Qualification for Europe

by True Raven Sat Feb 13, 2016 10:15 am

First topic message reminder :

Looking at the pro12 table and seeing how close the teams are for European qualification, isn't it about time where we award the top 7 with qualification regardless of nationality? Right now its an exciting league where every game means something in terms of the playoffs or Europe yet one team will miss out as an Italian team will automatically get an undeserving spot!

They haven't earned the right to be in the the top European tournament nor have they shown they can compete so wouldn't the second tier be more their level.

I understand there's an argument where playing better teams improves players but no one can prove that based on the Italian teams.

by LordDowlais Sun Feb 21, 2016 8:47 pm

mikey_dragon wrote:The qualification ruling should entice the lower teams to challenge the status quo. So far only Connacht have done that.

Cardiff Blues and Dragons should apply to that as we'll ?

by PhilBB Sun Feb 21, 2016 8:52 pm

Pot Hale wrote:
Stone Motif wrote:
Pot Hale wrote:The Guinness League
The PrO'12 League

Do any Welsh actually know the proper name of the league that the Welsh regions play in?

I just refer to it as "that sh1te", as good a nomenclature as any

Are you, Philbb, and chunky Norwich all the same person or just share and express very similar views in similar language?

Nomenclature refers to a system of names or terms, I thought.

Hi Pot. Many in Wales see the PrO'12 as a recipe for the decline in our game.

Thanks.

by PhilBB Sun Feb 21, 2016 8:53 pm

mikey_dragon wrote:The qualification ruling should entice the lower teams to challenge the status quo. So far only Connacht have done that.

Thanks to the IRFU.

by Guest Sun Feb 21, 2016 8:55 pm

Here we go LD. By stating that you're implying that the Blues and Dragons are not trying to finish higher up the table, which is just plain wrong. Of course the Dragons want to challenge the status quo. They'd love nothing better than finishing top 6 and playing in the champions cup. It's a lot harder than just wanting it though.

by PhilBB Sun Feb 21, 2016 9:02 pm

Griff wrote:Here we go LD. By stating that you're implying that the Blues and Dragons are not trying to finish higher up the table, which is just plain wrong. Of course the Dragons want to challenge the status quo. They'd love nothing better than finishing top 6 and playing in the champions cup. It's a lot harder than just wanting it though.

I'm pretty confident that the Cardiff boys did try to beat Leinster.

by mikey_dragon Sun Feb 21, 2016 9:17 pm

geoff999rugby wrote:
mikey_dragon wrote:The qualification ruling should entice the lower teams to challenge the status quo. So far only Connacht have done that.

Cardiff and Dragons are enticed to challenge the status quo - they just cant because they are not good enough.
Only the Italians get a free ride - hence my suggestion

Yep hence why I said only Connacht have done that so far.

by geoff999rugby Mon Feb 22, 2016 9:48 am

PhilBB wrote:
mikey_dragon wrote:The qualification ruling should entice the lower teams to challenge the status quo. So far only Connacht have done that.

Thanks to the IRFU.

Rugby Unions support Professional teams shock Shocked

by geoff999rugby Mon Feb 22, 2016 9:50 am

mikey_dragon wrote:
geoff999rugby wrote:
mikey_dragon wrote:The qualification ruling should entice the lower teams to challenge the status quo. So far only Connacht have done that.

Cardiff and Dragons are enticed to challenge the status quo - they just cant because they are not good enough.
Only the Italians get a free ride - hence my suggestion

Yep hence why I said only Connacht have done that so far.

So why use the word should - it implies they don't.

by LordDowlais Mon Feb 22, 2016 9:50 am

PhilBB wrote:
Griff wrote:Here we go LD. By stating that you're implying that the Blues and Dragons are not trying to finish higher up the table, which is just plain wrong. Of course the Dragons want to challenge the status quo. They'd love nothing better than finishing top 6 and playing in the champions cup. It's a lot harder than just wanting it though.

I'm pretty confident that the Cardiff boys did try to beat Leinster.

Yep, but they just weren't good enough. It must be that participation agreement rearing it's bloody head again. Laugh

by Exiledinborders Mon Feb 22, 2016 10:27 am

Seagultaf wrote:The changes to the Top level European club competition had nothing to with improving the standard, it was about funnelling more of the available money into the already rich French and English clubs. And it has worked spectacularly well with no Pro 12 teams in the knock out stages this season, meaning all the financial rewards go to English and French rugby. We now effectively have a two tier system, with the rich countries getting richer and the poorer countries getting poorer. How long will it be before this starts to be translated into the international game?

How do the financial rewards go the French and English clubs? The money is shared equally between the leagues irrespective of results. The only proviso is that if the income is less than the old HC then the Pro12 teams are guaranteed the previous amount. So it is possible for the Pro12 teams to get more than the English and French but not vice versa.

by PhilBB Mon Feb 22, 2016 10:35 am

geoff999rugby wrote:

Rugby Unions support Professional teams shock

In Wales that would be a shock.

But the point is that Connacht's increase in spending power had nothing to do with Connacht's own efforts which, of course, further makes the league devalued.

by PhilBB Mon Feb 22, 2016 10:36 am

LordDowlais wrote:
Yep, but they just weren't good enough. It must be that participation agreement rearing it's bloody head again.

Be careful, mate, as you don't want to paint the picture of being unaware that income directly affects the performance on the pitch. You'd look stupid if you went down that route, after all.

by Exiledinborders Mon Feb 22, 2016 10:38 am

marty2086 wrote:
True Raven wrote:
marty2086 wrote:
Kingshu wrote:
True Raven wrote:But in your scenario it would be the top 6 that would be in the top European competition as they were the six best teams. Imagine now their league was the top 5 who qualify plus Newcastle (who usually finish near the bottom) because they want to grow the game up north. It doesn't seem right

You could then say the top league in Italy should get at least one place then, would you really rather see the National Championship of Excellence Champions get into RCC or one of Zebra or Treviso?

It goes back to what the RCC is?

Is the RCC supposed to be the best teams of each Union playing the best teams of others Union?

Its easy for Unions to decide on their best teams to enter through domestic league positions in relation to each other.

Or is it supposed to be the best teams in Europe v the best teams in Europe?
Who decides who the best team in Europe are then?
Some Italians may feel Rugby Calvisano are one of the best teams in Europe as Italian champions, should they be allowed in, the FIR feel however finishes higher in the Pro 12 Zebra or Treviso is better.
Some may feel the Italians do not have any teams good enough to enter?
Really it boils done to who decides which teams are best?

Why top 6 from each League? Who's to say 6th in England is better than 7th in France?

Anyone remember the old rankings someone used to do (like the international rankings) where it took all your games in the League and Europe and ranked teams based on this.

Surly if you want the best in Europe v the best you have to use a table like this rather than Leagues v Leagues which we currently have?

What about those performing well in the RCC? Should the quarter/semi finalists receive automatic qualification the following season given that they have outperformed some of the top teams from across Europe?

No one should decide who enters the champions cup, that's the point. The teams that enter it should be the teams that deserve to be there by finishing in a qualifying position in the league.

If the Ospreys fail to automatically qualify, we shouldn't be handed a 'pity spot' to have a token welsh team in becasue we don't deserve to be competing in the cup.

You're failing to grasp my point as no one is deciding Im asking if that was part of the qualification process, the 8 teams in the QFs this year are surely the best 8 teams in Europe? So shouldn't they automatically requalify for next season overriding the league positions? Should Northampton not be in there when they may out if they don't win the ERCC

No. The qualification process from the leagues provides an incentive to do well in the league. Under your system a team that has qualified for Europe based on last year's European form could play their second team in the league to save them for Europe. The perception that the Irish teams saved their best players for Europe was one of the things that the English and French wanted changed.

by PhilBB Mon Feb 22, 2016 10:38 am

Exiledinborders wrote:
Seagultaf wrote:The changes to the Top level European club competition had nothing to with improving the standard, it was about funnelling more of the available money into the already rich French and English clubs. And it has worked spectacularly well with no Pro 12 teams in the knock out stages this season, meaning all the financial rewards go to English and French rugby. We now effectively have a two tier system, with the rich countries getting richer and the poorer countries getting poorer. How long will it be before this starts to be translated into the international game?
How do the financial rewards go the French and English clubs? The money is shared equally between the leagues irrespective of results. The only proviso is that if the income is less than the old HC then the Pro12 teams are guaranteed the previous amount. So it is possible for the Pro12 teams to get more than the English and French but not vice versa.

Quite right. There's a bizarre narrative (completely false) that the English and French clubs get more out of EPRC.

For the record, each Welsh team gets £1.7m whilst each English team gets £1.6m

http://sport360.com/article/business-sport/29212/360business-european-rugbys-finest-must-be-competitive-and-field

by LordDowlais Mon Feb 22, 2016 10:42 am

PhilBB wrote:
LordDowlais wrote:
Yep, but they just weren't good enough. It must be that participation agreement rearing it's bloody head again.

Be careful, mate, as you don't want to paint the picture of being unaware that income directly affects the performance on the pitch. You'd look stupid if you went down that route, after all.

Yeah and Cardiff's demise has nothing to do with the fact that they have had about 6 head coaches in place since Dai Young left, and the countless amounts of other coaches that went/came in when the head coaches left/came in. Cardiff Blues have been run like a bunch of amateurs for the last 5/6 years now, yet you would rather point the finger outwards instead of admitting what has happened right in front of you.

by mikey_dragon Mon Feb 22, 2016 10:56 am

geoff999rugby wrote:
mikey_dragon wrote:
geoff999rugby wrote:
mikey_dragon wrote:The qualification ruling should entice the lower teams to challenge the status quo. So far only Connacht have done that.

Cardiff and Dragons are enticed to challenge the status quo - they just cant because they are not good enough.
Only the Italians get a free ride - hence my suggestion

Yep hence why I said only Connacht have done that so far.

So why use the word should - it implies they don't.

Not sure how you've read that from it. But I guess the lower teams aren't challenging, apart from Connacht who were formerly a lower team.

by PhilBB Mon Feb 22, 2016 11:21 am

LordDowlais wrote:
Yeah and Cardiff's demise has nothing to do with the fact that they have had about 6 head coaches in place since Dai Young left, and the countless amounts of other coaches that went/came in when the head coaches left/came in. Cardiff Blues have been run like a bunch of amateurs for the last 5/6 years now, yet you would rather point the finger outwards instead of admitting what has happened right in front of you.

Well, you must be aware that the selection of each of those coaches was on the basis of the Participation Agreement, right? The need for WRU level 5 coaches brought in Davies and Burnell. Garland's selection was Hammett.

And all of them had to work with woeful squads because there was no money in the game.

Now, I'm sure that you'd like to take into account those external factors to add into the mix of the internal issues, in order to provide a more rounded opinion than you have so far.

Yes?

by geoff999rugby Mon Feb 22, 2016 11:22 am

PhilBB wrote:
geoff999rugby wrote:

Rugby Unions support Professional teams shock

In Wales that would be a shock.

But the point is that Connacht's increase in spending power had nothing to do with Connacht's own efforts which, of course, further makes the league devalued.

Rubbish.

The main reason Connacht have improved is a top coach being employed and some genuine talent coming through their youth policy that has nothing to do with spending power
They have only 1 player, McGinty, who has played for an another International side (USA)
Cardiff by comparison have 7 full non Welsh Internationals in their squad

Guys like Henshaw, Buckley, Marmion, O'Halloran are examples of a team harnessing a genuine and productive youth policy
If Cardiff and Dragons got their act together they could improve as well
If Treviso and Zebre got their act together they could improve as well

The continued failure of those 4 teams says more about a failure of Welsh and Italian rugby to spend the money they have available wisely and by a failure in those teams to do simple things well

by LordDowlais Mon Feb 22, 2016 11:31 am

I've have to say it, although I do not agree with geoff999rugby often, he is spot on with what he is saying here, especially this bit:-

The continued failure of those 4 teams says more about a failure of Welsh and Italian rugby to spend the money they have available wisely and by a failure in those teams to do simple things well

Well said Geoff, well said.

You see there is a trend with certain regional fans on here, to blame everyone and everything else, instead of looking at what the regions can do to improve.

by PhilBB Mon Feb 22, 2016 11:37 am

geoff999rugby wrote:
Rubbish.

The main reason Connacht have improved is a top coach being employed and some genuine talent coming through their youth policy that has nothing to do with spending power
They have only 1 player, McGinty, who has played for an another International side (USA)
Cardiff by comparison have 7 full non Welsh Internationals in their squad

Guys like Henshaw, Buckley, Marmion, O'Halloran are examples of a team harnessing a genuine and productive youth policy
If Cardiff and Dragons got their act together they could improve as well
If Treviso and Zebre got their act together they could improve as well

The continued failure of those 4 teams says more about a failure of Welsh and Italian rugby to spend the money they have available wisely and by a failure in those teams to do simple things well

So there was no linear improvement in their performances once the IRFU threw more cash at them?

Oh, hang on, I know the answer to that one: yes there was.

Which, of course, totally undermines your point. Players like Aki don't come for a love of oysters and gale force winds, you know.

by PhilBB Mon Feb 22, 2016 11:38 am

geoff999rugby wrote:
Cardiff by comparison have 7 full non Welsh Internationals in their squad

Can you see the contradiction? Walk me through how many players Connacht lose during the RWC and 6N? Then understand the settled squad. Then understand who is paying for it.

And it ain't Connacht.

by marty2086 Mon Feb 22, 2016 11:45 am

PhilBB wrote:
geoff999rugby wrote:
Cardiff by comparison have 7 full non Welsh Internationals in their squad

Can you see the contradiction? Walk me through how many players Connacht lose during the RWC and 6N? Then understand the settled squad. Then understand who is paying for it.

And it ain't Connacht.

http://www.rte.ie/sport/rugby/provincial/2015/1205/751471-connacht-injury-crisis-deepens/

One thing is certain, there will be as long a queue outside physio Gavin Malouf's treatment room this week as heading out to the pitch to train, with 23 Connacht players out at the weekend through injury.

http://www.independent.ie/sport/rugby/connacht-rugby/connachts-casualty-list-at-crisis-point-34283907.html

by PhilBB Mon Feb 22, 2016 11:47 am

marty2086 wrote:
http://www.rte.ie/sport/rugby/provincial/2015/1205/751471-connacht-injury-crisis-deepens/

One thing is certain, there will be as long a queue outside physio Gavin Malouf's treatment room this week as heading out to the pitch to train, with 23 Connacht players out at the weekend through injury.

http://www.independent.ie/sport/rugby/connacht-rugby/connachts-casualty-list-at-crisis-point-34283907.html

So now they can put out a winning side despite 23 players missing. And none of this is because of more money, right?

Give over.

by marty2086 Mon Feb 22, 2016 11:51 am

PhilBB wrote:
marty2086 wrote:
http://www.rte.ie/sport/rugby/provincial/2015/1205/751471-connacht-injury-crisis-deepens/

One thing is certain, there will be as long a queue outside physio Gavin Malouf's treatment room this week as heading out to the pitch to train, with 23 Connacht players out at the weekend through injury.

http://www.independent.ie/sport/rugby/connacht-rugby/connachts-casualty-list-at-crisis-point-34283907.html

So now they can put out a winning side despite 23 players missing. And none of this is because of more money, right?

Give over.

Maybe you should check their results for December and January and tell us that they were putting out a winning side

by PhilBB Mon Feb 22, 2016 11:52 am

marty2086 wrote:

Maybe you should check their results for December and January and tell us that they were putting out a winning side

Sorry, I'm getting as confused as a bloke who can't add up 7+17 to get to 24.

My point is that Connacht's improvement has coincided with a chunk of cash being thrown their way by the IRFU. Does anybody else wish to deny that?

by LeinsterFan4life Mon Feb 22, 2016 11:53 am

The improvements didn't really start until Lam came in, before that they were very inconsistent. The increased funding could also be down to going from 300 season ticket holders in 2010 to 3000 now. Of course the IRFU has backed Connacht more in recent years too.

by PhilBB Mon Feb 22, 2016 11:58 am

LeinsterFan4life wrote:The improvements didn't really start until Lam came in, before that they were very inconsistent. The increased funding could also be down to going from 300 season ticket holders in 2010 to 3000 now. Of course the IRFU has backed Connacht more in recent years too.

http://www.the42.ie/connacht-funding-bunce-fitness-1473040-May2014/

It's almost as though people will pay to see their team win.

by LeinsterFan4life Mon Feb 22, 2016 12:13 pm

PhilBB wrote:
LeinsterFan4life wrote:The improvements didn't really start until Lam came in, before that they were very inconsistent. The increased funding could also be down to going from 300 season ticket holders in 2010 to 3000 now. Of course the IRFU has backed Connacht more in recent years too.

http://www.the42.ie/connacht-funding-bunce-fitness-1473040-May2014/

It's almost as though people will pay to see their team win.

The funding is just one side of it and the main thing it's done is allow them to retain most of their players, that they have produced. The likes of Aki and Poolman came over to become IQ. Lam came in and got rid of the huge chip on the shoulder Connacht had towards everyone else in Irish rugby that had held the club back for years.

They do need to redevelop that stadium. That is their next step.

by LordDowlais Mon Feb 22, 2016 12:16 pm

LeinsterFan4life wrote:They do need to redevelop that stadium. That is their next step

Where will the money come from for that ?

by LeinsterFan4life Mon Feb 22, 2016 12:21 pm

LordDowlais wrote:
LeinsterFan4life wrote:They do need to redevelop that stadium. That is their next step

Where will the money come from for that ?

Who knows. It certainly won't be happening anytime soon, they aren't even seriously discussing it. For all I know the Connacht board are happy enough with the SG.

by **RiscaGame** Mon Feb 22, 2016 1:02 pm

LordDowlais wrote:I've have to say it, although I do not agree with geoff999rugby often, he is spot on with what he is saying here, especially this bit:-

The continued failure of those 4 teams says more about a failure of Welsh and Italian rugby to spend the money they have available wisely and by a failure in those teams to do simple things well

Well said Geoff, well said.

You see there is a trend with certain regional fans on here, to blame everyone and everything else, instead of looking at what the regions can do to improve.

Firstly, I find it laughable when people say stupid things like the first bit you did. In the case of you especially, as you'll find you won't be in agreement with many on here, due to your pigheadedness.

Secondly, no there isn't. There is a trend with certain fair-weather regional fans on here, that arrogantly think that certain supporters have to adopt their way of thinking. Especially when throwing around a few buzzwords like "heads in the sand", "status quo" and "all NWQ signings are a waste of time". What's worse is you have forgotten those articles you've posted moaning about budgets yourself again.

by LordDowlais Mon Feb 22, 2016 1:05 pm

Still trolling me risca ?

by **RiscaGame** Mon Feb 22, 2016 1:07 pm

Can't answer a post, reverts to calling people trolls. Standard.

by ScarletSpiderman Mon Feb 22, 2016 1:10 pm

LeinsterFan4life wrote:The improvements didn't really start until Lam came in, before that they were very inconsistent. The increased funding could also be down to going from 300 season ticket holders in 2010 to 3000 now. Of course the IRFU has backed Connacht more in recent years too.

Larger numbers of season ticket holders does not mean larger amounts of cash available, that would be increased average attendances that would do that. If you keep the same average attendance, but have more season ticket sales, odds are you are actually making less money. Sorry, I know that is pedantic.

by marty2086 Mon Feb 22, 2016 1:20 pm

PhilBB wrote:
marty2086 wrote:

Maybe you should check their results for December and January and tell us that they were putting out a winning side

Sorry, I'm getting as confused as a bloke who can't add up 7+17 to get to 24.

My point is that Connacht's improvement has coincided with a chunk of cash being thrown their way by the IRFU. Does anybody else wish to deny that?

That like posting an article to prove someone wrong when you prove them right?

The chunk of cash is likely down to Lam and those running Connacht now pointing out the deficiencies in the setup and the IRFU injecting the cash into the facilities to address them

by geoff999rugby Mon Feb 22, 2016 1:43 pm

There are many factors that are the reason for Conacht improving.

Coaching improvements is one, a productive academy is another, and yes money is another (one of the reasons for that is more people through the gates, more merchandise being sold (should they apologise for that !)

No one, and I mean no one, has lost more players to injury this year than Connacht.

by geoff999rugby Mon Feb 22, 2016 1:48 pm

PhilBB wrote:
marty2086 wrote:
http://www.rte.ie/sport/rugby/provincial/2015/1205/751471-connacht-injury-crisis-deepens/

One thing is certain, there will be as long a queue outside physio Gavin Malouf's treatment room this week as heading out to the pitch to train, with 23 Connacht players out at the weekend through injury.

http://www.independent.ie/sport/rugby/connacht-rugby/connachts-casualty-list-at-crisis-point-34283907.html

So now they can put out a winning side despite 23 players missing. And none of this is because of more money, right?

Give over.

So you accept they haven't had a settle side - which was your previous point.
Any side can put out a side with 23 players missing - the question is whether or not they feel sorry for themselves and complain or roll up their sleeves and give it a go as Connacht have.

There seems to be a terrible tendency in Welsh rugby to blame others for failure rather than look at the source of the problem - the way Welsh rugby conducts itself.
I repeat Cardiff in particular have a set up that should yield far better results than Connacht - it doesn't because Cardiff themselves are the problem

by mikey_dragon Mon Feb 22, 2016 1:55 pm

How many of Connacht's 23 missing players were first choice?

by LordDowlais Mon Feb 22, 2016 1:57 pm

geoff999rugby wrote:There seems to be a terrible tendency in Welsh rugby to blame others for failure rather than look at the source of the problem - the way Welsh rugby conducts itself.
I repeat Cardiff in particular have a set up that should yield far better results than Connacht - it doesn't because Cardiff themselves are the problem

Again, I agree. Just be happy that you do not get the same slating on here as I do for pointing these facts out.

by LordDowlais Mon Feb 22, 2016 2:03 pm

geoff999rugby wrote:No one, and I mean no one, has lost more players to injury this year than Connacht.

OK this is where I might disagree with you, Scarlets have had quite a horrendous time with injuries this season.

Scott Williams
Samson Lee
James Davies
Ken Owens
DTH Van Der Merwe
Jake Ball
Rob Evans
Aaron Shingler
John Barcley
Will Boyde
Peter Edwards
Jack Payne
Rory Pitman
Tom Williams

Have all been out for lengthy spells this season, and 99% of those players a first teamers.

by PhilBB Mon Feb 22, 2016 2:12 pm

geoff999rugby wrote:

So you accept they haven't had a settle side - which was your previous point.
Any side can put out a side with 23 players missing - the question is whether or not they feel sorry for themselves and complain or roll up their sleeves and give it a go as Connacht have.

There seems to be a terrible tendency in Welsh rugby to blame others for failure rather than look at the source of the problem - the way Welsh rugby conducts itself.
I repeat Cardiff in particular have a set up that should yield far better results than Connacht - it doesn't because Cardiff themselves are the problem

Yeah, that's the view of the ignorant, Geoff.

Connacht have had the money to bring the success they have, mixed with the minimum disruption in comparison with others. For example, look at the number missing from the Leinster team that played in Newport.

You need to consider the IRFU cash impetus at Connacht versus 6 years of the WRU screwing PRW teams.

by PhilBB Mon Feb 22, 2016 2:14 pm

LordDowlais wrote:
geoff999rugby wrote:There seems to be a terrible tendency in Welsh rugby to blame others for failure rather than look at the source of the problem - the way Welsh rugby conducts itself.
I repeat Cardiff in particular have a set up that should yield far better results than Connacht - it doesn't because Cardiff themselves are the problem

Again, I agree. Just be happy that you do not get the same slating on here as I do for pointing these facts out.

Sorry, but it is context-less nonsense.

by LordDowlais Mon Feb 22, 2016 2:17 pm

But Cardiff are the architects of their own downfall, you cannot keep blaming the WRU for the failures of the regions.

by PhilBB Mon Feb 22, 2016 2:18 pm

LordDowlais wrote:But Cardiff are the architects of their own downfall, you cannot keep blaming the WRU for the failures of the regions.

No PRW team is the architect of its downfall because of the trading conditions they were placed under. How much more education on this will you need before it sinks in?

by LordDowlais Mon Feb 22, 2016 2:24 pm

PhilBB wrote:
LordDowlais wrote:But Cardiff are the architects of their own downfall, you cannot keep blaming the WRU for the failures of the regions.

No PRW team is the architect of its downfall because of the trading conditions they were placed under. How much more education on this will you need before it sinks in?

I can see your typing, but all I am reading is excuse after excuse after excuse, it's not our fault, it is the nasty WRU they placed all these rules on us.............. Rolling Eyes

by PhilBB Mon Feb 22, 2016 2:25 pm

LordDowlais wrote:
I can see your typing, but all I am reading is excuse after excuse after excuse, it's not our fault, it is the nasty WRU they placed all these rules on us..............

They are reasons, not excuses.

An excuse is given for something that could have been done better. I've already challenged you on the coaching selection but I've obviously missed your reply on that. Did you make one?

Shall we move on to the relative financial aspects of the 2009 PA? Do you even know anything about it?

by LordDowlais Mon Feb 22, 2016 2:28 pm

PhilBB wrote:They are reasons, not excuses.

No, you use those reasons AS excuses, there is a difference. If it was not all the nonsense with the WRU it would be something else, of that I am sure.

by PhilBB Mon Feb 22, 2016 2:29 pm

LordDowlais wrote:
No, you use those reasons AS excuses, there is a difference. If it was not all the nonsense with the WRU it would be something else, of that I am sure.

No, I used those reasons as reasons. I've provided no excuses.

Your final sentence doesn't make any sense.

by marty2086 Mon Feb 22, 2016 2:32 pm

PhilBB wrote:
LordDowlais wrote:But Cardiff are the architects of their own downfall, you cannot keep blaming the WRU for the failures of the regions.

No PRW team is the architect of its downfall because of the trading conditions they were placed under. How much more education on this will you need before it sinks in?

Are Cardiff working under different conditions than Ospreys or Scarlets?

by PhilBB Mon Feb 22, 2016 2:37 pm

marty2086 wrote:

Are Cardiff working under different conditions than Ospreys or Scarlets?

Nope.

by Sponsored content