The Future for the PRO 12 - Part 2 - USA Expansion

First topic message reminder :

We've had the discussion on how does the PRO12 move forward for much of last season.

Towards the end of the season, PR012 CEO, Martin Anayi gave several media interviews on his own, and with PRO 12 chairman, Gerald Davies, on where the PRO12 needs to go to cope with changes in rugby within Six Nations and globally.

Anayi and Davies identified and acknowledged a number of the issues raised by PRO clubs CEOs and fans including increase in TV monies, match-day attendances, marketing, standard of refereeing, season structure and test window matches,  scheduling of season matches/kick-off times including Sunday games, European competitions, player welfare/concussion, growing "event" weekends, etc.

Anayi and Davies met with PRO12 CEOs over the last season to discuss issues and get feedback on a number of proposals that would mark out the future for the PRO 12 and its member unions.  

From various media interviews and reports - some unsubstantiated - a number of key decisions are being considered by PRO 12 and its 12 member clubs along with their representative organisations and unions.  In summary, these would appear to include:

• Changes to season scheduling to make it more accessible, consistent, and appealing to fans across the four unions territories starting from next season 2016/17.
  
• Further investment in a referee development programme to deal with issues/perceptions of bias and neutrality for league fixtures
  
• Stronger and more localised marketing and promotion of league games by the PRO12 and by the individual clubs to attract fans to games and make it more appealing to broadcasters.
  
• More promotion and stronger branding/marketing of games by TV partners
  
• Changing the structure of the league from home & away 22 games to a conference/pool structure that can accommodate more teams in the future from other unions/territories e.g. North America and South Africa, with East Coast of America being the first target to develop a franchise with operational and coaching expertise being provided by the four unions.
  
• Development of Big Event Weekends to drive crowd numbers, create a more appealing product for TV companies/sponsors, and generate more revenues for the PRO12
  
• Reduce number of games played during season and re-strucure so that no "league" games are played during the test windows in November and Feb/March
  
• Consequently, this would allow a greater proportion of league games to have test players involved and increase quality of product.
  
• During test windows, the PRO CEOs want rugby to continue, and a revised development competition is being proposed for these periods for development of academy and young players within squads not involved in test rugby.  This may involve changes to the British & Irish Cup and the Anglo-Wlesh Cup.  One report indicates that Premier Rugby may be interested in discussing the creation of a British & Irish development cup to replace the current AW Cup that would attract increased sponsorship and TV money than currently.
  

It's clear that changes need to occur for the PRO12.   The current structure and set-up is neither sufficient nor sustainable.   The most recent comments on this from the CEO of the IRFU in publishing their annual report indicate this clearly, and what changes need to occur.  He also commented on the plans to develop a franchise in the US.

The potential for the development of a B&I league has been regularly discussed on 606v2, but for the purposes of this topic, it's not being included as the Premiership has commitments for the next 6-7 years on its TV deals that would not countenance such a move.  

Feel free to comment/dispute/argue on what is being proposed - any errors are entirely mine.

PhilBB wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

I know. It should have been 6. So was it 'truth', or was it you being annoying? Make your mind up. I'm thinking annoying. The 'truth' thing seems very unlikely.

Any newbie to this board can see how the truth is annoying to a certain small clique.

Truth can be very annoying, but so can talking horse dung.

Hey, maybe Chunky/Dai will magically appear now that you have returned, Phil?

PhilBB wrote:

Any newbie to this board can see how the truth is annoying to a certain small clique.

The snarls, whines, teeth showing, ears back, bullish dirt digging, foul language, sneers, cheap personal jibes.... well yeah, I guess all newbies to this board would know where those annual incessant grunts and bites of anguished discontent emanate from......

But don't let that stop those folks that do. The rugby board wouldn't be the same without them.

Live on TV or not. We should have the same level of officiating across the board otherwise we do not have an even playing field.

Can people not see how this makes our supposedly professional league look ? No wonder we are lagging behind the rest of Europe.

Lord, I thought you were going to be more upbeat this year?

Where's the smiles? Rugby is back after the break. Smile... it's a lovely sport when football is the alternative

Munchkin wrote:Hey, maybe Chunky/Dai will magically appear now that you have returned, Phil?

You can find him on Gwlad.

Munchkin wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

I know. It should have been 6. So was it 'truth', or was it you being annoying? Make your mind up. I'm thinking annoying. The 'truth' thing seems very unlikely.

Any newbie to this board can see how the truth is annoying to a certain small clique.

Truth can be very annoying, but so can talking horse dung.

Indeed. Hence I can see why those talking horse dung are annoyed when it is pointed out to them.

LordDowlais wrote:Live on TV or not. We should have the same level of officiating across the board otherwise we do not have an even playing field.

Can people not see how this makes our supposedly professional league look ? No wonder we are lagging behind the rest of Europe.

Do you remember the league claiming it was 'fan feedback' that led them to have neutral TMOs? Like this was a big thing.

Shambolic, amateurish organisation.

'Shambolic'? That isn't even a word!
Shamrolic tis'it when Pr'O12 is bein' talked about. Let's be havin' some respect for the League!

LordDowlais wrote:Live on TV or not. We should have the same level of officiating across the board otherwise we do not have an even playing field.

Can people not see how this makes our supposedly professional league look ? No wonder we are lagging behind the rest of Europe.

But you can see that the problem is with the broadcasters (BBCW for not covering the Cardiff v Glasgow game and the Italian broadcaster for this game) and not with PRO12 itself?

Strange that since Phil disappeared you had been very well behaved, and on the eve of his return you kick off again.

PhilBB wrote:

Munchkin wrote:Hey, maybe Chunky/Dai will magically appear now that you have returned, Phil?

You can find him on Gwlad.

Very odd that he disappears the same time as you do. Can he not post here unless you hold his hand?

Munchkin wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

Munchkin wrote:Hey, maybe Chunky/Dai will magically appear now that you have returned, Phil?

You can find him on Gwlad.

Very odd that he disappears the same time as you do. Can he not post here unless you hold his hand?

I don't know, mate. Ask him.

He's a Llanelli fan, by the way. So if you're trying to imply that he and I are the same bloke, you're very much mistaken.

Munchkin wrote:
But you can see that the problem is with the broadcasters (BBCW for not covering the Cardiff v Glasgow game and the Italian broadcaster for this game) and not with PRO12 itself?

Strange that since Phil disappeared you had been very well behaved, and on the eve of his return you kick off again.

There are no Italian broadcasters, in the conventional sense. Its just an online stream.

The PrO'12 could easily state 'to win domestic TV rights, the broadcaster must supply the minimum required for a TMO to be in place at each domestic game'.

The product belongs to the PrO'12. If the product isn't right, you don't blame your customer (the broadcasters).

Munchkin wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

Munchkin wrote:Hey, maybe Chunky/Dai will magically appear now that you have returned, Phil?

You can find him on Gwlad.

Very odd that he disappears the same time as you do. Can he not post here unless you hold his hand?

It's division of Labour, Munch. They'll interchange between that Gwlad Site and this Pr'O12 dominated one. Shift work. It's a good idea actually, keeps things fresh.

Munchkin wrote:Strange that since Phil disappeared you had been very well behaved, and on the eve of his return you kick off again.

Firstly what that supposed to mean ?

Secondly, Phil was back on here TODAY. I brought this concern up yesterday.

Thirdly, this is the first time I heard of it happening, so that is why I am saying about it now.


What is the matter with people on here, why do they put up with mediocrity ? It is in ALL our best interest that our league is portrayed in a fully professional light, by not having a TMO and no microphone communication between the officials we are going backwards a decade.

How is this good for our league ?

Going back a decade? Oh yes please, I wish! We were good in Europe in them days.

PhilBB wrote:

Munchkin wrote:
But you can see that the problem is with the broadcasters (BBCW for not covering the Cardiff v Glasgow game and the Italian broadcaster for this game) and not with PRO12 itself?

Strange that since Phil disappeared you had been very well behaved, and on the eve of his return you kick off again.

There are no Italian broadcasters, in the conventional sense. Its just an online stream.

The PrO'12 could easily state 'to win domestic TV rights, the broadcaster must supply the minimum required for a TMO to be in place at each domestic game'.

The product belongs to the PrO'12. If the product isn't right, you don't blame your customer (the broadcasters).

I see RAI pulled out, although others are interested. There was no stream for the Dragons game.

No broadcaster is going to equip TMO's when they are not providing live coverage.

LordDowlais wrote:

Munchkin wrote:Strange that since Phil disappeared you had been very well behaved, and on the eve of his return you kick off again.

Firstly what that supposed to mean ?

Secondly, Phil was back on here TODAY. I brought this concern up yesterday.

Thirdly, this is the first time I heard of it happening, so that is why I am saying about it now.


What is the matter with people on here, why do they put up with mediocrity ? It is in ALL our best interest that our league is portrayed in a fully professional light, by not having a TMO and no microphone communication between the officials we are going backwards a decade.

How is this good for our league ?

The meaning is obvious.

Read my post again and you will find that I did say " on the eve of Phil returning "

SecretFly wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

Munchkin wrote:Hey, maybe Chunky/Dai will magically appear now that you have returned, Phil?

You can find him on Gwlad.

Very odd that he disappears the same time as you do. Can he not post here unless you hold his hand?

It's division of Labour, Munch.  They'll interchange between that Gwlad Site and this Pr'O12 dominated one.  Shift work.  It's a good idea actually, keeps things fresh.

Like a tag team? They must be very close ...

Munchkin wrote:

I see RAI pulled out, although others are interested. There was no stream for the Dragons game.

No broadcaster is going to equip TMO's when they are not providing live coverage.

Any broadcaster would equip TMOs if they are not providing live coverage IF it was a pre-requisite of providing live coverage.

PhilBB wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

I see RAI pulled out, although others are interested. There was no stream for the Dragons game.

No broadcaster is going to equip TMO's when they are not providing live coverage.

Any broadcaster would equip TMOs if they are not providing live coverage IF it was a pre-requisite of providing live coverage.

So broadcasters should provide TMOs for games they aren't covering? That makes loads of business sense for them, paying for something you will have no return on

A great way to drive broadcasters away from the league

Or maybe that's part of your dastardly plan

marty2086 wrote:

So broadcasters should provide TMOs for games they aren't covering? That makes loads of business sense for them, paying for something you will have no return on

A great way to drive broadcasters away from the league

Or maybe that's part of your dastardly plan

They are covering them, just not as much as they would do fully. The Glasgow game at CAP had cameras, just not enough to meet the PrO'12 expectations for TMO.

So, instead, there was no TMO.

Have a think on that. For a small clause in the broadcast contract, meaning that the broadcasters would have to invest a little more, the league wouldn't be such a farce, meaning the broadcasters would get a better league to broadcast. So they get more for their money.

Simple business.

Although, maybe TG4 can't afford it. Or neither can Alba. So we're back to the fact that the Irish and Scottish domestic TV deals are an embarrassment to the PrO'12, if that's the case.

So a game in Wales doesn't have enough cameras and you slate the Irish and Scottish broadcasters?

Interesting logic there

marty2086 wrote:So a game in Wales doesn't have enough cameras and you slate the Irish and Scottish broadcasters?

Interesting logic there

If you miss out the word 'although' from your reading, I can see how you'd arrive at that thought.

PhilBB wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

I see RAI pulled out, although others are interested. There was no stream for the Dragons game.

No broadcaster is going to equip TMO's when they are not providing live coverage.

Any broadcaster would equip TMOs if they are not providing live coverage IF it was a pre-requisite of providing live coverage.

Showing the game on the big screen, even if not providing live broadcast to TV, is still live coverage. So I would think there would be a legal issue. I suppose it's possible that broadcasters include in contracts that they provide TMO, when covering games for highlights only, but broadcasters may feel that doing so is cost prohibitive.

The issue isn't one of PRO12, but of broadcasters. Ideally, the Cardiff v Glasgow game and the Treviso v Dragons game could have been covered by Welsh or Scottish broadcasters, but then they would need to make space in their own schedules to slot them in. Probably difficult with the Treviso game, given the short notice. BBCNI managed to broadcast a live game in Italy a few weeks ago though.

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:So a game in Wales doesn't have enough cameras and you slate the Irish and Scottish broadcasters?

Interesting logic there

If you miss out the word 'although' from your reading, I can see how you'd arrive at that thought.

I don't think the word 'Although' solves that puzzle.

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:So a game in Wales doesn't have enough cameras and you slate the Irish and Scottish broadcasters?

Interesting logic there

If you miss out the word 'although' from your reading, I can see how you'd arrive at that thought.

And given how your mind works we all know how you arrived at the conclusion its everybodys fault but the Welsh

Given that Sky have a contracts running simultaneously with numerous other broadcasters maybe you'd like to explain why anyone can't afford it when Sky are primary broadcaster

Maybe stop with the haterising

I cannot believe, that in this day and age, that we are in a position, where in a professional sport, where results are key, we are in a situation where we do not have equal officiating throughout the league. If people cannot see that this is compromising the integrity of our league, then we really are done.

Not only can people not see the issues caused by this, they are also trying to justify it.

How can it be the broadcasters fault ? They do not run the league. No. It is the fault of the people who are in charge of the Pro12, they are responsible for our league, they should be demanding that all games are officiated to the same levels for every game so that we get meritocracy. This is just another stick that people who look at the Pro12 and laugh, have to beat us with, and people wonder why we are falling behind ?

LordDowlais wrote:I cannot believe, that in this day and age, that we are in a position, where in a professional sport, where results are key, we are in a situation where we do not have equal officiating throughout the league. If people cannot see that this is compromising the integrity of our league, then we really are done.

Not only can people not see the issues caused by this, they are also trying to justify it.

How can it be the broadcasters fault ? They do not run the league. No. It is the fault of the people who are in charge of the Pro12, they are responsible for our league, they should be demanding that all games are officiated to the same levels for every game so that we get meritocracy. This is just another stick that people who look at the Pro12 and laugh, have to beat us with, and people wonder why we are falling behind ?

Yep, you have returned to poor form. Phil is a bad influence on you. Maybe you're another one who needs Phils hand to hold?

Munchkin wrote:

Showing the game on the big screen, even if not providing live broadcast to TV, is still live coverage. So I would think there would be a legal issue. I suppose it's possible that broadcasters include in contracts that they provide TMO, when covering games for highlights only, but broadcasters may feel that doing so is cost prohibitive.

The issue isn't one of PRO12, but of broadcasters. Ideally, the Cardiff v Glasgow game and the Treviso v Dragons game could have been covered by Welsh or Scottish broadcasters, but then they would need to make space in their own schedules to slot them in. Probably difficult with the Treviso game, given the short notice. BBCNI managed to broadcast a live game in Italy a few weeks ago though.

We are going round in circles here. The Cardiff v Glasgow game had cameras, so God knows what 'legal issue' you are thinking of.

Simply put, the PrO'12 should say: if you are a broadcaster, this is the minimum requirement for all games. Are you in or out?

Munchkin wrote:Yep, you have returned to poor form. Phil is a bad influence on you. Maybe you're another one who needs Phils hand to hold?

Munchkin, seriously grow up. For a start I am not agreeing with Phil, he is blaming the broadcasters. What is the problem, can you not see the issue with not having a level playing field with officiating in our league ?

PhilBB wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

Showing the game on the big screen, even if not providing live broadcast to TV, is still live coverage. So I would think there would be a legal issue. I suppose it's possible that broadcasters include in contracts that they provide TMO, when covering games for highlights only, but broadcasters may feel that doing so is cost prohibitive.

The issue isn't one of PRO12, but of broadcasters. Ideally, the Cardiff v Glasgow game and the Treviso v Dragons game could have been covered by Welsh or Scottish broadcasters, but then they would need to make space in their own schedules to slot them in. Probably difficult with the Treviso game, given the short notice. BBCNI managed to broadcast a live game in Italy a few weeks ago though.

We are going round in circles here. The Cardiff v Glasgow game had cameras, so God knows what 'legal issue' you are thinking of.

Simply put, the PrO'12 should say: if you are a broadcaster, this is the minimum requirement for all games. Are you in or out?

Have you not been following the thread, or even my replies to you. I doesn't matter that cameras were there. It does matter if the game was broadcast live. Understand?

marty2086 wrote:

And given how your mind works we all know how you arrived at the conclusion its everybodys fault but the Welsh

Given that Sky have a contracts running simultaneously with numerous other broadcasters maybe you'd like to explain why anyone can't afford it when Sky are primary broadcaster

Maybe stop with the haterising

Mate, you are confused.

As Sky are the primary broadcaster, it is then down the domestic broadcaster to show the rest. If the domestic broadcaster cannot afford to do so, let's hear about it.

And, then, if the PrO'12 can't sell its product to domestic broadcasters who can afford a minimum standards contract, let's hear about that too.

Because, of course, if it is true that minimum standards cannot be afforded, the value of the league is clear for all to see.

LordDowlais wrote:

How can it be the broadcasters fault ? They do not run the league. No. It is the fault of the people who are in charge of the Pro12, they are responsible for our league, they should be demanding that all games are officiated to the same levels for every game so that we get meritocracy. This is just another stick that people who look at the Pro12 and laugh, have to beat us with, and people wonder why we are falling behind ?

So even if Broadcaster doesn't want to turn up for a specific game they don't intend to televise, even if that game itself isn't then televised, the Pro12 people should still have a dedicated full TV crew and sufficient cameras to make the TMO job viable (and have the same number of angles that a professionally televised event would have - not one camera less!)...at all games?

Maybe they should have their own Broadcasting company then? Maybe they should tell SKY and others to eff off and that Pr'O12 would broadcast games on its own dedicated channel?

LordDowlais wrote:I cannot believe, that in this day and age, that we are in a position, where in a professional sport, where results are key, we are in a situation where we do not have equal officiating throughout the league. If people cannot see that this is compromising the integrity of our league, then we really are done.

Not only can people not see the issues caused by this, they are also trying to justify it.

How can it be the broadcasters fault ? They do not run the league. No. It is the fault of the people who are in charge of the Pro12, they are responsible for our league, they should be demanding that all games are officiated to the same levels for every game so that we get meritocracy. This is just another stick that people who look at the Pro12 and laugh, have to beat us with, and people wonder why we are falling behind ?

Exactly.

Munchkin wrote:
Have you not been following the thread, or even my replies to you. I doesn't matter that cameras were there. It does matter if the game was broadcast live. Understand?

No, I don't understand.

It's quite simple for a broadcast contract to have a minimum requirement to provide suitable TMO facilities at each game. The PrO'12 decides those facilities.

If broadcasters cannot meet those standards, let's hear about it and judge the league in that light.

LordDowlais wrote:

Munchkin wrote:Yep, you have returned to poor form. Phil is a bad influence on you. Maybe you're another one who needs Phils hand to hold?

Munchkin, seriously grow up. For a start I am not agreeing with Phil, he is blaming the broadcasters. What is the problem, can you not see the issue with not having a level playing field with officiating in our league ?

There you go with the abuse. Hey, I can play the victim.

LD, your posts since Phil had been given time on the side-lines have been pleasant. You have even been very helpful in starting a match thread and offering to set one up. You are like two different posters, depending on the presence of certain other posters.

PhilBB wrote:

It's quite simple for a broadcast contract to have a minimum requirement to provide suitable TMO facilities at each game. The PrO'12 decides those facilities.

If broadcasters cannot meet those standards, let's hear about it and judge the league in that light.

If a League ain't Aviva Premiership lets hear about it and judge that league in that light.

LordDowlais wrote:

Munchkin wrote:Yep, you have returned to poor form. Phil is a bad influence on you. Maybe you're another one who needs Phils hand to hold?

Munchkin, seriously grow up. For a start I am not agreeing with Phil, he is blaming the broadcasters. What is the problem, can you not see the issue with not having a level playing field with officiating in our league ?

I'm not blaming the broadcasters at all. I'm blaming the PrO'12 for not having minimum standards.

PhilBB wrote:

Mate, you are confused.

As Sky are the primary broadcaster, it is then down the domestic broadcaster to show the rest. If the domestic broadcaster cannot afford to do so, let's hear about it.

And, then, if the PrO'12 can't sell its product to domestic broadcasters who can afford a minimum standards contract, let's hear about that too.

Because, of course, if it is true that minimum standards cannot be afforded, the value of the league is clear for all to see.

No you're the one who's confused

As you clearly don't now what you are asking for and the cost, especially since the bulk of the games are shown by a public broadcaster that's is seeing its budget eroded you can't ask them to fund highly skilled staff for games they aren't showing especially if they aren't showing the game

Its absolutely ridiculous to not have a standardised refereeing team for every single game in the Pro12, especially for games between teams at the lower end of the table - how are they supposed to progress ?

We should scrap the domestic broadcasting, ask Sky or BT to match the funding and bring in some much needed professionalism.

marty2086 wrote:
No you're the one who's confused

As you clearly don't now what you are asking for and the cost, especially since the bulk of the games are shown by a public broadcaster that's is seeing its budget eroded you can't ask them to fund highly skilled staff for games they aren't showing especially if they aren't showing the game

You've assumed the issue is cost. If so, I'd like that in the public domain.

A PrO'12 statement: We would like a TMO function at each of our games but, unfortunately, our broadcast partners cannot afford the infrastructure to supply us with this.

That would do me. If it is so, we can judge the league on that basis.

Now, that's my point in a nutshell. There's no confusion there. If, as you hint, the issue is that TG4 and Alba can't afford it, let's hear about it.

PhilBB wrote:

Munchkin wrote:
Have you not been following the thread, or even my replies to you. I doesn't matter that cameras were there. It does matter if the game was broadcast live. Understand?

No, I don't understand.

It's quite simple for a broadcast contract to have a minimum requirement to provide suitable TMO facilities at each game. The PrO'12 decides those facilities.

If broadcasters cannot meet those standards, let's hear about it and judge the league in that light.

I'm sure it's the broadcasters who will decide if they are to provide the facilities, during negotiations. I'm sure that cost in providing those facilities is a huge factor.

You want to twist everything in order to cast PRO12 in a bad light. It's just who you are. Someone who is unable to think objectively when it comes to PRO12.

SecretFly wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

It's quite simple for a broadcast contract to have a minimum requirement to provide suitable TMO facilities at each game. The PrO'12 decides those facilities.

If broadcasters cannot meet those standards, let's hear about it and judge the league in that light.

  If a League ain't Aviva Premiership lets hear about it and judge that league in that light.

... or T14.

Munchkin wrote:

I'm sure it's the broadcasters who will decide if they are to provide the facilities, during negotiations. I'm sure that cost in providing those facilities is a huge factor.

You want to twist everything in order to cast PRO12 in a bad light. It's just who you are. Someone who is unable to think objectively when it comes to PRO12.

OK, you're sure. I'm not so sure.

So, to recap, I'd like the information in the public domain. I want the PrO'12 to tell us they asked for these minimum standards but their broadcast partners couldn't accommodate.

I'm not sure why anybody would have an issue with that information being in the public domain or why it's taken so much vitriol from you and Martyn to get to this stage.

I get the feeling that a lot of people see Phil's posts and just argue the opposite, regardless of their true feelings on the matter.  There's a lot of posters on here that I have seen over the years pushing for better standards in the pro 12, better league, better 'marketability', everyone 'pulling their weight', etc. and then Phil comes along and says 'wouldn't it be great if ALL games had TMOs to improve standards' and suddenly it's the worst idea in the world!  I get the feeling if the question was raised by Munchkin, Notch, Bedford, et al. we'd have a lot more agreement and head nodding.  It's a funny old world.  

Just an observation men.  As you were...

Munchkin wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

It's quite simple for a broadcast contract to have a minimum requirement to provide suitable TMO facilities at each game. The PrO'12 decides those facilities.

If broadcasters cannot meet those standards, let's hear about it and judge the league in that light.

  If a League ain't Aviva Premiership lets hear about it and judge that league in that light.

... or T14.

Of course, the flip side to this silly thinking from you and your pal is the following:

When a broadcaster invests millions of Euros into a product, it wants the product to be the best it can be. It wants minimum standards and it expects high standards. When a broadcaster invests €900k or £150k, it doesn't really give a rat's arse about the product because it is so cheap.

Griff wrote:I get the feeling that a lot of people see Phil's posts and just argue the opposite, regardless of their true feelings on the matter.  There's a lot of posters on here that I have seen over the years pushing for better standards in the pro 12, better league, better 'marketability', everyone 'pulling their weight', etc. and then Phil comes along and says 'wouldn't it be great if ALL games had TMOs to improve standards and suddenly it's the worst idea in the world!  I get the feeling if the question was raised by Munchkin, Notch, Bedford, et al. we'd have a lot more agreement and head nodding.  It's a funny old world.  

Just an observation men.  As you were...

Cheers, Griff.

I don't agree with Phil on most things but to argue against having contractual standards for all games in the league is retarded.

Griff wrote:I get the feeling that a lot of people see Phil's posts and just argue the opposite, regardless of their true feelings on the matter.  There's a lot of posters on here that I have seen over the years pushing for better standards in the pro 12, better league, better 'marketability', everyone 'pulling their weight', etc. and then Phil comes along and says 'wouldn't it be great if ALL games had TMOs to improve standards and suddenly it's the worst idea in the world!  I get the feeling if the question was raised by Munchkin, Notch, Bedford, et al. we'd have a lot more agreement and head nodding.  It's a funny old world.  

Just an observation men.  As you were...

I can only speak for myself, and it isn't true for me. We all want better standards, but the issue with no TMO is hardly the fault of PRO12. That is an issue that can only be addressed by broadcasters.