The Future for the PRO14 - Part 4 - A Global Club Championship

First topic message reminder :

Following the Union Balldance of the last 12 months, another union has finally joined the party - SARU. The PRO12 league is gone with Martin Anayi's announcement of a global club championship involving conferences of teams from five unions with the potential for more to be included.

At first glance, it looks like a smart play - albeit somewhat fortuitous with SARU having to shed two teams from the Super Rugby competition. It brings together a lot more viewers that are attractive to media companies and business sponsors. Celtic Rugby Ltd still owns the competition with just its three founding shareholders - IRFU, SRU and WRU. No club or franchise owners involved. FIR failed to meet the required performance that would have made them shareholders at the beginning of July. And SARU weren't persuasive enough to get their seat at the table just yet. Rumours of a new company being set up failed to materialise. But they still signed up to a six-year agreement with £6m in funding each year.

It's not clear if this money is coming from SARU or directly from SuperSport, their broadcast partner. It is SARU who have signed the agreement to provide two teams so presumably the financial buck stops with them. It's more likely the £6m is a participation fee paid by SARU, similar to what FIR was charged when it joined in 2010. Media reports have said that the monies will be split equally amongst the 12 teams with travel and logistics costs for SA trips met centrally by Celtic Rugby Ltd since these will vary for clubs depending on whether they play one or both teams in SA.

Next on Anayi's agenda is the negotiation of a new media deal involving PPV and terrestrial TV, and online platforms. SuperSport may have already got their slice - all 20-22 home games involving Cheetahs and Kings plus some/all of the finals stages. Or perhaps not. Sky and possibly other PPV broadcasters such as Eir Sport may be willing to bid more to be the primary broadcaster for a higher profile, expanded Championship. But Anayi will want to keep a slice for terrestrial TV since they have a much better viewership reach. The current deal is for four years. Would a six-year deal be a better strategic move to guarantee increased revenues for a longer period? It would link in with the duration of the SARU agreement. And it would outlast the current participation agreement for the European Cup run by EPCR.

Further expansion is obviously the other key consideration with possibly other teams from SA, US and Europe coming on board. The danger is that Celtic Rugby goes too far and repeats the mistakes of Super Rugby. Better to build slowly to see if they will still come.

The coming season will be a fascinating one to see how the new structure and Championship beds in. Will attendances increase? Will there be more surprise results and potentially another new team to lift the cup next May?

Roll on 1 September.



Further info on PRO14 can be found here:
http://www.pro14rugby.org/2017/08/01/guinness-pro14-championship-qa/

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:It baffles me how some think that the Pro 14 is the only competition with officiating problems, the AP and Super Rugby have complaints every round. Only difference is that nationality isn't brought into it. The same refs go into the ERCC and fans complain about them there, the truth is they are just crap

Firstly I do not think this, I just do not care about any other competition. Secondly, the only reason nationality is not brought into it, is because in suoer rugby they have enough refs from each country to be impartial, and the AP have all English/RFU refs officiating sides.

You don't care about other competitions but you care about what other fans think of the league? Should PSG, Monaco etc fans care that their league is called a farmers league by premier league fans every day? Seriously why do you care what the French/English think? It just makes it all the sweeter when we smash them in Europe..

LordDowlais wrote:

SecretFly wrote:Let's put it this way then.  Let's say that it never is or was a Nationality issue (it is with many)...and let's say instead that it is a 'quality' issue.  

There is deffo a quality issue with the Pro14 when it comes to officials, that's why I would like them all to come under one umbrella, all being given the same directives, all singing from the same hymn sheet.

I agree with this, LD. I’ve said this many times. Ideally the Championship (it’s not a league anymore) should have its own panel of referees being managed by one central guy who would have previous experience with Internationals, European Cup and other high quality leagues like Premiership or Top14. Ideally, he wouldn’t come from any of the five participant unions.

The Ref Manager could decide all the PRO14 ref appointments and also have a proper objective performance review process (liaising with the Unions of course) and help identify and promote future match official talent.

Any ref appointments could be both a balance of merit and keeping it neutral, wherever possible. The ultimate aim should be to have a panel of full-time professional elite refs - possibly employed directly by the PRO14.

I think it would be great if the PRO14 would say that its aim was to create some kind of high performance talent pool across the various Unions to make sure they could eventually appoint neutral match officials to all games, whilst raising ref/official standards and developing new and consistent talent.

Let’s wait and see.

Yeah but..no but....yeah but...

The Pro14 is ...em.... owned by the boys that are in it.  They already negotiate everything they want out of it with their chosen delegates; and then leave the organising of their wishes with the head guy.  But one must assume that they already have their detailed discussion or text storms or video conferences with each other to decide on just about everything.

Now surely, if delegates from Unions A, B and C think that Ref P is an eejit and not fit for purpose - and that he infuriates their teams and coaches and fans - surely they not only communicate that opinion to Union D (who own the ref) but also make it quite clear they don't want the guy reffing in Pro14 for the reasons they set out?

Surely someone already runs the Pro14 show.  Surely there are things called Agreements............... about everything.   "And then we'll do that.  Everyone in agreement? - Yes? - Okay, good...next topic.  Refs...."
Surely the boat is already being run in a format meant to keep everyone roughly happy?

But yet, some of you seem to suggest or think that no Union reps talk to each other about details or concerns - especially in any end of year meetings, to talk about the year before.  
Some here seem to insinuate that the Pro14 just happens every year without any organisation, without any meetings, without any joined up thinking, without any show of hands, without any tiny bottles of water on boardroom tables.....  Pro14 just happens and everyone but everyone feels they're getting a bum deal but have nowhere to drop in a protest note?

Hmmm..............

I guess my point is that the bosses of the refs that turn up at Pro14 games are already the bosses you want the refs turned over to.  All they have to do is have those discussions and come to a collective agreement on the pathway for Pro14 refs from now on.  Pro14 partners decide what happens in Pro14...together.... already.

SecretFly wrote:Yeah but..no but....yeah but...

The Pro14 is ...em.... owned by the boys that are in it.  They already negotiate everything they want out of it with their chosen delegates; and then leave the organising of their wishes with the head guy.  But one must assume that they already have their detailed discussion or text storms or video conferences with each other to decide on just about everything.

Now surely, if delegates from Unions A, B and C think that Ref P is an eejit and not fit for purpose - and that he infuriates their teams and coaches and fans - surely they not only communicate that opinion to Union D (who own the ref) but also make it quite clear they don't want the guy reffing in Pro14 for the reasons they set out?

Surely someone already runs the Pro14 show.  Surely there are things called Agreements............... about everything.   "And then we'll do that.  Everyone in agreement? - Yes? - Okay, good...next topic.  Refs...."
Surely the boat is already being run in a format meant to keep everyone roughly happy?

But yet, some of you seem to suggest or think that no Union reps talk to each other about details or concerns - especially in any end of year meetings, to talk about the year before.  
Some here seem to insinuate that the Pro14 just happens every year without any organisation, without any meetings, without any joined up thinking, without any show of hands, without any tiny bottles of water on boardroom tables.....  Pro14 just happens and everyone but everyone feels they're getting a bum deal but have nowhere to drop in a protest note?

Hmmm..............

I guess my point is that the bosses of the refs that turn up at Pro14 games are already the bosses you want the refs turned over to.  All they have to do is have those discussions and come to a collective agreement on the pathway for Pro14 refs from now on.  Pro14 partners decide what happens in Pro14...together.... already.

Yes, Prof Fly.  O, Keeper of the Secrets and Master of the Barrel.  You are quite correct.  They should have them.  Indeed, I will go further and declare unto all on this day and henceforth that verily, they do.  There is now one amongst them who has *garnered* unto himself sufficient wisdom and knowledge to be appointed Master of the Middle, Chief Runner of the White Line, the Oracle of the Laws as they are written in the Book -both book and novella version.  Those in the know whisper his name with reverence for his recognized authority and controller of all things Ref.

Wonderful stuff, you auld goat, Pot.

LordDowlais wrote:

Why not ?

I have never sat well with the attitude that something cannot happen, how do you know this without trying ?

Because not all the teams in the competition are in agreement with how domestic rugby should be governed. Some are run by the Unions who take world class players out of their provinces and therefore deny the Pro14 fans the chance of seeing them play (Peinaar). Others want full control of their destiny and rightfully want to be able to choose which players they should keep and discard. That's just 1 example in a whole maze of issues.

The league will never prosper with such a mish mash of priorities.

If you think the current lot in charge are the problem, then why can't it improve with a new regime in charge ?

It can. As long as the Unions don't run the competition or own the teams in it.

Also a union controlled competition is fine, it has worked with the 5N/6N for the past 100 years or so. It just needs tweaking.

That's because those teams have players that are selected by the Unions and coaches that are paid by the Unions and tv deals that are negotiated by the Unions. A national team can't be owned by an independent body as far as I'm aware, so there is no alternative for the 6N to be run by anybody else.

It really is no surprise that the 2 richest leagues in the world are those that the Unions have zero involvement in.

It's all about moneeeee..eeee!!!!

The two richest Leagues in the world should be producing the players to have a record at International that equals or betters the little giant called New Zealand.  The two richest Leagues in the world should have International teams that have taken World Cups and runner up spots between them since its inception.

The two richest Leagues in the world can inject as much money into their product as they see fit... for some it's a false economy as they don't ever balance the books sufficiently to be viable in their own terms and need the flow of 'hobby' money coming in all the time from the Big Daddy backers.  Great stuff.

The argument never dies because it is about the fundamental difference between the fan that thinks CLUB is the Sacred beast that they want to worship before all else - and other fans that see Club/Provincial as only the tools used to find the quality of players needed to give Glory to the National shirt. International is their sacred cow.

You won't change either person's view.  Our system here in Ireland suits us because largely we all see the exploits of the Provinces as a proving ground for International.  International is the big deal and our system is supported by most Irish Provincial fans because we believe in it as both a guarantor of quality within the Provinces themselves and then as a factory system to produce players for International.  And to date...it works. It's easy for us to happily claim a certain ownership emotion about all the Provinces. They all feed in to the overall system.

The Club should be Boss and Priority advocators can't even get their own players to support the idea that it should be club loyalties above International.  Many players simply want to be/need to be club players in order to have a crack at being International players.... just ask Stander and a few others who have cruised the world to find a possible route to International.

International in Rugby Union IS the priority for most people involved in the sport.  In football the priority seems to be the other way round but not in rugby.  And if International IS the priority then our Union organised 'club' set up is the best framework.  

Privately run 'clubs' are a active RIVAL to International.  Their very role is to try to lessen the role of International and make their product step into the space left.  Money...and more money.

International/Union controlled rugby impedes the pursuit of more and more profit. That's the real war when we talk of the variations of League structures.

SecretFly wrote:

The two richest Leagues in the world should be producing the players to have a record at International that equals or betters the little giant called New Zealand.  The two richest Leagues in the world should have International teams that have taken World Cups and runner up spots between them since its inception.

Nope. Not their job at all.

The two richest Leagues in the world can inject as much money into their product as they see fit... for some it's a false economy as they don't ever balance the books sufficiently to be viable in their own terms and need the flow of 'hobby' money coming in all the time from the Big Daddy backers.  Great stuff.

Yes. It's called professional sport. It costs money.

The argument never dies because it is about the fundamental difference between the fan that thinks CLUB is the Sacred beast that they want to worship before all else - and other fans that see Club/Provincial as only the tools used to find the quality of players needed to give Glory to the National shirt.  International is their sacred cow.

Incorrect. There is nothing to stop a fan adoring Exeter rugby club and England.

You won't change either person's view.  Our system here in Ireland suits us because largely we all see the exploits of the Provinces as a proving ground for International.  International is the big deal and our system is supported by most Irish Provincial fans because we believe in it as both a guarantor of quality within the Provinces themselves and then as a factory system to produce players for International.  And to date...it works.  It's easy for us to happily claim a certain ownership emotion about all the Provinces.  They all feed in to the overall system.

Now we are getting somewhere. This is the first post I've seen which actually admits that the club scene in Ireland is a factory for the test game, and therefore in direct opposition to those owners of say Scarlets, Ospreys and Cardiff. That, by default encapsulates the problem we have in the Pro14 whilst there are these 2 different and polarising models of rugby ownership involved.

Privately run 'clubs' are a active RIVAL to International.

Agree with that, but only because Unions meddle with domestic rugby needlessly.

 Their very role is to try to lessen the role of International and make their product step into the space left.  Money...and more money.

Depends what you mean by "lessen the role". If you mean have less of an input into domestic leagues then yes. Of course...domestic leagues are domestic they should be run by domestic teams. Unions should run test rugby and govern the rugby structures overall.

If you mean private owners are trying to damage test rugby, then no I disagree and your statement is probably libelous. The owners all realise how much getting capped for your country means to players. They know it's the pinnacle. They just want their businesses to be run as well as possible. For them that means getting their players for a fair amount of time and maximizing income.

International/Union controlled rugby impedes the pursuit of more and more profit.  That's the real war when we talk of the variations of League structures.

No, that's not right. Ask the owners of Saracens and Wasps if they care about making profit.

Scarlets and Ospreys and Cardiff are responsible for their own slice of the planet, their own fans, their own backers, their own results, their own philosophy about what Professional sport is about..(Our Union is Ultra professional... many many people get paid.  So quit with the elementary and inaccurate concept of 'Professionalism'.

It's up to the Welsh Regions to decide for themselves what competitions they want to be in, who they want to share it with, when they want to leave, where to go to.... That's their problem...not the IRFU's problem.

The rest of your comments...well, evasion.

Oh , one more thing  - if the owners of Saracens and Wasps don't care about making profit then that's not exactly a version of Professionalism that makes a bit of sense.  Fortunately, I don't believe you.  The owners have their investment portfolios spread so wide that I'm sure for damn certain they're making/or intend making a profit from rugby, either directly... or indirectly, either today, or tomorrow..

SecretFly wrote:Scarlets and Ospreys and Cardiff are responsible for their own slice of the planet, their own fans, their own backers, their own results, their own philosophy about what Professional sport is about..(Our Union is Ultra professional... many many people get paid.  So quit with the elementary and inaccurate concept of 'Professionalism'.

It's up to the Welsh Regions to decide for themselves what competitions they want to be in, who they want to share it with, when they want to leave, where to go to.... That's their problem...not the IRFU's problem.

The rest of your comments...well, evasion.

Oh , one more thing  - if the owners of Saracens and Wasps don't care about making profit then that's not exactly a version of Professionalism that makes a bit of sense.  Fortunately, I don't believe you.  The owners have their investment portfolios spread so wide that I'm sure for damn certain they're making/or intend making a profit from rugby, either directly... or indirectly, either today, or tomorrow..

They make it sound like union owned clubs is a bad thing. Leinster have average crowds of 16-18000 per season, produce international quality players for fun (18 of Leinster's match day 23 against Exeter came from the academy) signed a sponsorship deal worth at least 6 million euros with bank of Ireland and still attract quality foreign players like Fardy and Lowe.

LeinsterFan4life wrote:

SecretFly wrote:Scarlets and Ospreys and Cardiff are responsible for their own slice of the planet, their own fans, their own backers, their own results, their own philosophy about what Professional sport is about..(Our Union is Ultra professional... many many people get paid.  So quit with the elementary and inaccurate concept of 'Professionalism'.

It's up to the Welsh Regions to decide for themselves what competitions they want to be in, who they want to share it with, when they want to leave, where to go to.... That's their problem...not the IRFU's problem.

The rest of your comments...well, evasion.

Oh , one more thing  - if the owners of Saracens and Wasps don't care about making profit then that's not exactly a version of Professionalism that makes a bit of sense.  Fortunately, I don't believe you.  The owners have their investment portfolios spread so wide that I'm sure for damn certain they're making/or intend making a profit from rugby, either directly... or indirectly, either today, or tomorrow..

They make it sound like union owned clubs is a bad thing. Leinster have average crowds of 16-18000 per season, produce international quality players for fun (18 of Leinster's match day 23 against Exeter came from the academy) signed a sponsorship deal worth at least 6 million euros with bank of Ireland and still attract quality foreign players like Fardy and Lowe.

But it ain't modern and Professional, Leinsterfan.  It's still a backward and amateur-run team.

Brian Moore told a story a while back. He was at a premiership function and one of the guys from the PRL shared a taxi with Moore after the do. This PRL guy had had a skinfull. The PRL guy was quick to mention that controlling the Aviva was just the start, the main aim of the PRL was to take over all professional rugby in england from the international team down, and leave the RFU to deal with grass roots and community stuff. International was the cash cow they wanted.
Simon Haliday gave an interview not long after he got a job with European rugby (can't remember if it was this new one of the old Heineken one) and he also parroted the line about PRL running everything from team England down.
The RFU were never informed about the original BT sport's deal or the plan to split from the old Heineken cup, until the FRU chairman asked him about the details.
Some speculation was thrown around as to if this was some power play to try and force RFU to relinquish more control to the PRL of team England, and that maybe BT sport's had been promised the England team as part of the deal.
So maybe, just maybe the club's big contention with international teams being run by the same people who run club's is that they don't have control of team England and that upsets them.

SecretFly wrote:

LeinsterFan4life wrote:

SecretFly wrote:Scarlets and Ospreys and Cardiff are responsible for their own slice of the planet, their own fans, their own backers, their own results, their own philosophy about what Professional sport is about..(Our Union is Ultra professional... many many people get paid.  So quit with the elementary and inaccurate concept of 'Professionalism'.

It's up to the Welsh Regions to decide for themselves what competitions they want to be in, who they want to share it with, when they want to leave, where to go to.... That's their problem...not the IRFU's problem.

The rest of your comments...well, evasion.

Oh , one more thing  - if the owners of Saracens and Wasps don't care about making profit then that's not exactly a version of Professionalism that makes a bit of sense.  Fortunately, I don't believe you.  The owners have their investment portfolios spread so wide that I'm sure for damn certain they're making/or intend making a profit from rugby, either directly... or indirectly, either today, or tomorrow..

They make it sound like union owned clubs is a bad thing. Leinster have average crowds of 16-18000 per season, produce international quality players for fun (18 of Leinster's match day 23 against Exeter came from the academy) signed a sponsorship deal worth at least 6 million euros with bank of Ireland and still attract quality foreign players like Fardy and Lowe.

But it ain't modern and Professional, Leinsterfan.  It's still a backward and amateur-run team.

Aye, Toulon's owner is looking to sell up, perhaps he could come over and bring us up to speed with the other clubs?

carpet baboon wrote:Brian Moore told a story a while back. He was at a premiership function and one of the guys from the PRL shared a taxi with Moore after the do. This PRL guy had had a skinfull. The PRL guy was quick to mention that controlling the Aviva was just the start, the main aim of the PRL was to take over all professional rugby in england from the international team down, and leave the RFU to deal with grass roots and community stuff. International was the cash cow they wanted.
Simon Haliday gave an interview not long after he got a job with European rugby (can't remember if it was this new one of the old Heineken one) and he also parroted the line about PRL running everything from team England down.
The RFU were never informed about the original BT sport's deal or the plan to split from the old Heineken cup, until the FRU chairman asked him about the details.
Some speculation was thrown around as to if this was some power play to try and force RFU to relinquish more control to the PRL of team England, and that maybe BT sport's had been promised the England team as part of the deal.
So maybe, just maybe the club's big contention with international teams being run by the same people who run club's  is that they don't have control of team England and that upsets them.

Yeah, carpet, that's on the records. Rugbyfan won't have heard all that though, because he's new.

SecretFly wrote:
 The owners have their investment portfolios spread so wide that I'm sure for damn certain they're making/or intend making a profit from rugby, either directly... or indirectly, either today, or tomorrow..

I would love you to go to a 'Meet the management' event at the Scarlets and put that forward to Philip Davies, Huw Evans and Nigel Short. Let me know what kind of response you get from them.

You simply have not got a clue what you are talking about.

SecretFly wrote:

carpet baboon wrote:Brian Moore told a story a while back. He was at a premiership function and one of the guys from the PRL shared a taxi with Moore after the do. This PRL guy had had a skinfull. The PRL guy was quick to mention that controlling the Aviva was just the start, the main aim of the PRL was to take over all professional rugby in england from the international team down, and leave the RFU to deal with grass roots and community stuff. International was the cash cow they wanted.
Simon Haliday gave an interview not long after he got a job with European rugby (can't remember if it was this new one of the old Heineken one) and he also parroted the line about PRL running everything from team England down.
The RFU were never informed about the original BT sport's deal or the plan to split from the old Heineken cup, until the FRU chairman asked him about the details.
Some speculation was thrown around as to if this was some power play to try and force RFU to relinquish more control to the PRL of team England, and that maybe BT sport's had been promised the England team as part of the deal.
So maybe, just maybe the club's big contention with international teams being run by the same people who run club's  is that they don't have control of team England and that upsets them.

Yeah, carpet, that's on the records.  Rugbyfan won't have heard all that though, because he's new.

I've never heard that. PRL haven't got a cat in hell's chance of gaining control of England rugby.

LeinsterFan4life wrote:

Aye, Toulon's owner is looking to sell up, perhaps he could come over and bring us up to speed with the other clubs?

Apart from the way the chairman conducts himself, Toulon are THE model every club should be aiming for.

RugbyFan100 wrote:

SecretFly wrote:
 The owners have their investment portfolios spread so wide that I'm sure for damn certain they're making/or intend making a profit from rugby, either directly... or indirectly, either today, or tomorrow..

 I would love you to go to a 'Meet the management' event at the Scarlets and put that forward to Philip Davies, Huw Evans and Nigel Short.  Let me know what kind of response you get from them.

You simply have not got a clue what you are talking about.

Oh yeah...I do know what I'm talking about... I'm talking about the owners of Saracens and Wasps. Why the hell would I need to go put that to Scarlets? Are they the new 'PRL style' Headquarters of Pro14?

But continue evading the points you can't respond to...like that elementary understanding of Professionalism for example.

RugbyFan100 wrote:

LeinsterFan4life wrote:

Aye, Toulon's owner is looking to sell up, perhaps he could come over and bring us up to speed with the other clubs?

Apart from the way the chairman conducts himself, Toulon are THE model every club should be aiming for.

Right.... the hotels and stuff. Yep, I heard that stuff a few years back. Nice novel.

RugbyFan100 wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

carpet baboon wrote:Brian Moore told a story a while back. He was at a premiership function and one of the guys from the PRL shared a taxi with Moore after the do. This PRL guy had had a skinfull. The PRL guy was quick to mention that controlling the Aviva was just the start, the main aim of the PRL was to take over all professional rugby in england from the international team down, and leave the RFU to deal with grass roots and community stuff. International was the cash cow they wanted.
Simon Haliday gave an interview not long after he got a job with European rugby (can't remember if it was this new one of the old Heineken one) and he also parroted the line about PRL running everything from team England down.
The RFU were never informed about the original BT sport's deal or the plan to split from the old Heineken cup, until the FRU chairman asked him about the details.
Some speculation was thrown around as to if this was some power play to try and force RFU to relinquish more control to the PRL of team England, and that maybe BT sport's had been promised the England team as part of the deal.
So maybe, just maybe the club's big contention with international teams being run by the same people who run club's  is that they don't have control of team England and that upsets them.

Yeah, carpet, that's on the records.  Rugbyfan won't have heard all that though, because he's new.

I've never heard that. PRL haven't got a cat in hell's chance of gaining control of England rugby.

I'm surprised you haven't heard it...you're pretty up to date on the other Leagues..... pretty well read.

Besides, the point isn't that they'd gain control of International or not...the point is that it's on their agenda (on record).... piece by piece by piece by piece.

SecretFly wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

carpet baboon wrote:Brian Moore told a story a while back. He was at a premiership function and one of the guys from the PRL shared a taxi with Moore after the do. This PRL guy had had a skinfull. The PRL guy was quick to mention that controlling the Aviva was just the start, the main aim of the PRL was to take over all professional rugby in england from the international team down, and leave the RFU to deal with grass roots and community stuff. International was the cash cow they wanted.
Simon Haliday gave an interview not long after he got a job with European rugby (can't remember if it was this new one of the old Heineken one) and he also parroted the line about PRL running everything from team England down.
The RFU were never informed about the original BT sport's deal or the plan to split from the old Heineken cup, until the FRU chairman asked him about the details.
Some speculation was thrown around as to if this was some power play to try and force RFU to relinquish more control to the PRL of team England, and that maybe BT sport's had been promised the England team as part of the deal.
So maybe, just maybe the club's big contention with international teams being run by the same people who run club's  is that they don't have control of team England and that upsets them.

Yeah, carpet, that's on the records.  Rugbyfan won't have heard all that though, because he's new.

I've never heard that. PRL haven't got a cat in hell's chance of gaining control of England rugby.

I'm surprised you haven't heard it...you're pretty up to date on the other Leagues..... pretty well read.

Besides, the point isn't that they'd gain control of International or not...the point is that it's on their agenda (on record).... piece by piece by piece by piece.

Also makes there repeated complaints about union interference a little , well disingenuous to be kind to them, if they want the same thing but not call themselves a union

RugbyFan100 wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

carpet baboon wrote:Brian Moore told a story a while back. He was at a premiership function and one of the guys from the PRL shared a taxi with Moore after the do. This PRL guy had had a skinfull. The PRL guy was quick to mention that controlling the Aviva was just the start, the main aim of the PRL was to take over all professional rugby in england from the international team down, and leave the RFU to deal with grass roots and community stuff. International was the cash cow they wanted.
Simon Haliday gave an interview not long after he got a job with European rugby (can't remember if it was this new one of the old Heineken one) and he also parroted the line about PRL running everything from team England down.
The RFU were never informed about the original BT sport's deal or the plan to split from the old Heineken cup, until the FRU chairman asked him about the details.
Some speculation was thrown around as to if this was some power play to try and force RFU to relinquish more control to the PRL of team England, and that maybe BT sport's had been promised the England team as part of the deal.
So maybe, just maybe the club's big contention with international teams being run by the same people who run club's  is that they don't have control of team England and that upsets them.

Yeah, carpet, that's on the records.  Rugbyfan won't have heard all that though, because he's new.

I've never heard that. PRL haven't got a cat in hell's chance of gaining control of England rugby.

Why not? The LNR have a big part to play in Guy Noves downfall and Brunel was a guy they approved of while blocking the likes of Galthie and I think Collazo too

carpet baboon wrote:

Also makes there repeated complaints about union interference a little , well disingenuous to be kind to them, if they want the same thing but not call themselves a union

Yep.  I've always semi-jokingly said on these kinds of threads that PRL IS the English Union now.  They virtually already call all the shots in domestic English rugby.  And to date, the head of the RFU just rubber stamps what they want (reference back to the last days of the HC, when the RFU of all organisations pretended all they wanted to be was an honest broker 'neutral' facilitator in the carve up of Europe away from their Union partners into the arms of............... em BT and PRL.)

They now have a new Head at the RFU, it'll be interesting how he sees things if the PRL come to him with more suggestions about how he could further water down his own power base and hand it to them.

SecretFly wrote:

carpet baboon wrote:

Also makes there repeated complaints about union interference a little , well disingenuous to be kind to them, if they want the same thing but not call themselves a union

Yep.  I've always semi-jokingly said on these kinds of threads that PRL IS the English Union now.  They virtually already call all the shots in domestic English rugby.  And to date, the head of the RFU just rubber stamps what they want (reference back to the last days of the HC, when the RFU of all organisations pretended all they wanted to be was an honest broker 'neutral' facilitator in the carve up of Europe away from their Union partners into the arms of............... em BT and PRL.)

They now have a new Head at the RFU, it'll be interesting how he sees things if the PRL come to him with more suggestions about how he could further water down his own power base and hand it to them.

Well apparently there are one of two people within BT sport questioning the value of the deal they have with the PRL and if there exclusive rights to the champions cup as of next year don't bear fruit a radical rethink could be on the cards. But as with all rumours it could be complete twaddle

SecretFly wrote:

Oh yeah...I do know what I'm talking about... I'm talking about the owners of Saracens and Wasps.  Why the hell would I need to go put that to Scarlets?  Are they the new 'PRL style' Headquarters of Pro14?

.

Because they have exactly the same business model. (apart from the way Wasps raised the bond equity)

You really need to get clued up on this.

marty2086 wrote:
Why not? The LNR have a big part to play in Guy Noves downfall and Brunel was a guy they approved of while blocking the likes of Galthie and I think Collazo too

A part to play - of course. "Running England rugby from the top down" - er, nope.

SecretFly wrote:
I'm surprised you haven't heard it...you're pretty up to date on the other Leagues..... pretty well read.

Confused now:

LeinsterFan4life wrote:
You don't seem to know much about anything...

RugbyFan100 wrote:

SecretFly wrote:
I'm surprised you haven't heard it...you're pretty up to date on the other Leagues..... pretty well read.

Confused now:

Confused now?  About what?

I'll repeat the line slowly.

I'm surprised you hadn't heard about it [the bit about the PRL guy in the taxi with Moore).  I'm surprised you hadn't heard it, considering you seem to be old enough to have had the same interest you now have in rugby (a detailed interest) back then a very short few years ago when the alternative to the HC was being debated to saturation levels.

I'm surprised a guy like you hadn't heard about PRL and their long term over-view and wishlists.

So........... why confused?

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:
Why not? The LNR have a big part to play in Guy Noves downfall and Brunel was a guy they approved of while blocking the likes of Galthie and I think Collazo too

A part to play - of course. "Running England rugby from the top down" - er, nope.

these things tend not to happen in one swoop, they tend to be gradual and the LNR are slowing building their power as Laporte is finding. The same is happening in England, only difference is the RFU are in a financially strong position but the more money the AP and PRL generate the less they need the RFU.

RugbyFan100 wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

Oh yeah...I do know what I'm talking about... I'm talking about the owners of Saracens and Wasps.  Why the hell would I need to go put that to Scarlets?  Are they the new 'PRL style' Headquarters of Pro14?

.

Because they have exactly the same business model. (apart from the way Wasps raised the bond equity)

You really need to get clued up on this.

You still don't get it, do you? You talk about Professionalism.... yet you say certain bosses don't want or need profit from their Rugby investments.
I say I disagree with that nutty assumption on your part and say there are many avenues of revenue from rugby directly or indirectly ..and if you have the bank account that lets you dabble in the stock market...profits come...directly or indirectly.
You say try telling that to the 'poor cousins' who own the Three Welsh Regions that haven't been taken semi-over by WRU.
I say I'm talking about the guys you mentioned, the owners that don't need to profit from rugby.

I ask now again, are we talking about the need for profit (Scarlets, Ospreys, Blues) or not needing profit (Saracens and Wasps) when we consider this word you're so fond of Professionalism?

SecretFly wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

SecretFly wrote:
I'm surprised you haven't heard it...you're pretty up to date on the other Leagues..... pretty well read.

Confused now:

Confused now?  About what?

I'll repeat the line slowly.

I'm surprised you hadn't heard about it [the bit about the PRL guy in the taxi with Moore).  I'm surprised you hadn't heard it, considering you seem to be old enough to have had the same interest you now have in rugby (a detailed interest) back then a very short few years ago when the alternative to the HC was being debated to saturation levels.

I'm surprised a guy like you hadn't heard about PRL and their long term over-view and wishlists.

So........... why confused?

Read the {whole} post again. Including the second quote.

marty2086 wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:
Why not? The LNR have a big part to play in Guy Noves downfall and Brunel was a guy they approved of while blocking the likes of Galthie and I think Collazo too

A part to play - of course. "Running England rugby from the top down" - er, nope.

these things tend not to happen in one swoop, they tend to be gradual and the LNR are slowing building their power as Laporte is finding. The same is happening in England, only difference is the RFU are in a financially strong position but the more money the AP and PRL generate the less they need the RFU.

The NRL in rugby league run the international game in Australia and basically the PIs too. They are also responsible for the cancellation of a test between England and NZ in America for this year due to the power and money they have in the game. A lot of league fans actually blame the NRL for the problems in international rugby league. Unions are essential imo.

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:
Why not? The LNR have a big part to play in Guy Noves downfall and Brunel was a guy they approved of while blocking the likes of Galthie and I think Collazo too

A part to play - of course. "Running England rugby from the top down" - er, nope.

Again, your 'nope' has no significance. The PRL's stated intentions do. They might never get what they want...but the objective, secret or open, is that they wanted it.. from the top down..

SecretFly wrote:

You still don't get it, do you?  You talk about Professionalism.... yet you say certain bosses don't want or need profit from their Rugby investments.  
I say I disagree with that nutty assumption on your part and say there are many avenues of revenue from rugby directly or indirectly ..and if you have the bank account that lets you dabble in the stock market...profits come...directly or indirectly.

You say try telling that to the 'poor cousins' who own the Three Welsh Regions that haven't been taken semi-over by WRU.  
I say I'm talking about the guys you mentioned, the owners that don't need to profit from rugby.

I ask now again, are we talking about the need for profit (Scarlets, Ospreys, Blues) or not needing profit (Saracens and Wasps) when we consider this word you're so fond of Professionalism?

They're the same model. They are the bankrolled in the same manner. Just some are bankrolled more than others.

It's funny this is so alien to you, when this is basically the way professional sport is funded the world over.

Your IRFU ownership model is stone age. It's prehistoric.

SecretFly wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:
Why not? The LNR have a big part to play in Guy Noves downfall and Brunel was a guy they approved of while blocking the likes of Galthie and I think Collazo too

A part to play - of course. "Running England rugby from the top down" - er, nope.

Again, your 'nope' has no significance.  The PRL's stated intentions do.  They might never get what they want...but the objective, secret or open, is that they wanted it.. from the top down..  

Stated intentions? A drunk conversation in the back of a taxi cab?

LeinsterFan4life wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:
Why not? The LNR have a big part to play in Guy Noves downfall and Brunel was a guy they approved of while blocking the likes of Galthie and I think Collazo too

A part to play - of course. "Running England rugby from the top down" - er, nope.

these things tend not to happen in one swoop, they tend to be gradual and the LNR are slowing building their power as Laporte is finding. The same is happening in England, only difference is the RFU are in a financially strong position but the more money the AP and PRL generate the less they need the RFU.

The NRL in rugby league run the international game in Australia and basically the PIs too. They are also responsible for the cancellation of a test between England and NZ in America for this year due to the power and money they have in the game. A lot of league fans actually blame the NRL for the problems in international rugby league. Unions are essential imo.

Unions ARE essential. I've never stated otherwise.

RugbyFan100 wrote:

International/Union controlled rugby impedes the pursuit of more and more profit.  That's the real war when we talk of the variations of League structures.

No, that's not right. Ask the owners of Saracens and Wasps if they care about making profit.

If Wasps owners don't care about profits then why did they move to Coventry to tap into a fanbase away from a crowded marketplace?

marty2086 wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

International/Union controlled rugby impedes the pursuit of more and more profit.  That's the real war when we talk of the variations of League structures.

No, that's not right. Ask the owners of Saracens and Wasps if they care about making profit.

If Wasps owners don't care about profits then why did they move to Coventry to tap into a fanbase away from a crowded marketplace?

To maximize their income and rugby brand.

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

International/Union controlled rugby impedes the pursuit of more and more profit.  That's the real war when we talk of the variations of League structures.

No, that's not right. Ask the owners of Saracens and Wasps if they care about making profit.

If Wasps owners don't care about profits then why did they move to Coventry to tap into a fanbase away from a crowded marketplace?

To maximize their income and rugby brand.

And maximizing income helps do what?

marty2086 wrote:

And maximizing income helps do what?

Pay for things

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

And maximizing income helps do what?

Pay for things

So Wasps in are business to breakeven?

RugbyFan100 wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:
Why not? The LNR have a big part to play in Guy Noves downfall and Brunel was a guy they approved of while blocking the likes of Galthie and I think Collazo too

A part to play - of course. "Running England rugby from the top down" - er, nope.

Again, your 'nope' has no significance.  The PRL's stated intentions do.  They might never get what they want...but the objective, secret or open, is that they wanted it.. from the top down..  

Stated intentions? A drunk conversation in the back of a taxi cab?

No...no...more than that. You pretend you read nothing but read everything.

But you're kinda drifting now.... "How can I argue that Unions should f**k off out of Club competitions when PRL has designs on controlling more of what International does?"

I know Rugbyfan.. It's a tough one. Pity we all remember too much of what gets said.

marty2086 wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

And maximizing income helps do what?

Pay for things

So Wasps in are business to breakeven?

Wasps are in business to win rugby matches using very good players.

SecretFly wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:
Why not? The LNR have a big part to play in Guy Noves downfall and Brunel was a guy they approved of while blocking the likes of Galthie and I think Collazo too

A part to play - of course. "Running England rugby from the top down" - er, nope.

Again, your 'nope' has no significance.  The PRL's stated intentions do.  They might never get what they want...but the objective, secret or open, is that they wanted it.. from the top down..  

Stated intentions? A drunk conversation in the back of a taxi cab?

No...no...more than that.  You pretend you read nothing but read everything.

But you're kinda drifting now.... "How can I argue that Unions should f**k off out of Club competitions when PRL has designs on controlling more of what International does?"

My guess is that PRL have absolutely no desire to control England rugby at the top. So I'm not about to argue that they do.

RugbyFan100 wrote:

It's funny this is so alien to you, when this is basically the way professional sport is funded the world over.

Your IRFU ownership model is stone age. It's prehistoric.

It's funny that the stone age model works and the Welsh one (to date) doesn't? Is that not funny? Back to the stone age for you guys maybe? Better diets anyway, less sugar, bigger muscles.

SecretFly wrote:

It's funny that the stone age model works and the Welsh one (to date) doesn't?  Is that not funny?   Back to the stone age for you guys maybe?  Better diets anyway, less sugar, bigger muscles.

The Pro12 was won last year by "the Welsh one".

The RCC has now been won how many times ina  row by the same model?

RugbyFan100 wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:
Why not? The LNR have a big part to play in Guy Noves downfall and Brunel was a guy they approved of while blocking the likes of Galthie and I think Collazo too

A part to play - of course. "Running England rugby from the top down" - er, nope.

Again, your 'nope' has no significance.  The PRL's stated intentions do.  They might never get what they want...but the objective, secret or open, is that they wanted it.. from the top down..  

Stated intentions? A drunk conversation in the back of a taxi cab?

No...no...more than that.  You pretend you read nothing but read everything.

But you're kinda drifting now.... "How can I argue that Unions should f**k off out of Club competitions when PRL has designs on controlling more of what International does?"

My guess is that PRL have absolutely no desire to control England rugby at the top. So I'm not about to argue that they do.

Of course you don't want to argue it. And guesses aren't good enough in this age of Professionalism. Come on now, don't start guessing your way through a debate...get your facts and figures and spread sheets up where we can see them

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

And maximizing income helps do what?

Pay for things

So Wasps in are business to breakeven?

Wasps are in business to win rugby matches using very good players.

how very altruistic

They are a business and making a profit matters since they have shareholders they have a fiduciary duty to turn a profit

RugbyFan100 wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:
Why not? The LNR have a big part to play in Guy Noves downfall and Brunel was a guy they approved of while blocking the likes of Galthie and I think Collazo too

A part to play - of course. "Running England rugby from the top down" - er, nope.

Again, your 'nope' has no significance.  The PRL's stated intentions do.  They might never get what they want...but the objective, secret or open, is that they wanted it.. from the top down..  

Stated intentions? A drunk conversation in the back of a taxi cab?

No...no...more than that.  You pretend you read nothing but read everything.

But you're kinda drifting now.... "How can I argue that Unions should f**k off out of Club competitions when PRL has designs on controlling more of what International does?"

My guess is that PRL have absolutely no desire to control England rugby at the top. So I'm not about to argue that they do.

So someone who actually is in the know says they are but you guess they don't?

Why wouldn't they want control? If it means a bigger piece of the pie for them then it's the smart thing to do and saves them having to go with a begging bowl to the RFU

marty2086 wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

RugbyFan100 wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

And maximizing income helps do what?

Pay for things

So Wasps in are business to breakeven?

Wasps are in business to win rugby matches using very good players.

how very altruistic

They are a business and making a profit matters since they have shareholders they have a fiduciary duty to turn a profit

That's not what I'm debating though is it. I'm arguing that this statement from Secretfly is false:

" I'm sure for damn certain the owners are making/or intend making a profit from rugby"