European rugby, the interest just isn't there

First topic message reminder :

I know I will get a bashing off some quarters on here, but sorry it has to be said, looking at the crowds for the two semi-finals on the weekend, it would seem the interest is not there. The aggregate figure for the two games was a paltry 38,968 people, there was more people than that for the Cardiff Blues V Leicester semi final a few years ago 44,212 turned up that day.

This proves that the greedy club owners have ruined a once prestigious competition, admired by thousands and getting better year on year. Where are all these new massive sponsorship deals ? Where is all this money we are supposed to be swimming in ? 

All I saw on the weekend was empty seats, the future of the European club competition for me looks bleak, dwindling crowds, the same teams ALL the time in the knockout stages, lack of interest, the French already consider their own league a priority, for me something drastic needs to be done as it would seem the writing is on the wall for one of our favourite club competitions, it's sad, as it's been well and truly ruined by the greedy club owners.

Take a read of some of these, you might find them interesting:-

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union/2016/04/25/empty-seats-as-saracens-and-racing-92-won-through-must-be-a-wake/
http://www.walesonline.co.uk/sport/rugby/rugby-news/much-better-europe-champions-cup-11238143

Notch wrote:I do feel weary at this point. Ulster still in the playoff race but with the World Cup warm-ups in August I've gotten to the point where I have big game fatigue, and its just diminishing returns. Enjoyed todays excellent match very much, but can't say I'm disappointed its the last home match of our season.

Indeed I've never been less sorry to see the off-season coming up, and the thought of a three-game tour to South Africa after the Pro12 is over... talk about over saturation! That can't be laid at the foot of the EPCR. 6-9 games is about right. Less league games and less tests than we have in a RWC year would be better. Ireland will have played 17 test matches by the end of the season, which is absurd, but thats the RWC... there should not be a full tour the next summer. There's too much rugby all round. You'd have to be a real glutton to be getting excited about games that don't affect you at this stage of the season. Bring on the summer.

I agree with all that Notch.

As with issues in many sports we need fewer games and a higher quality of them when played. This is especially true for a contact sport. The injury rate and fatigue/burn-out of players currently in rugby is absurd.

3 Autumn tests MAX with one of these against Samoa/Fiji/Tonga/Japan etc for the NH sides and one against Georgia/Romania etc for SH sides

3 test Summer tour MAX with the pointless end of season international games such as England vs Wales this year being dropped

That plus 5 6 nations games a year and the RWC is plenty of international rugby. That's before you consider the Lions as well!

Well the lions I'd just get rid of full stop. 10 match tours are ridiculous no matter how many players you bring and only one or two warm-ups wouldn't do it justice. If we're cutting the fat, the Lions would be a good place to start.

Thanks for the feedback on the viewing figures.

What about the popularity of the competition this year with people on the forum and who you know? (I didn't watch either semi since although I've a soft spot for some clubs other than the Irish provinces none of these were involved.) Are the English and French fans liking it as much this year? Whether or not it's being promoted on tv it should still be more popular with real rugby fans with clubs from these countries in the final.

Well I've enjoyed the pool stages more.

Can't talk for anyone else obviously.

I think if Saracens win they will get some new fans. Success breeds support and all that. And their team is so young that I think this could be the start of good era for them and English rugby.

So I am confident that the competition will grow in support

All the pools have produced top standard games but with Pro12 sides surprisingly not being on form, the competition has been left with proper clubs with relative small scale following rather than sides who attract national support. There is zero chance of me going to a game with other AP teams competing. I have a season ticket which is plenty enough time and money invested.
Notch is spot on with there being far too many Test games added to demanding league schedules. The dropping of the LV tournament where welsh teams just take the money and run was thankfully dropped but presumably will be in place next season.

Top down Union control has been seen as a medium term saviour with little other choice but ultimately will lead those Unions down a financial cul-de-sac which will be to the detriment of the global game and it's the players who will get battered.

So Rewatcher, I get how you wouldn't want to go to a match to support another AP team playing but would you not be more interested in watching a final where an English team is playing? Would rugby fans in general be talking more about the competition this year compared to others where English teams were not involved in the final stages? I'm asking because I don't necessarily buy this idea that media are entirely responsible for making a competition or a team popular or not and it's all down to the hype. So are English rugby fans as interested or more interested this year than previous years? Or has this years competition not grabbed people's interest as the OP states?

Just on UK viewing TV figures for finals over last couple of years from Barb.

2012 Final (Leinster v Ulster) - 309K sky
2014 Final (Toulon v Saracens) - 460K Sky
2015 Final (Clermont v Toulon) - 99K BT. 79K Sky (total 177k )

Can anybody find more?

Would best if wanting to use tv to use all coverage unless those stats do cover all viewers everywhere.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Would best if wanting to use tv to use all coverage unless those stats do cover all viewers everywhere.

Barb doesn't cover Ireland, just Northern Ireland.

I'd imagine there were a few viewers in Leinster watching the 2012 final - Sky has about 700k plus subscribers in ROI.  By way of comparison, TG4, the Irish language channel got about 510,000 viewers for a Leinster v Munster match in 2014.

Viewership certainly has a massive drop when it just involves two French teams obviously.

I don't think its been a classic euro cup this year by any means.
For me the WC hangover ruined some teams chances ( mainly pro 12) and led to poor early rounds.
I watched an all english q/f and it was a dire game full of niggle and "gamesmanship" and that didn't make me want to watch more games it was so poor
I predicted it would be less interesting once dominated by french and english teams following the changes and for this scots fan it was certainly so

So overall not a classic year for a number of reasons. Lets hope next year is better. I'd like to see better marketing for the euro cup and giving the winners of the minnows cup entry to the main event should be made permanent

That's what I was thinking Pot. Who covers the french, Italians, anyone else in Europe or wider though? Those stats don't tell anything.

TJ, I always come back to how it would have differed in previous years on the pitch; for me nothing would have changed.

Certainly the WC had an effect and by ruining Glasgows hopes my interest as a scots fan declined - sad maybe but its a fact.

This year many of the games I watched were poor in comparison to previous years but nothing to do with the changes bar of course the greater number of French / French games and England / England games which are less interesting as they already play each other in their leagues.

Nothing I saw this year matched up to the quality of game or drama of the home and away Bath / Glasgow from last year
Lets hope next year is better. The WC hangover which disproportionately effected the pro 12 teams will not be there, the new format will be more settled, they will have time to market it properly.

There weren't a greater number of games with the same teams in thr groups from previous years, so also nowt to do with the changes. So basically lack of marketing.

Tbh I just think everyone is suffering from too much rugby.

We've been saturated with it for a year now pretty much non stop, and by 2016 it'd got to the point that most people just couldn't bring themselves to engage as much as they perhaps would of in the past.

I know that's true for me.

I can't wait for some time away. I'll watch the 3 test series in isolation, have plenty of time off around that, go to a pre season game at Quins and hopefully be more up for it next season.

NH rugby has too many games. At the moment it's all about quantity over quality and that can't be sustainable can it?

No 7&1/2 wrote:That's what I was thinking Pot. Who covers the french, Italians, anyone else in Europe or wider though? Those stats don't tell anything.

TJ, I always come back to how it would have differed in previous years on the pitch; for me nothing would have changed.

Well it shows the effect that the split tv coverage has had on the comp. Having only 99k people view the final on BT in the UK is deplorable and would surely effect future sponsorship deals.

LeinsterFan4life wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:That's what I was thinking Pot. Who covers the french, Italians, anyone else in Europe or wider though? Those stats don't tell anything.

TJ, I always come back to how it would have differed in previous years on the pitch; for me nothing would have changed.

Well it shows the effect that the split tv coverage has had on the comp. Having only 99k people view the final on BT in the UK is deplorable and would surely effect future sponsorship deals.

No it doesn't. If the same teams were competing fair enough but they aren't.

Notch wrote:Well the lions I'd just get rid of full stop. 10 match tours are ridiculous no matter how many players you bring and only one or two warm-ups wouldn't do it justice. If we're cutting the fat, the Lions would be a good place to start.

I'd do it permanently, the B&I Lions is a relic that should be consigned to history in the modern professional era.

Jimpy wrote:I'd do it permanently, the B&I Lions is a relic that should be consigned to history in the modern professional era.

That would not happen, Australia and New Zealand rely on the money made from it too much.

The problem for me with Europe is that there are too many French and English fixtures.

LordDowlais wrote:

Jimpy wrote:I'd do it permanently, the B&I Lions is a relic that should be consigned to history in the modern professional era.

That would not happen, Australia and New Zealand rely on the money made from it too much.

The problem for me with Europe is that there are too many French and English fixtures.

Sigh. 3 leagues. This is not a national comp. etc etc.

Jimpy wrote:

Notch wrote:Well the lions I'd just get rid of full stop. 10 match tours are ridiculous no matter how many players you bring and only one or two warm-ups wouldn't do it justice. If we're cutting the fat, the Lions would be a good place to start.

I'd do it permanently, the B&I Lions is a relic that should be consigned to history in the modern professional era.

Hear hear! I'm fed up hearing great players, from any of the four Nations, being defined in press cuttings by their 'Lions' duty stats. "B&I Lion Sam Warburton feels that .............."

He's Welsh. Use that and his record as a Welsh player to define him. That's his Nation. B&I Lions isn't a Nation.

SecretFly wrote:He's Welsh. Use that and his record as a Welsh player to define him. That's his Nation. B&I Lions isn't a Nation.

British is a nation. I am very proud to be British, and I will be supporting team GB at the Olympics. Other British people might feel the same as well. Just because the Irish have different feelings towards it, it does not make any less of a thing.

There is a lot to be proud of when you look at the history of Britain and it's people.

LordDowlais wrote:

SecretFly wrote:He's Welsh. Use that and his record as a Welsh player to define him. That's his Nation. B&I Lions isn't a Nation.

British is a nation. I am very proud to be British, and I will be supporting team GB at the Olympics. Other British people might feel the same as well. Just because the Irish have different feelings towards it, it does not make any less of a thing.

There is a lot to be proud of when you look at the history of Britain and it's people.

Grand...combine and form a British Team...that's your prerogative.
Maybe having that natural union of labour would free up more Nations to enter the top ten rankings???

Meanwhile, I don't have a 'different feeling' I live in a entirely different Nation. And the B&I Lions still isn't one.

LordDowlais wrote:

SecretFly wrote:He's Welsh. Use that and his record as a Welsh player to define him. That's his Nation. B&I Lions isn't a Nation.

British is a nation. I am very proud to be British, and I will be supporting team GB at the Olympics. Other British people might feel the same as well. Just because the Irish have different feelings towards it, it does not make any less of a thing.

There is a lot to be proud of when you look at the history of Britain and it's people.

If you are being specific British is a nationality, Britain is an island of nations not an actual nation.

British and Irish or Lion is not a nationality either

marty2086 wrote:British and Irish or Lion is not a nationality either

If you are from the nation of Britain then you are British. So of course it's a nationality. Look I know how some of the Irish on here feel towards Britain/British, I had the same arguments with them when Scotland had it's referendum and some of our Irish members wanted Scotland to leave Britain, I just wanted to point out, that some people who live in GB are quite proud of what they are.

LordDowlais wrote:

I had the same arguments with them when Scotland had it's referendum and some of our Irish members wanted Scotland to leave Britain, I just wanted to point out, that some people who live in GB are quite proud of what they are.

We are going off topic here and I apologise to others...but just to take it a little further. Who would doubt that many, many, many British people are proud to be British? I had an opinion on the Scottish Independent debate but never would I have attempted an argument that suggested most people in the UK didn't at some level feel British. It's a National Identity, it's an identifier of Nationhood - good luck with it - I like people being proud of who they are.

I suppose back to the topic now...

No 7&1/2 wrote:

LeinsterFan4life wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:That's what I was thinking Pot. Who covers the french, Italians, anyone else in Europe or wider though? Those stats don't tell anything.

TJ, I always come back to how it would have differed in previous years on the pitch; for me nothing would have changed.

Well it shows the effect that the split tv coverage has had on the comp. Having only 99k people view the final on BT in the UK is deplorable and would surely effect future sponsorship deals.

No it doesn't. If the same teams were competing fair enough but they aren't.

They'll need better than 99k people viewing a final no matter who is playing if they want to keep the sponsorship and tv rights up. The current deal runs out in the next couple of years, I think.

LordDowlais wrote:

SecretFly wrote:He's Welsh. Use that and his record as a Welsh player to define him. That's his Nation. B&I Lions isn't a Nation.

British is a nation. I am very proud to be British, and I will be supporting team GB at the Olympics. Other British people might feel the same as well. Just because the Irish have different feelings towards it, it does not make any less of a thing.

There is a lot to be proud of when you look at the history of Britain and it's people.

there is?

LeinsterFan4life wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

LeinsterFan4life wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:That's what I was thinking Pot. Who covers the french, Italians, anyone else in Europe or wider though? Those stats don't tell anything.

TJ, I always come back to how it would have differed in previous years on the pitch; for me nothing would have changed.

Well it shows the effect that the split tv coverage has had on the comp. Having only 99k people view the final on BT in the UK is deplorable and would surely effect future sponsorship deals.

No it doesn't. If the same teams were competing fair enough but they aren't.

They'll need better than 99k people viewing a final no matter who is playing if they want to keep the sponsorship and tv rights up. The current deal runs out in the next couple of years, I think.

Sorry thought your point was about tv viewer numbers rather than just BT. If they want to bid again they will, probably more to get sole rights though. Give Sky the kicking their ratings are lower? But again overall look at the complete picture otherwise it means nothing.

split coverage has hurt overall quality of coverage for me.

last year's all french final was very widely watched in france though...

The split coverage is a problem, but probably what hurts it most is the lack of supporting sponsorship. For instance, Heineken used do a lot of on the ground promotional work (in Ireland they used sponsor radio programmes just before the weekend games around the country), huge promotion in the pubs (posters etc) as well as making great rugby geared commercials.

As Neil Francis said in his article this week that McCafferty was a failure on the commerical board of the ERC, it was unlikely that he would be much of a success with the new organisation.

quoting neil francis is like the media equivalent of Godwins Law...

quinsforever wrote:quoting neil francis is like the media equivalent of Godwins Law...

The point he makes is true though.

Any truth in the rumour that Aviva are pulling their sponsorship of Aviva Premiership?

Please let Guinness take over again #IrishCentric

Actually, its not a rumour. Its true. Aviva are pulling out and Premiership are in the hunt for a new sponsor from 2017.

http://www.sportbusiness.com/sport-news/premiership-rugby-appoints-esp-search-new-main-sponsor

Sin é wrote:Actually, its not a rumour. Its true. Aviva are pulling out and Premiership are in the hunt for a new sponsor from 2017.

http://www.sportbusiness.com/sport-news/premiership-rugby-appoints-esp-search-new-main-sponsor

OH well, what a wonderful new world the PRL has created.

It's gotta be BT Premiership, ain't it???  They're the only ones that can afford to surely?

They'll pay for the upgrade of Broadcasting rights to English Premiership - 23 billion
They'll pay for a exclusive buy-out of the European side of the biz - 440 billion
They'll pay to be main sponsor of English Premiership Rugby - 687 billion
They'll pay to be main sponsor of Top14 - 687 billion
They'll pay to be main sponsor of Pro12 - 300 quid
They'll pay to legally enforce all pubs in Europe to broadcast all Premiership League games live with the sound Always Up full - 1 Trillion

These guys are already planning to put a bid in for the World in 2019- starting bid (to discourage Trump and others from even thinking about it) it is said will be in the region of 700,000 Trillion Pounds.... to perhaps go up even more if the citizens of the World agree to call all their babies BT.

You all should be pleased if you think BT and the Prem are going to suffer. I don't think they'll be struggling myself.

I don't see how the English Premiership could suffer 7 1/2, there is much too much ready money floating around the product. It has quite a bit of growing to do yet before anybody could begin to foresee a falling off. No, those guys involved in that show are smart enough.

sponsors change all the time. new heads of corporations with different strategies etc.

it doesnt feel like the Premiership will struggle to find a sponsor that is an improvement on Aviva...i mean insurance isnt exactly beer now is it...lol

have no idea how much money aviva pay the premiership and how that compares to TV and RFU contributions plus ticket sales

LordDowlais wrote:

Sin é wrote:Actually, its not a rumour. Its true. Aviva are pulling out and Premiership are in the hunt for a new sponsor from 2017.

http://www.sportbusiness.com/sport-news/premiership-rugby-appoints-esp-search-new-main-sponsor

OH well, what a wonderful new world the PRL has created.

Yeah, it's not exactly an unusual situation. The Pro12 has gone through three sponsors in 10 years. Long-running relationships like RBS with the Six Nations and Heineken with the old Cup are the exception not the rule.

munkian wrote:Please let Guinness take over again #IrishCentric

If only Guinness was Irish an Irish company.

quinsforever wrote:sponsors change all the time. new heads of corporations with different strategies etc.

it doesnt feel like the Premiership will struggle to find a sponsor that is an improvement on Aviva...i mean insurance isnt exactly beer now is it...lol

have no idea how much money aviva pay the premiership and how that compares to TV and RFU contributions plus ticket sales

They must have been paying well as the PRL dumped Guinness for them. PRL not a good match for a financial institution who would want to be associated with an organisation that exudes integrity.

Notch wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

Sin é wrote:Actually, its not a rumour. Its true. Aviva are pulling out and Premiership are in the hunt for a new sponsor from 2017.

http://www.sportbusiness.com/sport-news/premiership-rugby-appoints-esp-search-new-main-sponsor

OH well, what a wonderful new world the PRL has created.

Yeah, it's not exactly an unusual situation. The Pro12 has gone through three sponsors in 10 years. Long-running relationships like RBS with the Six Nations and Heineken with the old Cup are the exception not the rule.

Basically, Magners & Rabo were based on the Irish market (and Magners, a Clonmel company was doing it as a favour).

Most established brands hold onto their sponsors unless something happens (like Munster lost Toyota because of the economic downturn in Ireland where no one was buying cars). Most established brands change because they have got a better offer (i.e., Dublin GAA from Arnotts to Vodafone 2009 to AIG Insurance 2013).

Sin é wrote:...Most established brands hold onto their sponsors...

That's not true. The sports sponsorship market worldwide is very fluid. Only today, Chelsea are ending their deal with Adidas after 10 years, while Qatar Airways look to be ditching Barcelona in favour of a contract with La Liga, which has decided to end its deal with BBVA. Barclays sponsorship of the Premier League is ending. If you keep a close eye on this market, you'll see regular changes all over the place.

As you point out, circumstances change but it's not just the sporting side looking for a better deal, or the sponsor having financial problems. As the football examples show, sponsors can be committed to the market without sticking by the same franchises all the time.

A sponsor is always looking to make sure that they are using their money effectively. A long-term association can be extremely good for your brand but there is a risk that your name becomes associated in a generic way, such that the marginal benefit decreases, rather increases, over time.

I've no idea why Aviva are choosing not to renew their deal. Perhaps the relationship has indeed been mishandled. On the other hand, it could be because they don't see any further value, or else the contract may have become too rich for them. Perhaps they've decided rugby presents unwanted reputation risks. There are any number of reasons, none of which need point to mismanagement on either side.

Aviva seem to have resigned the sponsorship and PRL are now going to start a new looking to find a new sponsor.

Barclays sponsored the Premiership since 2001 and the reason they have given for not renewing it is that they fear it will be too expensive.

In other news to do with the Champs Cup, Donal Courtney the Match Day Official manager has resigned.

Ah Donal Courtney, TMO for this 'try':

https://youtu.be/2yRM46g0Mp4

sin e why dont you give it a rest? every post you make is alleging proof that the champs cup is somehow failing...honestly no-one cares. it is what it is. either teams give it a go or they dont.

this always looking for reasons to complain about the past is a bit old...

PRL won. yes we know you dont like it. but it'll take more than 2 seasons to judge what the event turns into.

next year if 2 provinces make the semis, and one a final, then all of a sudden it'll be a different tune...

quinsforever wrote:

next year if 2 provinces make the semis, and one a final, then all of a sudden it'll be a different tune...

Well yes, European Champions Cup in Switzerland certainly hope so.  The moaning Irish, back to fill stadiums and drink them dry

Seriously though, no I'm not so sure it'll be ever the same again.  Too much cloak and dagger stuff in the background.  By the time that mood even has a chance to die down, a renegotiation of the present will be on the cards again - or an entirely different structure to European club/regional rugby and International rugby.  
The whole situation is very fluid and even as one agreement is settled, the wheelers and dealers are already jostling behind the scenes, preparing for yet another 'new' way and setting themselves up to be at the head of the train.  So more wars to fight and sides to take.
There is no trust anymore - anywhere.

Sin é wrote:Aviva seem to have resigned the sponsorship and PRL are now going to start a new looking to find a new sponsor.

Maybe they will not looking for one new sponsor, but 8 collective new sponsors, after all its worked out so well for the RCC.

quinsforever wrote:sin e why dont you give it a rest? every post you make is alleging proof that the champs cup is somehow failing...honestly no-one cares. it is what it is. either teams give it a go or they dont.

this always looking for reasons to complain about the past is a bit old...

PRL won. yes we know you dont like it. but it'll take more than 2 seasons to judge what the event turns into.

next year if 2 provinces make the semis, and one a final, then all of a sudden it'll be a different tune...

Its poorly run. Donal Lenihan on Against the Head (who commentates on games) says his experience of the organisation is that it is very poor.

And no, I won't be changing my mind. Could not care less if an Irish team didn't make another KO. The spivs destroyed a great tournament and the punters are voting with their feet.