Pro12 value - the facts

Weegie Wizard wrote:This is much less of a problem if the final is in Ireland. Thomond, the RDS or Ravenhill could all host comfortably. MF and MS are the only rugby venues which meet the criteria in Scotland & Wales. The important thing should be to rotate the nation in which the final is held.

In your hypothetical, I reckon you could get somewehre around 35k at MF which I agree would not look too good. Ibrox or Hampden maybe?

Weegie Wizard wrote:The way I see it, it is important to focus on priorities.

Priority 1 - improve refereeing. TJ & TMO should not be of the home union. In a multi-national league this is ridiculous and should be stopped immediately. Focused effort from Pro12 to increase the number of officials from Scotland, Italy and Wales to make this easier.

Priority 2 - Get rid of the nationality aspect of Euro qualification. Treviso do not deserve to be in the Heineken. Either we are merit based or we aren't.

Priority 3 - Increase TV/Media revenue. Much of this will follow on from the first 2 points and I understand it is easier said than done but, whilst competition with France & England is not realistic we should continue the progress we have made this season. This includes the RRW stopping moaning and the IRFU playing internationals more often. The SRU are, of course, blameless.

Priority 4 - If we are going to decide the final destination at the start of the season, do it at the start of the season so folk can plan their trips. Offer free ticket cancellations so that Leinster fans can book their tickets without worrying if they will be there. Rotate the finals between national stadiums. This may prove and issue with Italy - I don't have a solution for this at the moment.

Munchkin wrote:

Weegie Wizard wrote:This is much less of a problem if the final is in Ireland. Thomond, the RDS or Ravenhill could all host comfortably. MF and MS are the only rugby venues which meet the criteria in Scotland & Wales. The important thing should be to rotate the nation in which the final is held.

In your hypothetical, I reckon you could get somewehre around 35k at MF which I agree would not look too good. Ibrox or Hampden maybe?

I can't remember the ground, but I do know Glasgow where looking to host at other venues recently. Yep, hosting at Aviva would be fine if there's an Irish team involved. Other than that you would be trusting that the Irish support fills the stadium as neutrals. It's just that hosting a final in a half empty stadium doesn't make for a good event, and would prove damaging to Pro12.
I think eventually it would be great to rotate the final between the nations. I think it's too early for Pro12 though. We need to grow a bit first.

Weegie Wizard wrote:N/A to Toonie - he's a demi god round these parts

SecretFly wrote:

Weegie Wizard wrote:N/A to Toonie - he's a demi god round these parts

That's my point.

Good coaches don't moan or let 'limitations' get to them.  They just coach and get more out of what they have than the sides that sit around waiting for blank cheques to be thrown their way first.

Better coaching is going to become my go-to issue whenever this Pro12 topic raises its head in the future.  Too many teams are being let off the hook, blaming this and blaming that.  Blame the coaches.  That's my new chant.  Blame the coaches for Pro12's perceived tardiness.

Griff wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

Weegie Wizard wrote:N/A to Toonie - he's a demi god round these parts

That's my point.

Good coaches don't moan or let 'limitations' get to them.  They just coach and get more out of what they have than the sides that sit around waiting for blank cheques to be thrown their way first.

Better coaching is going to become my go-to issue whenever this Pro12 topic raises its head in the future.  Too many teams are being let off the hook, blaming this and blaming that.  Blame the coaches.  That's my new chant.  Blame the coaches for Pro12's perceived tardiness.

I'll remember that next time Leinster sign someone big rather than just coach the current players 'better'!

SecretFly wrote:Some good points there, shuren.  Of course our main complication is that we're more than one 'Union' to begin with, so each of the four Unions have their own reasons for the League in the first place.... which is a markedly different set up to the Top14 and AP.

But still a lot of good points.... except maybe Number 5:  

Yes, the English will either begin to demand a more stringent Salary cap for Top14 (in Euro contests anyway) or they'll simply end or loosen the limits on their own imposed salary cap.  Whatever happens, they're not going to sit by as Top14 hoovers up all best SH players into the future.  They'll make a move sooner or later.

But they (PRL) already had an opportunity to bring the topic of Salary caps into the equation when discussing the New European competition last year.  They chose not to for their own ends - first weaken Pro12, then try to weaken or rise to the levels of Top14 themselves.  Joining them now in a battle against the French?  That was available to the PRL before.... I don't think we should all so easily 'follow' them now on any new crusade to curtail the French cap.  Let them try that on their own....

Plus - I don't like the idea of compensation.  Despite compensation, you still lose the players you don't want to let go in the first place.  And with our sizes and player pools (Wales, Ireland, France) that's often a luxury you can't afford.  

It can mean that you make money but still lose out in competitiveness both in the League and in Europe.  It also forces you to join 'the market' of buying up outside players and filling your ranks with proven players (though always below the levels of the Top14 and AP) rather than training up your own academy guys.  

Not good for long term growth as a side.  Your value to sponsors also goes down as a result and pretty soon all you're relying on IS that compensation money you might get for one or two of your most promising players being taken from you each year.
Pro12 sides will want to compete with AP and Top14 sides not simply become providers of players to these sides.

shuren34 wrote:
And as I don't think our clubs will agree this subject, how will you stop us to take your players?
If we had to pay you 500 000 euros for an international player, a lot of our club would give up and chose a player from the SH instead. It would help your teams in wage negociations with players. No more false contract offers from us. And if one our clubs still take one of your men, you will at least have 500 000 euros to replace him. Because in our actual situation the risk of losing them is more important for you, and you have nothing in exchange.

SecretFly wrote:

Griff wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

Weegie Wizard wrote:N/A to Toonie - he's a demi god round these parts

That's my point.

Good coaches don't moan or let 'limitations' get to them.  They just coach and get more out of what they have than the sides that sit around waiting for blank cheques to be thrown their way first.

Better coaching is going to become my go-to issue whenever this Pro12 topic raises its head in the future.  Too many teams are being let off the hook, blaming this and blaming that.  Blame the coaches.  That's my new chant.  Blame the coaches for Pro12's perceived tardiness.

I'll remember that next time Leinster sign someone big rather than just coach the current players 'better'!

I think Leinster fans, Munster fans, Glasgow fans...and of course Connacht fans ..................... are the only bunch who ever mention their coaches.  Moan about them when they lose, applaud them to the rafters when they win.  I'd be hard pressed to know most other coaches.  Seldom get a mention in these parts.  The Refs do! ... but not the coaches.  

So, in the game of 'Blame the Coach' (rather than the ref) I think you'll find Provinces win there too

Oh by the way.... MOC wasn't big, Griff.  He was an assistant coach that wasn't wanted by many Leicester fans as he was leaving.  They were saying "You're welcome to him" to my very face.  And you'll hear most Leinster fans now moan about him, semi-final or not.  
Schmidt wasn't the superstar he is now either, Leinster took a gamble.... and boy did he ever 'just coach players to be better' and not moan.   And Cheika.... he was well famous before Leinster picked him?

We sign Big Coaches?  They might gain reputations some of them, but they didn't come with gold-plating to begin with.

Griff wrote:

And I didn't mention signing big name coaches. I was talking about players. Next time you (or anyone) signs an SH player I'll be expecting the "coach what you've got instead" call! Brad Thorn anyone...?

SecretFly wrote:

shuren34 wrote:
And as I don't think our clubs will agree this subject, how will you stop us to take your players?
If we had to pay you 500 000 euros for an international player, a lot of our club would give up and chose a player from the SH instead. It would help your teams in wage negociations with players. No more false contract offers from us. And if one our clubs still take one of your men, you will at least have 500 000 euros to replace him. Because in our actual situation the risk of losing them is more important for you, and you have nothing in exchange.

I'm not sure I understand this bit, shuren.  Not only will best Pro12 players be sucked up by the one League that seems to use unlimited wealth to buy Best players.  In time, in a short enough time, England itself will feel that pressure of losing best players IF they don't address their capping issues.  It's already being spoken about within AP.  

English rugby will not play second fiddle in the money market for long.  They just won't.  It's not in their nature.  They see France running ahead and taking up all choice SH players for themselves, as well as trying to entice some of England's best to Top14 post-WC.  English rugby will have a long talk with itself and the cap will be substantially eased to address those concerns.  They won't accept one semi-finalist per year in Europe; not for the investments they're putting in and sponsorship they're getting.  That investment program is not designed to be second best.

And the compensation thing again.... 500,000 to replace a player will not be like with like as if it were like with like, the French club buying one of our players for a fee and Compensation would simply buy the player we'd be expecting to replace our player with!  They give us compensation when hiring Player A so that we can buy Player B.... but if Player B was considered good enough, the Top14 team would just go straight to Player B.

Money is no solution to competitiveness.  Being competitive in League and in Europe comes from retaining best players, not by being compensated for their loss.  And if you start stalling in League or Europe, you begin to lose sponsors.  The downward spiral begins and it is hard to regain lost ground.
Compensation is a poor alternative to finding methods to retain best players.

shuren34 wrote:

So what is your method to retain your players? Because if like you say the english will spend money like us (doubt it because they have less money), you will have a bigger exodus. So what's your plan. If we had to pay you 500 000 euros, it would be more difficult for us to take them. So the exodus would be smaller and you would have money to help you to retain the other ones. Without that in your future you will have nothing.

SecretFly wrote:

shuren34 wrote:

So what is your method to retain your players? Because if like you say the english will spend money like us (doubt it because they have less money), you will have a bigger exodus. So what's your plan. If we had to pay you 500 000 euros, it would be more difficult for us to take them. So the exodus would be smaller and you would have money to help you to retain the other ones. Without that in your future you will have nothing.

You won't find me disagreeing with the idea that the New Rugby Way in Europe has left Nations on the fringes very vulnerable to attack.  It has been my very longwinded argument all last year when the New European Competition was being debated.  The New Europe is not designed to be sympathetic to the fringes.  

But my point is that the idea of compensation is really no consolation.  It's a Catch 22 drive downhill.  Yes, it will be an increasing pressure and we'll see how the fringe Nations cope and adapt.  But the idea that compensation will be a nice little consolation prize for giving up competitiveness is something I hope my Union and Nation will work on resisting.

BTW...when we get paid the 500,000 compensation................ what do we pay in compensation to the next team along the line that we'll want to buy our replacement from?  I'm sure if some Nations begin to get compensation, others will see the opportunities to up the REAL price of players in the open market even more.

It's a runaway train and it's leaving the station.

Pot Hale wrote:Congrats to Pro12Edinburgh for the giving the Pro12 another boost, and being the first Scottish team to reach a European final.

All we need now is for Pro12Glasgow to win the league and Pro12Leinster to win the first NEW European Cup to round out the season nicely.

Cardiff Dave wrote:Gloucester, Clermont or Toulon for me.

Cardiff Dave wrote:Gloucester, Clermont or Toulon for me.

Pot Hale wrote:

Cardiff Dave wrote:Gloucester, Clermont or Toulon for me.

So you must be a Welsh fan, then?

Cyril wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:

Cardiff Dave wrote:Gloucester, Clermont or Toulon for me.

So you must be a Welsh fan, then?

He's right so far though, isn't he?

Cyril wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:

Cardiff Dave wrote:Gloucester, Clermont or Toulon for me.

So you must be a Welsh fan, then?

He's right so far though, isn't he?

SecretFly wrote:

Cyril wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:

Cardiff Dave wrote:Gloucester, Clermont or Toulon for me.

So you must be a Welsh fan, then?

He's right so far though, isn't he?

Well two of those 'predictions' came after the games played, Cyril.  So that might be a Prediction cheat in other words

But I joke of course because Dave was obviously referring to the Final winners in his opinion ... or desire.  One of them has yet to be proven and of course he's sitting squarely on the fence with the other two.

Irish Londoner wrote:was that just a matter of the appropriate words at the time ?

George Carlin wrote:Nearly 1,000 posts on this. Good job, Chunky.

Irish Londoner wrote:... or was that just a matter of the appropriate words at the time ?

LordDowlais wrote:I noticed that Leinster rolled out the red carpet for the CC against Toulon at the weekend, I cannot believe they prioritise the scraps from the table that the French and English have thrown us over our league, they then have a go at us for wanting to jump into bed with them.

Pot Hale wrote:Have ye no shame at all?

Irish Londoner wrote:As an aside to all the to-ing and fro-ing re the PRO12 and the Avivia, I'm pretty sure that I remember one the supposed key drivers of the new European order was that it would increase the opportunities and expand the horizons of the "third tier" countries in Europe - Spain, Russia, Germany, Holland, Romania, etc. ?
If the future of top level rugby is all about increasing wealth and increasing spend where is that going to leave the developing nations or was that just a matter of the appropriate words at the time ?

shuren34 wrote:

Irish Londoner wrote:As an aside to all the to-ing and fro-ing re the PRO12 and the Avivia, I'm pretty sure that I remember one the supposed key drivers of the new European order was that it would increase the opportunities and expand the horizons of the "third tier" countries in Europe - Spain, Russia, Germany, Holland, Romania, etc. ?
If the future of top level rugby is all about increasing wealth and increasing spend where is that going to leave the developing nations or was that just a matter of the appropriate words at the time ?

Why do you expect the EPCR doing in one year what the ERC couldn't do in 19 years? I don't remember the Irish Union pushing for teams in east Europe for the "good of the game" all these years. You aren't better than the English or French clubs. Everyone was doing what it was the best for his finances.

shuren34 wrote:

Irish Londoner wrote:As an aside to all the to-ing and fro-ing re the PRO12 and the Avivia, I'm pretty sure that I remember one the supposed key drivers of the new European order was that it would increase the opportunities and expand the horizons of the "third tier" countries in Europe - Spain, Russia, Germany, Holland, Romania, etc. ?
If the future of top level rugby is all about increasing wealth and increasing spend where is that going to leave the developing nations or was that just a matter of the appropriate words at the time ?

Why do you expect the EPCR doing in one year what the ERC couldn't do in 19 years? I don't remember the Irish Union pushing for teams in east Europe for the "good of the game" all these years. You aren't better than the English or French clubs. Everyone was doing what it was the best for his finances.

Griff wrote:Sin, it's applaudable that you've played Georgia but isn't that just part of the 10 year schedule the IRB announced a few years back to make the tier 1 nations/developed nations play the developing nations? The top 8 were just playing each other all the time so then IRB announced the schedule. Ireland therefore don't get much of a say in it, it was just they were up first for Georgia, and other nations will have their turn against them, Japan (wales did their stint their last year), etc. in the comings years.

I think that's it anyway.

Griff wrote:Sin, it's applaudable that you've played Georgia but isn't that just part of the 10 year schedule the IRB announced a few years back to make the tier 1 nations/developed nations play the developing nations? The top 8 were just playing each other all the time so then IRB announced the schedule. Ireland therefore don't get much of a say in it, it was just they were up first for Georgia, and other nations will have their turn against them, Japan (wales did their stint their last year), etc. in the comings years.

I think that's it anyway.

SecretFly wrote:

Griff wrote:Sin, it's applaudable that you've played Georgia but isn't that just part of the 10 year schedule the IRB announced a few years back to make the tier 1 nations/developed nations play the developing nations? The top 8 were just playing each other all the time so then IRB announced the schedule. Ireland therefore don't get much of a say in it, it was just they were up first for Georgia, and other nations will have their turn against them, Japan (wales did their stint their last year), etc. in the comings years.

I think that's it anyway.

The thing about Ireland in recent years is that they've often played on the double in a sense these last number of years.  Indeed, when the last Lions tour was taking place, which took away our best players, we still had a tour of the USA and Canada (Wales had one to Japan?)  but we also sent an Emerging Ireland side to play a mini tournament in Georgia I think, with a number of Tier 2 Nations and a Development South African team.  We've been playing in those mini tournaments now for a couple of years.

Does Wales or England do that?  I don't actually know, so I'm asking legitimately.

Sin é wrote:

shuren34 wrote:

Irish Londoner wrote:As an aside to all the to-ing and fro-ing re the PRO12 and the Avivia, I'm pretty sure that I remember one the supposed key drivers of the new European order was that it would increase the opportunities and expand the horizons of the "third tier" countries in Europe - Spain, Russia, Germany, Holland, Romania, etc. ?
If the future of top level rugby is all about increasing wealth and increasing spend where is that going to leave the developing nations or was that just a matter of the appropriate words at the time ?

Why do you expect the EPCR doing in one year what the ERC couldn't do in 19 years? I don't remember the Irish Union pushing for teams in east Europe for the "good of the game" all these years. You aren't better than the English or French clubs. Everyone was doing what it was the best for his finances.

Perhaps the Irish knew it wasn't workable anyway.

As for what the Irish are doing with the Eastern Europeans - at least we've been giving them international games (Georgia was one of Ireland autumn international games) and sending Ireland A to Eastern European touraments in June.

Ireland also tour the US & Canada regularly.

Irish Londoner wrote:What i was trying to point out was that if as seems likely the new era of rugby is increasingly about the rich getting richer and/or spending more (more TV money, increased salary caps, etc.), how will this square up against trying to support the smaller nations - are we going to end up with the situation like football, where the Champions League is taken seriously but an increasing number of clubs are not playing full strength sides in the secondary competition, and the smaller nations are going to be permanently frozen out, the couple of lower tier sides that make it to the secondary competition are always going to be on the end of cricket scores, so where does the development aspect come from?
Incidentally UEFA have jsut revised their criteria to give a Champions League place to the Europa League winners to make the competition more meaningful - maybe rugby could do the same?

shuren34 wrote:

Sin é wrote:

shuren34 wrote:

Irish Londoner wrote:As an aside to all the to-ing and fro-ing re the PRO12 and the Avivia, I'm pretty sure that I remember one the supposed key drivers of the new European order was that it would increase the opportunities and expand the horizons of the "third tier" countries in Europe - Spain, Russia, Germany, Holland, Romania, etc. ?
If the future of top level rugby is all about increasing wealth and increasing spend where is that going to leave the developing nations or was that just a matter of the appropriate words at the time ?

Why do you expect the EPCR doing in one year what the ERC couldn't do in 19 years? I don't remember the Irish Union pushing for teams in east Europe for the "good of the game" all these years. You aren't better than the English or French clubs. Everyone was doing what it was the best for his finances.

Perhaps the Irish knew it wasn't workable anyway.

As for what the Irish are doing with the Eastern Europeans - at least we've been giving them international games (Georgia was one of Ireland autumn international games) and sending Ireland A to Eastern European touraments in June.

Ireland also tour the US & Canada regularly.

Well we played Fidji, Samoa or Tonga in the last years. And we employed a quite lot of Georgian players in our championsips.
But what I was saying is: you couldn't criticize the new cup to not doing in one year something which has never been done (or even wanted) before by ERC in the last 19 years.