Champions Cup goes from strength to stength.

First topic message reminder :

Great to see this competition throwing up some great games in only its 2nd season.

Just goes to show what the HC could have been.

Great stuff and long may it continue.

A fair call Risky, but I go back to would it be any different there under the old cup?

No 7&1/2 wrote:A fair call Risky, but I go back to would it be any different there under the old cup?

Yes there would be more mediocre Pro12 clubs and less mediocre English and French clubs.

Wasps finished outside the top 4 and smashed Toulon.

We don't need more of the Pro 12 teams.

Welcome to the aqe of Giant Smashers.... the milk is in the fridge and we left an apple tart that isn't finished in the press beside the door leading to the hall.

LondonTiger wrote:
In the end we have two broadcasters because all the participants wanted the huge amount offered by BT, while the Pro12 countries could not afford to be sued by Sky.

That is just nonsense.

1. BT Sport bribed the SRU for their vote (by sponsoring pretty much everything that moves in Scottish rugby) - that is what swung it. Absolutely no benefit to any other PRO12 country from the new deal (though Welsh Regions also received sponsorship for their teams).

2. The RFU & FFR had also agreed to the Sky deal as Board members of the ERC. In fact, the greatest champion of the Heineken Cup was a Frenchman and chairman of the ERC.

3. Sky Sports would not have sued the Unions - after all they have lots of other lucractive fish to fry such as Lions Tour, Six Nations broadcasting outside UK & Ireland etc. etc.

No 7&1/2 wrote:A fair call Risky, but I go back to would it be any different there under the old cup?

To be contrary, I wouldn't go back to the old cup version, because there were obvious inequities within it.

So no point in attempting to go back to that.

The question about whether the new version is/will be successful has to be treated separately. And what criteria are used to measure its success.

Sin é BT also sponser Ulster & the Welsh regions

Don't think BT are that interested in sponsoring Irish sides because they would have to change their name to B&IT.

Sin é wrote:
1. BT Sport bribed the SRU for their vote

I'm really surprised that forum administrators allow this kind of posting to continue. It's massively libelous.

The Great Aukster wrote:Don't think BT are that interested in sponsoring Irish sides because they would have to change their name to B&IT.

Have something against The letters B and T? BT owns British Telecommunications but they're bigger than that. They operate in 170 countries.

Chunky Norwich wrote:

Sin é wrote:
1. BT Sport bribed the SRU for their vote

I'm really surprised that forum administrators allow this kind of posting to continue. It's massively libelous.

Nice to see Sin being very careful not to slag off any of the pro12 members, as it will reduce the leagues marketability.

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

Chunky Norwich wrote:

Sin é wrote:
1. BT Sport bribed the SRU for their vote

I'm really surprised that forum administrators allow this kind of posting to continue. It's massively libelous.

Nice to see Sin being very careful not to slag off any of the pro12 members, as it will reduce the leagues marketability.

... oh that's in the gutter already, Scarlet. The Campaign for B&I is already seeing to that. The members of that club don't need Sin joining them.

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

Chunky Norwich wrote:

Sin é wrote:
1. BT Sport bribed the SRU for their vote

I'm really surprised that forum administrators allow this kind of posting to continue. It's massively libelous.

Nice to see Sin being very careful not to slag off any of the pro12 members, as it will reduce the leagues marketability.

The irony that you've captured two posters with your one quote is not lost on me. Very well done.

Sin é wrote:

1. BT Sport bribed the SRU for their vote (by sponsoring pretty much everything that moves in Scottish rugby) - that is what swung it. Absolutely no benefit to any other PRO12 country from the new deal (though Welsh Regions also received sponsorship for their teams).

Can you tell me why Ulster have BT logos on their shirts?

broadlandboy wrote:Sin é BT also sponser Ulster & the Welsh regions

Not to the same extent as Scottish Rugby. I don't think Irish/Ulster Rugby would sell their vote to BT for a shoulder logo placement (which they have had for a number of years now anyway).

Chunky Norwich wrote:

Sin é wrote:
1. BT Sport bribed the SRU for their vote

I'm really surprised that forum administrators allow this kind of posting to continue. It's massively libelous.

The Mods have been immunised now from your constant 'libelous' comments about Irish Rugby/IRFU etc.

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

Chunky Norwich wrote:

Sin é wrote:
1. BT Sport bribed the SRU for their vote

I'm really surprised that forum administrators allow this kind of posting to continue. It's massively libelous.

Nice to see Sin being very careful not to slag off any of the pro12 members, as it will reduce the leagues marketability.

I'm not slagging off the league. I'm making sure the record is straight on what actually happened.

The Great Aukster wrote:Don't think BT are that interested in sponsoring Irish sides because they would have to change their name to B&IT.

They offered to buy the IRFU vote by sponsoring all the Irish sides. The IRFU turned them down.

Ah, so anyone who has got any sponsorship has been bought.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Ah, so anyone who has got any sponsorship has been bought.

BT Sport declined to tender for the broadcasting rights to the PRO12. About a year later they are sponsoring most the teams & stadiums.
They tried to sponsor Irish teams (even though BT has very little business in ROI).

All this sponsorship offers came about when the Spivs were destroying the Heineken Cup and the SRU changed their vote to go with the Spivs.

No because the sponsorship on the Ulster shirts is worth peanuts and has no impact on decision making at Ulster or the IRFU.

Unpalatable as it may seem it is quite clear the SRU were brought by BT to come onside

Sin é wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Ah, so anyone who has got any sponsorship has been bought.

BT Sport declined to tender for the broadcasting rights to the PRO12. About a year later they are sponsoring most the teams & stadiums.
They tried to sponsor Irish teams (even though BT has very little business in ROI).

All this sponsorship offers came about when the Spivs were destroying the Heineken Cup  and the SRU changed their vote to go with the Spivs.

I would like to think that your fellow countrymen, munchkin, marty, secretfly et al, are going to come on here and call you a tin hatted conspiracy theorist now. After all you cannot come up with these unfounded accusations without any evidence. When we mention things like this about the Pro12, that is the abuse we get, so I would like to see some consistency at least.

geoff999rugby wrote:No because the sponsorship on the Ulster shirts is worth peanuts and has no impact on decision making at Ulster or the IRFU.

Unpalatable as it may seem it is quite clear the SRU were brought by BT to come onside

How very tin hatted.

Who are the Irish owned by now?

geoff999rugby wrote:

Unpalatable as it may seem it is quite clear the SRU were brought by BT to come onside

Makes you wonder what else they would be "on side" with, should BT Sport and their friends conjure up something else.

LordDowlais wrote:

geoff999rugby wrote:No because the sponsorship on the Ulster shirts is worth peanuts and has no impact on decision making at Ulster or the IRFU.

Unpalatable as it may seem it is quite clear the SRU were brought by BT to come onside

How very tin hatted.

In what way ?????????????????

No 7&1/2 wrote:Who are the Irish owned by now?

There not.

They are a Union run organisation.
For sure have an eye for a commercial arrangement but no outside body dictates policy

LordDowlais wrote:

Sin é wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Ah, so anyone who has got any sponsorship has been bought.

BT Sport declined to tender for the broadcasting rights to the PRO12. About a year later they are sponsoring most the teams & stadiums.
They tried to sponsor Irish teams (even though BT has very little business in ROI).

All this sponsorship offers came about when the Spivs were destroying the Heineken Cup  and the SRU changed their vote to go with the Spivs.

I would like to think that your fellow countrymen, munchkin, marty, secretfly et al, are going to come on here and call you a tin hatted conspiracy theorist now. After all you cannot come up with these unfounded accusations without any evidence. When we mention things like this about the Pro12, that is the abuse we get, so I would like to see some consistency at least.

There is plenty of evidence that BT bought the SRU's vote.

geoff999rugby wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Who are the Irish owned by now?

There not.

They are a Union run organisation.
For sure have an eye for a commercial arrangement but no outside body dictates policy

Well they obviously are if they have sponsors; do they not have sponsors?

Sin é wrote:

There is plenty of evidence that BT bought the SRU's vote.

I can't wait to see this one. Please show us this evidence that shows the SRU were bribed. Thanks.

Someobody pass the popcorn.

In April 2014 the European dispute was resolved.

In the following month BT and the SRU announced a  £20 naming rights deal for Murrayfield.
The following year a £3.6 million shirt sponsorship deal was announced

Between January 2014 and April 2014 the SRU did a complete U-turn on their position with respect to the outcome of the European situation

Draw your own conclusion.

geoff999rugby wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

geoff999rugby wrote:No because the sponsorship on the Ulster shirts is worth peanuts and has no impact on decision making at Ulster or the IRFU.

Unpalatable as it may seem it is quite clear the SRU were brought by BT to come onside

How very tin hatted.

In what way ?????????????????

Well you are conjuring up something that is not true. If it is then show us the proof.

Look, I do not mean to have a go, but the abuse people on here have been given from our Irish members when we suggest the same things in the Pro12 is unbelievable. There are so much double standards here, I just want the same people to come out and rubbish these claims as well.

geoff999rugby wrote:In April 2014 the European dispute was resolved.

In the following month BT and the SRU announced a  £20 naming rights deal for Murrayfield.
The following year a £3.6 million shirt sponsorship deal was announced

Between January 2014 and April 2014 the SRU did a complete U-turn on their position with respect to the outcome of the European situation

Draw your own conclusion.

And this is evidence?

I've been hounded on these boards for coming up with stuff like that.

"Show me the meeting minutes" is the usual response.

Sin é wrote:There is plenty of evidence that BT bought the SRU's vote.

There always enough evidence to manipulate your ends, plenty of evidence was shown by chunky and phill on the Pro12 debate, but they were still dismissed with a tap of a keyboard.

I am waiting for your fellow countrymen to do the same with this beauty.

So anyone sponsored is accepting bribes. Interesting geoff. Who bribe the Irish then?

Why do you think the SRU did a U-turn ?

To suggest the £20 million had nothing to do with in not believable

What is in the minutes is the SRU supporting the IRFU and WRU position in January and not in April

geoff999rugby wrote:Why do you think the SRU did a U-turn ?

Because they have sense.

Who do the irish teams get sponsored/bribed by?

No 7&1/2 wrote:Who do the irish teams get sponsored/bribed by?

They have sponsors those sponsors do not dictate policy - it is really very simple

Yes they do it's obvious. Who are they taking bribes from?

So, the Irish are brilliant and everyone else is wrong/crooked?

geoff, you really need to change the record and/or get some perspective.

Chunky Norwich wrote:

geoff999rugby wrote:Why do you think the SRU did a U-turn ?

Because they have sense.

Which came to them in a flash of inspiration there just happened to be £20 million inside

No 7&1/2 wrote:Yes they do it's obvious. Who are they taking bribes from?

Guinness is as Irish as anything. The Harp is even on Leinsters crest. So there you go, keep the sponsors happy, and keep the Irish teams at the top of the league.

See how easy it is to work out evidence to meet your ends.

Cyril wrote:So, the Irish are brilliant and everyone else is wrong/crooked?

geoff, you really need to change the record and/or get some perspective.

Straw man I am saying nothing of the sort.

The IRFU make mistakes as do other Unions.
I am also not claiming Unions change policy because of sponsorship.

However in this one incident the whole scenario stinks to high heaven and the sequencing of events is just too cute.
The SRU were in financial difs, along comes a fairy godmother and hey presto they change their opinion to match the wishes of said fairy godmother

Cyril wrote:So, the Irish are brilliant and everyone else is wrong/crooked?

That's about the size of it, yes.

More meaningless contributions from Chunky and Lord Dowlais

Cyril wrote:So, the Irish are brilliant and everyone else is wrong/crooked?

geoff, you really need to change the record and/or get some perspective.

Welcome to what we have to put up with when debating the issues in the Pro12. They are a marvelous bunch those boys from the emerald isles. Just to let you know Cyril, NOTHING IS EVER THE FAULT OF THE IRISH.

Unfortunately geoff in this case they have a point.

LordDowlais wrote:

Cyril wrote:So, the Irish are brilliant and everyone else is wrong/crooked?

geoff, you really need to change the record and/or get some perspective.

Welcome to what we have to put up with when debating the issues in the Pro12. They are a marvelous bunch those boys from the emerald isles. Just to let you know Cyril, NOTHING IS EVER THE FAULT OF THE IRISH.

Yes, that's the impression I get from most of these threads. The Irish will lead us into the promised land where unicorns will frolic over sunbeams. If only us mortal nations had a fraction of their integrity.