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.

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.

Easy points? Saracens and Munster only just beat them away, with neither getting TBP.

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.

wrong. clermont are much stronger. sitting atop top14. munster are in 3rd in pro12 again, same as last year. and sarries are 3rd vs being runners up in AP last year.

so if they arent playing to the same standard, then no-one else is either.

In previous years english teams have occupied second in group more than other countries

You only have to look on these boards to see the only folk who think this format is an improvement are fans of english clubs. No one else does. does that not tell you something?

Enough - its been done to death but the changes have produced the intended effect - more english club's in the QF

wrong again tj. the only frenchman who regularly contributes, whocares, has made it clear he thinks its an improvement.

so what you are really saying is that all the fans with teams in the pro12 dont like to admit the competition is more compelling and an improvement.

How many pro teams have finished top of their groups and how many Aviva?

But the winner of the pool that has disappeared would surely push the Engish team in their pool down into 3rd? We're only talking one extra runner up spot. Or is there something magically about being 2nd in the pool and English?

Munster Sale game currently 13-10 I believe. Sale definitely worth their spot - even though they're English

HammerofThunor wrote:But the winner of the pool that has disappeared would surely push the Engish team in their pool down into 3rd? We're only talking one extra runner up spot. Or is there something magically about being 2nd in the pool and English?

in this format 60% of runners up go thru. in the previous format 30%, In past euro cups second place teams were predominately english. It is desinged to make it easier for english clubs to go thru and it has worked. this is why the english fans think it great and the rest of us know that by becoming a anglo french cup with a few other teams its devalued. Now I know rugby fans are one eyed and I know that you will never admit this but its obvious the only folk who like this format are english team fans - and thats because it biased towards their teams.

stub wrote:Munster Sale game currently 13-10 I believe. Sale definitely worth their spot - even though they're English

Ah, but maybe Munster aren't trying (or they're part of the English conspiracy!)

quinsforever wrote:wrong again tj. the only frenchman who regularly contributes, whocares, has made it clear he thinks its an improvement.

so what you are really saying is that all the fans with teams in the pro12 dont like to admit the competition is more compelling and an improvement.

Ok - french fans as well.

You will see - the cup is now in huge financial and management difficulties. I expect it to fade away over the years unles a fairer format is found.

TJ wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:But the winner of the pool that has disappeared would surely push the Engish team in their pool down into 3rd? We're only talking one extra runner up spot. Or is there something magically about being 2nd in the pool and English?

in this format 60% of runners up go thru.  in the previous format 30%,  In past euro cups second place teams were predominately english.  It is desinged to make it easier for english clubs to go thru and it has worked.  this is why the english fans think it great and the rest of us know that by becoming a anglo french cup with a few other teams its devalued.  Now I know rugby fans are one eyed and I know that you will never admit this but its obvious the only folk who like this format are english team fans - and thats because it biased towards their teams.

I've emboldened the most 'tin-foil-hatted' bits

Luckily, only English fans are biased and one-eyed...

But that is complete nonsense. I've just looked at the last 4 years. Last year there were 5 out 6 English teams in 2nd. The year before that there was 1. The year before that there was 1. The year before that there was 2. So that is 9 in 4 years (so 24). Which is only just above 33%. You are talking out your arse.

TJ wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:But the winner of the pool that has disappeared would surely push the Engish team in their pool down into 3rd? We're only talking one extra runner up spot. Or is there something magically about being 2nd in the pool and English?

in this format 60% of runners up go thru.  in the previous format 30%,  In past euro cups second place teams were predominately english.  It is desinged to make it easier for english clubs to go thru and it has worked.  this is why the english fans think it great and the rest of us know that by becoming a anglo french cup with a few other teams its devalued.  Now I know rugby fans are one eyed and I know that you will never admit this but its obvious the only folk who like this format are english team fans - and thats because it biased towards their teams.

yes. you are correct. but given that in the old format, english and french clubs were at a serious disadvantage (qualification, no relegation domestically, biased seeding related to auto-qualification), it is clearly fair and an improvement.

I've just looked the 4 years before that. 2, 2, 1, 0. So in 8 years there have been 14 out 48 2nd places filled by the English (about 30%). There has only been one year when more than a third of the 2nd place have been English, in 8 years

This is as funny as the claim on another thread that just because Edinburgh managed to beat Bordeaux yesterday that showed they were too good for the Challenge Cup and should be in the Champions Cup - missing the fact that they finished 5th in the rankings for the quarters and didn't get a home fixture.

Heaf wrote:This is as funny as the claim on another thread that just because Edinburgh managed to beat Bordeaux yesterday that showed they were too good for the Challenge Cup and should be in the Champions Cup - missing the fact that they finished 5th in the rankings for the quarters and didn't get a home fixture.

That's with London Welsh in their group as well, who were easy points for everyone...

Sale winless and currently getting thrashed by Munster - wonder if they believe this is an improved rugby format?

Wow, Sale are getting a bit of a pasting!

Looks like Irish sides (except Leinster) left it a little late to start performing.

Heaf wrote:This is as funny as the claim on another thread that just because Edinburgh managed to beat Bordeaux yesterday that showed they were too good for the Challenge Cup and should be in the Champions Cup - missing the fact that they finished 5th in the rankings for the quarters and didn't get a home fixture.

I think it's that tournament that suffers the credibility problem (both in its old and new formats) and it's because the French don't care- no French in the KO stages of that, which will actually be good for that tournament because the Pro12 teams actually want it- but it illustrates the French attitude towards it. Stade Francais unapologetically prioritising the Brennus etc.

If it wasn't credible before (when the winner did qualify for the 'top' competition), how do you make it credible?

Will a 2nd tier tournament always suffer from these issues simply because it's 2nd tier?

Sides dropping down from the 1st tier tournament added a bit of spice but I always thought it was unfair on sides who had grafted through the group stages of the 2nd tier only to be met by Leinster or Northampton etc.

Munster score 52 (52!) points unopposed in the second half against Sale. This second half is the kind of contest thats normally reserved for the Italians in the Challenge Cup. They just lost interest completely.

Munster 65-10 Sale Sharks

there's no money in the challenge cup. and no qualification for the top tier (that spot was given up to accommodate a 7th automatic qualifier from the pro12). if it affects a french sides shot at winning the top14 or avoiding relegation, then they would be insane to take that risk.

there is no point complaining about it. thats always been the reality. nothing is ever going to change it. pro12 teams should be pleased as they get a chance in the 2nd tier to get some confidence boosting matches. worked well for edinburgh after a terrible start to their season.

maestegmafia wrote:The eight richest clubs to make the quarter finals.

Rugby used to be a game where fifteen local guys played fifteen blokes from somewhere else.

Now it's a business, if your profit margins are good, you'll do well.

That pretty much describes an amateur sport becoming a professional one.

Notch - maybe but that doesn't justify claiming Edinburgh are too good for it, unless all the other teams that so far have finished higher are too, and saying it's all part of a big English stitch up (which was the gist of the post on the other thread).

TJ wrote:

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.

Probably best just to speak for yourself, TJ. I prefer the tighter format and I'm not a supporter from England.

Sale have not been cannon fodder for the other teams in their pool. One example - they narrowly lost to Munster in their opening game - how can that be defined as cannon fodder? They were beaten heavily today by Munster, but there was nothing in the game for either side.

Castres have without doubt been the poorest performing team in the comp this season. Last season it was someone else, and next season, it'll likely be someone else. However, any team, from whatever country/league should be required to field their strongest side when qualifying points are at stake - Quins v Castres was a gimme for five points and could have put Quins through had other results gone their way.

Heaf wrote:This is as funny as the claim on another thread that just because Edinburgh managed to beat Bordeaux yesterday that showed they were too good for the Challenge Cup and should be in the Champions Cup - missing the fact that they finished 5th in the rankings for the quarters and didn't get a home fixture.

Edinburgh are definitely more worthy of it than Sale!

Heaf wrote:Notch - maybe but that doesn't justify claiming Edinburgh are too good for it, unless all the other teams that so far have finished higher are too, and saying it's all part of a big English stitch up (which was the gist of the post on the other thread).

I don't much care about conspiracy theories myself.

sportform wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:The eight richest clubs to make the quarter finals.

Rugby used to be a game where fifteen local guys played fifteen blokes from somewhere else.

Now it's a business, if your profit margins are good, you'll do well.

That pretty much describes an amateur sport becoming a professional one.

It is not even true that they are the eight richest teams.

Surely Leicester have a larger income that Saints. I know Wasps have had some investment from their owner but I do not believe their budget is any bigger than Leicester, Quins or Gloucester.

Munster and Ulster surely have bigger budgets than Saints or Wasps.

Looks like money buys home semi finals aswell. That's 3 years in a row for Toulon.

The only reason Bath went through the pool stage is they played a disinterested Montpellier team.

Very dodgy draw for the semi finals


Surprise, surprise - semis are all in France, again

Exiledinborders wrote:
Munster and Ulster surely have bigger budgets than Saints or Wasps.

I doubt it. It's something of a moot point as the structures are not comparable.

Well b*gger that.     The French have stitched up the semi-finals nicely.

Toulon (or Wasps) play Leinster (or Bath)

Clermont (or Saints)  play at home to winner of Racing or Sarries.

Looks like it could be an all-French affair at Twickenham.

Connacht if they manage to somehow beat Gloucester in the Challenge Cup get a home semi against either Exeter/Newcastle.

VinceWLB wrote:The only reason Bath went through the pool stage is they played a disinterested Montpellier team.

No, it's because they earned more match points than the other sides in their pool.

Notch wrote:Munster score 52 (52!) points unopposed in the second half against Sale. This second half is the kind of contest thats normally reserved for the Italians in the Challenge Cup. They just lost interest completely.

Munster 65-10 Sale Sharks

The Ulster Academy have put up a better fight than that though in Thomond Park.

Anyway, great to see Keith Earls back (and looking very sharp) and Zebo had a great game as well.

Cyril wrote:

VinceWLB wrote:The only reason Bath went through the pool stage is they played a disinterested Montpellier team.

No, it's because they earned more match points than the other sides in their pool.

It's who they got them from is probably the point he's seeking to make. Montpellier blew hot and cold this season. More often cold than hot, today's victory aside. However, Glasgow and Toulouse had the same advantage, and ultimately it came down to the performances of the other three teams against each other. Bath won it, with a try in the final game.

VinceWLB wrote:

Heaf wrote:This is as funny as the claim on another thread that just because Edinburgh managed to beat Bordeaux yesterday that showed they were too good for the Challenge Cup and should be in the Champions Cup - missing the fact that they finished 5th in the rankings for the quarters and didn't get a home fixture.

Edinburgh are definitely more worthy of it than Sale!

I'm assuming you mean because they didn't win a match? So what sort of crystal ball do you have to say Edinburgh would have done better in the Champions Cup and/or Sale wouldn't have done better than Edinburgh in the Challenge Cup? Sale were unlucky not to beat Munster at home (due to the ref denying them a certain try by blowing his whistle a fraction of a second too early) so who knows how things may have panned out after that. Today they clearly put out a 2nd string team for what was a dead rubber.

The reality is Sale qualified and Edinburgh didn't so they had every right to be there.

Pot Hale wrote:

Cyril wrote:

VinceWLB wrote:The only reason Bath went through the pool stage is they played a disinterested Montpellier team.

No, it's because they earned more match points than the other sides in their pool.

It's who they got them from is probably the point he's seeking to make.   Montpellier blew hot and cold this season.   More often cold than hot, today's victory aside.    However, Glasgow and Toulouse had the same advantage, and ultimately it came down to the performances of the other three teams against each other.  Bath won it, with a try in the final game.

You can try and decide who 'deserves' to go through as much as you want based on how other sides perform. It just sounds a little churlish to claim that Bath only went through because of their results against Montpelier. I'm assuming he's a cheesed-off Glasgow fan? Bath did what Glasgow couldn't and smashed Toulouse away.

Cyril wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:

Cyril wrote:

VinceWLB wrote:The only reason Bath went through the pool stage is they played a disinterested Montpellier team.

No, it's because they earned more match points than the other sides in their pool.

It's who they got them from is probably the point he's seeking to make.   Montpellier blew hot and cold this season.   More often cold than hot, today's victory aside.    However, Glasgow and Toulouse had the same advantage, and ultimately it came down to the performances of the other three teams against each other.  Bath won it, with a try in the final game.

You can try and decide who 'deserves' to go through as much as you want based on how other sides perform. It just sounds a little churlish to claim that Bath only went through because of their results against Montpelier. I'm assuming he's a cheesed-off Glasgow fan? Bath did what Glasgow couldn't and smashed Toulouse away.

Well, I won't try and speak for someone else and their point of view.

In my view, a general comment would be about teams in one pool being able to pick up points against disinterested or deliberately weakened teams at the expense of teams in other pools. If a team is going to play competitively in a competition , then it behoves them to put out their strongest team every round. The only exception would likely be a dead rubber in the final round where the outcome makes no difference - even then, I think there should be some penalty/incentive to win every match, even if that means rewarding pool position financially.

VinceWLB wrote:The only reason Bath went through the pool stage is they played a disinterested Montpellier team.

Nope - Bath are well worth their QF place. Played some very good rugby, fought back from a bad start and beat Toulouse ( something Glasgow ere unable to do) Played a very disciplined game in the last game against Glasgow. Bath are well worth their place in the QFs

If Toulon face Racing in the final, at least it will be interesting. The owners have been at each others throats all season, the winner gets the ultimate bragging rights!

Pot Hale wrote:

Cyril wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:

Cyril wrote:

VinceWLB wrote:The only reason Bath went through the pool stage is they played a disinterested Montpellier team.

No, it's because they earned more match points than the other sides in their pool.

It's who they got them from is probably the point he's seeking to make.   Montpellier blew hot and cold this season.   More often cold than hot, today's victory aside.    However, Glasgow and Toulouse had the same advantage, and ultimately it came down to the performances of the other three teams against each other.  Bath won it, with a try in the final game.

You can try and decide who 'deserves' to go through as much as you want based on how other sides perform. It just sounds a little churlish to claim that Bath only went through because of their results against Montpelier. I'm assuming he's a cheesed-off Glasgow fan? Bath did what Glasgow couldn't and smashed Toulouse away.

Well, I won't try and speak for someone else and their point of view.

In my view, a general comment would be about teams in one pool being able to pick up points against disinterested or deliberately weakened teams at the expense of teams in other pools.    If a team is going to play competitively in a competition , then it behoves them to put out their strongest team every round.  The only exception would likely be a dead rubber in the final round where the outcome makes no difference - even then, I think there should be some penalty/incentive to win every match, even if that means rewarding pool position financially.  

I agree. Though I imagine it would be quite difficult to 'prove' that a side is not taking it seriously, even if it sometimes looks pretty obvious from the outside.

The problem is with the seeding - it isn't fair - its wrong for any club to get stuck in a group with the previous 2 year semi finalists.

Having pointless games will affect the bottom line for clubs as well. If the final game was for instance, Sales v Munster, Sale would likely have had an empty stadium (which affects their bottom line).

Anyway, congrats to all the English clubs for providing the cannon fodder for the 3 French and 1 Irish team still in the last  

Sin é wrote:

Notch wrote:Munster score 52 (52!) points unopposed in the second half against Sale. This second half is the kind of contest thats normally reserved for the Italians in the Challenge Cup. They just lost interest completely.

Munster 65-10 Sale Sharks

The Ulster Academy have put up a better fight than that though in Thomond Park.

Anyway, great to see Keith Earls back (and looking very sharp) and Zebo had a great game as well.

Last year, the Ulster Academy actually won in Thomond iirc

Aye, it's bound to be unfair if Munster don't make it through. That much is a given.

stub wrote:Munster Sale game currently 13-10 I believe. Sale definitely worth their spot - even though they're English

Absolutly stuffed in the end 6 games, no wins, 2 losing bonus points. You still think they are not easy points / cannon fodder? Really - same as in the previous incarnation you get teams in the comp that are not up to standard and unbalanced groups.

The Saint wrote:If Toulon face Racing in the final, at least it will be interesting. The owners have been at each others throats all season, the winner gets the ultimate bragging rights!

I fancy Clermont this year - Lopez has made a huge difference to them.

Ronan O'Gara reckoned (in his column in the examiner) that the Irish & English clubs can compete with each other (and with Racing). He says no one can compete with Toulon or Clermont though.

TJ, you might want to read Pot Hale's post further up.

Seems you don't speak for all Pro12 fans after all...

Cyril wrote:Aye, it's bound to be unfair if Munster don't make it through. That much is a given.

I wasn't thinking of Munster, as Munster was a semi finalist for the last 2 seasons.

I was thinking of Sale and how daunting it must have been for them.

Sale were above Wasps in the Aviva last year, but Wasps got an easier group and so has progressed further.

TJ wrote:

stub wrote:Munster Sale game currently 13-10 I believe. Sale definitely worth their spot - even though they're English

Absolutly stuffed in the end  6 games, no wins, 2 losing bonus points.  You still think they are not easy points / cannon fodder?  Really - same as in the previous incarnation you get teams in the comp that are not up to standard and unbalanced groups.

They got a royal stuffing in the end there TJ - but made a fight of it for a half at least I still maintain that (despite being English) they deserved their place and they will learn and become stronger for the experience. They are out now, because they are not as good this year as the others in their group. I do not know if Edinburgh would have done better but if they qualify next year we'll get more of an idea. We can see how they do in the Challenge Cup. I will enjoy watching their progress along with the other teams. I've enjoyed a great weekend of rugby myself and look forward to some daunting quarters later in the year.