Well what an improved European Rugby format that is

by quinsforever Sun 18 Jan 2015, 8:06 pm

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.

by TJ Sun 25 Jan 2015, 6:24 pm

Certainly some good rugby played - no doubt at all. glasgow / Bath was a cracker

Edinburgh are unlikely to get into europe ever again under current qualification. its a declining spiral of inability to attract top players, inability to compete financially because they are not in the euro cup meaning its very hard to break back in. they cannot run a deficit for a couple of years to buy their way back in. Its possible but very unlikely that they will ever be back into Europe. same with the other excluded teams.

Edit - that post looks daft in isolation - its an answer to the one above

by sportform Sun 25 Jan 2015, 6:45 pm

How about they do away with top flight domestic rugby in Europe and have a pan-European competition similar to the NFL. 32 teams divided into eight divisions of four regionally. They could play 20 games per season, home and away within their division (six games), and then half of the other 28 teams in alternate years. Top 12 (possibly 16) going into a knock-out round for the championship.

It would certainly reduce the number of games and allow free weeks for the internationals. They could also bring back domestic FA Cup style competitions for each country. I certainly miss the old style knock-out competition (Pilkington Cup) that preceded the Anglo-Welsh Cup.

by Sin é Sun 25 Jan 2015, 6:50 pm

sportform - not a hope of the French abandoning the Top 14 (and who could blame them - it has a long tradition)?

Personally, I like the idea of a domestic and european competition. I like the novelty and randomness of the european draw and it makes it exciting that you never have played this team before. It does get boring after a while to be playing the same teams x 2 times every year.

by stub Sun 25 Jan 2015, 6:57 pm

Sin - English might not be that keen about getting rid of Prem either...

by Cyril Sun 25 Jan 2015, 7:07 pm

Sin é wrote:
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.

Sure mate. Of course you weren't Wink

by Cyril Sun 25 Jan 2015, 7:09 pm

I'd hate to lose top-flight domestic competition. A pan-European competition would just get a bit samey and you would lose the traditions.

I think you need the domestic/Euro Cup/International set-up.

The AP is the bread and butter for me and it's great viewing at the moment.

by stub Sun 25 Jan 2015, 7:11 pm

Agree Cyril - good to have the contrasts.

by quinsforever Sun 25 Jan 2015, 7:18 pm

Sin é wrote: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

100% disagree. seeding should be based on performances over the course of a whole season (hence why AP sides went with league finishing position and ignore the playoffs vs pro12 choosing to be based on playoffs as they recognise that league finishing position is not representative in their league of the "best" teams).

seeding should not be based on an unbalanced HC with dodgy automatic qualification for some teams, random groups and a knockout phase.

by quinsforever Sun 25 Jan 2015, 7:25 pm

Sin é wrote:
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.

daunting for Sale how?

ref robbed them of a home win vs munster. as you well know. not daunted there!

they beat Saints (league leaders) in the AP 2 weeks ago, so not going to be daunted playing Sarries.

got thumped away by clermont, but then lets be honest, was far closer than Ulster's thrashing at the hands of Toulon, and clermont are ahead of Toulon in the top14.

you really do talk some rubbish sometimes. Sale totally deserved their place in the competition. they earned it. they learned a lot, and will be a stronger side for it in the future. they operate on half the budget of the french sides and significantly less than the provinces, so i think they will fell like they did fine.

by The Great Aukster Sun 25 Jan 2015, 7:28 pm

The final 8 had 6 pool winners last year, and only 5 this year - fewer winners, more runners up.
This year had two teams make it through having lost their first two games for the first time ever - conclusion the opening rounds are less important.

by TJ Sun 25 Jan 2015, 7:29 pm

quinsforever wrote:
Sin é wrote: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
100% disagree. seeding should be based on performances over the course of a whole season (hence why AP sides went with league finishing position and ignore the playoffs vs pro12 choosing to be based on playoffs as they recognise that league finishing position is not representative in their league of the "best" teams).

seeding should not be based on an unbalanced HC with dodgy automatic qualification for some teams, random groups and a knockout phase.

I thought thats what you wanted - 6 automatic places for the english clubs, leading to unbalanced pools and easier ways thru to the QFs for them - or do you really prefer the old fair format after all Wink

by quinsforever Sun 25 Jan 2015, 7:34 pm

TJ.

unbalanced pools where english teams qualified...
ASM, Sarries, Munster
Leinster, Wasps, Quins, Castres
Bath, Toulouse, Glasgow (2nd in pro12), Montpellier
Racing, Saints, Ospreys (top of pro12)

so which of those were the unbalanced pools that made it easier for english clubs to qualify?

Hug

by Cyril Sun 25 Jan 2015, 7:36 pm

The Great Aukster wrote:The final 8 had 6 pool winners last year, and only 5 this year - fewer winners, more runners up.
This year had two teams make it through having lost their first two games for the first time ever - conclusion the opening rounds are less important.

Another conclusion: don't peak too early.

by quinsforever Sun 25 Jan 2015, 7:38 pm

The Great Aukster wrote:The final 8 had 6 pool winners last year, and only 5 this year - fewer winners, more runners up.
This year had two teams make it through having lost their first two games for the first time ever - conclusion the opening rounds are less important.

that's either a bad wum or you need to have a think about what you suggested a bit more carefully before hitting send...

the fact that teams can qualify even if they lose the first two rounds, shows precisely, that the groups are much more close fought, and that is precisely because with 3 runner up spots, everything is still up for grabs right until the last match of round 6. kind of like what happened this weekend.

every round and every point are equally important. dont you see that?

and that is very different from previous HC incarnations.

by Exiledinborders Sun 25 Jan 2015, 7:52 pm

TJ wrote:
quinsforever wrote:
Sin é wrote: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
100% disagree. seeding should be based on performances over the course of a whole season (hence why AP sides went with league finishing position and ignore the playoffs vs pro12 choosing to be based on playoffs as they recognise that league finishing position is not representative in their league of the "best" teams).

seeding should not be based on an unbalanced HC with dodgy automatic qualification for some teams, random groups and a knockout phase.
I thought thats what you wanted - 6 automatic places for the english clubs, leading to unbalanced pools and easier ways thru to the QFs for them - or do you really prefer the old fair format after all

No English team has an automatic qualification. They have slightly over fifty per cent chance of qualifying. Under the old system teams such as Edinburgh were guaranteed qualification however underserving they were.

The results this year indicate that the qualification still unfairly favours the Pro12 teams. After all 57% of AP teams are going through to quarter finals whereas only 14% of Pro12 teams aquitted themselves well.

by TJ Sun 25 Jan 2015, 8:36 pm

quinsforever wrote:TJ.

unbalanced pools where english teams qualified...
ASM, Sarries, Munster
Leinster, Wasps, Quins, Castres
Bath, Toulouse, Glasgow (2nd in pro12), Montpellier
Racing, Saints, Ospreys (top of pro12)

so which of those were the unbalanced pools that made it easier for english clubs to qualify?

by The Great Aukster Sun 25 Jan 2015, 8:37 pm

quinsforever wrote:
The Great Aukster wrote:The final 8 had 6 pool winners last year, and only 5 this year - fewer winners, more runners up.
This year had two teams make it through having lost their first two games for the first time ever - conclusion the opening rounds are less important.
that's either a bad wum or you need to have a think about what you suggested a bit more carefully before hitting send...

the fact that teams can qualify even if they lose the first two rounds, shows precisely, that the groups are much more close fought, and that is precisely because with 3 runner up spots, everything is still up for grabs right until the last match of round 6. kind of like what happened this weekend.

every round and every point are equally important. dont you see that?

and that is very different from previous HC incarnations.

8 qualifiers from 20 is easier that 8 from 24 - simple maths.
Add in another three places to play for in the CC last year and that's 11 from 24 which is greater than 8 from 20 so more potential places up for grabs last year than this - again simple maths.

Thanks for your concern about my thinking ability - but I should warn you it doesn't extend beyond logic and simple maths

by HammerofThunor Sun 25 Jan 2015, 9:03 pm

Only if every side has an equal chance of qualifying. The 'maths' isn't that simple.

by Sin é Sun 25 Jan 2015, 9:04 pm

quinsforever wrote:
Sin é wrote:
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.
daunting for Sale how?

ref robbed them of a home win vs munster. as you well know. not daunted there!

they beat Saints (league leaders) in the AP 2 weeks ago, so not going to be daunted playing Sarries.

got thumped away by clermont, but then lets be honest, was far closer than Ulster's thrashing at the hands of Toulon, and clermont are ahead of Toulon in the top14.

you really do talk some rubbish sometimes. Sale totally deserved their place in the competition. they earned it. they learned a lot, and will be a stronger side for it in the future. they operate on half the budget of the french sides and significantly less than the provinces, so i think they will fell like they did fine.

In your rush to defend the AP, you missed that I was not criticising Sale or think they were unworthy (despite what happened today), I think the seeding isn't working as Sale were above Wasps in the AP, but Wasps got an easier group to negotiate.

by quinsforever Sun 25 Jan 2015, 9:13 pm

Sin é wrote:
quinsforever wrote:
Sin é wrote:
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.
daunting for Sale how?

ref robbed them of a home win vs munster. as you well know. not daunted there!

they beat Saints (league leaders) in the AP 2 weeks ago, so not going to be daunted playing Sarries.

got thumped away by clermont, but then lets be honest, was far closer than Ulster's thrashing at the hands of Toulon, and clermont are ahead of Toulon in the top14.

you really do talk some rubbish sometimes. Sale totally deserved their place in the competition. they earned it. they learned a lot, and will be a stronger side for it in the future. they operate on half the budget of the french sides and significantly less than the provinces, so i think they will fell like they did fine.

In your rush to defend the AP, you missed that I was not criticising Sale or think they were unworthy (despite what happened today), I think the seeding isn't working as Sale were above Wasps in the AP, but Wasps got an easier group to negotiate.

there had been a bit of sale-were-as-soft-as-treviso type bashing earlier in the thread which i thought you were joining in. apologies if you werent.

re the seeding, any system based on previous years performance in anything is going to throw up some strange results if teams have improved or deteriorated from one season to the next. Castres beaten finalists in top14 the last 2 seasons. this year they may well get relegated. thats not the seedings fault. its just one of those cycles that all teams experience, albeit not usually as dramatically as Castres this season.

As regards Sale, Wasps etc, there are 2 points separating 4 thru 8 in the AP. So i dont think Sale or Wasps or Quins or Exeter or Leics (teams 4-8) are going to be afraid of any of the big french or irish teams. the fact only Wasps made it through to the QFs out of those teams feels about right. They are probably playing the best of all of them at the moment, and they just squeaked in.

by The Great Aukster Sun 25 Jan 2015, 9:55 pm

HammerofThunor wrote:Only if every side has an equal chance of qualifying. The 'maths' isn't that simple.

No it really is simple probability. Maybe you know what teams have an advantage over others so I would expect that you're either a bookmaker or taking them for loads of cash at every turn. Hang on even bookmakers reduce the odds with fewer numbers...

Sorry for using the shortened and more colloquial term 'maths', what I meant was mathematics.

by The Great Aukster Sun 25 Jan 2015, 10:08 pm

quinsforever wrote:re the seeding, any system based on previous years performance in anything is going to throw up some strange results if teams have improved or deteriorated from one season to the next. Castres beaten finalists in top14 the last 2 seasons. this year they may well get relegated. thats not the seedings fault. its just one of those cycles that all teams experience, albeit not usually as dramatically as Castres this season.

If Competition A's seeding for the following year depends on Competition B, then any sensible team who can't win Competition A this year will totally forget about it and focus all their attention on Competition B.

Let's face it the PRL and Top14 don't want teams focusing on Europe at all, hence the emphasis on their Leagues being the most important things in the Universe, and all other competitions should revolve around them.

by shuren34 Sun 25 Jan 2015, 10:48 pm

sportform wrote:How about they do away with top flight domestic rugby in Europe and have a pan-European competition similar to the NFL. 32 teams divided into eight divisions of four regionally. They could play 20 games per season, home and away within their division (six games), and then half of the other 28 teams in alternate years. Top 12 (possibly 16) going into a knock-out round for the championship.

It would certainly reduce the number of games and allow free weeks for the internationals. They could also bring back domestic FA Cup style competitions for each country. I certainly miss the old style knock-out competition (Pilkington Cup) that preceded the Anglo-Welsh Cup.

Thanks, but no way. We will keep our top 14.
But you could probably create a British league with the english teams.

by HammerofThunor Sun 25 Jan 2015, 10:50 pm

The Great Aukster wrote:
HammerofThunor wrote:Only if every side has an equal chance of qualifying. The 'maths' isn't that simple.

No it really is simple probability. Maybe you know what teams have an advantage over others so I would expect that you're either a bookmaker or taking them for loads of cash at every turn. Hang on even bookmakers reduce the odds with fewer numbers...

Sorry for using the shortened and more colloquial term 'maths', what I meant was mathematics.

The removal of 4 teams with bugger all chance of making it through makes bugger all difference to the rest. It's like saying buying two lottery tickets makes it easier to win the lottery. Technically true but not in any meaningful way.

by shuren34 Sun 25 Jan 2015, 10:53 pm

The Great Aukster wrote:
Let's face it the PRL and Top14 don't want teams focusing on Europe at all, hence the emphasis on their Leagues being the most important things in the Universe, and all other competitions should revolve around them.

Well we didn't force you to play with us. In fact the old Heineken-Cup was create to help the celtic nations to survive in the professional era.
For us it's even a pain in the ass, because it's add more games to our season.

by quinsforever Sun 25 Jan 2015, 11:13 pm

shuren34 wrote:
sportform wrote:How about they do away with top flight domestic rugby in Europe and have a pan-European competition similar to the NFL. 32 teams divided into eight divisions of four regionally. They could play 20 games per season, home and away within their division (six games), and then half of the other 28 teams in alternate years. Top 12 (possibly 16) going into a knock-out round for the championship.

It would certainly reduce the number of games and allow free weeks for the internationals. They could also bring back domestic FA Cup style competitions for each country. I certainly miss the old style knock-out competition (Pilkington Cup) that preceded the Anglo-Welsh Cup.

Thanks, but no way. We will keep our top 14.
But you could probably create a British league with the english teams.

Thanks, but no way.

the AP is a great league. Many of our top clubs pre-date international rugby! and many of the rivalries between clubs are equally longstanding.

i like international rugby. i like club rugby. and i like them separate. i don't want club rugby to be just inter-national.

by Pot Hale Mon 26 Jan 2015, 2:22 am

shuren34 wrote:
sportform wrote:How about they do away with top flight domestic rugby in Europe and have a pan-European competition similar to the NFL. 32 teams divided into eight divisions of four regionally. They could play 20 games per season, home and away within their division (six games), and then half of the other 28 teams in alternate years. Top 12 (possibly 16) going into a knock-out round for the championship.

It would certainly reduce the number of games and allow free weeks for the internationals. They could also bring back domestic FA Cup style competitions for each country. I certainly miss the old style knock-out competition (Pilkington Cup) that preceded the Anglo-Welsh Cup.

Thanks, but no way. We will keep our top 14.
But you could probably create a British league with the english teams.

There already is a British league with english teams - it's called the Premiership. Didn't think Top 14 fans were that blinkered that they don't know what's happening in rugby outside of France.... Smile

by **Rugby Fan** Mon 26 Jan 2015, 7:35 am

To those who are already convinced that the new tournament is inferiority because it favours rich teams, the question remains: how would the outcome have been different under the Heineken format? Was there a handicapping system built in to help poorer teams before? If so, how does that square with the long-held contention the old Cup was a level playing field for all?

I think Moore has it about right:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/european-rugby/11368794/European-competitions-should-mean-all-of-Europe-not-just-Anglo-French.html

He thinks automatic qualification did give Pro12 sides an edge to use if they were able, but rugby won't benefit from a European Cup if it becomes all about the English and French - or just the French, for that matter.

We can't tell from this year alone whether that is the way we are going. It it is an inevitable consequence, though, then we will have to consider how to keep a wider competitive base. That probably means a discussion about salary caps or even some kind of squad limits for the tournament.

by shuren34 Mon 26 Jan 2015, 11:23 am

Pot Hale wrote:
shuren34 wrote:
sportform wrote:How about they do away with top flight domestic rugby in Europe and have a pan-European competition similar to the NFL. 32 teams divided into eight divisions of four regionally. They could play 20 games per season, home and away within their division (six games), and then half of the other 28 teams in alternate years. Top 12 (possibly 16) going into a knock-out round for the championship.

It would certainly reduce the number of games and allow free weeks for the internationals. They could also bring back domestic FA Cup style competitions for each country. I certainly miss the old style knock-out competition (Pilkington Cup) that preceded the Anglo-Welsh Cup.

Thanks, but no way. We will keep our top 14.
But you could probably create a British league with the english teams.

There already is a British league with english teams - it's called the Premiership. Didn't think Top 14 fans were that blinkered that they don't know what's happening in rugby outside of France....

a British league with english, welsh, scottish and irish teams in it.

by shuren34 Mon 26 Jan 2015, 11:25 am

quinsforever wrote:
shuren34 wrote:
sportform wrote:How about they do away with top flight domestic rugby in Europe and have a pan-European competition similar to the NFL. 32 teams divided into eight divisions of four regionally. They could play 20 games per season, home and away within their division (six games), and then half of the other 28 teams in alternate years. Top 12 (possibly 16) going into a knock-out round for the championship.

It would certainly reduce the number of games and allow free weeks for the internationals. They could also bring back domestic FA Cup style competitions for each country. I certainly miss the old style knock-out competition (Pilkington Cup) that preceded the Anglo-Welsh Cup.

Thanks, but no way. We will keep our top 14.
But you could probably create a British league with the english teams.
Thanks, but no way.

the AP is a great league. Many of our top clubs pre-date international rugby! and many of the rivalries between clubs are equally longstanding.

i like international rugby. i like club rugby. and i like them separate. i don't want club rugby to be just inter-national.

So the answer is clear the english and the french don't want the other nation in their championship.

by geoff998rugby Mon 26 Jan 2015, 11:32 am

Money talks if the English clubs determine that a B & I league is to their commercial advantage they will push for it

by shuren34 Mon 26 Jan 2015, 11:37 am

Rugby Fan wrote:To those who are already convinced that the new tournament is inferiority because it favours rich teams, the question remains: how would the outcome have been different under the Heineken format? Was there a handicapping system built in to help poorer teams before? If so, how does that square with the long-held contention the old Cup was a level playing field for all?

I think Moore has it about right:

He thinks automatic qualification did give Pro12 sides an edge to use if they were able, but rugby won't benefit from a European Cup if it becomes all about the English and French - or just the French, for that matter.

We can't tell from this year alone whether that is the way we are going. It it is an inevitable consequence, though, then we will have to consider how to keep a wider competitive base. That probably means a discussion about salary caps or even some kind of squad limits for the tournament.

Last year he didn't care about the celtic nations and know he doesn't want them to become useless.
I don't know why I didn't trust a word of what is saying. Rolling Eyes

I suppose his solution would be an european salary cap base on the money the english club could spend in order to save Munster and Leinster. Of course if the english were in the french position they would restrain to buy all of the good players ( and see it in football). Whistle

Sorry for him but if the english club can't spend like our clubs, they will follow the other nations. It must be sad for the european rugby and even the world rugby, but that's the actual trend.

by Jenifer McLadyboy Mon 26 Jan 2015, 11:40 am

shuren34 wrote:
Pot Hale wrote:
shuren34 wrote:
sportform wrote:How about they do away with top flight domestic rugby in Europe and have a pan-European competition similar to the NFL. 32 teams divided into eight divisions of four regionally. They could play 20 games per season, home and away within their division (six games), and then half of the other 28 teams in alternate years. Top 12 (possibly 16) going into a knock-out round for the championship.

It would certainly reduce the number of games and allow free weeks for the internationals. They could also bring back domestic FA Cup style competitions for each country. I certainly miss the old style knock-out competition (Pilkington Cup) that preceded the Anglo-Welsh Cup.

Thanks, but no way. We will keep our top 14.
But you could probably create a British league with the english teams.

There already is a British league with english teams - it's called the Premiership. Didn't think Top 14 fans were that blinkered that they don't know what's happening in rugby outside of France....

a British league with english, welsh, scottish and irish teams in it.

Ah here. Don't open that can of worms. That would have to be called a British and Irish league.

There is an Island called Britain and an Island called Ireland. There is a "United kingdom" of Britain and 2/3ds of the northern province of Ireland (Ulster)

From a Rugby perspective there is a United Ireland and always has been. From a political perspective we all live and let live as to who wants to be seen as what these days.

by lostinwales Mon 26 Jan 2015, 11:46 am

geoff998rugby wrote:Money talks if the English clubs determine that a B & I league is to their commercial advantage they will push for it

If you can design a competition where there was a similar number of games (cant kill the international game) and half the English teams didnt have to drop into a second division then yes I am sure the English clubs would be more interested. Maybe a conference system - I don't know. But the AP is going just fine and the top English teams are not going to buy into big changes.

Who knows, things may change, and there were probably times in the past where such a thing might have been more possible but a B&I league is not currently in the AP team's best interests.

by shuren34 Mon 26 Jan 2015, 12:04 pm

Jenifer McLadyboy wrote:
Ah here. Don't open that can of worms. That would have to be called a British and Irish league.

There is an Island called Britain and an Island called Ireland. There is a "United kingdom" of Britain and 2/3ds of the northern province of Ireland (Ulster)

From a Rugby perspective there is a United Ireland and always has been. From a political perspective we all live and let live as to who wants to be seen as what these days.

I'm sure I will make a lot of irish friends:boxing: But as a french who didn't care about about politically correct, in France when there is a group of island we tend call the archipelago with the name of the biggest island. Here it's Britain, so for us Ireland is geographically in the british isles.
So the people living in Ireland are irish but also british and european.

But now you can call this league like you want. Very Happy

by No 7&1/2 Mon 26 Jan 2015, 12:06 pm

British comes from Great Britain and not the British Isles. It would be like calling a Frenchman Belgian.

by geoff998rugby Mon 26 Jan 2015, 12:19 pm

shuren34 wrote:
Jenifer McLadyboy wrote:
Ah here. Don't open that can of worms. That would have to be called a British and Irish league.

There is an Island called Britain and an Island called Ireland. There is a "United kingdom" of Britain and 2/3ds of the northern province of Ireland (Ulster)

From a Rugby perspective there is a United Ireland and always has been. From a political perspective we all live and let live as to who wants to be seen as what these days.

I'm sure I will make a lot of irish friends:boxing: But as a french who didn't care about about politically correct, in France when there is a group of island we tend call the archipelago with the name of the biggest island. Here it's Britain, so for us Ireland is geographically in the british isles.
So the people living in Ireland are irish but also british and european.

But now you can call this league like you want.

Its not about being politically correct its about showing ignorance
I think we should call you a German from now on - just as valid

by brennomac Mon 26 Jan 2015, 12:34 pm

shuren34 wrote:
Rugby Fan wrote:To those who are already convinced that the new tournament is inferiority because it favours rich teams, the question remains: how would the outcome have been different under the Heineken format? Was there a handicapping system built in to help poorer teams before? If so, how does that square with the long-held contention the old Cup was a level playing field for all?

I think Moore has it about right:

He thinks automatic qualification did give Pro12 sides an edge to use if they were able, but rugby won't benefit from a European Cup if it becomes all about the English and French - or just the French, for that matter.

We can't tell from this year alone whether that is the way we are going. It it is an inevitable consequence, though, then we will have to consider how to keep a wider competitive base. That probably means a discussion about salary caps or even some kind of squad limits for the tournament.

Last year he didn't care about the celtic nations and know he doesn't want them to become useless.
I don't know why I didn't trust a word of what is saying.
I suppose his solution would be an european salary cap base on the money the english club could spend in order to save Munster and Leinster. Of course if the english were in the french position they would restrain to buy all of the good players ( and see it in football).
Sorry for him but if the english club can't spend like our clubs, they will follow the other nations. It must be sad for the european rugby and even the world rugby, but that's the actual trend.

Money of course talks loudest and given the union-based structure of Irish rugby, Irish provinces will never have the sort of money the comic book guy ploughs into Toulon, Michelins plough into Clermont and Lorenzetti ploughs into RM. But given Leinster's population base and (let's be honest about it) its support from the AB socio-economic group of south Dublin, Leinster can realistically aspire to get outside financial backing to at least keep players at home and potentially attract the occasional big name overseas signing. Already Ireland's richest man Denis O'Brien has dipped into his wallet to part-fund Sexton's financial package next year while a moneybags stockbroker has it seems provided most of the funding for Leinster's new state-of-the-art training complex in Clonskeagh.

Unfortunately the other Irish provinces probably can't aspire to any serious outside funding llke that provided by O'Brien for Leinster - unless rich Munstermen like JP McManus or Denis Brosnan give up on the horses or GAA, or the Cork merchant princes give up on the yachts and decided to put money into rugby instead.

by shuren34 Mon 26 Jan 2015, 12:39 pm

geoff998rugby wrote:

Its not about being politically correct its about showing ignorance
I think we should call you a German from now on - just as valid

I explained why in France we call British isles: Britain and Ireland.
Maybe in the english countries you didn't do it but here we doing it.
The proof: ://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%8Eles_Britanniques.

But I will not fight with you for that.
Call your eventual league like you want.

by No 7&1/2 Mon 26 Jan 2015, 12:43 pm

I kinda doubt that the French education system is this poor.

by geoff998rugby Mon 26 Jan 2015, 1:44 pm

Agreed

To assume that the term British Isles justifies calling the Irish British does show an alarming lack of education from a close geographical neighbour

Shuren34 - next time you go to a home game against an Irish side - ask the supporters what it is like to be a Brit.
I am sure they will point out the error of your ways. Very Happy

Come to think of it there are some perople I met in Biarritz a couple of years back who would give you a stiff tawlking to if you called them French Very Happy

by quinsforever Mon 26 Jan 2015, 1:53 pm

give the guy a break. the ireland/northern ireland/geography/nationality/rugby-united issue is pretty confusing. and would clearly not be mentioned in schools in France.

do we spend any time on france's relationship with La Corse or Nouvelle Caledonie?

its great to have another french poster here. especially as he tells it like he sees it.

Hug

by geoff998rugby Mon 26 Jan 2015, 3:04 pm

Maybe its me but I would like to thing I actually do understand, to a reasonable degree, the subtle differences with respect to Corsica, Basque country, Britanny, Wallons, Flemish, Catalonia, Sicily etc etc

We are all Europeans now and it is a simple matter of common courtesy to address other people correctly as they would wish to be addressed

by **Notch** Mon 26 Jan 2015, 3:15 pm

quinsforever wrote:its great to have another french poster here. especially as he ~~tells it like he sees it~~ seems to agree with me.

by **rodders** Mon 26 Jan 2015, 3:22 pm

Jenifer McLadyboy wrote:
There is an Island called Britain and an Island called Ireland. There is a "United kingdom" of Britain and 2/3ds of the northern province of Ireland (Ulster)

Here now - lets stick to facts. It's 6/9ths not 2/3rds.

by **Notch** Mon 26 Jan 2015, 3:35 pm

Have we seen this?

http://www.the42.ie/champions-cup-challenge-qualification-winners-qualify-1903336-Jan2015/?utm_source=shortlink

If a Pro12 side wins the Challenge Cup, they will get the Pro12 spot in the qualifying playoffs for the Champions Cup (if they haven't already qualified already) So say Cardiff/Dragons/Edinburgh/Connacht finish 7th or lower but win the Challenge Cup- they can still qualify for the Champions Cup... if they win two games against the best non-qualified English and French sides

by Welshmushroom Mon 26 Jan 2015, 3:50 pm

The way I see it the new format is a clear advantage to English and French sides. Every Pool (5 down from the previous 6) contains 50% english teams or french in it. The pools where for example english or french have 2 teams in it give them a greater chance of success to qualify. It would be like having 2 Irish sides in one pool. The odds of qualification improve. Thats just maths. In truth the English have increased the odds of qualification by increasing the number of runner up qualifiers from last year (3 up from 2).

Anyone looking at the pools in ernest will know that given the final pool standings, the french are clearly the dominant force. They topped 3 pools, Irish one, English one. The fact 3 english sides qualified through runner up spots highlights my point. I also dont see any of those second seed teams having any joy against the pool winners with home advantage.

In truth the way money is going we may as well hand the European title to the french to duke out amongst themselves. Even the english are kidding themselves if they think they will realistically challenge for it.

In my opinion all the Irish/Welsh/Scottish/Italians had to do when forming this new tournament would have been to restrict the amount of non home grown nationals in the European Cup. It would at least have put a stop to the french fielding multi national sides in the tournament and buying success. Sadly as always our management didnt really have the foresight for that one.

by shuren34 Mon 26 Jan 2015, 4:12 pm

geoff998rugby wrote:Agreed

To assume that the term British Isles justifies calling the Irish British does show an alarming lack of education from a close geographical neighbour

Shuren34 - next time you go to a home game against an Irish side - ask the supporters what it is like to be a Brit.
I am sure they will point out the error of your ways.

Come to think of it there are some perople I met in Biarritz a couple of years back who would give you a stiff tawlking to if you called them French

I will ask them in Belfast. Whistle

by Jenifer McLadyboy Mon 26 Jan 2015, 4:21 pm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yarrY9Q0_XU

by shuren34 Mon 26 Jan 2015, 4:21 pm

geoff998rugby wrote:Maybe its me but I would like to thing I actually do understand, to a reasonable degree, the subtle differences with respect to Corsica, Basque country, Britanny, Wallons, Flemish, Catalonia, Sicily etc etc

We are all Europeans now and it is a simple matter of common courtesy to address other people correctly as they would wish to be addressed

Difference between Corsica, Basque country, Britanny, Wallons, Flemish, Catalonia?
Quite simple in Corsica the native language is an italian dialect.
The Basque are different, this isn't an indo-european language as french, english or german, etc...
Wallon are the french belgium and flemish the dutch ones.
In Catalonia they speak a latin language different from spanish and french.
And people in Brittany originally came from Wales and Cornwall. They left the British isles when the English invaded it.
That's why their language is a celtic one very similar to the welsh.

by Sponsored content