Should the top two English leagues be merged?

First topic message reminder :

Ruck.co.uk have put together a rather pie in the sky piece about league reform in England.

https://www.ruck.co.uk/what-would-the-premiership-look-like-if-it-was-split-into-conferences-like-the-nfl/

It suggests splitting the top two divisions into 5 NFL style conferences. 

NORTHERN DIVISION
Doncaster Knights
Newcastle Falcons
Sale Sharks
Yorkshire Carnegie

LONDON DIVISION
Ealing Trailfinders
Harlequins
London Irish
Saracens

MIDLANDS 1
Bedford Blues
Leicester Tigers
Northampton Saints
Nottingham

MIDLANDS 2
Bristol Bears
Gloucester
Wasps
Worcester Warriors

SOUTHERN DIVISION
Bath
Cornish Pirates
Exeter Chiefs
Jersey

The issues emerge immediately as outraged Bristol fans want to know why they are a Midlands team and Bath are a Southern one. Midlands 2 would be much better re-badged as West.

Yorkshire/Leeds or whatever their name is this week obviously aren't fit to enter and Coventry would probably be annoyed by being overlooked after finishing last season on 4th. Not sure the Prem teams would be keen on sharing the television coverage pie but more games should mean more coverage options and maybe some shared coverage.

The West Country teams would probably want to be in the same group for derby game purposes but this would make their conference extremely harsh.

Brendan wrote:

Only problem with that was that Rupert sold his share because he didn't want a share of 50m debt.  Add in that the Sarries ownership is not connected to CVC.  If anything the B&I league would of had no issue with it, and if they did Rupert's share in Sarries would be worth more not less as he/Sarries could hold up the PRL sign off on the league.
Much like it was suggest that in a ringfenced Premership the owner of Wocesher (when it was for sale) could be relegated and sell the Shares to the PRL and make money on their investment.

Phillips says

“There are other options like South Africa. The skill is to have as many options as possible, particularly in these current times.”.

If as you say the Pro16 is more or less sorted with the 4 big SA teams then by Phillips own words they have gone for a different opinion which is not B&I league.

He already had a share of the £50m debt.

Sarries ownership is connected to CVC via PRL. PRL won't allow Altrad to invest in Gloucester because of 'single ownership of multiple entrants' which Rupert knew was a danger because of his SA links.

Remind me again of how much he got for getting out of Saracens....

B&I league comes when the broadcast contracts are up for renewal. Nothing will be done for that, so there's another season after this one to go.

If the English clubs and Irish and Scottish want it to happen. Lot of ifs there.

PhilBB wrote:

Brendan wrote:

Only problem with that was that Rupert sold his share because he didn't want a share of 50m debt.  Add in that the Sarries ownership is not connected to CVC.  If anything the B&I league would of had no issue with it, and if they did Rupert's share in Sarries would be worth more not less as he/Sarries could hold up the PRL sign off on the league.
Much like it was suggest that in a ringfenced Premership the owner of Wocesher (when it was for sale) could be relegated and sell the Shares to the PRL and make money on their investment.

Phillips says

“There are other options like South Africa. The skill is to have as many options as possible, particularly in these current times.”.

If as you say the Pro16 is more or less sorted with the 4 big SA teams then by Phillips own words they have gone for a different opinion which is not B&I league.

He already had a share of the £50m debt.

Sarries ownership is connected to CVC via PRL. PRL won't allow Altrad to invest in Gloucester because of 'single ownership of multiple entrants' which Rupert knew was a danger because of his SA links.

Remind me again of how much he got for getting out of Saracens....

B&I league comes when the broadcast contracts are up for renewal. Nothing will be done for that, so there's another season after this one to go.

Rupert was able to talk away from the Debt. So in April 2018 it had already been decieded to sell a B&I&SA league with CVC. That is one big jump. I wonder why the 3 Celtic Unions even bothered to sell for so little to CVC if the PRL and Pro16 were basically selling the same product to CVC.

TV deals for a Pro16 and Premiership as two different competitions will raise more money than a combined league where England would have no more than 6 at the top table.  Why would advertisers pay more for one super league than two separate.  I would say the SA TV deal is more about SA teams than European teams.  CVC are about commercial, they may well the two leagues in a package but would be more than one league.

If the Pro16 happens and even that is an IF it basically takes the place of Super Rugby and is Definately equal with the Premership and T14 in terms of standard and resources. It would have 10 strong teams each year and the league competition for drama and tight races would be atleastvas good as the other two.
The Tasman league would drop down in standing and be like the SA tournaments in soccer (shop window for kids) as all games will be on in the middle if the night and team resources will be worse than they are now.  One overlooked point of the NZRU review was that the people didn't think that NZRU could support a 6th team in terms of players and coaches so not sure how they will form the 11th and 12th team for the league.  It will also have a smaller budget per team than maybe even Zebre and Dragons in a few years.

Brendan wrote:

Rupert was able to talk away from the Debt.  So in April 2018 it had already been decieded to sell a B&I&SA league with CVC.  That is one big jump.  I wonder why the 3 Celtic Unions even bothered to sell for so little to CVC if the PRL and Pro16 were basically selling the same product to CVC.

I don't understand the final sentence, but I do know the CVC deal was long in discussions before being completed for PRL, let alone for the PrO

Brendan wrote:TV deals for a Pro16 and Premiership as two different competitions will raise more money than a combined league where England would have no more than 6 at the top table.  Why would advertisers pay more for one super league than two separate.

Because it's the same number of games played?

We could see a conference type system, of course, a la NFL.

Brendan wrote:
If the Pro16 happens and even that is an IF it basically takes the place of Super Rugby and is Definately equal with the Premership and T14 in terms of standard and resources.

Until this PrO'16 delivers a €97m per year TV contract, how can you say it's the equal of the T14 in terms of "resources"?

PhilBB wrote:

Brendan wrote:
If the Pro16 happens and even that is an IF it basically takes the place of Super Rugby and is Definately equal with the Premership and T14 in terms of standard and resources.

Until this PrO'16 delivers a €97m per year TV contract, how can you say it's the equal of the T14 in terms of "resources"?

What is the actual tv revenue currently per annum?

Old Man wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

Brendan wrote:
If the Pro16 happens and even that is an IF it basically takes the place of Super Rugby and is Definately equal with the Premership and T14 in terms of standard and resources.

Until this PrO'16 delivers a €97m per year TV contract, how can you say it's the equal of the T14 in terms of "resources"?

What is the actual tv revenue currently per annum?

About 1/5th of the French.

PhilBB wrote:

Old Man wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

Brendan wrote:
If the Pro16 happens and even that is an IF it basically takes the place of Super Rugby and is Definately equal with the Premership and T14 in terms of standard and resources.

Until this PrO'16 delivers a €97m per year TV contract, how can you say it's the equal of the T14 in terms of "resources"?

What is the actual tv revenue currently per annum?

About 1/5th of the French.

T14 & ProD2 (16) is €88m per season
Prem roughly €38m per season
Pro14 €15-20m per season

From Irish Times 09/04/2020

The Top 14 deal is €97m isn't it? To claim that the Pro14 will be in the same bracket "resources wise" as that, is so laughable, that at this point you simply must be having serious fits of giggles as you type these posts.

RugbyFan100 wrote:The Top 14 deal is €97m isn't it? To claim that the Pro14 will be in the same bracket "resources wise" as that, is so laughable, that at this point you simply must be having serious fits of giggles as you type these posts.

Resources and financial values aren't the same thing.  Any Pro16 if based on SA SR deal would see them bring their TV deals up to around the Premership level.  The Premiership is already reducing the wage cap because they don't have the resources to carry on as they are (maybe they know something about income).  Less wage inflation due to the reduction in spending power of English Clubs (including the Championship going semi-pro) and also that of Aus and NZ results in the home grown players staying in the Pro14 as the SH players go to France and Japan.

As far as I know only the Welsh teams are carrying debt that isn't related to stadiums. If you have large debt you can't pay, your resources reduce ask Worcester whose wage is nearly their entire income.

French TV deal is for Top two divisions which is 30 teams.  Article i saw was €88m. Can you provide the breakdown for T14 teams v ProD2 teams.  Is the Premiership's TV deal between all PRL teams or just those in the Premiership.

We recently had the report where the WRU was able to step in and given a 20m overdraft to the Welsh teams who just need to worry about the interest (as shared by Phill). I doubt the RFU or FFR are going to share their resources with the PRL & LNR but the Pro16 will and do with all theirs (as seen at the Dragons and Kings, Using Union employees to help teams)

To show you the difference between resources and financial value.

From the Guardian (It is what it is)

No fans until Summer 2021
RFU £138m hit to revenue (EPS will be lower for second 4 years for sure) which is about 1.5 times the IRFU annual income.
IRFU cash to go from €28m surplus to €10 debt.

So while the RFU have a much bigger income their money put aside wasn't much and their bills still need to be paid.

Brendan wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

Old Man wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

Brendan wrote:
If the Pro16 happens and even that is an IF it basically takes the place of Super Rugby and is Definately equal with the Premership and T14 in terms of standard and resources.

Until this PrO'16 delivers a €97m per year TV contract, how can you say it's the equal of the T14 in terms of "resources"?

What is the actual tv revenue currently per annum?

About 1/5th of the French.

T14 & ProD2 (16) is €88m per season
Prem roughly €38m per season
Pro14 €15-20m per season

From Irish Times 09/04/2020

If the Pro14 is only bringing in 15-20 million thenI struggle to see the benefit for SARU to join them, they currently recieve around $20 million from Super sport for currie cup and super rugby.

Brendan wrote:
Resources and financial values aren't the same thing.  Any Pro16 if based on SA SR deal would see them bring their TV deals up to around the Premership level.  

Well the first sentence is illuminating but the second sentence is some claim.

Brendan wrote:
As far as I know only the Welsh teams are carrying debt that isn't related to stadiums. If you have large debt you can't pay, your resources reduce ask Worcester whose wage is nearly their entire income.

Debt is irrelevant. To whom the debt is owed is the key.

Get the right lender and a €9m debt can be paid back at €100,000 a year, to the Bank of Mum and Da

Other debt just gets written off or turned to equity.

Brendan wrote: Article i saw was €88m. Can you provide the breakdown for T14 teams v ProD2 teams.  Is the Premiership's TV deal between all PRL teams or just those in the Premiership.

We recently had the report where the WRU was able to step in and given a 20m overdraft to the Welsh teams who just need to worry about the interest (as shared by Phill). I doubt the RFU or FFR are going to share their resources with the PRL & LNR but the Pro16 will and do with all theirs (as seen at the Dragons and Kings, Using Union employees to help teams)

There's no £20m overdraft.

The PrO league is owned by unions. The English league is owned by PRL. You're not comparing like with like

"The42.ie" says €97m a year: https://www.the42.ie/top-14-tv-rights-deal-97-million-2766175-May2016/

So does "Pundit Arena": https://punditarena.com/rugby/thepateam/french-clubs-sign-staggering-388-million-euro-tv-deal/

I think ProD2 now has its own exclusive tv deal: https://media.sportbusiness.com/news/canal-plus-acquires-exclusive-pro-d2-rights-in-france/

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/pro14/pro14-nations-could-miss-out-on-15m-in-tv-revenue-if-league-is-not-completed-1.4224352%3fmode=amp
.

The Pro 14 has deals with nine different broadcasters, including Eir Sport, TG4 and Premier Sport, which is believed to bring in €15-20 million of revenue, and which in turn is split between the IRFU, WRU, SRU, FIR (Italian Rugby Federation) and the South African Rugby Union.

This pales by comparison to the €88 million per season generated for the Top 14 and 16 Pro D2 clubs due to the LNR’s deal with Canal+, or the estimated €38 million per season for the Premiership clubs which PRL struck in their extended six-year deal with BT until 2021.

Brendan wrote:https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/pro14/pro14-nations-could-miss-out-on-15m-in-tv-revenue-if-league-is-not-completed-1.4224352%3fmode=amp
.

The Pro 14 has deals with nine different broadcasters, including Eir Sport, TG4 and Premier Sport, which is believed to bring in €15-20 million of revenue, and which in turn is split between the IRFU, WRU, SRU, FIR (Italian Rugby Federation) and the South African Rugby Union.

This pales by comparison to the €88 million per season generated for the Top 14 and 16 Pro D2 clubs due to the LNR’s deal with Canal+, or the estimated €38 million per season for the Premiership clubs which PRL struck in their extended six-year deal with BT until 2021.

The journo has quite clearly cocked his maths up - because 97m Euros in GBP is..................88m.

RugbyFan100 wrote:

Brendan wrote:https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/pro14/pro14-nations-could-miss-out-on-15m-in-tv-revenue-if-league-is-not-completed-1.4224352%3fmode=amp
.

The Pro 14 has deals with nine different broadcasters, including Eir Sport, TG4 and Premier Sport, which is believed to bring in €15-20 million of revenue, and which in turn is split between the IRFU, WRU, SRU, FIR (Italian Rugby Federation) and the South African Rugby Union.

This pales by comparison to the €88 million per season generated for the Top 14 and 16 Pro D2 clubs due to the LNR’s deal with Canal+, or the estimated €38 million per season for the Premiership clubs which PRL struck in their extended six-year deal with BT until 2021.

The journo has quite clearly cocked his maths up - because 97m Euros in GBP is..................88m.

Makes sense, thanks for that.

So we're expecting the addition of the four main SA teams, in February, to double the TV contract for the PrO league.

Am I right, Brendan? Was that your claim?

I still don't think the English Premiership should merge with the Championship. By the looks of things neither does anyone else.

rugby racing and beer wrote:I still don't think the English Premiership should merge with the Championship. By the looks of things neither does anyone else.

Until the PRL solves the issue of having 13 teams with shares and only 12 places in the Premiership there will always be speculation around how they square that circle before they ringfence. But however it turns out, it will be the English clubs that have the final say.

Irish Londoner wrote:

rugby racing and beer wrote:I still don't think the English Premiership should merge with the Championship. By the looks of things neither does anyone else.

Until the PRL solves the issue of having 13 teams with shares and only 12 places in the Premiership there will always be speculation around how they square that circle before they ringfence. But however it turns out, it will be the English clubs that have the final say.

Well teh Championship are talking about ring fencing their division, excluding all 13 PRL shareholders. So in that world we woudl see a 13 team Premiership. However I fully expect at least one Premiership club to go bust before the 2021/22 season starts.

LondonTiger wrote:

Irish Londoner wrote:

rugby racing and beer wrote:I still don't think the English Premiership should merge with the Championship. By the looks of things neither does anyone else.

Until the PRL solves the issue of having 13 teams with shares and only 12 places in the Premiership there will always be speculation around how they square that circle before they ringfence. But however it turns out, it will be the English clubs that have the final say.

Well teh Championship are talking about ring fencing their division, excluding all 13 PRL shareholders. So in that world we woudl see a 13 team Premiership. However I fully expect at least one Premiership club to go bust before the 2021/22 season starts.

It seems reasonable. How are London Irish looking?

Its fair comment. The clubs are warning of bankruptcies, if that does happen with one or two we could see a longer term natural settling in of the smaller franchised mutually supporting premsiership that has long made sense.


Noone wants to see a club bust of course, but this happened when the rfu let the professionalism cat out of the bag in an uncontrolled way. Its nothing new, and the costs have spiralled in recent years in spite of the cap has left it looking inevitable, just hastened by the current situation.

Even if clubs don't go bust what it's certain to do is see the mega rich clubs take advantage and entrench their dominance. Players won't agree to 50%+ wage cuts they'd rather leave before that happens and the only way you can mitigate this is either massive funding from loans (not a good idea) or, who knows, centralised payments from unions, or you effectively allow the market to step in - which means the French and, ironically, clubs like Saracens picking up the slack. The salary cap might have to be relaxed. Or rugby will face a real challenge not just retaining but attrating young athletes to the sport when the money on offer from athletics, NFL, League etc will be much more attractive.

The Championship clubs were in a really difficult situation before covid with the funding being cut by the RFU.

Does anyone know if the funding to the championship as been reduced even more or if it's unchanged. I think the bigger changes are going to happen in the championship rather than the Premiership but we just don't know.

Is there any talk of commercial deals for next season being part paid early to help. I know soccer did some of this. It's not in the interest of the investing companies to see unrest and upheaval.

rugby racing and beer wrote:when the money on offer from athletics, NFL, League etc will be much more attractive.

Yeah I can imagine the professional marathon league will be offering multi million contracts to every 20 stone Tongan teenager. We've already seen the impact of the massive contracts on offer in RL poaching great talent like that young Henson lad from Wales. And as we know getting an NFL contract is really easy if you haven't gone through the right High School/College pathway, just look at Wade!

sport is screwed financially at the elite level. everyone will take a hit. at grass roots it should be ok as long as govt dont choke and ban all outdoor sports. wouldnt put it past them based on current panicky responses.

Gooseberry wrote:

rugby racing and beer wrote:when the money on offer from athletics, NFL, League etc will be much more attractive.

Yeah I can imagine the professional marathon league will be offering multi million contracts to every 20 stone Tongan teenager. We've already seen the impact of the massive contracts on offer in RL poaching great talent like that young Henson lad from Wales. And as we know getting an NFL contract is really easy if you haven't gone through the right High School/College pathway, just look at Wade!

League: Australia and N England
Atheltics: London and inner cities, also globally (Africa esp.)

This is already happening. It's not a hypothetical.

Your point is cheap and you know it.

Just to prove that "rugby racing and beer" is completely clueless (as if it needs proving again), the salary cap in the English Super League for rugby league is about £2.5m

https://www.rugby-league.com/salary_cap_regulations

Oh yeah, my mistake, all those northern working class lads are lining up to play union, aren't they. I wonder how many 10 year old lads in Yorkshire and Lancs are thinking 'no, I will play rugby union instead, because as Phil pointed out the salary cap is bigger in union'. You don't seem to understand that League offers a chance for these boys to earn high 5 and 6 figure salaries playing sport without a decent background or education. The fact is, if you choose to play union in the north, the lack of concentrated talent playing the sport (as opposed to League) means you probably won't make it. That's the reality of Union not having the financial pull. It's not just about salary caps, it's infrastructure, Phil. Come on wake up Phil! It's not just an issue for the north as well, it's most of the UK where union fails to make the most of talent - so much still depends on contacts and going to the right school more often than not in England. If you're a 14 year old from Halifax it makes more sense to play League if you're genuinely talented and likely to make it as a pro. Then you can move down to Australia and earn a shed load of money. Better that than not being a professional athlete and ending up working as a doorman or in Tesco's.

And what about Australia, Phil? Or does the fact that the overwhelming example of a country/region where union is financial small fry in comparison to a different code/sport not chime with your notion of 'being clued in' (god help us if you truly think what you've written) mean you'll just ignore that for the sake of writing insults and getting your daily hit of dopamine?

Pathetic, truly pathetic.

rugby racing and beer wrote:Oh yeah, my mistake, all those northern working class lads are lining up to play union, aren't they. I wonder how many 10 year old lads in Yorkshire and Lancs are thinking 'no, I will play rugby union instead, because as Phil pointed out the salary cap is bigger in union'. You don't seem to understand that League offers a chance for these boys to earn high 5 and 6 figure salaries playing sport without a decent background or education. The fact is, if you choose to play union in the north, the lack of concentrated talent playing the sport (as opposed to League) means you probably won't make it. That's the reality of Union not having the financial pull. It's not just about salary caps, it's infrastructure, Phil. Come on wake up Phil! It's not just an issue for the north as well, it's most of the UK where union fails to make the most of talent - so much still depends on contacts and going to the right school more often than not in England. If you're a 14 year old from Halifax it makes more sense to play League if you're genuinely talented and likely to make it as a pro. Then you can move down to Australia and earn a shed load of money. Better that than not being a professional athlete and ending up working as a doorman or in Tesco's.

And what about Australia, Phil? Or does the fact that the overwhelming example of a country/region where union is financial small fry in comparison to a different code/sport not chime with your notion of 'being clued in' (god help us if you truly think what you've written) mean you'll just ignore that for the sake of writing insults and getting your daily hit of dopamine?

Pathetic, truly pathetic.

"League offers a chance for these boys to earn high 5 and 6 figure salaries playing sport without a decent background or education" Erm, so does rugby union.
" The fact is, if you choose to play union in the north, the lack of concentrated talent playing the sport (as opposed to League) means you probably won't make it. That's the reality of Union not having the financial pull" George Ford and Owen Farrell mean much to you?
"If you're a 14 year old from Halifax it makes more sense to play League if you're genuinely talented and likely to make it as a pro. Then you can move down to Australia and earn a shed load of money" How many English players are in the NRL?

Union in Australia has significantly more money than League. It's why players like Beale, Folau and Cooper move to Union. Union is the sport associated with the business class, with the private schools, with the money. League is the working class man's game - exactly the same as in England. And what happens in England? Many of the best League players try to play Union because they will earn more money.

Out of curiosity what is the side likely to be that Saracens put out next season in the champs?

GeordieFalcon wrote:Out of curiosity what is the side likely to be that Saracens put out next season in the champs?

Given the financial problems of the Championship clubs at the moment, they could probably put out their academy side with the odd run out for the big player to keep them match fit and still not worry about missing promotion.

What will be interesting is to see (assuming fans are allowed back in) what it does to attendances, will Championship clubs attract a few extra spectators to see Owen Farrell play ?

To be honest...i expect it to be mostly academy and young 1st team fringe players.

It could be a good side though...with the odd appearance from the stars to keep their fitness up in between internationals...

Will there be a Championship next season?

Well thats another question ...

PhilBB wrote:

rugby racing and beer wrote:Oh yeah, my mistake, all those northern working class lads are lining up to play union, aren't they. I wonder how many 10 year old lads in Yorkshire and Lancs are thinking 'no, I will play rugby union instead, because as Phil pointed out the salary cap is bigger in union'. You don't seem to understand that League offers a chance for these boys to earn high 5 and 6 figure salaries playing sport without a decent background or education. The fact is, if you choose to play union in the north, the lack of concentrated talent playing the sport (as opposed to League) means you probably won't make it. That's the reality of Union not having the financial pull. It's not just about salary caps, it's infrastructure, Phil. Come on wake up Phil! It's not just an issue for the north as well, it's most of the UK where union fails to make the most of talent - so much still depends on contacts and going to the right school more often than not in England. If you're a 14 year old from Halifax it makes more sense to play League if you're genuinely talented and likely to make it as a pro. Then you can move down to Australia and earn a shed load of money. Better that than not being a professional athlete and ending up working as a doorman or in Tesco's.

And what about Australia, Phil? Or does the fact that the overwhelming example of a country/region where union is financial small fry in comparison to a different code/sport not chime with your notion of 'being clued in' (god help us if you truly think what you've written) mean you'll just ignore that for the sake of writing insults and getting your daily hit of dopamine?

Pathetic, truly pathetic.

"League offers a chance for these boys to earn high 5 and 6 figure salaries playing sport without a decent background or education" Erm, so does rugby union.
" The fact is, if you choose to play union in the north, the lack of concentrated talent playing the sport (as opposed to League) means you probably won't make it. That's the reality of Union not having the financial pull" George Ford and Owen Farrell mean much to you?
"If you're a 14 year old from Halifax it makes more sense to play League if you're genuinely talented and likely to make it as a pro. Then you can move down to Australia and earn a shed load of money" How many English players are in the NRL?

Union in Australia has significantly more money than League. It's why players like Beale, Folau and Cooper move to Union. Union is the sport associated with the business class, with the private schools, with the money. League is the working class man's game - exactly the same as in England. And what happens in England? Many of the best League players try to play Union because they will earn more money.

"Rugby Union has significantly more money than soccer in England. It is the sport associated with public schools and the aristocracy and Empire. Soccer is the working class man's game - exactly the same in Argentina."

You don't have a clue, do you. You're just relying on lazy stereotypes for the sake of an argument. Nice one. Well, not nice at all, is it...

It's is one thing to be associated with money people and another to have money.

The top teams like Untied, Liverpool, Arsenal etc make £100m from attendances alone. And each club has a larger turnover than the RFU.

It might be the poor man's game but the poor men have plenty of money combined.

League is an interesting one.  Australian league has more money but more players to employ.  If you pick the top 25 earning Australians in league and union in the world who would earn more.  I don't know but I would assume the union players would earn more but no longer be based in Australia.

Yes, Brendan. It's almost like lazy stereotypes about the particular socioeconomic background of fans of a certain sport are mostly meaningless when it comes to talking about the money involved in the sport...but apparently they'll do in place of actually knowing what you're talking about (if you just want to have online arguments rather than, I don't know, discussions where you learn something).

rugby racing and beer wrote:

"Rugby Union has significantly more money than soccer in England. It is the sport associated with public schools and the aristocracy and Empire. Soccer is the working class man's game - exactly the same in Argentina."

You don't have a clue, do you. You're just relying on lazy stereotypes for the sake of an argument. Nice one. Well, not nice at all, is it...

What a really odd response.

Union is associated with public schools and money in Australia.

Have you ever been to Australia?!?!?

rugby racing and beer wrote:Yes, Brendan. It's almost like lazy stereotypes about the particular socioeconomic background of fans of a certain sport are mostly meaningless when it comes to talking about the money involved in the sport...but apparently they'll do in place of actually knowing what you're talking about (if you just want to have online arguments rather than, I don't know, discussions where you learn something).

And we're back with this bloke not understanding ABC1 for marketing purposes again.

Keep swimming against that tide.

PhilBB wrote:

rugby racing and beer wrote:

"Rugby Union has significantly more money than soccer in England. It is the sport associated with public schools and the aristocracy and Empire. Soccer is the working class man's game - exactly the same in Argentina."

You don't have a clue, do you. You're just relying on lazy stereotypes for the sake of an argument. Nice one. Well, not nice at all, is it...

What a really odd response.

Union is associated with public schools and money in Australia.

Have you ever been to Australia?!?!?

Yeah and so is polo in the UK. That means literally less than a gnat's fecal matter when it comes to the actual money involved in the sport.

If you hadn't noticed (have YOU been to Australia, for instance?), Australia is underdoing what all western countries are: huge socio-economic change. Australia is going to be an East Asian country soon enough and they're not really the kind to care too much about the old colonial games let alone the most physical ones. Rugby is dying, even League is struggling as their fan base dies off and soccer becomes more popular. Rugby is third in the pecking order for the egg shaped football codes in Australia, which is the lesson to be learned and, ultimately, the original point in all of this if we don't allow Union to pay its star players well for the sake of competition.

Had you forgotten what we were talking about?

rugby racing and beer wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

rugby racing and beer wrote:

"Rugby Union has significantly more money than soccer in England. It is the sport associated with public schools and the aristocracy and Empire. Soccer is the working class man's game - exactly the same in Argentina."

You don't have a clue, do you. You're just relying on lazy stereotypes for the sake of an argument. Nice one. Well, not nice at all, is it...

What a really odd response.

Union is associated with public schools and money in Australia.

Have you ever been to Australia?!?!?

Yeah and so is polo in the UK. That means literally less than a gnat's fecal matter when it comes to the actual money involved in the sport.

If you hadn't noticed (have YOU been to Australia, for instance?), Australia is underdoing what all western countries are: huge socio-economic change. Australia is going to be an East Asian country soon enough and they're not really the kind to care too much about the old colonial games let alone the most physical ones. Rugby is dying, even League is struggling as their fan base dies off and soccer becomes more popular. Rugby is third in the pecking order for the egg shaped football codes in Australia, which  is the lesson to be learned and, ultimately, the original point in all of this if we don't allow Union to pay its star players well for the sake of competition.

Had you forgotten what we were talking about?

I've spent a lot of time in Australia in the last decade as I have family there, Champ. You? It looks not.

I think that you were writing drivel about stereotypes earlier in the thread but then you went on to actually put your 'name' to that post.

Ask yourself why Beale, Cooper, Folau and the rest played Union rather than the other codes

I think some on here are really overestimating how much money is in league. The average super league salary is around 40k and the NRL continues to lose players to union, see Koribete, Vunivalu, Radrada, Karmichael Hunt. The international game in union dwarfs anything in league. The Kangaroos still can't get anywhere close the exposure and attendances the Wallabies can. At the last RLWC, Aus couldn't sell out a 30k seater stadium for a final against England where as just a couple of months the before the Wallabies got 60k for their last Bledisloe cup game.

The NRL's 16 professional clubs in Australia and NZ should be able to survive with this....

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/may/20/nrl-broadcast-deal-with-nine-and-fox#:~:text=The NRL is powering towards,required from both their boards.

LeinsterFan4life wrote:I think some on here are really overestimating how much money is in league. The average super league salary is around 40k and the NRL continues to lose players to union, see Koribete, Vunivalu, Radrada, Karmichael Hunt. The international game in union dwarfs anything in league. The Kangaroos still can't get anywhere close the exposure and attendances the Wallabies can. At the last RLWC, Aus couldn't sell out a 30k seater stadium for a final against England where as just a couple of months the before the Wallabies got 60k for their last Bledisloe cup game.

League is a club sport in Australia. It's bigger than Union at grass roots and domestic professional level, but you're right to point out the international element.

That chap - brr or whatever his pseudonym is this week - is writing out of his backside

PhilBB wrote:

LeinsterFan4life wrote:I think some on here are really overestimating how much money is in league. The average super league salary is around 40k and the NRL continues to lose players to union, see Koribete, Vunivalu, Radrada, Karmichael Hunt. The international game in union dwarfs anything in league. The Kangaroos still can't get anywhere close the exposure and attendances the Wallabies can. At the last RLWC, Aus couldn't sell out a 30k seater stadium for a final against England where as just a couple of months the before the Wallabies got 60k for their last Bledisloe cup game.

League is a club sport in Australia. It's bigger than Union at grass roots and domestic professional level, but you're right to point out the international element.

That chap - brr or whatever his pseudonym is this week - is writing out of his backside

Yes but the sport is desperate to expand now and make a foothold in the international scene because, like I said that is where the money is.