Nations championship draws nearer

First topic message reminder :

Well there is a meeting today in Dublin to discuss the future of a global championship. Would this ruin the 6N and world cup ? I think they are going to discuss how everybody are supposed to play each other, apparently though there is going to be a backing of 5 billion big ones for this from sports giants Infront.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/48348250

What are everyone's thoughts on this ?

marty2086 wrote:

ebop wrote:Because Fiji, Samoa, Tonga play at Twickers and make England money and are handed out meal vouchers in return. But does England play in Fiji, Sampa, Tonga to return the favour (to make those unions some money) and get fed kava and taro. Do you honestly not see the discrepancy marty?

Are Samoa forced to play England?

I imagine so, if they want to be a viable international rugby playing nation

So that's a no. They have a choice as to whether they wish to play.

ebop wrote:Because Fiji, Samoa, Tonga play at Twickers and make England money and are handed out meal vouchers in return. But does England play in Fiji, Samoa, Tonga to return the favour (to make those unions some money) and get fed kava and taro. Do you honestly not see the discrepancy marty?

I'm all in favour of the Pacificas and the Tier 2 European teams getting a fair shake of the money when they play at Twickenham or the Aviva, etc. but don't see any reason why the NH nations should pay the Tier 1 SH nations a penny beyond the agreed expenses.

No 7&1/2 wrote:So that's a no. They have a choice as to whether they wish to play.

Seems so but it's everyone elses fault that the likes of Fiji and Samoa are at best run by incompetents

I have no issue with RFU sharing some of the monies made with the visitors. It seems the RFU would rather do that than sign up to the Nations League. The percentage would be a matter of discussion and would need to take into account the matchday costs and some element for stadium depreciation. 

In 2017/18 RFU made £30m Ticket Sales, 41m matchday hospitality and catering. (They also had income from Broadcasting, Sponsoship, Hotel etc). Direct costs attributable to generating these sales (Stewards, Catering Staff, Ticketing Staff, Security, Cost of food and drink) came to £30m. Stadium depreciation came to £16m, thus gross profits from matchdays could be argued at £25m. 

Sharing a percentage of profits with visitors would seem reasonable, but should also happen when England are the visitors. To me that seems reasonable and RFU should be able to afford it with the proposed incomes from the various deals 6Ns have in the pipeline.

What does not seem reasonable is NZRU wanting a bigger slice of the cake than any other country.

Irish Londoner wrote:

ebop wrote:Because Fiji, Samoa, Tonga play at Twickers and make England money and are handed out meal vouchers in return. But does England play in Fiji, Samoa, Tonga to return the favour (to make those unions some money) and get fed kava and taro. Do you honestly not see the discrepancy marty?

I'm all in favour of the Pacificas and the Tier 2 European teams getting a fair shake of the money when they play at Twickenham or the Aviva, etc. but don't see any reason why the NH nations should pay the Tier 1 SH nations a penny beyond the agreed expenses.

The ABs are a draw card and ticket prices at NH stadia get ramped up when they’re in town and make your unions ‘more’ money than the average game would. In return, the ABs get meal vouchers. And vice versa, kiwis want to see the All Blacks beat England and Ireland at home so will pay more because we’re sick of getting served up no-hopers. England and Ireland would benefit from the higher ticket prices sold to NZers. The percentage paid out is the question.

LondonTiger wrote:
What does not seem reasonable is NZRU wanting a bigger slice of the cake than any other country.

The likes of the RFU increase ticket prices for teams like NZ, so the same share of it as other teams should still equal more.

Should home teams get any of the sponsorship or tv revenue that touring teams get?

marty2086 wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:
What does not seem reasonable is NZRU wanting a bigger slice of the cake than any other country.

The likes of the RFU increase ticket prices for teams like NZ, so the same share of it as other teams should still equal more.

Should home teams get any of the sponsorship or tv revenue that touring teams get?

I would not look at sharing sponsorship and TV revenues. Just direct match profits.

marty2086 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Always a balance and it's the choice clubs regions etc take. Clubs in sh can make the same choices.
There isn't one correct way of doing things.

Spot on but choosing a model then complaining about someone elses is moronic, NZRU choose to shoulder the burden of paying all contracts if that is hurting the franchises that means it isn't working

So you are in favour of non union controlled enterprises now are you ?

LondonTiger wrote:What does not seem reasonable is NZRU wanting a bigger slice of the cake than any other country.

Have NZR said they want a bigger percentage?

No 7&1/2 wrote:So that's a no. They have a choice as to whether they wish to play.

If they don’t they’ll starve because the RFU won’t give them their meal vouchers

LondonTiger wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:
What does not seem reasonable is NZRU wanting a bigger slice of the cake than any other country.

The likes of the RFU increase ticket prices for teams like NZ, so the same share of it as other teams should still equal more.

Should home teams get any of the sponsorship or tv revenue that touring teams get?

I would not look at sharing sponsorship and TV revenues. Just direct match profits.

I can see that being a minefield though

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Always a balance and it's the choice clubs regions etc take. Clubs in sh can make the same choices.
There isn't one correct way of doing things.

Spot on but choosing a model then complaining about someone elses is moronic, NZRU choose to shoulder the burden of paying all contracts if that is hurting the franchises that means it isn't working

So you are in favour of non union controlled enterprises now are you ?

Go back to bed would you

ebop wrote:

Irish Londoner wrote:

ebop wrote:Because Fiji, Samoa, Tonga play at Twickers and make England money and are handed out meal vouchers in return. But does England play in Fiji, Samoa, Tonga to return the favour (to make those unions some money) and get fed kava and taro. Do you honestly not see the discrepancy marty?

I'm all in favour of the Pacificas and the Tier 2 European teams getting a fair shake of the money when they play at Twickenham or the Aviva, etc. but don't see any reason why the NH nations should pay the Tier 1 SH nations a penny beyond the agreed expenses.

The ABs are a draw card and ticket prices at NH stadia get ramped up when they’re in town and make your unions ‘more’ money than the average game would. In return, the ABs get meal vouchers. And vice versa, kiwis want to see the All Blacks beat England and Ireland at home so will pay more because we’re sick of getting served up no-hopers. England and Ireland would benefit from the higher ticket prices sold to NZers. The percentage paid out is the question.

So what other international sport does this? When England play France in the European Soccer Championship England should give half the gate receipts from Wembley to the French for turning up?

If NZ don't want to tour then stay at home.

They must be starving now then ebop as they don't get a match against England every year.

ebop wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:What does not seem reasonable is NZRU wanting a bigger slice of the cake than any other country.

Have NZR said they want a bigger percentage?

In the past yes.

LondonTiger wrote:

ebop wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:What does not seem reasonable is NZRU wanting a bigger slice of the cake than any other country.

Have NZR said they want a bigger percentage?

In the past yes.

All Blacks Demand Double Their Test Match Fee

https://punditarena.com/rugby/cmalone/blacks-impose-exceeded-test-price-charge/

Irish Londoner wrote:

ebop wrote:

Irish Londoner wrote:

ebop wrote:Because Fiji, Samoa, Tonga play at Twickers and make England money and are handed out meal vouchers in return. But does England play in Fiji, Samoa, Tonga to return the favour (to make those unions some money) and get fed kava and taro. Do you honestly not see the discrepancy marty?

I'm all in favour of the Pacificas and the Tier 2 European teams getting a fair shake of the money when they play at Twickenham or the Aviva, etc. but don't see any reason why the NH nations should pay the Tier 1 SH nations a penny beyond the agreed expenses.

The ABs are a draw card and ticket prices at NH stadia get ramped up when they’re in town and make your unions ‘more’ money than the average game would. In return, the ABs get meal vouchers. And vice versa, kiwis want to see the All Blacks beat England and Ireland at home so will pay more because we’re sick of getting served up no-hopers. England and Ireland would benefit from the higher ticket prices sold to NZers. The percentage paid out is the question.

So what other international sport does this? When England play France in the European Soccer Championship England should give half the gate receipts from Wembley to the French for turning up?

If NZ don't want to tour then stay at home.

Wouldn’t bother me and no money lost by NZR. Your fans might miss out though and get a bit nervous the next time they played in a RWC. Imagine if SA and Aus also said ‘not playing them guys for meal vouchers’ when we can negotiate terms with Wales (for example) for a % of the gate. Why don’t we freeze them out because they’re greedy and want it all? Play someone else until they’re more reasonable.

marty2086 wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:

ebop wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:What does not seem reasonable is NZRU wanting a bigger slice of the cake than any other country.

Have NZR said they want a bigger percentage?

In the past yes.

All Blacks Demand Double Their Test Match Fee

https://punditarena.com/rugby/cmalone/blacks-impose-exceeded-test-price-charge/

That’s an ‘out of window’ game marty, any others?

ebop wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:

ebop wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:What does not seem reasonable is NZRU wanting a bigger slice of the cake than any other country.

Have NZR said they want a bigger percentage?

In the past yes.

All Blacks Demand Double Their Test Match Fee

https://punditarena.com/rugby/cmalone/blacks-impose-exceeded-test-price-charge/

That’s an ‘out of window’ game marty, any others?

Who said it had to be within the window?

marty2086 wrote:

ebop wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:

ebop wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:What does not seem reasonable is NZRU wanting a bigger slice of the cake than any other country.

Have NZR said they want a bigger percentage?

In the past yes.

All Blacks Demand Double Their Test Match Fee

https://punditarena.com/rugby/cmalone/blacks-impose-exceeded-test-price-charge/

That’s an ‘out of window’ game marty, any others?

Who said it had to be within the window?

Because playing an ‘out of window’ game for meal vouchers is not very wise marty

What do you mean by meal vouchers. You seem to saying that Samoa and new zealand get the same money?

ebop wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

ebop wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:

ebop wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:What does not seem reasonable is NZRU wanting a bigger slice of the cake than any other country.

Have NZR said they want a bigger percentage?

In the past yes.

All Blacks Demand Double Their Test Match Fee

https://punditarena.com/rugby/cmalone/blacks-impose-exceeded-test-price-charge/

That’s an ‘out of window’ game marty, any others?

Who said it had to be within the window?

Because playing an ‘out of window’ game for meal vouchers is not very wise marty

Thems some expensive meal vouchers

Seems you're just digging into a position with no way out now

No 7&1/2 wrote:They must be starving now then ebop as they don't get a match against England every year.

Yeah true 7.5, probably why so many Pacific Islanders are turning up in lily-white English shirts with red roses on them. Gotta feed the extended family I suppose. I mean, who cares if you’re the only Vunipola in England. It’s novel and that’s something to be proud of. All thanks to rugby eh.

I'm certainly proud England embraces people of different races and cultures yes. And on the flip side I'm horrified when I hear people claim lads like the vunipola s shouldn't be able to play for England.

marty, you understand what ‘out of window’ means don’t you? It means making money basically. Money for us and money for them England wanted the game because they thought they were the business at the time and wanted to see if they could beat the best but they weren’t prepared to pay up for the privilege. Probably for the best because they tanked soon after.

ebop wrote:marty, you understand what ‘out of window’ means don’t you? It means making money basically. Money for us and money for them England wanted the game because they thought they were the business at the time and wanted to see if they could beat the best but they weren’t prepared to pay up for the privilege. Probably for the best because they tanked soon after.

I'm trying to grasp what point you're actually trying to make there since it's always about making money

Vunipolas can play for England 7.5 because they’re good at rugby and qualify through lenient WR rules. But the average Tongan isn’t allowed to live in your country. That’s not very good is it 7.5? It smacks of me-me-me doesn’t it 7.5?

No 7&1/2 wrote:I'm certainly proud England embraces people of different races and cultures yes. And on the flip side I'm horrified when I hear people claim lads like the vunipola s shouldn't be able to play for England.

Sadly such views are held by a sizeable portion of the population in England. Not sure how many votes they will have received but the Election Leaflet I got through the door from teh English Democratic Party was pretty horrid - pretty much "English, White and Proud". Thankfully they are a minority but we will see a massive lurch to the right in the Govt now and people with these views will find a more mainstream home to espouse them.

Migration rules suck ebop. Not as much as others but far too harsh. Sadly there's a proportion of the coin try tricked into thinking they are too lenient! But yes it's great that their parent s settled here.

Yup LT. I find it fairly worrying.

ebop wrote:Vunipolas can play for England 7.5 because they’re good at rugby and qualify through lenient WR rules. But the average Tongan isn’t allowed to live in your country. That’s not very good is it 7.5? It smacks of me-me-me doesn’t it 7.5?

Are you saying that only sports people are able to move to the UK?  If so, then I've never read such horsesh!te on this site!

I'd wager that the UK has more cultural diversity than NZ.

marty, the game in the link you provided was for an out of window game that England wanted. NZR said ok but give us 50%. RFU said no. NZR said ok no problem. End of story.

ebop wrote:marty, the game in the link you provided was for an out of window game that England wanted. NZR said ok but give us 50%. RFU said no. NZR said ok no problem. End of story.

And when it was taking place is irrelevant, they doubled their asking price

The Oracle wrote:

ebop wrote:Vunipolas can play for England 7.5 because they’re good at rugby and qualify through lenient WR rules. But the average Tongan isn’t allowed to live in your country. That’s not very good is it 7.5? It smacks of me-me-me doesn’t it 7.5?

Are you saying that only sports people are able to move to the UK?  If so, then I've never read such horsesh!te on this site!

I'd wager that the UK has more cultural diversity than NZ.

Whoa, calm down mate, lol. Oracle, I don’t imagine there’s many non-rugby playing Pacific Islanders emigrating to Britain for the weather, lifestyle and economic opportunities. Do you see many Pacific Islanders walking down the high street? Didn’t think so. And besides, you say the UK has cultural diversity but over 50% don’t want it. That’s a telling stat isn’t it Oracle.

ebop wrote:

Irish Londoner wrote:

ebop wrote:

Irish Londoner wrote:

ebop wrote:Because Fiji, Samoa, Tonga play at Twickers and make England money and are handed out meal vouchers in return. But does England play in Fiji, Samoa, Tonga to return the favour (to make those unions some money) and get fed kava and taro. Do you honestly not see the discrepancy marty?

I'm all in favour of the Pacificas and the Tier 2 European teams getting a fair shake of the money when they play at Twickenham or the Aviva, etc. but don't see any reason why the NH nations should pay the Tier 1 SH nations a penny beyond the agreed expenses.

The ABs are a draw card and ticket prices at NH stadia get ramped up when they’re in town and make your unions ‘more’ money than the average game would. In return, the ABs get meal vouchers. And vice versa, kiwis want to see the All Blacks beat England and Ireland at home so will pay more because we’re sick of getting served up no-hopers. England and Ireland would benefit from the higher ticket prices sold to NZers. The percentage paid out is the question.

So what other international sport does this? When England play France in the European Soccer Championship England should give half the gate receipts from Wembley to the French for turning up?

If NZ don't want to tour then stay at home.

Wouldn’t bother me and no money lost by NZR. Your fans might miss out though and get a bit nervous the next time they played in a RWC. Imagine if SA and Aus also said ‘not playing them guys for meal vouchers’ when we can negotiate terms with Wales (for example) for a % of the gate. Why don’t we freeze them out because they’re greedy and want it all? Play someone else until they’re more reasonable.

Because without the income for the reverse fixtures i.e. when the NH and Lions tour you'd be bankrupt in a couple of years.

ebop wrote:

The Oracle wrote:

ebop wrote:Vunipolas can play for England 7.5 because they’re good at rugby and qualify through lenient WR rules. But the average Tongan isn’t allowed to live in your country. That’s not very good is it 7.5? It smacks of me-me-me doesn’t it 7.5?

Are you saying that only sports people are able to move to the UK?  If so, then I've never read such horsesh!te on this site!

I'd wager that the UK has more cultural diversity than NZ.

Whoa, calm down mate, lol. Oracle, I don’t imagine there’s many non-rugby playing Pacific Islanders emigrating to Britain for the weather, lifestyle and economic opportunities. Do you see many Pacific Islanders walking down the high street? Didn’t think so. And besides, you say the UK has cultural diversity but over 50% don’t want it. That’s a telling stat isn’t it Oracle.

Well there's a lie to begin with

ebop wrote:

The Oracle wrote:

ebop wrote:Vunipolas can play for England 7.5 because they’re good at rugby and qualify through lenient WR rules. But the average Tongan isn’t allowed to live in your country. That’s not very good is it 7.5? It smacks of me-me-me doesn’t it 7.5?

Are you saying that only sports people are able to move to the UK?  If so, then I've never read such horsesh!te on this site!

I'd wager that the UK has more cultural diversity than NZ.

Whoa, calm down mate, lol. Oracle, I don’t imagine there’s many non-rugby playing Pacific Islanders emigrating to Britain for the weather, lifestyle and economic opportunities. Do you see many Pacific Islanders walking down the high street? Didn’t think so. And besides, you say the UK has cultural diversity but over 50% don’t want it. That’s a telling stat isn’t it Oracle.

Of course New Zealand and Australia (to name a couple of places) are welcoming to migrants from all over the world, with an open door policy and place absolutely no restrictions on who can come in, how long they can stay for and what jobs they can do when they arrive?

The Oracle wrote:

ebop wrote:Vunipolas can play for England 7.5 because they’re good at rugby and qualify through lenient WR rules. But the average Tongan isn’t allowed to live in your country. That’s not very good is it 7.5? It smacks of me-me-me doesn’t it 7.5?

Are you saying that only sports people are able to move to the UK?  If so, then I've never read such horsesh!te on this site!

I'd wager that the UK has more cultural diversity than NZ.

Not sure, lets see:

NZ Census 2013 - European 74%, Maori 15%, Pacific Islands 7.4%, Asian 12%, Middle East 1.2% Other 1.7%   (You will note that this comes to quite a lot more than 100%. this is due teh the census allowing people to pick multiple ethnicities. there are various advantages to doing so but perhaps we should leave internal political arguments for another place)

UK Census 2011 - White 87%, Asian 7%, Black 3%, Mixed Race 2%, Other 1%


Taken by that NZ would appear more diverse. However we would need to delve deeper to understand whether that is true.


PS - there were 70k Kiwi born residents of teh UK in 2015, and 7k born in Fiji.

ebop wrote:

The Oracle wrote:

ebop wrote:Vunipolas can play for England 7.5 because they’re good at rugby and qualify through lenient WR rules. But the average Tongan isn’t allowed to live in your country. That’s not very good is it 7.5? It smacks of me-me-me doesn’t it 7.5?

Are you saying that only sports people are able to move to the UK?  If so, then I've never read such horsesh!te on this site!

I'd wager that the UK has more cultural diversity than NZ.

Whoa, calm down mate, lol. Oracle, I don’t imagine there’s many non-rugby playing Pacific Islanders emigrating to Britain for the weather, lifestyle and economic opportunities. Do you see many Pacific Islanders walking down the high street? Didn’t think so. And besides, you say the UK has cultural diversity but over 50% don’t want it. That’s a telling stat isn’t it Oracle.

If you're referring to the Brexit vote then you'd be a fool if you thought that was all to do with cultural diversity and 'stopping foreigners'. For some of the racists and xenophobes it was, yes. But they're a small minority, same as in every country.

On your point about PIs walking down the street. Actually I do! Not many but there's a strong community of PI families in the Gwent valleys. Offspring of ex-rugby players and extended families, so rugby was part of the reason some of them came here in the first place. But others then followed. Big in the church. Our security guard at work is Tongan. Related to the Vunipolas. This guy isn't a pro rugby player but still very much Tongan and living in the UK.

LondonTiger wrote:

The Oracle wrote:

ebop wrote:Vunipolas can play for England 7.5 because they’re good at rugby and qualify through lenient WR rules. But the average Tongan isn’t allowed to live in your country. That’s not very good is it 7.5? It smacks of me-me-me doesn’t it 7.5?

Are you saying that only sports people are able to move to the UK?  If so, then I've never read such horsesh!te on this site!

I'd wager that the UK has more cultural diversity than NZ.

Not sure, lets see:

NZ Census 2013 - European 74%, Maori 15%, Pacific Islands 7.4%, Asian 12%, Middle East 1.2% Other 1.7%   (You will note that this comes to quite a lot more than 100%. this is due teh the census allowing people to pick multiple ethnicities. there are various advantages to doing so but perhaps we should leave internal political arguments for another place)

UK Census 2011 - White 87%, Asian 7%, Black 3%, Mixed Race 2%, Other 1%


Taken by that NZ would appear more diverse. However we would need to delve deeper to understand whether that is true.


PS - there were 70k Kiwi born residents of teh UK in 2015, and 7k born in Fiji.

European and White are not necessarily the same thing, so that could be very misleading above! Also, why separate out Maori and PI but lump all Asian together and all Middle East? (I appreciate these are not your stats, LT).

Irish Londoner wrote:

Taylorman wrote:

yappysnap wrote:Shouldnt you be angry with NZ for not doing more to keep players then with the countries who recieve them? Sort your house out then throw stones

We’ve always had our house sorted. Shows in the results. What we can’t do is conjure up 200 million lazy fat fans to but a ticket to our matches.

For someone from a country that is built on immigration by people looking for a better life, you seem very cross about people leaving it to do the same......

What seems acceptable is northern rugby is prepared to lose its identity for the sake of results. Your teams are soaked with SH input.

That’s fine. Just glad we don’t have that here.

We produce our players and teams. The north have largely given that up.

Such a shame.

Again more to do with economic concerns than rugby. People are attracted to opportunity and money which new zealand doesn't have as much of as other countries

Oracle, have you asked the Tongan security guard at work what Visa he’s on and when he’s returning home? You know, just in casual conversation.

ebop wrote:Oracle, have you asked the Tongan security guard at work what Visa he’s on and when he’s returning home?

No, but he's been here since the 90s so it's a pretty long visa! Pretty sure he must be eligible to stay forever by now.

Just to confirm with you guys. There is free movement for all countries to new zealand yes?

Really Oracle, the 90s?! That’s commitment, shake that guys hand

Taylorman wrote:

What seems acceptable is northern rugby is prepared to lose its identity for the sake of results.  Your teams are soaked with SH input.

That’s fine. Just glad we don’t have that here.

We produce our players and teams. The north have largely given that up.

Such a shame.

While the bold bits fit your narrative, not strictly true that NH clubs are "soaked with SH input" and "given up producing players."

Of the 46 players representing Saracens and Exeter in this week's semi finals 9 were not in school in the UK by the age of 13. (Maitland, Barritt, Koch, Skelton, Rhodes, White, Dennis, Ewers, Armand). Of these two played their first pro rugby in the UK and have British parents. Both teams have strong academies and are building strong links with their local communities. It is a model that seems to be working pretty well. If you believe 15% of fully developed imports is giving up well that is your prerogative.

You'll love this one eBop - there was a Tongan international who came to Wales many moons ago, settled down and had a family.  Had a son who is now with the Scarlets and is in the Wales age group system (born and bred here, before you get your knickers in a twist ).  His name is..... wait for it....... Carwyn Tuipulotu!  Superb name!  Good mix of the two cultures right there.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Just to confirm with you guys. There is free movement for all countries to new zealand yes?

https://www.immigration.govt.nz/new-zealand-visas/apply-for-a-visa/about-visa/skilled-migrant-category-resident-visa


New Zealand as a country is one of the good guys. I like the country, and have enjoyed meeting a lot of Kiwis either on my travels or theirs. The kiwis I have met in person have a great sense of humour and have seemed to lack any semblance of self-importance. Much like here their press can be overbearing and at times insufferable. We have Stephen Jones and Mick Cleary for rugby, they have similar. We have keyboard warriors, they have similar.

We are both countries with diverse populations and large amounts of migration. There is more that connects us than divides us. 

Oh and neither of us are Australians.