't look anything like that right now... but

The main change is that poorer teams from Pro12 now join the poorer teams from AP and Top14 in Challenge Cup. As it is unlikely any of these teams would have qualified for quarter finals, I fail to see how their absence in any way helps French and English qualify for quarter finals. If the three Irish teams do fail to qualify it will be because they do not seem to be at quite the same level as in previous seasons. Are you suggesting that because they now need to qualify from Pro12 this is hampering their ERCC efforts? If so they are in the same position as French and English.

As for your assertion that the 6N is the centrifugal force of European Rugby I do not accept that. The clubs do not exist for the benefit of international rugby. They exist for their own sake. Club rugby existed before international rugby. International rugby, which I love, is the icing on the cake but it is not the raison d'etre for club rugby and never has been.

by Exiledinborders Mon Dec 15, 2014 2:42 pm

SecretFly wrote:
Exiledinborders wrote:
Funnily enough that is the original PRL/LNR proposal.

PRL/LNR also proposed the Franglo Cup. They didn't need any other meddling kids around to cast a vote on that one? But they wanted the rest of us watching too (as we also buy stuff and things that big sponsors might like us to buy ) ............. so with grunts of Merde, they decided it might be best to keep the Lilliput men on side and offer them something.

Anyway, the compromise is something everyone is still trying to mentally correct now with the numbers and letter of which Pool someone should be in if the other side has too many lame ducks!

They proposed the Franglo cup only because the Celtic unions would not initially accept any change.

by Exiledinborders Mon Dec 15, 2014 2:52 pm

rodders wrote:
FecklessRogue wrote:I think all the Irish fans complaints about the new tournament is based on the fact that it's controlled by private club owners who don't care about the well being of the European game.

Well no my complaints are that the seeding and reduced number of sides has produced some rediculously difficult pools, some of which are essentially wrapped up halfway through. From what I can see we will end up with a lot of dead rubber games in the next few rounds, with many teams with nothing to play for I can see some lopsided results and weakened teams rolled out.

The pools are supposed to be difficult. It is meant to be the elite competition! Having Treviso in does go against that I admit but it is the Pro12 unions who insisted on places for the top teams from each union. I would still like to see a format of the top six from each league plus the previous winners from both competitions. I am convinced that would be better for Treviso too. How does it help them to be thrashed all the time?

by thebandwagonsociety Mon Dec 15, 2014 2:58 pm

Find it awkward having to follow the european matches through 2 sports providers.

BT are highly pro-english. Sky still have an unnatural admiration for Munster/Leinster.

The use of TMOs seems to have regressed. This season it looks like it is the first time a
TMO has even seen a TV let alone trying to figure out what aspect of an incident they are meant to be evaluating.

As a Leinster fan, watching a team play poorly this season skews any review of other matches. The games seem more attritional this season, poor handling, more scrums, more kicking, but part of that is probably us being in the depths of winter.

by **rodders** Mon Dec 15, 2014 3:00 pm

Treviso are a disgrace this season to be honest.

The concept of having representation in from all 6N in principal is correct though.

Tight pools is one thing but 3 groups of death is another. All top cup tournaments try and keep the top sides away from each other until the KO stages and the seeding system and format has failed here.

All english and all french clashes in the groups too is just dull.

by ScarletSpiderman Mon Dec 15, 2014 3:25 pm

rodders wrote:Treviso are a disgrace this season to be honest.

The concept of having representation in from all 6N in principal is correct though.

Tight pools is one thing but 3 groups of death is another. All top cup tournaments try and keep the top sides away from each other until the KO stages and the seeding system and format has failed here.

All english and all french clashes in the groups too is just dull.

Do you feel the same about the all Pro-12 fixtures? Because to be fair it is a similar situation, two teams who play each other regularly and know each others game inside out.

by **rodders** Mon Dec 15, 2014 3:39 pm

ScarletSpiderman wrote:
rodders wrote:Treviso are a disgrace this season to be honest.

The concept of having representation in from all 6N in principal is correct though.

Tight pools is one thing but 3 groups of death is another. All top cup tournaments try and keep the top sides away from each other until the KO stages and the seeding system and format has failed here.

All english and all french clashes in the groups too is just dull.

Do you feel the same about the all Pro-12 fixtures? Because to be fair it is a similar situation, two teams who play each other regularly and know each others game inside out.

Yes I think it doesn't have the same sense of occaision about it - I take your point but think we are getting more of this, this time out. I suppose as neutral in an anglo/ anglo game it just holds less interest.

by Sin é Mon Dec 15, 2014 3:51 pm

ScarletSpiderman wrote:
rodders wrote:Treviso are a disgrace this season to be honest.

The concept of having representation in from all 6N in principal is correct though.

Tight pools is one thing but 3 groups of death is another. All top cup tournaments try and keep the top sides away from each other until the KO stages and the seeding system and format has failed here.

All english and all french clashes in the groups too is just dull.

Do you feel the same about the all Pro-12 fixtures? Because to be fair it is a similar situation, two teams who play each other regularly and know each others game inside out.

I'd say that you need the Pro12 countries in to provide diversity. I hate when we get Pro12 teams in our group.

The BT coverage is horrible. I hate the way they stick cameras everywhere and interview coaches/players prematch & at half time. I don't like cameras in the dressing room either at half time and I detest the way the players come out the (too narrow) tunnels together soccer style and the playing of that horrible music waiting for the teams to come out. Dayglo is a clown as well.

The seeding is crap - it just doesn't work. Some teams are really good at league but poor at cup rugby. They should change the seedings to being based on performance in the competition in the previous year. i.e., semi-finalists first 4 seeds and best qualifiers for the knockout stages.

Increase the size of the tournament back to 24 (6 pools instead of 5).

by Sin é Mon Dec 15, 2014 3:55 pm

thebandwagonsociety wrote:
BT are highly pro-english. Sky still have an unnatural admiration for Munster/Leinster.

Its not unnatural. They are the teams that give them the ratings - 3.1m viewed Clermont v Munster yesterday in France.

ROG twitted the viewings - Nigel Owens tweeted back that that was greater than the population of Wales!

by **rodders** Mon Dec 15, 2014 3:57 pm

Kick out some of the French too, starting with Castres and Montpellier and put Treviso out of their misery while you are at it.

Bring in Connacht, Exeter and Gloucester.

by Exiledinborders Mon Dec 15, 2014 4:20 pm

Sin é wrote:
thebandwagonsociety wrote:
BT are highly pro-english. Sky still have an unnatural admiration for Munster/Leinster.

Its not unnatural. They are the teams that give them the ratings - 3.1m viewed Clermont v Munster yesterday in France.

ROG twitted the viewings - Nigel Owens tweeted back that that was greater than the population of Wales!

If it was viewers in France that has nothing to do with Sky.

by Exiledinborders Mon Dec 15, 2014 4:23 pm

rodders wrote:Kick out some of the French too, starting with Castres and Montpellier and put Treviso out of their misery while you are at it.

Bring in Connacht, Exeter and Gloucester.

Given their even quite recent history I just cannot believe how bad Castres are.

Much as I would love to see Gloucester in, even I as a Gloucester fan, do not think they are up to it this season.

by HammerofThunor Mon Dec 15, 2014 4:25 pm

Sin é wrote:
thebandwagonsociety wrote:
BT are highly pro-english. Sky still have an unnatural admiration for Munster/Leinster.

Its not unnatural. They are the teams that give them the ratings - 3.1m viewed Clermont v Munster yesterday in France.

ROG twitted the viewings - Nigel Owens tweeted back that that was greater than the population of Wales!

Have you forgotten all the cries of bias against Sky to the English teams back when they were the main broadcasters of the English league? They tailed off when ESPN took more games on, and have fallen away completely now that Sky don'y broadcast any English league games. And now Sky broadcast Pro12 games and they're seen as much fairer by the Pro12 supportors. Funny coincidence that. They clearly developed better coverage skills when the Pro12 sold out.

by MichaelT Mon Dec 15, 2014 4:28 pm

Sin é wrote:
thebandwagonsociety wrote:
BT are highly pro-english. Sky still have an unnatural admiration for Munster/Leinster.

Its not unnatural. They are the teams that give them the ratings - 3.1m viewed Clermont v Munster yesterday in France.

ROG twitted the viewings - Nigel Owens tweeted back that that was greater than the population of Wales!

That viewing figure is amazing. For a club game? Just looked up the BARB website for the 6th December Thomond Park match between these two and it says 94,000 viewers. 3rd on Sky Sports 2 for the week. To go from that to 3.1 million in a week is some jump.

by HammerofThunor Mon Dec 15, 2014 4:29 pm

rodders wrote:
ScarletSpiderman wrote:
rodders wrote:Treviso are a disgrace this season to be honest.

The concept of having representation in from all 6N in principal is correct though.

Tight pools is one thing but 3 groups of death is another. All top cup tournaments try and keep the top sides away from each other until the KO stages and the seeding system and format has failed here.

All english and all french clashes in the groups too is just dull.

Do you feel the same about the all Pro-12 fixtures? Because to be fair it is a similar situation, two teams who play each other regularly and know each others game inside out.

Yes I think it doesn't have the same sense of occaision about it - I take your point but think we are getting more of this, this time out. I suppose as neutral in an anglo/ anglo game it just holds less interest.

What you're getting is a more even spread of which leagues the two teams come from. With pools of 4 and 3 leagues you ALWAYS get 2 teams from the same league in the pool. Previously it was between 4-6 pools having 2 PRO12 teams in them. Now it's 2-3.

by stub Mon Dec 15, 2014 4:32 pm

Pot Hale wrote:My guess:

2014-15: Toulon, Toulouse/Glasgow, Clermont/Saracens, Racing/Northampton, Quins/Wasps/Leinster
4 French, 3/4English, I/0 Irish, 1/0 Scottish, 0 Welsh, 0 Italian
2013-14 : 3 French, 3 Irish, 2 English
2012-13 : 3 French, 3 English, 2 Irish
2011-12 : 3 Irish, 2 French, 1 English, 1 Scottish, 1 Welsh
2010-11 : 4 French, 2 Irish, 2 English
2009-10 : 4 French, 2 Irish, 1 English, 1 Welsh
2008-09 : 3 English, 2 Welsh, 2 Irish, 1 French
2007-08 : 3 English, 2 Welsh, 2 French, 1 Irish
2006-07 : 3 English, 2 French, 2 Irish, 1 Welsh
2005-06 : 3 English, 3 French, 2 Irish
2004-05 : 3 English, 3 French, 2 Irish

Not sure about the claim that there will be a lot of dead rubber matches - that means neither side is incentivised. Too early to call them yet. There are definitely some sitting ducks ripe for extracting 5 points - Sale, Castres, Ulster, Montpellier, Treviso and Ospreys - maybe Leicester in there too.

In Pool 1, Sale will be the target for 5 points for Clermont and Munster. Sale are done and dusted. Still a three-way contest though for Round 5. If Sarries beat Munster, then the Munster v Sale match in Round 6 is definitely a dead rubber. If Munster beat Sarries, then Round 6 is going to be very interesting.

Pool 2. all to play for with Quins, Leinster and Wasps all tightly bunched. Castres are the Aunt Sally, but they can be feisty on their home ground. If Quins and Leinster win their round 5 games, then Round 6 is still going to be interesting to see whom comes out on top.

Pool 3. Toulon win their next game and they should be through. Scarlets, Leicester and Ulster likely to take points off each other, with Ulster v Leicester in round 6 a possible dead rubber. Least exciting of the 5 pools.

Pool 4. This is probably more about whether Glasgow or Bath can qualify as runners-up from this group. They're on 10 points a piece. Glasgow have Montpellier in Round 5, and then Bath in Round 6. If Bath lose to Toulouse, then they won't have any skin in the Round 6 game. If Glasgow lose to Montpellier, then Bath v Glasgow is another dead rubber.

Pool 5. A two horse race between Saints and Racing. Ospreys may look to give the Saints a bloody nose in round 5 at home. Racing to extract 5 points from hapless Treviso. Assuming the top two continue their wins, then a royal battle at home for Saints to take top spot in round 6. Ospreys v Treviso would be another dead rubber.

Thanks Pot Hale - still a fair bit of interest in there as far as I can see with plenty to play for in many cases. The end result could still see a spread of nations too which is good as I am in agreement with those who say that there is less interest in same league clubs/regions playing each other. Picking up on some other posters point about David and Goliath encounters being less likely I still think there will be those sort of freak results that delight most of us. For example if Sale managed to trip up Clermont - not likely I know but still possible - that would shake things up at the top a bit. As to the coverage I am glad that BT are not simply replicating what Sky offer as I've said before I'm enjoying the change/variety and it's still early days for BT Sport. I think it's healthy that Sky have some competition although I understand that I am fortunate to be get BT Sport for free - well for now at least.

by Nos na Gaoithe Mon Dec 15, 2014 4:36 pm

Exiledinborders wrote:

The main change is that poorer teams from Pro12 now join the poorer teams from AP and Top14 in Challenge Cup. As it is unlikely any of these teams would have qualified for quarter finals, I fail to see how their absence in any way helps French and English qualify for quarter finals. If the three Irish teams do fail to qualify it will be because they do not seem to be at quite the same level as in previous seasons. Are you suggesting that because they now need to qualify from Pro12 this is hampering their ERCC efforts? If so they are in the same position as French and English.

As for your assertion that the 6N is the centrifugal force of European Rugby I do not accept that. The clubs do not exist for the benefit of international rugby. They exist for their own sake. Club rugby existed before international rugby. International rugby, which I love, is the icing on the cake but it is not the raison d'etre for club rugby and never has been.

You see, it seems like there's just a huge gulf in understanding between the two sides of this debate. Irish (and I can only presume many Scottish, Italian and possibly Welsh) do not come to rugby with the same interests, wants and culture as you English club supporters seem to. And that encourages both sides to simply think that the other side must be "putting it on" or "not really believe what they're saying". Certainly I feel like that when I read your comments Exiled.

What you wrote appears completely oblivious to what I've been going on about. The rather obvious part that you've left out is the complete restructuring of the competition whereby nearly every match in the competition now involves either a French or an English club - and more than half the pools are 3 out of 4 French/English. You know... that little, minor, easy-to-miss detail. ...Easy to miss if you're English (or French) and couldn't care less that is. And the point of the problem with the quarter final line-up this year is that (with 13 out of 20 entrants) it looks like a sign of things to come.

For the rest of us, who don't watch French or English club rugby, can't you maybe see that that might be a little bit boring? No? You can't step that tiny step outside your own teams' interests to see that? I can quite easily admit that the Heineken Cup was structurally favourable to the smaller nation's clubs as regards format. I can also easily comprehend that the PRL/LNR teams were under pressure to not let that more charitable format stand. But pretending that all this isn't happening and that it doesn't have consequences for rugby outside France/England. That's its all in our imagination... well... as I said that just seems like you're having us on!

And as for the 6 Nations not driving European rugby... unsuprisingly, your comment applies to your own little patch called England. Ireland, Wales, Scotland and Italy are all dependent upon international representative rugby to try to keep the sport competitive at the higher level. Which keeps the 6 Nations and WCs advancing as well. In other words the 6 Nations international structure is the centrifugal force of European rugby whether you happen to like that or not. (I didn't say it was the centrifugal force of English rugby.) As a Leinster supporter, it is quite clear that the Irish provinces have gotten where they are by mimicking that representative structure. Irish rugby would not be where it is today if they had simply handed out random franchise names and hired professional players from anywhere. So corroding that structure from within is not something with no consequences.

But hey... I'm more than likely living in the past on this one. The trend is set and even I struggle to see how there can be any turning of the tide. Probably time to move on and get used to the new direction.

by HammerofThunor Mon Dec 15, 2014 4:48 pm

Nos na Gaoithe wrote:
Exiledinborders wrote:

The main change is that poorer teams from Pro12 now join the poorer teams from AP and Top14 in Challenge Cup. As it is unlikely any of these teams would have qualified for quarter finals, I fail to see how their absence in any way helps French and English qualify for quarter finals. If the three Irish teams do fail to qualify it will be because they do not seem to be at quite the same level as in previous seasons. Are you suggesting that because they now need to qualify from Pro12 this is hampering their ERCC efforts? If so they are in the same position as French and English.

As for your assertion that the 6N is the centrifugal force of European Rugby I do not accept that. The clubs do not exist for the benefit of international rugby. They exist for their own sake. Club rugby existed before international rugby. International rugby, which I love, is the icing on the cake but it is not the raison d'etre for club rugby and never has been.

You see, it seems like there's just a huge gulf in understanding between the two sides of this debate. Irish (and I can only presume many Scottish, Italian and possibly Welsh) do not come to rugby with the same interests, wants and culture as you English club supporters seem to. And that encourages both sides to simply think that the other side must be "putting it on" or "not really believe what they're saying". Certainly I feel like that when I read your comments Exiled.

What you wrote appears completely oblivious to what I've been going on about. The rather obvious part that you've left out is the complete restructuring of the competition whereby nearly every match in the competition now involves either a French or an English club - and more than half the pools are 3 out of 4 French/English. You know... that little, minor, easy-to-miss detail. ...Easy to miss if you're English (or French) and couldn't care less that is. And the point of the problem with the quarter final line-up this year is that (with 13 out of 20 entrants) it looks like a sign of things to come.

I think the issue here is that 'we' (as in some of us that think the same way) see it as a competition between three leagues. There are the same number of games involving English clubs as involving PRO12 sides. There are fewer games involving French clubs than involving PRO12 sides. That seems about right to 'us' because we see the three leagues being equal. It's not right to 'you' because 'you' see it as a competetion between 6 nations and don't see the issue with 4 of the nations coming from one league/

For the rest of us, who don't watch French or English club rugby, can't you maybe see that that might be a little bit boring? No? You can't step that tiny step outside your own teams' interests to see that? I can quite easily admit that the Heineken Cup was structurally favourable to the smaller nation's clubs as regards format. I can also easily comprehend that the PRL/LNR teams were under pressure to not let that more charitable format stand. But pretending that all this isn't happening and that it doesn't have consequences for rugby outside France/England. That's its all in our imagination... well... as I said that just seems like you're having us on!

So this is about having no interest in English or French rugby? If the competition involves 6 nations and you have no interest in two of them, and the other 4 nations play in a 22 games league...why not just watch them? Or sort out your own cup?

And as for the 6 Nations not driving European rugby... unsuprisingly, your comment applies to your own little patch called England. Ireland, Wales, Scotland and Italy are all dependent upon international representative rugby to try to keep the sport competitive at the higher level. Which keeps the 6 Nations and WCs advancing as well. In other words the 6 Nations international structure is the centrifugal force of European rugby whether you happen to like that or not. (I didn't say it was the centrifugal force of English rugby.) As a Leinster supporter, it is quite clear that the Irish provinces have gotten where they are by mimicking that representative structure. Irish rugby would not be where it is today if they had simply handed out random franchise names and hired professional players from anywhere. So corroding that structure from within is not something with no consequences.

But hey... I'm more than likely living in the past on this one. The trend is set and even I struggle to see how there can be any turning of the tide. Probably time to move on and get used to the new direction.

by doctor_grey Mon Dec 15, 2014 4:52 pm

FecklessRogue wrote:So when I say I'd like a future where Leinster, Treviso, Ospreys Leicester and Toulon are all in one tournament and have broadly similar budgets it's obviously in Leinsters interests because it protects us from losing our talent to a richer club from a bigger country. But I'd argue a strong Leinster or Ospreys is also in Clermont and Leicesters interests in the long run. It's on that kind of basis that American football has seen such huge growth and become Americas biggest sport as the entire collective cooperates as almost a single business. It doesn't seem many English fans agree with that. I doubt the French give it much thought.

Actually mate, I don't really know many English club Rugby supporters who are members of the Nigel Wray and Bruce Craig fan club. Most people I know agree the salary cap is critical to keep competitive balance and keep clubs with owners with large bankrolls from dominating the rest of the Premiership. Even many Sarries and Bath fans I know have concerns. Certainly as a Saints supporter, we are firmly in favour of the cap. We have to break even every season, and we do. But it takes careful management. We have a wealthy owner, but he provides superior business management skills as opposed to money. In addition to his passion for Rugby, the city, and county, this is the best investment of all. Over a decade of breaking even or making a slight profit with not even a tuppence from the boss.

If someone was to somehow calculate the player cost to each team, my guess would be the Irish teams and the Premiership teams are not far apart. I think the Welsh, Scots, and Italians are probably behind. The real problem is what to do with the French clubs. It seems they have no de facto limits, and therefore are the hardest group to bring onside. The owners of most of the NFL teams are tough, competitive billionaires (as opposed to Rugby's millionaires). However, it is said that the NFL owners are a bunch of capitalists who act like socialists. Men who see the bigger picture and understand what is in it for them. This is what we need, and clearly don't have.

by **LondonTiger** Mon Dec 15, 2014 4:55 pm

Doc we do not even have a wealthy owner.

Pretty sure that the combined salaries of Leinster's ERCC squad is higher than that of Leicester's. And that is fine, no issues with that at all.

by thebandwagonsociety Mon Dec 15, 2014 4:57 pm

HammerofThunor wrote:
Sin é wrote:
thebandwagonsociety wrote:
BT are highly pro-english. Sky still have an unnatural admiration for Munster/Leinster.

Its not unnatural. They are the teams that give them the ratings - 3.1m viewed Clermont v Munster yesterday in France.

ROG twitted the viewings - Nigel Owens tweeted back that that was greater than the population of Wales!

Have you forgotten all the cries of bias against Sky to the English teams back when they were the main broadcasters of the English league? They tailed off when ESPN took more games on, and have fallen away completely now that Sky don'y broadcast any English league games. And now Sky broadcast Pro12 games and they're seen as much fairer by the Pro12 supportors. Funny coincidence that. They clearly developed better coverage skills when the Pro12 sold out.

Even then there was an unhealthy admiration for Munster/Leinster.

It's the not-so-subtle thing on BT though, the commentators are talking about how 'we' must hang on or how well 'we' are playing when talking about the english side and then talks about the opposition.

The sky commentators though on Sunday waxing on about Munster 'doing it again in Europe' with a great LBP away was a bit much.

by HammerofThunor Mon Dec 15, 2014 4:58 pm

It's generally been stated (I'm not sure where, I think it's been in IRFU branch meetings or supportors meetings) that the Irish Provincial wages budgets are around the English cap. No idea if that includes the Central Contracts, I've heard it did and that it didn't (different provinces perhaps?). Also, what does around the level mean? If it was under they would have said under, right? So it's probably a bit over, and is a bit £10k? £100k? £1M? And is that still the case? Have they got lower than the English cap? Higher? Stayed the same? The Provincial player salary budget is a complete mystery as far as I can tell. Same with the Scots. From memory the Italian superclubs had bigger player budgets than the English cap, but not 100%.

It would be great if it could happen but even then where do you put the line? With Welsh regions at £3.5M? Or the English cap £5M (or whatever it is now)? )Or the French at 10M Euros?

by Sin é Mon Dec 15, 2014 5:00 pm

Exiledinborders wrote:
Sin é wrote:
thebandwagonsociety wrote:
BT are highly pro-english. Sky still have an unnatural admiration for Munster/Leinster.

Its not unnatural. They are the teams that give them the ratings - 3.1m viewed Clermont v Munster yesterday in France.

ROG twitted the viewings - Nigel Owens tweeted back that that was greater than the population of Wales!
If it was viewers in France that has nothing to do with Sky.

It shows how attractive the fixture is to any broadcaster.

by thebandwagonsociety Mon Dec 15, 2014 5:02 pm

LondonTiger wrote:Doc we do not even have a wealthy owner.

Pretty sure that the combined salaries of Leinster's ERCC squad is higher than that of Leicester's. And that is fine, no issues with that at all.

You'd be surprised, there are a lot of marquee names there but then there was Byrne, Furlong, Reid, Conan, Fanning, (Mick)McGrath who would all be academy (or 1 year removed from academy) packages.

by ScarletSpiderman Mon Dec 15, 2014 5:02 pm

HammerofThunor wrote:It would be great if it could happen but even then where do you put the line? With Welsh regions at £3.5M? Or the English cap £5M (or whatever it is now)? )Or the French at 10M Euros?

Set it at the 3.5M limit, that would stop the influx of SH players coming over instantly.

by Sin é Mon Dec 15, 2014 5:03 pm

MichaelT wrote:
Sin é wrote:
thebandwagonsociety wrote:
BT are highly pro-english. Sky still have an unnatural admiration for Munster/Leinster.

Its not unnatural. They are the teams that give them the ratings - 3.1m viewed Clermont v Munster yesterday in France.

ROG twitted the viewings - Nigel Owens tweeted back that that was greater than the population of Wales!

That viewing figure is amazing. For a club game? Just looked up the BARB website for the 6th December Thomond Park match between these two and it says 94,000 viewers. 3rd on Sky Sports 2 for the week. To go from that to 3.1 million in a week is some jump.

The BARB figures do not include Republic of Ireland - just UK figures (which is fairly impressive in a country that neither Clermont or Munster have local fans).

BARB don't have the BT viewing figures up (which would be mainly English teams) yet.

by doctor_grey Mon Dec 15, 2014 5:03 pm

LondonTiger wrote:Doc we do not even have a wealthy owner.

Pretty sure that the combined salaries of Leinster's ERCC squad is higher than that of Leicester's. And that is fine, no issues with that at all.

You are probably right, but I would guess the order of magnitude is comparable. I didn't mention Leicester because despite the angst (also respect) we have for our northern brethren, it seems you do it right. Annoyingly right. Season after season. But as befits a Rugby city.

I think it is ironic that the Irish provinces and the English clubs are in a relatively similar situation. Shockingly have more in common than they do with the other nations in the Pro12 or with the French. But everyone is too emotional to admit it. .

by thebandwagonsociety Mon Dec 15, 2014 5:06 pm

Sin é wrote:
thebandwagonsociety wrote:
BT are highly pro-english. Sky still have an unnatural admiration for Munster/Leinster.

Its not unnatural. They are the teams that give them the ratings - 3.1m viewed Clermont v Munster yesterday in France.

ROG twitted the viewings - Nigel Owens tweeted back that that was greater than the population of Wales!

Just think how much higher the viewers would have been if there wasn't a poor minnow from the Pro12 in the fixture.

by Sin é Mon Dec 15, 2014 5:09 pm

HammerofThunor wrote:It's generally been stated (I'm not sure where, I think it's been in IRFU branch meetings or supportors meetings) that the Irish Provincial wages budgets are around the English cap. No idea if that includes the Central Contracts, I've heard it did and that it didn't (different provinces perhaps?). Also, what does around the level mean? If it was under they would have said under, right? So it's probably a bit over, and is a bit £10k? £100k? £1M? And is that still the case? Have they got lower than the English cap? Higher? Stayed the same? The Provincial player salary budget is a complete mystery as far as I can tell. Same with the Scots. From memory the Italian superclubs had bigger player budgets than the English cap, but not 100%.

It would be great if it could happen but even then where do you put the line? With Welsh regions at £3.5M? Or the English cap £5M (or whatever it is now)? )Or the French at 10M Euros?

A simpler way to level the playing field would be a percentage of the new players salary (maybe 10%) should be payable to whatever Club/Province/Union developed them (from underage upwards).

As for provincial wages - they vary. I believe Ian Madigan is on 350K per year which is pretty good (and he isn't on a central contract).

by thebandwagonsociety Mon Dec 15, 2014 5:10 pm

Sin é wrote:
HammerofThunor wrote:It's generally been stated (I'm not sure where, I think it's been in IRFU branch meetings or supportors meetings) that the Irish Provincial wages budgets are around the English cap. No idea if that includes the Central Contracts, I've heard it did and that it didn't (different provinces perhaps?). Also, what does around the level mean? If it was under they would have said under, right? So it's probably a bit over, and is a bit £10k? £100k? £1M? And is that still the case? Have they got lower than the English cap? Higher? Stayed the same? The Provincial player salary budget is a complete mystery as far as I can tell. Same with the Scots. From memory the Italian superclubs had bigger player budgets than the English cap, but not 100%.

It would be great if it could happen but even then where do you put the line? With Welsh regions at £3.5M? Or the English cap £5M (or whatever it is now)? )Or the French at 10M Euros?

A simpler way to level the playing field would be a percentage of the new players salary (maybe 10%) should be payable to whatever Club/Province/Union developed them (from underage upwards).

As for provincial wages - they vary. I believe Ian Madigan is on 350K per year which is pretty good (and he isn't on a central contract).

You serious Sin!? A reserve outhalf and part time inside centre on how much?

by **rodders** Mon Dec 15, 2014 5:11 pm

A man that dresses like Conor McGregor isn't going to come cheap.

by Sin é Mon Dec 15, 2014 5:12 pm

thebandwagonsociety wrote:
Sin é wrote:
HammerofThunor wrote:It's generally been stated (I'm not sure where, I think it's been in IRFU branch meetings or supportors meetings) that the Irish Provincial wages budgets are around the English cap. No idea if that includes the Central Contracts, I've heard it did and that it didn't (different provinces perhaps?). Also, what does around the level mean? If it was under they would have said under, right? So it's probably a bit over, and is a bit £10k? £100k? £1M? And is that still the case? Have they got lower than the English cap? Higher? Stayed the same? The Provincial player salary budget is a complete mystery as far as I can tell. Same with the Scots. From memory the Italian superclubs had bigger player budgets than the English cap, but not 100%.

It would be great if it could happen but even then where do you put the line? With Welsh regions at £3.5M? Or the English cap £5M (or whatever it is now)? )Or the French at 10M Euros?

A simpler way to level the playing field would be a percentage of the new players salary (maybe 10%) should be payable to whatever Club/Province/Union developed them (from underage upwards).

As for provincial wages - they vary. I believe Ian Madigan is on 350K per year which is pretty good (and he isn't on a central contract).

You serious Sin!? A reserve outhalf and part time inside centre on how much?

Thats what they claim on Whiff of Cordite (and they seem to be in the know a bit). Utility backs are worth a lot.

by MichaelT Mon Dec 15, 2014 5:18 pm

Sin é wrote:
MichaelT wrote:
Sin é wrote:
thebandwagonsociety wrote:
BT are highly pro-english. Sky still have an unnatural admiration for Munster/Leinster.

Its not unnatural. They are the teams that give them the ratings - 3.1m viewed Clermont v Munster yesterday in France.

ROG twitted the viewings - Nigel Owens tweeted back that that was greater than the population of Wales!

That viewing figure is amazing. For a club game? Just looked up the BARB website for the 6th December Thomond Park match between these two and it says 94,000 viewers. 3rd on Sky Sports 2 for the week. To go from that to 3.1 million in a week is some jump.

The BARB figures do not include Republic of Ireland - just UK figures (which is fairly impressive in a country that neither Clermont or Munster have local fans).

BARB don't have the BT viewing figures up (which would be mainly English teams) yet.

Do Ireland have an equivalent service to review figures? Plus, are you suggesting that 3 million people in Ireland watched a rugby game on Sky? We are talking about Sky figures aren't we? Considering the Late Late and finale of Love/ Hate have had at the most 1.4 million viewers and they're on RTE, I can't imagine that's true.

If Sky had 3 million viewers for a rugby match anywhere then the money they would throw at the sport would make the premier league money look like a childs piggy bank.

by Sin é Mon Dec 15, 2014 5:30 pm

MichaelT wrote:
Sin é wrote:
MichaelT wrote:
Sin é wrote:
thebandwagonsociety wrote:
BT are highly pro-english. Sky still have an unnatural admiration for Munster/Leinster.

Its not unnatural. They are the teams that give them the ratings - 3.1m viewed Clermont v Munster yesterday in France.

ROG twitted the viewings - Nigel Owens tweeted back that that was greater than the population of Wales!

That viewing figure is amazing. For a club game? Just looked up the BARB website for the 6th December Thomond Park match between these two and it says 94,000 viewers. 3rd on Sky Sports 2 for the week. To go from that to 3.1 million in a week is some jump.

The BARB figures do not include Republic of Ireland - just UK figures (which is fairly impressive in a country that neither Clermont or Munster have local fans).

BARB don't have the BT viewing figures up (which would be mainly English teams) yet.

Do Ireland have an equivalent service to review figures? Plus, are you suggesting that 3 million people in Ireland watched a rugby game on Sky? We are talking about Sky figures aren't we? Considering the Late Late and finale of Love/ Hate have had at the most 1.4 million viewers and they're on RTE, I can't imagine that's true.

If Sky had 3 million viewers for a rugby match anywhere then the money they would throw at the sport would make the premier league money look like a childs piggy bank.

Ireland (ROI) have an equivalent service, but Sky don't seem to give any figures for it.

I wasn't suggesting that Ireland would have had 3m viewers. I'd imagine they would have been about 100K, which isn't bad for subscription tv in a country of 4m people.

My point is that the Irish teams (Munster & Leinster) are a big draw for viewers in both the UK & France and that is why Sky love them (because they know they will have plenty of their fans watching). BT do exactly the same with the English teams.

by Sin é Mon Dec 15, 2014 5:57 pm

Munster have got an allocation of 175 tickets for their game against Saracens Very Happy

They seriously need to sort out a decent sized stadium if they want to be taken seriously in this competition.

by stub Mon Dec 15, 2014 6:06 pm

Sin é wrote:Munster have got an allocation of 175 tickets for their game against Saracens

They seriously need to sort out a decent sized stadium if they want to be taken seriously in this competition.

That seems a small allocation for a 10,000 capacity stadium to be fair. Also surprised that the capacity is only 10,000 - there is scope for development there though I guess.

by Dubbelyew L Overate Mon Dec 15, 2014 6:58 pm

Clermont v Munster was the sole Free To Air game on French TV over the weekend. Not sure who gets first picks between France2 and Bein, but it was a good one for them.

It would be interesting to see the FTA viewing figures compared to Pay TV for the previous rounds. We may yet get an occasional Free game on this side of La Manche.

by Sponsored content