RWC 2015 - The start of the decline of international rugby?

Sorry for the sensationalist headline, but I had to draw everyone in somehow...

OK so it's pretty well known that firstly the stadium issues, then the disagreement with Man U, Ticketmaster ballsing up, and the struggle to convince Joe Soap to only go to nothing games are all teething problems. These issues have nothing to do with the RFU of course, these are the usual issues that will pop up for every major tournament.

Then there are the Australian media boycotts, the lack of regulation on touts (of which may be a huge issue still, 1000's of £ tickets available already), the debenture holder swindel, and finally the public ticket allocation. But again, these profit maximising techniques are not uncommon at every major sporting event.

The big issue I want to discuss is the club games effect on this RWC specifically.

Firstly there are 3 big name first tier players retiring from international rugby pre tournament and on the verge of French club moves...

Strettle - Shocked Englands coach Lancaster when he decided the RWC wasn't a priority

Ven Der Merw - Despite SA's lock crisis the French bound international decided 'personal reasons' were to blame.

Ben Mowen - The super rugby captain has prioritised French club rugby over Australian international

Now there are many more, Ortega Uruguays only Pro player has elected to stay in Castres despite viewing RWC qualification as the highlight of his career, and looking forward to the tournament originally, only to U turn and pull out.

The reports are that there will be up to 20+ PAcific Island players made themselves unavailable, and estimates are 4/5 first team player per nation.

Imagine selecting 4/5 first team players from any tier 1 nation to leave out due to club comitments, NZ would go from favourites to also rans, SA would become semi final potentialists, and most 6N teams would struggle to get out of their group!

Why is this not a huge issue for World Rugby, the RWC is such a huge money maker if the trend continues, which was an issue for me in NZ in 2011 then in 2019 there will probably only be 2/3 nations truly competitive and the rest scrambling together a squad from who's available!

Now there isn't any criticism directed at anyone in particular, well except for World Rugby and the T14 at this point, I am yet to see the same attitude in the Aviva, Pro 12 or Super rugby, but surely I can't be the only one who is worried about this?!

I know that the odd player isn't going to effect the RWC, but the trend of 20/30 players of which is proving on this RWC alone does, and thats without talking about the Ref clash, fixture schedule, and travel / logistics issues smaller nations get hammered with!

Rant over, sorry it was a long night

I hate the Top14, I hate Toulon and I hate how money is really driving how rugby is evolving. Professionalism brought a lot of benefits to the game but now we are really beginning to experience the down side of professionalism.

I blame the French

Problem is that as in all things moving forward there are three options. You grow, you shrink or you stay the same, and staying the same is a tough option and way too close to shrinking.

Yup good points - its another step down the road to soccerville after the dismantling of the ERC.

Enjoy it whilst it last because the writing is on the wall for the international game and the Unions.

rodders wrote:dismantling of the ERC.

While maybe not in the same league as FIFA and ICU, that was a pretty corrupt organisation that deserved to die. Unless of course you believe that treating the delegates to all expenses trips to Vegas with hookers thrown in is beneficial to the game.

Mind to be fair, most sporting oprganisations are terribly run and usually driven by self interest. So is suspect the new organisation will be nor better - though assuming the replacement of one corrupt organisation by another probably corrupt one spells the death knell for the game is rather alarmist.

Tiger the EPCR is completely corrupt already. They have an English man as chairman and a French man as chief exec. The Heineken cup was due to have its first final in Rome which is absolutely fair but yet this new organisation move it to Twickenham instead and the latest one will be held in Lyon. Lyon???????????? You need to have rocks for brains if you dont think this is an outrage.

There are three voting members one from France one from England and one from either Wales, Italy or Ireland. The new organisation and tournament is completely rigged to favour English and French teams. Its an absolute disgrace that this was allowed to happen. I think the Pro 12 teams should withdraw from it.

There was almost perfect equilibrum in Euro rugby with the Heineken cup but greed and money has distroyed that.

#oneleagueonevote

As much as we don't like it it is still a personal choice. The players are doing what they think is best for them, which if we are honest most of us would.

The old arrangements were just as driven by greed, only difference is different people were benefiting.

I'll not defend the current set-up - but I sure as hell will try and denounce people who defend the old one when they were on the side that gained all the benefit.

Cyril wrote:#oneleagueonevote

#EveryUnionDeservesASay #InternationalOverClub #SportOverGreed

And yes, we have to remember that this is people's job. this is how they provide for their family.

It is easy for keyboard warriors to talk about the honour of playing for the country and how they would do it for free - if only they had some talent of course.


If we take someone like Ben Mowen - when on the ARUs books and playing super Rugby he stated he spent more than half the year on the road. (I think he said something like 200 nights away from home in the 12 months prior to leaving). He has a young family, the move to France means that he is a little more secure financially but more importantly gets home every night pretty much. Personally I think he has got his head screwed on right and made the sensible choice for a man who wants a family life.

GunsGerms wrote:

Cyril wrote:#oneleagueonevote

#EveryUnionDeservesASay #InternationalOverClub #SportOverGreed

# + =

How is it favoured to French and English when you state yourself there's an equal vote between the 3 leagues? To ever move on some people need to acknowledge there isn't the ability at present to field an Irish league, a Welsh league etc.

Don't think the international game will ever die off it's still massive in the club centric football world.

LondonTiger wrote:And yes, we have to remember that this is people's job. this is how they provide for their family.

It is easy for keyboard warriors to talk about the honour of playing for the country and how they would do it for free - if only they had some talent of course.


If we take someone like Ben Mowen - when on the ARUs books and playing super Rugby he stated he spent more than half the year on the road. (I think he said something like 200 nights away from home in the 12 months prior to leaving). He has a young family, the move to France means that he is a little more secure financially but more importantly gets home every night pretty much. Personally I think he has got his head screwed on right and made the sensible choice for a man who wants a family life.

I dont blame the players I blame the governance structures. World Rugby need to address sustainability issues and they arent doing that. I simply do not trust the EPRC. It is absolutely disgraceful that we have a European rugby board that is effectively run by the clubs and not the unions.

Basically the English have suceeded in replicating their own misfiring governance structures in Europe whereby International and Club rugby interests are completely misaligned. Its a receipe for disaster.

http://www.therugbypaper.co.uk/features/columnists/brendan-gallagher/22566/brendan-gallagher-speak-to-firebrand-eliota-fuimaono-sapolu-about-preaching-the-message-of-alofa/

think this is relevant to the topic

broadlandboy wrote:As much as we don't like it it is still a personal choice. The players are doing what they think is best for them, which if we are honest most of us would.

Is it a personal choice for all, or is it something that is forced on some? I seem to remember press reports of players being told their contracts will not be renewed if they play for their national side.

Which is still a choice.

LondonTiger wrote:The old arrangements were just as driven by greed, only difference is different people were benefiting.

I'll not defend the current set-up - but I sure as hell will try and denounce people who defend the old one when they were on the side that gained all the benefit.

Gained all the benefit? Nonsense. You can have your views on how the money was split, but to claim that some sides 'gained all the benefit' simply isn't true.
I defend the ERC that was. Denounce me all you want, but I honestly believe it was a fair competition for all. Although there is less of a split (% wise) for the PRO12 nations in this new competition I'm not yet ready to judge it as an organisation. There are things that I completely disagree with, but my hope is that things can change for the good as the competition evolves. I don't have much hope, but hope nonetheless.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Which is still a choice.

No it isn't. It wouldn't be a personal choice if it was forced on them.....

Oh I see but I'm not sure anyone then has a personal choice when it comes to employment.

Plus you'll never be happy with the new Euro comp as long as you see it as Pro 12 nations and not the Pro 12 league. The balance simply can't and shouldn't be swayed to one of the 3 leagues.

GunsGerms wrote:Tiger the EPCR is completely corrupt already. They have an English man as chairman and a French man as chief exec. The Heineken cup was due to have its first final in Rome which is absolutely fair but yet this new organisation move it to Twickenham instead and the latest one will be held in Lyon. Lyon???????????? You need to have rocks for brains if you dont think this is an outrage.

There are three voting members one from France one from England and one from either Wales, Italy or Ireland. The new organisation and tournament is completely rigged to favour English and French teams. Its an absolute disgrace that this was allowed to happen. I think the Pro 12 teams should withdraw from it.

Me too. Kick the franglo puppet Welsh regions out of the pro12 too and replace them with Greek, Russian and Catalonian franchises.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Oh I see but I'm not sure anyone then has a personal choice when it comes to employment.

I'm not interested in playing with semantics. You understand well enough my point about personal choice.

If you think club owners threatening to not renew contracts, should those players play for their national side, is ok, then fine. It isn't a view I share, and I would be appalled if my own club behaved in that manner. I think it's completely immoral. You don't. Such is life.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Plus you'll never be happy with the new Euro comp as long as you see it as Pro 12 nations and not the Pro 12 league. The balance simply can't and shouldn't be swayed to one of the 3 leagues.

Do you have comprehension problems? Read what I said and come to me. If you have difficulty with it then get another to help you.

Munchkin wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Oh I see but I'm not sure anyone then has a personal choice when it comes to employment.

I'm not interested in playing with semantics. You understand well enough my point about personal choice.

If you think club owners threatening to not renew contracts, should those players play for their national side, is ok, then fine. It isn't a view I share, and I would be appalled if my own club behaved in that manner. I think it's completely immoral. You don't. Such is life.

No, I agree with broad. We'd all like to see clubs accept good players will play for their international sides if chosen during designated windows but if something like this is threatened it's the players choice to accept it or not.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Oh I see but I'm not sure anyone then has a personal choice when it comes to employment.

I'm not interested in playing with semantics. You understand well enough my point about personal choice.

If you think club owners threatening to not renew contracts, should those players play for their national side, is ok, then fine. It isn't a view I share, and I would be appalled if my own club behaved in that manner. I think it's completely immoral. You don't. Such is life.

No, I agree with broad. We'd all like to see clubs accept good players will play for their international sides if chosen during designated windows but if something like this is threatened it's the players choice to accept it or not.

I notice you avoid personal choice, and if you think it's personal choice then you live in a bubble.

Munchkin wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Plus you'll never be happy with the new Euro comp as long as you see it as Pro 12 nations and not the Pro 12 league. The balance simply can't and shouldn't be swayed to one of the 3 leagues.

Do you have comprehension problems? Read what I said and come to me. If you have difficulty with it then get another to help you.

Don't be that person. I think it's a relevant point that you won't be happy until the balance relates to the number of countries in your league rather than balanced between 3 leagues. If I've read that wrong sorry, what did you mean?

Munchkin wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Oh I see but I'm not sure anyone then has a personal choice when it comes to employment.

I'm not interested in playing with semantics. You understand well enough my point about personal choice.

If you think club owners threatening to not renew contracts, should those players play for their national side, is ok, then fine. It isn't a view I share, and I would be appalled if my own club behaved in that manner. I think it's completely immoral. You don't. Such is life.

No, I agree with broad. We'd all like to see clubs accept good players will play for their international sides if chosen during designated windows but if something like this is threatened it's the players choice to accept it or not.

I notice you avoid personal choice, and if you think it's personal choice then you live in a bubble.

Yes, but as I said with employment it's never truely a personal choice, we all sign on with the terms and conditions. You can call it semantics but there we go, that's life.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Plus you'll never be happy with the new Euro comp as long as you see it as Pro 12 nations and not the Pro 12 league. The balance simply can't and shouldn't be swayed to one of the 3 leagues.

Do you have comprehension problems? Read what I said and come to me. If you have difficulty with it then get another to help you.

Don't be that person. I think it's a relevant point that you won't be happy until the balance relates to the number of countries in your league rather than balanced between 3 leagues. If I've read that wrong sorry, what did you mean?

Comprehending what I mean isn't that difficult. I have clearly stated that I although there are things about the new competition that I don't like, I will hold off judging the new competition. My hope is that those things I don't like will be changed as the competition evolves.

You quite clearly don't know if I will ever be happy about certain aspects in this new competition. I can't answer that, so you obviously can't.

'Family first' sounds good. But 'village first' is by far the most impressive.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Oh I see but I'm not sure anyone then has a personal choice when it comes to employment.

I'm not interested in playing with semantics. You understand well enough my point about personal choice.

If you think club owners threatening to not renew contracts, should those players play for their national side, is ok, then fine. It isn't a view I share, and I would be appalled if my own club behaved in that manner. I think it's completely immoral. You don't. Such is life.

No, I agree with broad. We'd all like to see clubs accept good players will play for their international sides if chosen during designated windows but if something like this is threatened it's the players choice to accept it or not.

I notice you avoid personal choice, and if you think it's personal choice then you live in a bubble.

Yes, but as I said with employment it's never truely a personal choice, we all sign on with the terms and conditions. You can call it semantics but there we  go, that's life.

You don't think players playing for top clubs is a personal choice?...

Ok, we should maybe leave it there

rodders wrote:Kick the franglo puppet Welsh regions out of the pro12

Hang on a minute, why are you dragging the Welsh through all this. I have been saying for ages we should stick two finger up to the scraps from the table that the English and French throw us.

It is the Irish that roll out the red carpet for this competition. Keeping all your best players wrapped up in cotton wool and playing them in the CC whilst fielding weakened teams in your bread and butter which is the Pro12.

I have been saying for ages we should all prioritise OUR league and make it better, but no you lot would rather roll out the red carpet for the scraps that the franglos are throwing us.

Sorry if I've misunderstood your misgivings from the new comp from reading your 1st comment it sounded as if you didn't like the switch to focus on leagues rather than nations.

As for personal choice what is it you're getting at? A player has a choice to sign with a club in a joint agreement with that club. They'll each have a number of demands. Neitehr will get what they want without the agreement of the other party. So you're saying that's a persoanl choice? But if one of the demands of the club is retire from international rugby it's no longer a personal choice? Ignoring the 'personal' from it it comes down to a simple decision on whether the players likes the terms or not. If he doesn't don't sign the new contract.

LondonTiger wrote:The old arrangements were just as driven by greed, only difference is different people were benefiting.

Different people were not benefitting. In the old system, the competition was run for the benefit of Rugby, the sport. In this new organisation, we are benefiting egotistical billionaires who want to throw money at players.

Take Leigh Halfpenny - how much money has Welsh Rugby invested in him so that he can earn 600K a season? Fairplay to Leigh for having the talent and working hard to become the player he has, but without Welsh rugby he would not be the player he is.

Meanwhile, Toulon's billionaire invests all the money he is earns into creaming off the top talent and has invested none of this money back into the grassroots of the game which is what the PRO12 Unions were doing.

LordDowlais wrote:

rodders wrote:Kick the franglo puppet Welsh regions out of the pro12

Hang on a minute, why are you dragging the Welsh through all this. I have been saying for ages we should stick two finger up to the scraps from the table that the English and French throw us.

It is the Irish that roll out the red carpet for this competition. Keeping all your best players wrapped up in cotton wool and playing them in the CC whilst fielding weakened teams in your bread and butter which is the Pro12.

I have been saying for ages we should all prioritise OUR league and make it better, but no you lot would rather roll out the red carpet for the scraps that the franglos are throwing us.

I'm pretty sure he wasn't being serious,he suggested replacing them with Greek franchises.

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

rodders wrote:Kick the franglo puppet Welsh regions out of the pro12

Hang on a minute, why are you dragging the Welsh through all this. I have been saying for ages we should stick two finger up to the scraps from the table that the English and French throw us.

It is the Irish that roll out the red carpet for this competition. Keeping all your best players wrapped up in cotton wool and playing them in the CC whilst fielding weakened teams in your bread and butter which is the Pro12.

I have been saying for ages we should all prioritise OUR league and make it better, but no you lot would rather roll out the red carpet for the scraps that the franglos are throwing us.

I'm pretty sure he wasn't being serious,he suggested replacing them with Greek franchises.

Indeed

sorry.

But why mention us as franglo puppet Welsh regions in the first place ?

No 7&1/2 wrote:Sorry if I've misunderstood your misgivings from the new comp from reading your 1st comment it sounded as if you didn't like the switch to focus on leagues rather than nations.

As for personal choice what is it you're getting at? A player has a choice to sign with a club in a joint agreement with that club. They'll each have a number of demands. Neitehr will get what they want without the agreement of the other party.  So you're saying that's a persoanl choice? But if one of the demands of the club is retire from international rugby it's no longer a personal choice? Ignoring the 'personal' from it it comes down to a simple decision on whether the players likes the terms or not. If he doesn't don't sign the new contract.

I didn't like the switch, but not liking it had less to do with nations, and more to do with what I personally felt was best/worst for European rugby.

Players want to play for top clubs, to win things, to earn more money, for personal loyalties. If they had a choice they would pick the club that appeals most to them. That would be their personal choice. These same players may want to represent their country at the very top by playing in their national side. If they have a choice, that again is their personal choice. The club they have joined may threaten to not renew their contract should they decide to play for their national side. They may feel torn between the two, but they might fear for their future should they lose their place at the club and so agree not to play for their national side. So pressure applied by that club has denied them of their personal choice. Ultimately it is still their choice. Just not their personal choice.

Well it looks as if this article is going down exactly as the author intended. Anyone else bored of people repeating old ground yet?

I think it's a discussion worth having. We could probably do without going over some old ground, admittedly. Not so easy to do when it's really the actions of certain T14 clubs being discussed though.

Munchkin wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Sorry if I've misunderstood your misgivings from the new comp from reading your 1st comment it sounded as if you didn't like the switch to focus on leagues rather than nations.

As for personal choice what is it you're getting at? A player has a choice to sign with a club in a joint agreement with that club. They'll each have a number of demands. Neitehr will get what they want without the agreement of the other party.  So you're saying that's a persoanl choice? But if one of the demands of the club is retire from international rugby it's no longer a personal choice? Ignoring the 'personal' from it it comes down to a simple decision on whether the players likes the terms or not. If he doesn't don't sign the new contract.

I didn't like the switch, but not liking it had less to do with nations, and more to do with what I personally felt was best/worst for European rugby.

Players want to play for top clubs, to win things, to earn more money, for personal loyalties. If they had a choice they would pick the club that appeals most to them. That would be their personal choice. These same players may want to represent their country at the very top by playing in their national side. If they have a choice, that again is their personal choice. The club they have joined may threaten to not renew their contract should they decide to play for their national side. They may feel torn between the two, but they might fear for their future should they lose their place at the club and so agree not to play for their national side. So pressure applied by that club has denied them of their personal choice. Ultimately it is still their choice. Just not their personal choice.

OK, I fail to see the difference between choice and personal choice. Players aren't being forced to sign any contract. They're just picking the best for them and/or their families.

The're not being forced to sign any contract. You're right (although they are not signing on their own terms). They may be being forced into not representing their nation, in the interest of their own financial best interests and that of their families. Surely you can see the difference in choices?

It's a Hobsons choice...

Fanster wrote:Then there are the Australian media boycotts

Not sure the Aussie media would ever be missed (competing strongly for the worst media in sport with their NZ equivalents!).

The Saint wrote:Well it looks as if this article is going down exactly as the author intended. Anyone else bored of people repeating old ground yet?

hear hear

with regards of capo-ortega :
- castres never tried to keep him when urugay were playing against the likes of russia while castres was in relegation territory
- Capo-ortega said his wife is pregnant and he didnt want to miss the birth

castres has a good record when it comes to release players: allowing a few to play for barbarians or 7s when they have no obligation to do so.

Munchkin wrote:The're not being forced to sign any contract. You're right (although they are not signing on their own terms). They may be being forced into not representing their nation, in the interest of their own financial best interests and that of their families. Surely you can see the difference in choices?

It's a Hobsons choice...

Yes it's a rubbish choice.

When the PRL/LNR made their power grab it was forecast that the clubs would start to dictate to Unions about when a player would be released. It is hardly surprising that those chickens are coming home to roost.

It could be argued that the PI players in France have already made their name and so don't have to appear on the RWC cat walk. By not being available they are simply giving opportunities to the next batch, but are also cementing the notion where their loyalty truly lies - to their club.

The Strettle move must really worry England fans though as he won't be on chickenfeed at Saracens, so to be tempted away and exclude himself from the RWC shows the scale of the problem. This is just the thin end of the wedge and the soccer experience should provide enough of a template for everyone to be scared.

Clubs will increasingly report that 'coincidentally' their International players are carrying knocks during the AIs and won't be available, probably the same for the summer tours. All of which devalues the 'friendly' tests and will increasingly impact the tournaments like the 6N and RWC.

It is easy to see what will happen in the International arena by again looking at how the top football clubs populate their teams with players who will both be available and won't be getting injured playing for some National side. The opportunities for home talent will be reduced, so reducing the home talent pool and in England's case they will forever look misty eyed on 1966 when the National team mattered more than the clubs from which it drew its players.

The decline of Test rugby started when the Unions allowed themselves to be sidelined, but now that train has started there's no stopping it. Still the RWC will be a good showcase for young players to attract a club deal. As for the fans - if they want to see their side succeed, perhaps they'll have to choose one from the Top14?

The Great Aukster wrote:When the PRL/LNR made their power grab it was forecast that the clubs would start to dictate to Unions about when a player would be released. It is hardly surprising that those chickens are coming home to roost.

It could be argued that the PI players in France have already made their name and so don't have to appear on the RWC cat walk. By not being available they are simply giving opportunities to the next batch, but are also cementing the notion where their loyalty truly lies - to their club.

The Strettle move must really worry England fans though as he won't be on chickenfeed at Saracens, so to be tempted away and exclude himself from the RWC shows the scale of the problem. This is just the thin end of the wedge and the soccer experience should provide enough of a template for everyone to be scared.

Clubs will increasingly report that 'coincidentally' their International players are carrying knocks during the AIs and won't be available, probably the same for the summer tours. All of which devalues the 'friendly' tests and will increasingly impact the tournaments like the 6N and RWC.

It is easy to see what will happen in the International arena by again looking at how the top football clubs populate their teams with players who will both be available and won't be getting injured playing for some National side. The opportunities for home talent will be reduced, so reducing the home talent pool and in England's case they will forever look misty eyed on 1966 when the National team mattered more than the clubs from which it drew its players.

The decline of Test rugby started when the Unions allowed themselves to be sidelined, but now that train has started there's no stopping it. Still the RWC will be a good showcase for young players to attract a club deal. As for the fans - if they want to see their side succeed, perhaps they'll have to choose one from the Top14?

I can't think of a time when a player was made 'unavailable' for a World or Euro Cup.

Also football have international window breaks in their club game to allow players to play international.

Isa Nacewa made himself unavailable for a world cup (for Fiji).