The Future for the PRO12 - Part 3 - The Union Balldance

First topic message reminder :

I stepped out and she stepped in again
I stepped out and she stepped in again
learning to dance for Lanigan's Ball


In thinking about recent goings-on at union level within the PRO12, I was reminded of the lyrics of this old song as unions, corporate interests, private investors, Welsh benefactors, and sundry money-makers make their various moves on the PRO12 dance floor.  Scotland and Ireland seem to be bashfully eyeing up the investor lads on one side of the hall, fluttering their eyelashes, whilst on the other side, the Welsh bennys (as they're affectionately known ) are making tapes and throwing shapes, whilst secretly hoping eagerly that they might get a chance to sign the WRU's card for a dance or two.  Meanwhile, the Italians dither in the middle wondering where they should be but won't tell anyone that they don't know even the music.  

But for now the band has taken a break whilst the visiting Europeans and Anglo heavies make their way onto the floor to start their version of French/Anglo hopscotch involving a number of bulky partners, foreign tap dancers, celtic coaches, and comic millionaires.

It's a good a time as any for a quick cuppa and a chance to talk about where the PRO12 is going with all the plans for expansion to US and Europe suddenly gone quiet, some league quality improvements, big weekend derbies, more neutral officials, and what else is on the horizon for upcoming changes within the PRO12.

The looming spectre of dwindling money and funding ever more expensive teams for the future seems to be the next big issue and where that is all going to come from.   Hopes of improved TV deals, better sponsors and business supporters of the league remain a distant aspiration - although the recent appointment of a commercial director to work alongside Martin Anayi on securing the best deals possible seems to be a step in the right direction.  Some are holding their whisth on that one.

Ownership and financing of the teams themselves is the most urgent and vexing issue facing the four unions operating in the PRO12.  Over the last number of months, the SRU have been making a lot of noise and some news headlines with their plans to bring in private investment to its two Scottish clubs to help meet some of the ongoing costs involved.   The SRU says it can't continue to finance the two teams at current levels of revenue and costs, and they need to bring in private investors/business to meet a substantial portion of the costs in return for a stake in one or both of the two clubs.  How much that stake would be is not clear as the SRU would want to keep their hand in the two clubs responsible for generating its line of test players, but whether that would be a 51% stake or less remains to be seen.   A voting process in late 2016 saw members give the green light to the Scottish Union to pursue this path of identifying and securing potential investment but only time will tell if it will draw in any worthwhile investors.

Italian rugby seems to lurch from one crisis to the next with the FIR having to bail out both Treviso and Zebre in recent times with substantial commitments of money.  After the last crisis, which saw a number of players leave the two clubs, it is Treviso who have fared better with the backing of Bennetton, and it is Zebre who are staring down the barrel of closure at season end once again.  A new franchise, based in Rome, is being rumoured to be on the cards with the FIR willing to put financial support into its development.   For many within the PRO12, and without, the Italian project seems to be a wasted exercise and just amounts to weekly humiliation as opposition teams pile up the points, regularly taking home try bonus points in their victories. For others, the Italian involvement is a long game and one that has to be persevered with.    Yet, the FIR is still not a shareholder in Celtic Rugby, the company which manages the PRO12 - the latest filings with the Companies Registration Office in Dublin shows that the three Celtic unions remain the founding shareholders, and critically, the beneficiaries of any financial dealing that flow through it - particularly in relation to TV broadcasting deals such as Sky Sports.  This current season, it took until Round 6 before an Italian broadcaster could be secured for covering the home matches of Treviso and Zebre, and with crowds often hovering around 1,500-2,000, this didn't raise many eyebrows.  for the foreseeable future, Italian rugby will stay within the PRO12, and the FIR will continue to be a major stakeholder/financier in the teams.

Irish rugby has been dabbling with business support for a number of years now with the provincial teams drawing in sponsorships, player salary top-ups, and increasing financial support for the various provinces through different types of schemes devised by the individual branches.   Jamie Heaslip recently re-signed with Leinster on what's likely to be his final playing contract before retirement (at age 37).  One of Ireland’s most consistent and durable players, he’s also been one of the most consistently highest paid through his IRFU central contract, and a salary top-up through his Leinster club with a business sponsorship deal with Bank of Ireland.  

But these adhoc business supports and extended sponsorships/player promotions and brand ambassadors do not fill the coffers of the branches sufficiently to grow and expand, it's sufficient only to pay the salaries of 2-3 players to keep them in place against ever higher competing offers from the TV-deal-enriched clubs in England and France.  As the IRFU pointed at the launch of its annual report last June, the IRFU cannot continue to be "the bank of last resort" for the provinces - following a €1 million plus bailout of Munster, and a €250k additional budget for each province to help them compete on player salaries.   A number of the provinces have sought quietly to persuade the IRFU to consider opening up the provinces’ branch company structures to allow private investors to take a stake in each of the provinces in return for continued investment over a period of time.  Until the last year, those overtures have been largely rebuffed with the occasional odd positive murmur about the need to keep control if such a development were to be envisaged.   It is rumoured that alongside the SRU’s current moves, the IRFU is also investigating how the branches’ structures could be altered to allow such investment in the future.  A variant of the NZRU model whereby they allowed private investors to take a stake in each of the five Super Rugby franchises is being considered, but the IRFU would want to maintain a controlling stake that gives them oversight and control in line with the current player management policy and protocols they have in place.  

As the IRFU have stated time and again, the revenues from the test game is what keeps the whole of Irish rugby afloat - interfering with or disabling that in some way is not something they would countenance.  Equally, the union recognises that costs will continue to rise in the PRO12 and wider club game with player salaries being biggest driver.   Their investment policy has switched from paying out large salaries to high-profile capped foreign players to investing in the domestic pathway development (€10m over the last 3 years) - with the emergence of some fine academy players across the provinces proving testament to this approach led by David Nucifora on behalf of the IRFU.

Nonetheless, the club game is getting bigger and more financially competitive so if a methodology can be developed to allow private investment takes its place at the table, it’s likely to happen over the next few years.  

But as two unions move across the dance floor looking for wealthy partners, the Welsh benefactors are being drawn (protestingly for some) from the other side by the WRU who have recently announced that they see the future of the Welsh game involving a marriage of both union and private investment funds.  As two unions prepare to step out, the Welsh union is preparing to step in again.   The Dragons region has been languishing in the shop window for the past year, gathering dust as various investor-type people amble up, take a poke and move off again without buying.   Martin Phillps was pushed recently in an interview to say that the WRU couldn't allow the region to fold, but he wasn't too specific in public as to what kind of support they might bring.  Equally, he was encouraged enough to say that increased union funding for the four regions seemed to be inevitable - but he didn't say what price they might extract for such investment.  Would the benefactors/shareholders be asked to move on, or move around the table to make more room for union faces to sit down?  

Whilst there are those who pine for a future whereby pure private investment and ownership rules the roost like their counterparts in England and France, the likelihood of that model being created and surviving does not seem to be on anyone's dance cards.   More likely, a marriage of convenience may be arrived at, wherein true love may never be expressed, but at least the two parties will be able to pay the mortgage together, and maybe afford a new extension or two in the near future to mix a few metaphors.

But for now, let the European hopscotch begin, and then the merry four-nation dance can begin again.

All together now:

Sixteen long years we spent in Dub-i-lin
Sixteen long years doin' nothing at all
Sixteen long years we spent in Dub-i-lin
Learning to dance at the PRO12 ball.

They stepped out, and they stepped in again......

Presumably the pro 12 clubs would agree to give the lions share of funding to the English allowing the same disparity in funding. They'd also give up voting rights etc so the prl are still in charge. They'd also be willing to agree to salary caps set by the prl which would include the payments made to players from the unions. Not sure how this helps the pro 12 clubs though.

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:
Do either of those clubs actually help make up the other as is the case in Wales and Ireland?

There's that nonsense again.

Newport shareholders-Newport RFC/WRU
Ospreys shareholders-Swansea Rugby Football Club Ltd
Cardiff Blues shareholders-Cardiff Athletic Club
Scarlets may have a different setup but guess who holds some shares in it? Llanelli RFC

So not only do the clubs have shares they feed into the regions, so nonsense?

That's not to mention the Irish provincial branches are made up of the clubs in the province.

PhilBB wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

I believe Tigers often have players playing for Nottingham to get over injury and lots of Tigers players have come through the Nottingham structure, even though they sued to be old foes.

The point is - once PRL is ring-fenced I'm not sure it would be a stumbling block to a B&I League. It would be more of a plus.

There are far bigger stumbling blocks.

Exactly.

His claim is 100% nonsense.

So the AP teams will take a cut in the their tv revenue?
They will get rid of a second tier then create a new one and relegate some of their current members to make way for the Pro12 teams?
Plus you keep saying how bad the Pro 12 is so why would a broadcaster pay the same never mind more for a weakened/diluted/Sub standard product?
It would also dilute the magnitude of the ERCC so would have a knock on affect there.

The phrase turkeys voting for xmas comes to mind

marty2086 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:Phil lets just end it here because you have a serious issue with the Pro12, Ulster and god knows what else

Go get your panties untwisted and it may life more enjoyable for you

Or you know, therapy

"let's end it here" 

Code for when yet another of Martyn's fabricated, made up on the spot, arguments is undone by his own posts.

Excuse me? What did I fabricate?

Phil?

I gave one example of that above. You didn't like it.

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:Phil lets just end it here because you have a serious issue with the Pro12, Ulster and god knows what else

Go get your panties untwisted and it may life more enjoyable for you

Or you know, therapy

"let's end it here" 

Code for when yet another of Martyn's fabricated, made up on the spot, arguments is undone by his own posts.

Excuse me? What did I fabricate?

Phil?

I gave one example of that above. You didn't like it.

Oh when you said nonsense? well seems you were full of sh t there

Link?

marty2086 wrote:
Actually the fact the clubs below the AP have been told they will be cut loose and not get any funding unless they are buddy clubs probably is a pretty good reason to be signing up.

I've not seen this. Do you have a link, please?

marty2086 wrote:
Oh when you said nonsense? well seems you were full of sh t there

Yes, the nonsense you wrote that I disproved earlier in the thread.

marty2086 wrote:

So the AP teams will take a cut in the their tv revenue?
They will get rid of a second tier then create a new one and relegate some of their current members to make way for the Pro12 teams?
Plus you keep saying how bad the Pro 12 is so why would a broadcaster pay the same never mind more for a weakened/diluted/Sub standard product?
It would also dilute the magnitude of the ERCC so would have a knock on affect there.

The phrase turkeys voting for xmas comes to mind

You've assumed a cut in their tv revenue but God knows why you've done that.

Obviously huge changes would need to be made to the Irish structure were this to ever happen. The Scots are making those changes. The point I've made is that IF it can pay, the Lions League is a possibility.

You not got that link then Phil? Alternative facts.

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:
Actually the fact the clubs below the AP have been told they will be cut loose and not get any funding unless they are buddy clubs probably is a pretty good reason to be signing up.

I've not seen this. Do you have a link, please?

'With no more RFU money on the table for tier two sides and Premiership Rugby keen to address issues around the A-League and player game time, the buddy system is seen as a viable way of helping Championship clubs cut costs and survive.'

http://www.therugbypaper.co.uk/featured-post/27416/exclusive-premiership-giants-will-buddy-up-to-save-the-championship/

marty2086 wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:
Do either of those clubs actually help make up the other as is the case in Wales and Ireland?

There's that nonsense again.

Newport shareholders-Newport RFC/WRU
Ospreys shareholders-Swansea Rugby Football Club Ltd
Cardiff Blues shareholders-Cardiff Athletic Club
Scarlets may have a different setup but guess who holds some shares in it? Llanelli RFC

So not only do the clubs have shares they feed into the regions, so nonsense?

That's not to mention the Irish provincial branches are made up of the clubs in the province.

Swansea Rugby Football Club own 1 share of the Ospreys. 1 in hundreds of thousands of shares.

You've mentioned four clubs there. There are 16 clubs in the Welsh Premiership. Even you can work out your magnitude of error, and that's before we come to your understanding of the ownership of Welsh pro teams.

No link then Phil.

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

So the AP teams will take a cut in the their tv revenue?
They will get rid of a second tier then create a new one and relegate some of their current members to make way for the Pro12 teams?
Plus you keep saying how bad the Pro 12 is so why would a broadcaster pay the same never mind more for a weakened/diluted/Sub standard product?
It would also dilute the magnitude of the ERCC so would have a knock on affect there.

The phrase turkeys voting for xmas comes to mind

You've assumed a cut in their tv revenue but God knows why you've done that.

Obviously huge changes would need to be made to the Irish structure were this to ever happen. The Scots are making those changes. The point I've made is that IF it can pay, the Lions League is a possibility.

And you've assumed a bump in the revenue, I've actually backed up why I see a cut yours is based on a just because you say so theory

marty2086 wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:
Actually the fact the clubs below the AP have been told they will be cut loose and not get any funding unless they are buddy clubs probably is a pretty good reason to be signing up.

I've not seen this. Do you have a link, please?

'With no more RFU money on the table for tier two sides and Premiership Rugby keen to address issues around the A-League and player game time, the buddy system is seen as a viable way of helping Championship clubs cut costs and survive.'

http://www.therugbypaper.co.uk/featured-post/27416/exclusive-premiership-giants-will-buddy-up-to-save-the-championship/

Dear Christ. You are clueless.

That link shows there will be no additional RFU money into the Championship. It doesn't state that clubs who choose to fund their own squads will receive no RFU funding.

FFS.

marty2086 wrote:
And you've assumed a bump in the revenue, I've actually backed up why I see a cut yours is based on a just because you say so theory

Of course its a bloody theory. It doesn't exist.

This is painful.

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:
Do either of those clubs actually help make up the other as is the case in Wales and Ireland?

There's that nonsense again.

Newport shareholders-Newport RFC/WRU
Ospreys shareholders-Swansea Rugby Football Club Ltd
Cardiff Blues shareholders-Cardiff Athletic Club
Scarlets may have a different setup but guess who holds some shares in it? Llanelli RFC

So not only do the clubs have shares they feed into the regions, so nonsense?

That's not to mention the Irish provincial branches are made up of the clubs in the province.

Swansea Rugby Football Club own 1 share of the Ospreys. 1 in hundreds of thousands of shares.

You've mentioned four clubs there. There are 16 clubs in the Welsh Premiership. Even you can work out your magnitude of error, and that's before we come to your understanding of the ownership of Welsh pro teams.

I think you went and got ahead of yourself there, can you point to where I said ALL the clubs?

No 7&1/2 wrote:No link then Phil.

As you've been told countless bloody times before.

You were making it up then Phil. Lying some would say.

marty2086 wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:
Do either of those clubs actually help make up the other as is the case in Wales and Ireland?

There's that nonsense again.

Newport shareholders-Newport RFC/WRU
Ospreys shareholders-Swansea Rugby Football Club Ltd
Cardiff Blues shareholders-Cardiff Athletic Club
Scarlets may have a different setup but guess who holds some shares in it? Llanelli RFC

So not only do the clubs have shares they feed into the regions, so nonsense?

That's not to mention the Irish provincial branches are made up of the clubs in the province.

Swansea Rugby Football Club own 1 share of the Ospreys. 1 in hundreds of thousands of shares.

You've mentioned four clubs there. There are 16 clubs in the Welsh Premiership. Even you can work out your magnitude of error, and that's before we come to your understanding of the ownership of Welsh pro teams.

I think you went and got ahead of yourself there, can you point to where I said ALL the clubs?

"There are no second tiers

The clubs in the leagues in those countries feed into the provinces and regions, they are essentially extensions of the clubs in their areas"

Not true in Wales, matey boy.

No 7&1/2 wrote:You were making it up then Phil.  Lying some would say.

Yep, some would say that.

And they'd be spot on. You not get embarrassed by the make believe you spout on here?

marty2086 wrote:
As for struggling to meet the Top 14 as the most attractive league I think this shows who is speaking drivel

http://www.varsity.co.uk/sport/11047

Where's Cruden going? Where was Ben Smith thinking of playing?

Come on, we all know the French have the bigger money league - just - at the moment.

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:
Do either of those clubs actually help make up the other as is the case in Wales and Ireland?

There's that nonsense again.

Newport shareholders-Newport RFC/WRU
Ospreys shareholders-Swansea Rugby Football Club Ltd
Cardiff Blues shareholders-Cardiff Athletic Club
Scarlets may have a different setup but guess who holds some shares in it? Llanelli RFC

So not only do the clubs have shares they feed into the regions, so nonsense?

That's not to mention the Irish provincial branches are made up of the clubs in the province.

Swansea Rugby Football Club own 1 share of the Ospreys. 1 in hundreds of thousands of shares.

You've mentioned four clubs there. There are 16 clubs in the Welsh Premiership. Even you can work out your magnitude of error, and that's before we come to your understanding of the ownership of Welsh pro teams.

I think you went and got ahead of yourself there, can you point to where I said ALL the clubs?

"There are no second tiers

The clubs in the leagues in those countries feed into the provinces and regions, they are essentially extensions of the clubs in their areas"

Not true in Wales, matey boy.

Excuse me for not specifically stating that its not each and every club in Wales, apologies you were so right

No 7&1/2 wrote:And they'd be spot on. You not get embarrassed by the make believe you spout on here?

If you wish to accuse me of lying then be my guest.

It would be an interesting angle to take when there's no evidence to counter what I've written, but if that's the intellectual approach you wish to take then please feel free to do so.

I just have. I asked you to back up your statement with a quote from the prl recently and you couldn't.

Phil and his alternative facts.

No 7&1/2 wrote:I just have. I asked you to back up your statement with a quote from the prl recently and you couldn't.

That means only that nothing is online.

But thanks for pointing out the limitation of your thinking.

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:
And you've assumed a bump in the revenue, I've actually backed up why I see a cut yours is based on a just because you say so theory

Of course its a bloody theory. It doesn't exist.

This is painful.

IRONY ALERT

Mine was a theory you fricking imbecile yet you chose to mock it

marty2086 wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:
And you've assumed a bump in the revenue, I've actually backed up why I see a cut yours is based on a just because you say so theory

Of course its a bloody theory. It doesn't exist.

This is painful.

IRONY ALERT

Mine was a theory you fricking imbecile yet you chose to mock it

It's mocked because nobody is going to sign up to something that makes them less money.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Phil and his alternative facts.

Phils an angry little man, apparently anyone else presenting a theory is wrong even though they back up their theory. Phil saying something and just because is wonderful

Its strange how his mind works

Not to mention him quoting what you have posted then reshaping it completely to create a straw man argument for him to argue against

marty2086 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Phil and his alternative facts.

Phils an angry little man, apparently anyone else presenting a theory is wrong even though they back up their theory. Phil saying something and just because is wonderful

Its strange how his mind works

Not to mention him quoting what you have posted then reshaping it completely to create a straw man argument for him to argue against

Oh dear.

Walk me through the ownership of Welsh clubs and how Championship clubs who don't buddy up won't get a penny from the RFU......shameful.

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:
And you've assumed a bump in the revenue, I've actually backed up why I see a cut yours is based on a just because you say so theory

Of course its a bloody theory. It doesn't exist.

This is painful.

IRONY ALERT

Mine was a theory you fricking imbecile yet you chose to mock it

It's mocked because nobody is going to sign up to something that makes them less money.

Ok lets clear this up Albert

That's the problem, there are a truckload of reasons why your hair brained idea won't make more money hence why it wont get off the ground

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Phil and his alternative facts.

Phils an angry little man, apparently anyone else presenting a theory is wrong even though they back up their theory. Phil saying something and just because is wonderful

Its strange how his mind works

Not to mention him quoting what you have posted then reshaping it completely to create a straw man argument for him to argue against

Oh dear.

Walk me through the ownership of Welsh clubs and how Championship clubs who don't buddy up won't get a penny from the RFU......shameful.

No one will be getting any money from the RFU in the Championship

Back to the fact that the prl statement isn't on the Internet. ...which is very strange....you could just type.out the quote.

Phil just do yourself a favour, take some deep breaths and control your breathing then reread what has been written and understand it and stop thinking what has been written and getting angry at it

marty2086 wrote:

That's the problem, there are a truckload of reasons why your hair brained idea won't make more money hence why it wont get off the ground

To properly clear it up: I've only ever written that it will only get off the ground if it makes all parties more money.

As we've seen from your comprehension of the value of TV rights, I can see why you're struggling with this.

marty2086 wrote:
No one will be getting any money from the RFU in the Championship

Jesus, you're clueless.

Yes. They. Will. Be.

Even the link you provided included the word MORE that you somehow missed.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Back to the fact that the prl statement isn't on the Internet. ...which is very strange....you could just type.out the quote.

I don't have a quote. Where did I claim that I had a quote?

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

That's the problem, there are a truckload of reasons why your hair brained idea won't make more money hence why it wont get off the ground

To properly clear it up: I've only ever written that it will only get off the ground if it makes all parties more money.

As we've seen from your comprehension of the value of TV rights, I can see why you're struggling with this.

And you've been asked to explain how they will make more money and

marty2086 wrote:Phil just do yourself a favour, take some deep breaths and control your breathing then reread what has been written and understand it and stop thinking what has been written and getting angry at it

Writes the man who doesn't understand Welsh rugby or how the RFU funds the Championship and has embarrassed himself on both topics on this page alone.

Buy a mirror, Martyn, or get somebody to proof read your posts. It will honestly help you.

marty2086 wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

That's the problem, there are a truckload of reasons why your hair brained idea won't make more money hence why it wont get off the ground

To properly clear it up: I've only ever written that it will only get off the ground if it makes all parties more money.

As we've seen from your comprehension of the value of TV rights, I can see why you're struggling with this.

And you've been asked to explain how they will make more money and

And I've always mentioned BT Sport being the driver. There's the clue. But, again, it's TV money so you wouldn't understand.

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:
No one will be getting any money from the RFU in the Championship

Jesus, you're clueless.

Yes. They. Will. Be.

Even the link you provided included the word MORE that you somehow missed.

'With no more RFU money on the table for tier two sides '

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

That's the problem, there are a truckload of reasons why your hair brained idea won't make more money hence why it wont get off the ground

To properly clear it up: I've only ever written that it will only get off the ground if it makes all parties more money.

As we've seen from your comprehension of the value of TV rights, I can see why you're struggling with this.

And you've been asked to explain how they will make more money and

And I've always mentioned BT Sport being the driver. There's the clue. But, again, it's TV money so you wouldn't understand.

You can mention them all you want but its still an idea based on them throwing more money at something that they don't need to just because you say so

marty2086 wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:
No one will be getting any money from the RFU in the Championship

Jesus, you're clueless.

Yes. They. Will. Be.

Even the link you provided included the word MORE that you somehow missed.

'With no more RFU money on the table for tier two sides '

MORE. MORE.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union/2016/11/10/rfu-director-nigel-melville-outlines-vision-to-unlock-academy-ta/

No more money. Not no money at all. Bloody clueless.

marty2086 wrote:
You can mention them all you want but its still an idea based on them throwing more money at something that they don't need to just because you say so

Why don't they need it? Why wouldn't they be interested?

Never mind.

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:
No one will be getting any money from the RFU in the Championship

Jesus, you're clueless.

Yes. They. Will. Be.

Even the link you provided included the word MORE that you somehow missed.

'With no more RFU money on the table for tier two sides '

MORE. MORE.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union/2016/11/10/rfu-director-nigel-melville-outlines-vision-to-unlock-academy-ta/

No more money. Not no money at all. Bloody clueless.

Funny you said the article said there was more? Where was that?

No more can mean none at all

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:
You can mention them all you want but its still an idea based on them throwing more money at something that they don't need to just because you say so

Why don't they need it? Why wouldn't they be interested?

Never mind.

Why don't they need it? What would the Pro 12 bring to the table that BT don't already get from the ERCC and AP?

Its not like there wasn't threats of cutting funding from PRL and no agreement in place for funding after this season with the RFU

'One senior Championship club source claimed that unless they accepted the deal, the funding would be stopped after next season.'

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union/2016/07/26/exclusion-from-new-rfu-deal-threatens-future-of-championship-rug/

PhilBB wrote:

Munchkin wrote:
I'm a moron because I want facts and not your fictional drivel?  

This really odd obsession you have with Irish rugby can't be healthy, and is probably symptomatic of deeper issue's. Maybe you should take a course in CBT.

You are a joke on here, just as you/Chunky/Dai are a running joke on PR. Even your own Welsh compatriots think you are nutjobs, and an embarrassment to them. You probably think we are all wrong and you are right o0

You are entertaining though, when you're not running away

You're a moron for the pure BS you wrote on Simon Thomas. And then you underlined that fact with the rest of the nonsense you wrote.

Simon Thomas is a click-bate clown and a poor journo.

Nice attempt at deflection though. Now, provide a primary source for your nonsense claim that the Regions provide £5m of the PRO12 pot, and not the ramblings of some twitter mad cheap journo. And don't run away this time.