Has anyone changed their opinion of the new European competition since it started?

Getting away from the point scoring exercises on the other thread, have the games or the way the quarter finalists panned out actually made anyone change their opinion of the competition from before it kicked off?

It hasn't been a good year for the Pro12 but I don't think that is connected with the competition itself, more the natural cycles of sporting ups and downs.

No, for me it has been a disappointment, as I knew what would happen from the start, the variety has been taken away from the game. Too many French V French games, too many English V English games, for me that is not an European competition, in fact, I have watched this years competition far less than any other over the years, I have just found it boring. Also, do not get me started on the farce that is the lower competition cup, which afterall, is what the changes were supposed to improve the most.

Haven't seen much of a difference. No changes to the Euro comp will stop the French teams broadening the gap. That has to come from the leagues.

LordDowlais wrote:No, for me it has been a disappointment, as I knew what would happen from the start, the variety has been taken away from the game. Too many French V French games, too many English V English games, for me that is not an European competition, in fact, I have watched this years competition far less than any other over the years, I have just found it boring. Also, do not get me started on the farce that is the lower competition cup, which afterall, is what the changes were supposed to improve the most.

So no change in your often stated opinion. Thanks for contributing

It's been very disappointing in terms of the new broadcast arrangements-Sky and BT have had competing games in the same timeslots, that has probably meant not being able to see all of the games I would like to watch due to more clashes. Having two broadcasters in the UK/Ireland has probably left fans either footing the bill or frustrated at not getting to see all the games they'd like.

The format of the competition is less relevant than the widening gap between clubs with money and those with significantly less money. For me this is the inevitable outcome of professional sport. Others can't accept it and will try to find ways to level the playing field, even when it's futile.

There have been some great games though!

lostinwales wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:No, for me it has been a disappointment, as I knew what would happen from the start, the variety has been taken away from the game. Too many French V French games, too many English V English games, for me that is not an European competition, in fact, I have watched this years competition far less than any other over the years, I have just found it boring. Also, do not get me started on the farce that is the lower competition cup, which afterall, is what the changes were supposed to improve the most.

So no change in your often stated opinion. Thanks for contributing

What is wrong with what I have said ?

offload wrote:The format of the competition is less relevant than the widening gap between clubs with money and those with significantly less money. For me this is the inevitable outcome of professional sport. Others can't accept it and will try to find ways to level the playing field, even when it's futile.

Rugby in Wales will never compete money wise with rugby in France and England, there is no point in us even trying, the best we can do is to try and keep our best players in Wales, if we can do this, slowly but surely over time we could at least gain parity, but other than on the international stage rugby in England and France will always be superior.

LordDowlais wrote:

lostinwales wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:No, for me it has been a disappointment, as I knew what would happen from the start, the variety has been taken away from the game. Too many French V French games, too many English V English games, for me that is not an European competition, in fact, I have watched this years competition far less than any other over the years, I have just found it boring. Also, do not get me started on the farce that is the lower competition cup, which afterall, is what the changes were supposed to improve the most.

So no change in your often stated opinion. Thanks for contributing

What is wrong with what I have said ?

I think lostinwales was asking to hear from people who had changed their minds about the competition while it has been running. He wants to hear some different voices and viewpoints to the other threads on the subject.

However, the way he has phrased his thread title does leave it open for people to say "no" and reiterate their previous opinions, just as you have done. That's not what he was looking for, though.

Well yes it's worse than I thought.

A French dominated farce that has backfired on the PRL. An all french final at twickenham, with no English involvement beyond the QF would be poetic justice for all the smug anti ERC/pro12 propaganda we've had to endure over the last few years.

Some of the matches have been good though.

Rugby Fan wrote:I think lostinwales was asking to hear from people who had changed their minds about the competition while it has been running. He wants to hear some different voices and viewpoints to the other threads on the subject.

However, the way he has phrased his thread title does leave it open for people to say "no" and reiterate their previous opinions, just as you have done. That's not what he was looking for, though.

Ok fair enough, thanks for the explanation.

Perhaps I should have stopped at no.

yes. it's even better than i had hoped. 4 english teams through for the first time since 1998. and a final round where the number of permutations was still huge and any of 11 teams still had a theoretical chance of progressing. the runners up spots now mean something given that whoever has treviso and zebre in their group isnt guaranteed to generate the runner up qualifier. totally changes the complexion of the group stages.

2nd tier is better too without the dropping down from HC. Could do with a qualifying spot for next season's top tier though.

its too early to tell what the impact on quality of rugby will be. that is going to take several seasons. but the format has produced tighter pools and more tension deeper into the competition. its undeniable.

Another no. The competition is basically the same. The main benefit is that not all the games are on Sky, which means my ears bleed a little less. My stance is still that I would have preferred an Anglo cup. It's been none stop bitching and moaning for the past 3 years so what's the point? Just put it out of it's misery.

rodders wrote:Well yes it's worse than I thought.

A French dominated[b] farce that has backfired on the PRL. An all french final at twickenham, with no English involvement beyond the QF would be poetic justice for all the smug anti ERC/pro12 propaganda we've had to endure over the last few years.

Some of the matches have been good though.

not sure how that is any different from the last couple of years of the HC then?

as a rugby fan i would love to watch toulon play clermont at twickenham. why would i not want to watch the top 2 teams in the world tearing chunks out of each other with an allstar cast, with HQ as the backdrop?

thats why i have tickets.

quinsforever wrote:2nd tier is better too

Are yousure about that ? French sides still putting out 2nd and 3rd string sides, Cardiff Blues putting over 100pts on teams like Rovigo.

I think it is a bigger farce, but that is just my opinion. If you think it is better who am I to tell you any different.

Rugby Fan wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

lostinwales wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:No, for me it has been a disappointment, as I knew what would happen from the start, the variety has been taken away from the game. Too many French V French games, too many English V English games, for me that is not an European competition, in fact, I have watched this years competition far less than any other over the years, I have just found it boring. Also, do not get me started on the farce that is the lower competition cup, which afterall, is what the changes were supposed to improve the most.

So no change in your often stated opinion. Thanks for contributing

What is wrong with what I have said ?

I think lostinwales was asking to hear from people who had changed their minds about the competition while it has been running. He wants to hear some different voices and viewpoints to the other threads on the subject.

However, the way he has phrased his thread title does leave it open for people to say "no" and reiterate their previous opinions, just as you have done. That's not what he was looking for, though.

Yes have to think more carefully about phrasing the question. So far we have some interesting comments - to paraphrase

'Its been disappointing because of the messed up TV coverage'
And
'It has highlighted the difference between the haves and have nots in european rugby'

There is a subtle difference between these statements and

'I knew it was going to be crap and it was crap'

only 1 irish team in the quarters...surely thats an improvement

And apologies about the thread I can see this one is going to slip out of control again.

Nice to see some positive comments about the competition but, for instance, Quins was always going to positive in the same way that we know what LD was going to say.

How many second tier teams have you watched quins. Not many I'd imagine given the lack of TV interest. Non of the French teams have even bothered as there are no ranking points. It's like a poor mans B&I cup.

lostinwales wrote:And apologies about the thread I can see this one is going to slip out of control again.

Nice to see some positive comments about the competition but, for instance, Quins was always going to positive in the same way that we know what LD was going to say.

the reason i'm positive is that it IS better for the neutrals.

there is no change if you are french
its worse if you are pro12 fan, although the long term benefits to the pro12 of having qualification will be important in making it a more compelling product
its better if you are english because we are more likely to grab an extra runner up spot or two (as happened)
and if you are a neutral, the qualification stage has been tighter and more exciting. might change next year. but it delivered more than hoped for this year.

and there have been some great games so far

rodders wrote:How many second tier teams have you watched quins. Not many I'd imagine given the lack of TV interest. Non of the French teams have even bothered as there are no ranking points. It's like a poor mans B&I cup.

Out of curiosity, how many have you seen then?

rodders wrote:How many second tier teams have you watched quins. Not many I'd imagine given the lack of TV interest. Non of the French teams have even bothered as there are no ranking points. It's like a poor mans B&I cup.

true. watched newcastle away vs stade. that was an awesome match. havent seen too many others as tv coverage has been sparse. but let me tell you stade were trying in that one.

how many have you watched rodders?

It would be ideal to have a less Anglo-French feeling to the competition but unfortunately most of the Pro12 sides simply aren't good enough to warrant that situation.

Lorddowlais you say you want variety (it's not variety if the same teams get beaten again and again).

As for a Franglo affair - that's what the challenge cup has mostly been.

Even when you had close to parity the Welsh sides have not performed well in Europe in general.

rodders wrote:How many second tier teams have you watched quins. Not many I'd imagine given the lack of TV interest. Non of the French teams have even bothered as there are no ranking points. It's like a poor mans B&I cup.

How many B&I Cup teams have you watched?

and i'm pretty sure grenoble were more than just showing up when they lost 43-41 to london irish

and when lyon beat embra in round 5 was that because embra couldnae be bothered?

rodders you are just repeating what you hear on the internet and from people who wont watch it because they have already made their minds up! there have been some great games in the Challenge Cup.

To a degree I have. I was very scepticle about the whole thing as I think it is sidelining smaller clubs and nations, in favour of the rich getting richer. On this front I still feel largely the same.

However, if I park that concern I can see improvements from the old system with regards to the competitions themselves.

The smaller number of groups make the race for the best 2nd places more open, which is a good thing as it reduces dead rubbers which was largely strangling the climax of the group stages.
I still think the "best runner up" system is a very poor one. I'd rather if the 5 winners advanced, and only the best runner up alongside them. The remaining 4 runners up to play off and the 2 winners join the last 8. This way if you are in the toughest group and have fought tooth and nail for the 2nd spot, your progress chances would still be alive. Not perfect (where would the play off be fit in?!), but would be another step in the right direction IMO.

I think being able to play in the Challenge Cup from an Edinburgh point of view has helped us no end. We are developing and these wins and QF to look forward to are a million times better for us than a slog in the Champions Cup would have been this year.
Having 6th to aim for in the league is also giving us a purpose in the Pro 12 going into February, now our chances of top 4 seem to have sailed.

The "not trying" issue in the Challenge Cup in particular will always be an issue when clubs are trying to balance priorities, but the organisers have definitely missed a trick. In my view, should have been qualification for the winner, and mabye a play off for the runner up.

Lastly, the 3rd tier competition structure looks promising for next season, another improvement - hope it will continue in the coming years and not be neglected.

Negatives definitely the split TV coverage and more teams from the same country in the same group.

So definitely mixed feelings. Feel optimistic, but also very anxious as to the direction that may be taken. Feel as though it is a promising debut, but with plenty to work on. Could go either way!

From an Ulster fan's point of view it's definately not the format that knocked us out but a cumulative effect of the lack of forsight in sacking our coach when the director of rugby left despite the fact there was nobody to fill the huge gap.......breath......and the fact we were missing too many key players in the initial pool stages. If the competition format hadn't been changed I don't think we'd have fared any better.

I do agree (mostly) with Thornley in his article though.

http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/gerry-thornley-leinster-should-be-thanked-for-breaking-monotony-of-champions-cup-1.2080312

good post jonny

One thing I'll say is that I do not think that the change in format has had any influence on the countries that are most successful.

I think we would be looking at pretty much the same quarter-finals in the old format. Some people have been saying 'Oh, now the English are more successful and the Irish less so'- really I think that is down to the Irish provinces having a poor year in general.

It's actually easier to snaffle a runners-up spot now, that will benefit Pro12 sides in coming years as much as anyone else. But we won't be seeing many runners-up actually competing in the knockout stages. If you get through only having won 4 out of 6 games I don't rate your chances of reaching a Final.

Notch wrote:It's actually easier to snaffle a runners-up spot now, that will benefit Pro12 sides in coming years as much as anyone else. But we won't be seeing many runners-up actually competing in the knockout stages. If you get through only having won 4 out of 6 games I don't rate your chances of reaching a Final.

But it's harder to get the pool winner spot

HammerofThunor wrote:

Notch wrote:It's actually easier to snaffle a runners-up spot now, that will benefit Pro12 sides in coming years as much as anyone else. But we won't be seeing many runners-up actually competing in the knockout stages. If you get through only having won 4 out of 6 games I don't rate your chances of reaching a Final.

But it's harder to get the pool winner spot

Nah, I think the old format generally had four or five pools as hard as this incarnation and then a soft pool most years. So some pools were soft and those are gone but in general the pools are much the same.

I don't see much difference in quality of rugby played. I don't think it has been a bad thing on the pitch, I have concerns about what's going on off the pitch.

quinsforever wrote:and i'm pretty sure grenoble were more than just showing up when they lost 43-41 to london irish

Grenoble coach Bernard Jackman has slammed the European Challenge Cup, describing the competition as "pointless" ahead of his side's match against Rovigo from Italy.

Top 14 coaches see the competition as an opportunity to rest first-choice players and Jackman believes the competition is unsustainable in its current format.

"The Challenge Cup, from my point of view, is a bit of a pointless competition in terms of your first-grade players," said the former Connacht and Leinster front rower. "There is no real benefit for us unless we go and win it. And, even if we do, we wouldn't be guaranteed a place in the Champions Cup for next year.

"The best scenario for us if we want to get in the Champions Cup is to finish in the top six in the Top 14, and that's obviously a huge ask. Certainly, the only way we could possibly look at that is by managing our resources smartly, and giving our first-grade players six weeks off during the Challenge Cup.

"It's great for the second-tier to get an opportunity to play the big sides from the Aviva Premiership and the Top 14, but I just don't see it being sustainable in its current format. I think the organisers have probably got a bit of a shock from how little interest the French teams have had in it.

"And the public as well. The minimum crowd we would get for a Top 14 game is 14,000. For London Irish we got 4,500. The public aren't silly and you can't pull the wool over their eyes: they see it for what it is."

Read more at http://www.espnscrum.com/european-rugby-challenge-cup-2014-15/rugby/story/250167.html#wTyJ8T5IA7zF4QIG.99

rodders wrote:Well yes it's worse than I thought.

A French dominated farce that has backfired on the PRL. An all french final at twickenham, with no English involvement beyond the QF would be poetic justice for all the smug anti ERC/pro12 propaganda we've had to endure over the last few years.

Some of the matches have been good though.

I hope so the tickets will only be a tenner on Groupon !

That's an odd article Sin e that was rehashed from an interview he gave in October.

French clubs are always likely to field weakened teams as they don't have the equivalent of the LV cup to rotate their squads. Nothing new here. London Irish in this instance were playing weakened Grenoble line ups this year and weakened Stade line ups year. Champions Cup qualification would be great, but I'm really not convinced that we would see significantly improved squads being fielded.

I've enjoyed the Challenge Cup this year outside of the sparse TV coverage. Not having drop downs gives lesser clubs a shot of silverware. The groups are also stronger with the introduction of Edinburgh etc. From the main comp.

lostinwales wrote:'I knew it was going to be crap and it was crap'

I did not say that, so please stop making things up.

Notch wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:

Notch wrote:It's actually easier to snaffle a runners-up spot now, that will benefit Pro12 sides in coming years as much as anyone else. But we won't be seeing many runners-up actually competing in the knockout stages. If you get through only having won 4 out of 6 games I don't rate your chances of reaching a Final.

But it's harder to get the pool winner spot

Nah, I think the old format generally had four or five pools as hard as this incarnation and then a soft pool most years. So some pools were soft and those are gone but in general the pools are much the same.

I don't see much difference in quality of rugby played. I don't think it has been a bad thing on the pitch, I have concerns about what's going on off the pitch.

RC W5 D1 L0
Tou W5 L 1
Cler W5 L1
Lein W5 D1 L1

Seems like it is just as easy to win a group

On the Newcastle v Stade game being mentions as the french were in good games. no offence but SF finishing 3rd in that group while being 3rd in the T14 says all you need to know about the teir two compitition

leinster played 7 games? no wonder they went through as winner

oh and what happened in bath's group?

lostinwales wrote:Nice to see some positive comments about the competition but, for instance, Quins was always going to positive in the same way that we know what LD was going to say.

So just because I do not like it I am not allowed an opinion ?

Brendan wrote: no offence but SF finishing 3rd in that group while being 3rd in the T14 says all you need to know about the teir two compitition

Exactly, look I am not saying we have not had one off good games, but if I wanted to watch French V French I would just watch their league, the same with English V English, in the old format I used to watch it all, some weekends I would veg out infront of the tele watching it all day, but when I see some of the games on offer this year, I just could not be bothered, I might have missed a decent match, but the fixture advertised before it was played did nothing to get me excited. The next round will be even worst, with teams from the same country duking it out against each other, it is all getting to predicatable now, we will get another all French final, and most likely have all French semi finals as well.

LordDowlais wrote:

lostinwales wrote:Nice to see some positive comments about the competition but, for instance, Quins was always going to positive in the same way that we know what LD was going to say.

So just because I do not like it I am not allowed an opinion ?

There is some irony with what you said considering some of the comments on a certain thread on rugby attendances.

We are all entitled to an opinion of course, but there are endless threads here on every last thing that is wrong or right about the new competition and I didnt want to start another thread like that. I wanted to start a thread to get opinions from people who thought it was going to be awful and actually found it was OK or visa versa. You could say I wanted some comments from people with at least partially opened minds.

Now the likes of sin e have waded in, filling up the pages with the odd fully quoted article supporting the same old rigid dogma I have to say that I failed.

So you only wanted the opinions of people who prefer it then ?

Sin é wrote:

quinsforever wrote:and i'm pretty sure grenoble were more than just showing up when they lost 43-41 to london irish

Grenoble coach Bernard Jackman has slammed the European Challenge Cup, describing the competition as "pointless" ahead of his side's match against Rovigo from Italy.

Top 14 coaches see the competition as an opportunity to rest first-choice players and Jackman believes the competition is unsustainable in its current format.

"The Challenge Cup, from my point of view, is a bit of a pointless competition in terms of your first-grade players," said the former Connacht and Leinster front rower. "There is no real benefit for us unless we go and win it. And, even if we do, we wouldn't be guaranteed a place in the Champions Cup for next year.

"The best scenario for us if we want to get in the Champions Cup is to finish in the top six in the Top 14, and that's obviously a huge ask. Certainly, the only way we could possibly look at that is by managing our resources smartly, and giving our first-grade players six weeks off during the Challenge Cup.

"It's great for the second-tier to get an opportunity to play the big sides from the Aviva Premiership and the Top 14, but I just don't see it being sustainable in its current format. I think the organisers have probably got a bit of a shock from how little interest the French teams have had in it.

"And the public as well. The minimum crowd we would get for a Top 14 game is 14,000. For London Irish we got 4,500. The public aren't silly and you can't pull the wool over their eyes: they see it for what it is."

Read more at http://www.espnscrum.com/european-rugby-challenge-cup-2014-15/rugby/story/250167.html#wTyJ8T5IA7zF4QIG.99

For London Irish, Grenoble got a crowd of 7,759 and their current average is below 14,000, let alone minimum.

ESPN edited out Jackman's statement in RTE's article published on their website (upon which ESPN based their own article) that "It's a great opportunity..."

There certainly seemed to be a propaganda push against the Challenge Cup in the Autumn, largely fuelled by Jackman's comments.

It's ironic that ESPN conclude with "The public aren't silly and you can't pull the wool over their eyes". Perhaps you can.

LordDowlais wrote:So you only wanted the opinions of people who prefer it then ?

Nope I have never said that. Have a look at what I have said so far, but then its a challenge to get past your preconceptions.

quinsforever wrote:oh and what happened in bath's group?

it was to highlight that of the 5 groups only one was compeditive points wise as the other four were not.
Bath's group was the exception and you could say but for Toulouses self-destruct it should of been 5

Mostly it's been the same as last year.

A lot of teams played rugby against each other. Some were good, others were crap.

With the number of teams cut for the pool stages, and an extra runner up spot available, the pools were definitely tighter, and points gained were reduced.

Eight teams managed to get into the quarter-finals with less minimum pool points than previous seasons.

Still some inequities in the pools with weak teams such as Castres and Treviso giving away free 5 pointers to their pool colleagues. No surprise that two of the runners up came from these pools - same as previous seasons.

The draw for the semi-finals continued unfortunately - this should be decided by ranking at end of pool stages in my view.

The split across two TV channels is unfortunate, but if you're a pub-goer and they have the subscriptions for both, it's not too bad. For all that, I didn't watch as many games this season as I have in previous years.

Oh and while I've often thought Stuart Barnes was bad on Sky, but Dallaglio and O'Driscoll on BT are near to surpassing him after just one season.

In summary, the matches were no different - some good, some bad. TV coverage not as good as expected.
The improvement in teams such as Racing, Glasgow and Wasps was good to see - better variety of competitors.
Contrast that with the abject performances in some of the matches from the Irish provinces was disheartening.
The annoyance of a team such as Castres not bothering their arSse seems to be a feature of the competition, no matter what.

Brendan wrote:

quinsforever wrote:oh and what happened in bath's group?

it was to highlight that of the 5 groups only one was compeditive points wise as the other four were not.
Bath's group was the exception and you could say but for Toulouses self-destruct it should of been 5

and leinsters group? i would say a draw in round 6 and 3 teams separated by 2 points was closer than any other group in HC history, no? or did you conveniently forget that one too, for illustrative purposes?

Pretty much the same as last year other than it was until the last weekend to decide who progressed which can be only a positive thing.

I think the pro12 will see improvements but it's too early to tell.

quinsforever wrote:

Brendan wrote:

quinsforever wrote:oh and what happened in bath's group?

it was to highlight that of the 5 groups only one was compeditive points wise as the other four were not.
Bath's group was the exception and you could say but for Toulouses self-destruct it should of been 5

and leinsters group? i would say a draw in round 6  and 3 teams separated by 2 points was closer than any other group in HC history, no? or did you conveniently forget that one too, for illustrative purposes?

I guess you do not know about the munster miracle match v Glaws were they had to score four tries and win by 30 something points and they did it in the 80 something minute with munster making it through with 1 point difference to spare over glaws.

Points are lower to go through due to there being three 2nd places rather than two.

Because of how the rankings are, only 2 at most of the three french teams quarterfinalist can be first seeds. If Castre finish high in the T14 (though unlikely) they get a higher ranking yet would still provide hardly anything to the compition as every year. Will SF do any better next year if they are struggling in the T14. For all the problem of the old rankings at least they work better then the current way of doing it.

The competition is a lot less exciting that it used to be, but that was expected when the chance of upsets was reduced, and a lot more fixtures are just league replays.
Thought the coverage would upgrade with competition between the broadcasters, but instead it went flat as I don't know anyone who would pay two subs and so missed some great games.
It hasn't been a good year for the Pro12 but that looks like a trend rather than a cycle. The investment the French have put in players is starting to pay off as it takes several years to build teams as Toulon have shown. The other French clubs who didn't have as much money will take more time, but they will get closer to Toulon and further from the Pro12. It may not be connected this year but as the uneven distribution of proceeds favours the Franglos that will widen the gap - when the organisation starts to be run professionally and get the sponsorship it should.