Well what an improved European Rugby format that is

First topic message reminder :

Round 6...

only 1 team has qualified for the quarter finals

as BOD said this evening - "this is unique. to have 11 teams still with a shot of making the quarter finals and only 1 team already qualified come round 6"

not a single dead rubber group come round 6. what a massive improvement that is on previous HC formats.

my picks for qualifiers. In order (first 4 get home quarters)

clermont
wasps
toulon
saints
toulouse (win group but not home QF)
RCM92
Saracens
Bath

NB - as a quins fan i admit that our group with leinster and wasps is the tightest. but i fancy wasps to deny leinster a LBP and thus qualification.

looks like a fair reflection of the actual quality of respective club rugby. without loaded draws by virtue of too many walkover matches.

Engine#4 wrote:What I'd give to just do away with the group stages altogether.  Teams like Castres and Montpellier don't want to be in the competition so why should they be here for 6 rounds of matches.  Making it a 32 team home and away knockout would clear out the undeserving early.

of course castres and montpellier want to be in the competition.

but when their chances of qualifying are gone, do you expect them to weaken their efforts on their domestic front (where 2 teams get relegated each year from the top14)?

but i do like the home and away straight knockout format. will reduce the number of games played for most teams and players during the season too. its kind of what a champions cup is all about.

Castres and Montpellier gave up after losses in Weeks 1 and 2 (edit: Castres even made changes for their Week 2 home game against Leinster).  They have been a disgrace and added nothing to the tournament. At least teams like Edinburgh and Connacht would have made a fist of it and potentially caused an upset or two (interestingly, looking at the results, has there been a single real upset this year?) .

Bath and Wasps lost their opening two games and managed to put themselves in with a chance to qualify for the quarters. Ulster are scrapping for league position and had nothing but pride to play for today.  Yet they went and put Leicester out. They had an impact.

Apologies but I can't agree that this years tournament has been any better. The same problems regarding teams not bothering exist in this format.

Well, that "Most Exciting Round 6 Ever" all went to plan.... not.

Leinster throw away a commanding lead and the resulting draw puts Saints and RM through without having kicked a ball.

Harlequins meanwhile waste their time putting hapless Castres to the sword....again

Treviso put Ospreys away in another dead rubber.

Northampton then get rogered by Racing Metro who get top seed spot.

Already qualified Toulon put Scarlets away comfortably.

Ulster extract their usual revenge too late in another all-but-dead rubber against Leicester.

Bar the other dead rubber between Munster and Sale, tomorrow's matches hopefully might make for better viewing.


Interestingly, Treviso's victory gives them 4 points for their six matches.

Behind them lie Sale on 2 points who have a dead rubber against Munster tomorrow.

Montpellier on 2 points who might give it a go in a nothing to play for match against Toulouse.

And lastly, the Chumps Cup medal goes to Castres who managed a miserly losing bonus point from their six pool matches.

Engine4, cut the BS and check your sources. castres played their best available XV against Leinster at home and were leading with 10 minutes to go. The only key players (kockott, lamerat and forestier) missing were injured.
Montpellier just vanished into mediocrity but it was the same in the T14.
Not saying those 2 teams are great and deserve more to be in the champ cup than others but sometimes it is just too easy to bring the same cliches... But dont worry you wont see them next year.

That actually makes it worse Treviso out performed 2 French sides

Treviso won against the Ospreys. That's the only fact here.

whocares wrote:Engine4, cut the BS and check your sources. castres played their best available XV against Leinster at home and were leading with 10 minutes to go. The only key players (kockott, lamerat and forestier) missing were injured.
Montpellier just vanished into mediocrity but it was the same in the T14.
Not saying those 2 teams are great and deserve more to be in the champ cup than others but sometimes it is just too easy to bring the same cliches... But dont worry you wont see them next year.

What cliches? Based on this year and this year alone, both teams gave up.

From memory, I think Castres made 5 changes from the team that started against Harlequins and only one was injury enforced (Kockott). i'm no expert on Castres best XV so I apologise if the players that came in were front liners. Whether they started resting players after week 1 or week 2, I don't think it makes much difference to my overall point.

whocares wrote:Treviso won against the Ospreys. That's the only fact here.

Not quite.

Treviso at least won a match and have four points at the end of the pool rounds is another fact.

Castres have lost all 6 and have only 1 point is another.

Montpellier have lost 5 and have 2 points so far is another.

Sale - ditto.

quinsforever wrote:

Engine#4 wrote:What I'd give to just do away with the group stages altogether.  Teams like Castres and Montpellier don't want to be in the competition so why should they be here for 6 rounds of matches.  Making it a 32 team home and away knockout would clear out the undeserving early.

of course castres and montpellier want to be in the competition.

but when their chances of qualifying are gone, do you expect them to weaken their efforts on their domestic front (where 2 teams get relegated each year from the top14)?

but i do like the home and away straight knockout format. will reduce the number of games played for most teams and players during the season too. its kind of what a champions cup is all about.

No it not. Its about competing.

How long do you think TV companies are going to remain interested in a comp that no one has any interest in watching? What sponsors will want to be associated with it. How are clubs going to make any gate money if they are not playing in competitive fixtures against competitive teams.

usual suspects inventing rubbish to pretend this seasons competition isnt better

biggest positive for me is the fantastic, open, attacking rugby being played by the english and french sides. will be good for the neutrals not to have to watch munster or ulster's fairly turgid, niggly style of rugby past the group stages.

of course the lack of irish sides past the pool stages also explains the anger about the changes to the competition format. but i think thats also a mistake as all 3 provinces are worse this year and much worse than 2-3 years ago. its not the competition's fault.

quinsforever wrote: will be good for the neutrals not to have to watch munster or ulster's fairly turgid, niggly style of rugby past the group stages.

Niggled our way to another bonus point win over an English side last night- 8 tries in our last two games is good value for money!

Notch wrote:

quinsforever wrote: will be good for the neutrals not to have to watch munster or ulster's fairly turgid, niggly style of rugby past the group stages.

Niggled our way to another bonus point win over an English side last night- 8 tries in our last two games is good value for money!

i should have obviously added Leics to the niggle list.

good win for ulster, helped by leics having to attempt to score freely. last 30 mins were pretty awful to watch unless you are an ulster fan i imagine.

Yeah, they could still be playing and they still wouldn't have scored. Very canny from Ulster and very good first-up tackling and they had no idea how to get through that.

quinsforever wrote:usual suspects inventing rubbish to pretend this seasons competition isnt better

.

Usual suspects for whom easier for english clubs = better. We all know the score

i prefer to view it as "fairer" for "all" = better.

but as you say, we all know the score.

I don't understand this argument. I just see the same teams playing the same quality rugby in a format which is basically the same. Very little has changed at all, it doesn't seem any better or worse in terms of quality.

Irish provinces have gone backwards, but it has nothing to do with the change in competitions. When you rely mainly on homegrown talent you will always have years like this, it goes in cycles. Only the likes of Toulon who can buy in new talent every year and don't have to develop it can potentially avoid that.

Thats the main worry for me regarding the quality of the tournament, just as it would be boring if the Irish provinces were on top every year it will be equally boring if Toulon and other big-spending French clubs can do the same.

relatively little has changed. but the new format has made for far mor excitement in far more games for me.

just look...montepellier pushing toulouse all the way, and glas/bath a few points apart, and all three can win the group and get a home semi, and there may be a runner up spot available too. great excitement.

TJ wrote:

quinsforever wrote:usual suspects inventing rubbish to pretend this seasons competition isnt better

.

Usual suspects for whom easier for english clubs = better.  We all know the score

Time for you to apologise about Bath/Glasgow (again!)

Again? :-(

Wasnt expecting Montpelier to beat Toulouse but the latter have frankly been quite poor..Didnt deserve to be anywhere near the QF so probably better for everyone they are stopped here.

Fair play to Montpellier who never stopped trying even when they knew they couldn't qualify. That is pretty rare for French teams.

LeinsterFan4life wrote:Fair play to Montpellier who never stopped trying even when they knew they couldn't qualify. That is pretty rare for French teams.

Bastids - if they had done what Castre did Glasgow would have gone thru. ;-)

And the changes that were meant to get more English teams thru as runners up appears to have worked. Looks like 4 english teams thru as away team in the QF Pools were obviously as unbalanced as before - Toulouse / Glasgow / Bath / Montpelier turned out to be by far the toughest with 3 teams who would not have looked out of place in the QF but only one will go thru as they all took points of each other. 2 pools still have teams without a single win and from those pools its a much easier passage thru Treviso, castre and Sale have just been gift points. If any of them had been in instead of montpellier two teams would have gone thru from that group

More culling needed you reckon?

4 pools of 4. Top 5 from each league + Challenge Cup winner. 1st and 2nd go through.

No. just sensible open format. I made my feelings clear a long time ago. 32 or 40 team entry, byes if needed for top teams, preliminary round to get rid of the dross.

dont agree about sale. they were in the toughest group imo. and should have beaten both munster and sarries at home. cant put them in the same category as treviso who have shipped -184 points difference even with a win!

26-27 vs munster (H)
35-3 vs clermont (A)
15-19 vs sarries (H)
28-15 vs sarries (A)
13-22 vs clermont (H)

HammerofThunor wrote:4 pools of 4. Top 5 from each league + Challenge Cup winner. 1st and 2nd go through.

Even dafter.

Sale were not in the toughest group ( it might have been close but Glasgow / Bath / Montpellier / toulose is obviously a much tougher group)and shouldn't even have been in the comp. A classic example of the unfair bias towards mediocre english and French teams. Easy points for the teams playing agaisnt them

Agree, quins. Sale were only well-beaten in the away game in Clermont. You can't lump them in with Treviso and Castres at all. Could have easily beaten Munster (and Sarries) at home.

TJ wrote:Sale were not in the toughest group ( it might have been close but Glasgow / Bath / Montpellier / toulose is obviously a much tougher group)and shouldn't even have been in the comp.  A classic example of the unfair bias towards mediocre english and French teams.  Easy points for the teams playing agaisnt them

Why shouldn't they?

Why shouldn't they = because they are much poorer than teams who did not get in. Qualification is biased towards english and french clubs -

I'd say

Clermont
Sarries
Munster
Sale

is at least on a par (in terms of strength of sides) with:

Bath
Toulouse
Glasgow
Montpelier

regardless of how close the 2nd one may have ended up.

That will always be the case when qualification is based the season before. Castres were finalists in the Top14 yet you think they shouldn't be in the competition? Perhaps we should just let you pick which teams make it in?

in the AP, there are currently 2 points separating 4th thru 8th. Sale are definitely good enough to play in the top tier euro comp. fair enough if you think english clubs have too many entrants. but they are clearly good enough.

TJ wrote:Why shouldn't they = because they are much poorer than teams who did not get in.  Qualification is biased towards english and french clubs -

Who are these 'much better' sides in the Pro12 who should be there instead?

Cyril wrote:

TJ wrote:Why shouldn't they = because they are much poorer than teams who did not get in.  Qualification is biased towards english and french clubs -

Who are these 'much better' sides in the Pro12 who should be there instead?

At this point in the season Edinburgh and Connacht. But we will never know. Any team doing as poorly as sale do not add anything to the competition - they have just been cannon fodder adn easy points

HammerofThunor wrote:That will always be the case when qualification is based the season before. Castres were finalists in the Top14 yet you think they shouldn't be in the competition? Perhaps we should just let you pick which teams make it in?

This is why I have always favoured a much larger more open entry - 40 teams - top 8 teams get a bye, remain 32 play off a qualifying round, 24 in the main cmp/ Something like this.

this year its exactly as predicted - the format was designed to get more 2nd place teams thru as that would favour the english clubs and that is what has happened. Groups remain very unequal in strength so some good teams go out. Of course if you support an english club then this format is good.

Neither were good enough to qualify though let alone go through.

Sale have just had a nightmare group. Are they really worse than Edinburgh?

TJ, it's already been shown that Sale have not embarrassed themselves at all in their pool and are not cannon fodder.

Seriously do you really think Edinburgh and Connacht are not just better but 'much better' than Sale?

There has only been one pool that was a bit unbalanced and that contained Treviso and Ospreys (two Pro12 sides).

But you still haven't explained why having more runners up going through (one more) benefits the English sides.

And you want to add an extra round to Europe. Then you want all the organisation to be sorted out just before playing? So flights, hotels, etc would have to be booked with a few weeks notice? There's a reason why qualification is sorted the season before. There is a reason why the ?World Cup pools are sorted with 2+ years notice. It's just completely unrealistic.

Sale worse that Edinburgh / connacht - thats my judgement. They have been cannon fodder in a group that was tight but not high quality

the whole competition is designed to make life easier for the english clubs to get to the QF and its succeeded in doing so. shame that in doing so its lost a lot of what made it so good including a huge financial loss.

So you're just going to keep repeating it without explaining?

At least you're admitting that it's just your opinion on Sale. That's a start.

HammerofThunor wrote:But you still haven't explained why having more runners up going through (one more) benefits the English sides.

Because the english clubs usually occupy the runners up spots in the pools. so if you are a runner up you now have a 3/5 (60%) chance of going thru when it was 2/6. (30%) It was obvious this was the main aim of the PRL - to make it easier for the english teams to get out of the pools.

Its very obvious on these boards - the only folk who think this is a better format is the english supporters. No one else does.

TJ wrote:Sale worse that Edinburgh / connacht - thats my judgement.  They have been cannon fodder in a group that was tight but not high quality

That group had three of last season's four semi-finalists in it!

Cyril wrote:

TJ wrote:Sale worse that Edinburgh / connacht - thats my judgement.  They have been cannon fodder in a group that was tight but not high quality

That group had three of last season's semi-finalists in it!

Yes - and this year none of them are playing to the standard they were last year. Sale have been easy points for the rest - the table tells you so.

TJ wrote:Sale worse that Edinburgh / connacht - thats my judgement.  They have been cannon fodder in a group that was tight but not high quality

the whole competition is designed to make life easier for the english clubs to get to the QF and its succeeded in doing so. shame that in doing so its lost a lot of what made it so good including a huge financial loss.

that group has 3 of last years 4 semi finalists. league leader in top14, 3rd in AP (and last years top of league), and 3rd in pro12. just saying.

English top as many groups as pro 12 teams dont they?

Those percentages apply to every team in it. Did you mean that it's easier to go through as runner up but used the English as an example?

As for them usual being runners up...well the pool winner from the lost pool would knock them down wouldn't they?

TJ wrote:

Cyril wrote:

TJ wrote:Sale worse that Edinburgh / connacht - thats my judgement.  They have been cannon fodder in a group that was tight but not high quality

That group had three of last season's semi-finalists in it!

Yes - and this year none of them are playing to the standard they were last year.  Sale have been easy points for the rest - the table tells you so.

No, it doesn't tell you it was "easy points" at all. Why do you have to exaggerate and invent things to suit your agenda?