'better for everyone. The SA teams will mean bigger, tougher games'

First topic message reminder :

Interesting article here.
https://www.the42.ie/south-africa-pro16-5451128-May2021/


Its from a SA point of view but there was also this line: There is hope that the Pro16 could double or treble its turnover in the next six or seven years.


More competition, tougher games, big name players and teams with big fan bases, a straight forward league instead of conferences, better refs (hopefully). Sounds good to me. If Benetton get up to speed it would boost Italian interest too.


I also heard that it won't be called the pro16. Its going to get a new name.

Brendan wrote:
Regarding the WRU and the league.  Just like the league doesn't care that the SRU have imposed a player wage cap which hinders the Scottish teams it doesn't care that the Regions take money to compensate them for giving up players outside the international window.  The Regions obviously considers it a good deal or they would only allow players to leave during the window and take them back on rest weeks as would be their right.

When did the SRU impose a wage cap? Or do you mean that it won't pay certain salaries?

And I really don't understand why you wrote the above, either. The point was that the actions of the shareholders negatively affect the quality of the competition. You've just confirmed that with the above.

So why did you write it?

Brendan wrote:
The league's purpose is to provide games in a structured manner that is cost effective to the teams.  It is not their job to make the competition fair so that Zebre and Leinster have the same access to players and budget because it is not what the shareholders want.  Again it highlights that your issue is with the WRU and not the league (or you don't understand what the league admistrators are paid to do).

If you think that's the league purpose then you have that wrong, too. Very, very, very wrong. The travel budget alone for each team is not cost effective. English clubs laugh at the travel budget of Welsh teams.

I've also no idea why you mentioned teams having access to the same players. You don't half write some weird, disconnected, nonsense at times.

You don't even seem to understand that administrators undertake the desired actions of the shareholders. You know, the point I made above that you don't seem to have grasped.

Old Man wrote:

Well, I am not a climate change protectionist, but those planes fly across the world either way, so I highly doubt the carbon footprint is influenced by teams travelling.

I would love SA teams to play by themselves, I would also like us to retain our stars to play in our domestic teams, but both are pie in the sky, as neither is going to happen the way I want.

Not sure why you believe Italy should play in the French comp, or even why the French would want them, same with the Welsh teams in the Premiership.

So what we would like or prefer isn’t attainable, so I suppose in the end we accept compromises and all that is left is to enjoy the rugby, as crooked as it seems.

The alternative is what?

Fewer planes fly with lower demand, Old Man, so "those plans fly either way" is economically plain wrong.

Italian teams should play in the French competition and Welsh in the English because of simple geography and because of ownership structures, as noted above.

The alternative is doing things properly which, whilst Blazers hold the Keys, is utterly impossible.

Brendan wrote:

PhilBB wrote:
So, for me, the Welsh clubs should be in the English system.

Under your proposal the three Welsh Private teams would be playing like the SA teams had to this year.  Endless derbies and no money.

I have no idea how anybody could have read my sentence and replied with that. Genuinely not an idea as to how or why you did that.

It's quite an astonishing inability to comprehend the actual words written.

Brendan wrote:
Benetton fans don't seem to care about being a private team in with all the unions.
Banning union owned teams would mean that all but England, France, Japan the 3 Welsh and 1 Italian would all be illegal.

I'm not sure how many Benetton fans you know in order to write on behalf of them so, judging solely by your output in this thread, I'm calling you out on that drivel.

Banning Union owned teams would mean the existing set ups would be sold off, Brendan. It's not a difficult concept. The Scottish teams are, as much as I am aware, still up for sale.

doctor_grey wrote:

Brendan wrote:Depending on when the Continental Cup is held and getting into the Challagne Cup along with the Currie Cup Cheetahs could nearly have a full season of games.

As you say it all comes down to money.

And would that 3rd tier pay enough money to offset the travel and other associated costs?  I don't think I have ever seen it on television.  

That is the big question with everything which is why the only talk is the Cheetahs. Because of the legal issues I think the agreement between them and the SARU was they would get them into something.

The Continental Club Rugby League was going to have 4 Russian, 3 Romanian and a German team it would be quarters, semis and final/3v4 So could be done in 3 weekends so not the worst in terms of cost. Setting up home in eastern Europe would be much cheaper than Australia which was one plan suggested.

Brendan wrote:

Your gerrymandering falls flat when you consider that the Scots have Regions since 1872 competing in a competition.  The Irish have been around since 1946 as district teams who played in a competition.  Can you advise when the 4 private teams in the league were created and their first year in a competition, and how their boarders weren't gerrymandered to create them.

Mate, gerrymandered refers to the central body affecting the quality of the teams they control via budget restrictions and moving their employees to a different department.

It seems that you missed the comprehension of the main word.

Brendan wrote:
The West is very hypocritical when it comes to global warming.  We make all the money.  We buy more and fly more and waste more.  But it's allowing the SA people join the league that is the problem.  I would happily wager more carbon is burned in the RC, 6N and WC with all its related consumerism then for the Pro14 over the same period.  Is 100 people taking part of a plane worse then 2-3000 fans driving from Exeter to London (not sure if any would fly).  More is burned on one weekend on flights from the UK to Spain in the summer than the entire league does in a season.

Erm, that's an argument to not ADD to the emissions, mate. Did you not notice the bullet wound in your own foot?

Brendan wrote:Playing in a competition that no one cares about that is not able to help retain players.

Hmmm. Not sure the WRU agree with you there.

PhilBB wrote:

Old Man wrote:

Well, I am not a climate change protectionist, but those planes fly across the world either way, so I highly doubt the carbon footprint is influenced by teams travelling.

I would love SA teams to play by themselves, I would also like us to retain our stars to play in our domestic teams, but both are pie in the sky, as neither is going to happen the way I want.

Not sure why you believe Italy should play in the French comp, or even why the French would want them, same with the Welsh teams in the Premiership.

So what we would like or prefer isn’t attainable, so I suppose in the end we accept compromises and all that is left is to enjoy the rugby, as crooked as it seems.

The alternative is what?

Fewer planes fly with lower demand, Old Man, so "those plans fly either way" is economically plain wrong.

Italian teams should play in the French competition and Welsh in the English because of simple geography and because of ownership structures, as noted above.

The alternative is doing things properly which, whilst Blazers hold the Keys, is utterly impossible.

How much impact does a team have on commercial flights, other than if it is a chartered flight? Negligible.

Geography is only a matter of convenience, when all the other factors suggest it won't happen. Why would the Premiership include the Welsh teams in their comp?

The Welsh teams already can’t compete with the Irish team caps, it isn’t going to improve if they join the Premiership.

The rugby calendar in England is already full, no space for more matches.

Revenue is unlikely to increase for the current Premiership teams, so what do they benefit?

Same applies to the Italian teams.

Brendan wrote:I really hope it happens as it would also allow for the Griquas and Pumas to take a similar route if it became financially viable for them too.

The great thing with the euro cup system is it provides a way to allow team like the Cheetahs, Griquas and Pumas a way to show they are good enough to be included in the Pro16 league in the future and help build professional rugby in SA.

Hmmm. Are you suggesting more teams from SA in the PrO'Nonsense?

Is what Brendan said contradictory? Think its a fair reflection that the pull of English qualified players not being considered for internationals (bar exceptional circumstances) if they play outside of England has what's kept the majority here. And it's certainly true a good foreign recruit can make all the difference. With the salary cap the way it is it's not really possible to have all the top English talent at one club, though clubs have tried through cheating to get more than their share! On the other hand I can see where the quote 'league is surviving because of cheap SA imports' has come from other than yourself Phil.

So Phill, I assmue then you aren’t going to watch the Pro whatever anymore?

Old Man wrote:
How much impact does a team have on commercial flights, other than if it is a chartered flight? Negligible.

Geography is only a matter of convenience, when all the other factors suggest it won't happen. Why would the Premiership include the Welsh teams in their comp?

The Welsh teams already can’t compete with the Irish team caps, it isn’t going to improve if they join the Premiership.

The rugby calendar in England is already full, no space for more matches.

Revenue is unlikely to increase for the current Premiership teams, so what do they benefit?

Same applies to the Italian teams.

You asked me what I would prefer. I gave you what I would prefer.

You also seem to be under the misunderstanding that the English spend more than the Irish. That's not true. The Irish outspend the English.

The English have room for a two division tournament, by the way. It's clear that such a set up would generate more cash into the English game and we've been through this before on this board by noting the value of a broadcaster for the second tier. I'd take the Welsh four into the second tier above the PrO'Drivel.

Old Man wrote:So Phill, I assmue then you aren’t going to watch the Pro whatever anymore?

I watch my club, as previously explained. The league is a complete disaster area of disinterest and woeful administration.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Is what Brendan said contradictory? Think its a fair reflection that the pull of English qualified players not being considered for internationals (bar exceptional circumstances) if they play outside of England has what's kept the majority here. And it's certainly true a good foreign recruit can make all the difference. With the salary cap the way it is it's not really possible to have all the top English talent at one club, though clubs have tried through cheating to get more than their share! On the other hand I can see where the quote 'league is surviving because of cheap SA imports' has come from other than yourself Phil.

Now you've fallen into the trap you set yourself with the payment for the EPS players that you claimed were different from the WRU 80% nonsense.

Brendan's contradictory comment was based on his inability to differentiate between numbers and quality. It's pretty clear in the explanation I gave.

Plus, the quote is directly lifted from his post.

So, you're doing your normal trick of pretending to not understand a clear and simple point. It's a boring trick.

PhilBB wrote:

Old Man wrote:
How much impact does a team have on commercial flights, other than if it is a chartered flight? Negligible.

Geography is only a matter of convenience, when all the other factors suggest it won't happen. Why would the Premiership include the Welsh teams in their comp?

The Welsh teams already can’t compete with the Irish team caps, it isn’t going to improve if they join the Premiership.

The rugby calendar in England is already full, no space for more matches.

Revenue is unlikely to increase for the current Premiership teams, so what do they benefit?

Same applies to the Italian teams.

You asked me what I would prefer. I gave you what I would prefer.

You also seem to be under the misunderstanding that the English spend more than the Irish. That's not true. The Irish outspend the English.

The English have room for a two division tournament, by the way. It's clear that such a set up would generate more cash into the English game and we've been through this before on this board by noting the value of a broadcaster for the second tier. I'd take the Welsh four into the second tier above the PrO'Drivel.

No misunderstanding from my part, you tend to respond to debate with “ you don’t understand or comprehend”

I am aware the Premiership has a salary cap smaller than the Irish, yet still quite a bit higher than what the Welsh teams have.

The English have room for two divisions? Divisions or tiers?

they already have two tiers, if divisions are you suggesting two conferences/pools?

More teams does not bring more revenue in the sense that the net effect of revenue per team increases. More matches doesn’t mean more revenue per match, just more fatigue on players if they have to play more matches. Super Rugby proved that increasing to more teams has the same net effect at the end of the day.

Old Man wrote:

I am aware the Premiership has a salary cap smaller than the Irish, yet still quite a bit higher than what the Welsh teams have.

In which you're not aware. Three of the Welsh teams would spend above the English salary cap for next season. Only the Dragons would be under it.

PhilBB wrote:

Old Man wrote:

I am aware the Premiership has a salary cap smaller than the Irish, yet still quite a bit higher than what the Welsh teams have.

In which you're not aware. Three of the Welsh teams would spend above the English salary cap for next season. Only the Dragons would be under it.

Well then, what is the problem?

Why aren’t the Welsh teams more competitve if they have more money than other teams?

Old Man wrote:

The English have room for two divisions? Divisions or tiers?

they already have two tiers, if divisions are you suggesting two conferences/pools?

More teams does not bring more revenue in the sense that the net effect of revenue per team increases. More matches doesn’t mean more revenue per match, just more fatigue on players if they have to play more matches. Super Rugby proved that increasing to more teams has the same net effect at the end of the day.

The English have two divisions. There is an issue with CVC not wanting relegation from the Premiership and that is a bone of contention right now. There's a play off on the way between Ealing and Saracens to underline the fact they have two divisions.

More matches means more revenue overall, but that's not my point so not relevant to the question you asked me.

Old Man wrote:

Why aren’t the Welsh teams more competitve if they have more money than other teams?

Because the demands of the international game remove the best (hence most expensive) players from those three teams for large parts of the season. When Sale thumped the Scarlets, the Sale coach noted he had prepared his team for 11 weeks for that match. The Scarlets coach had 1 week with his players.

The International game rips the club game apart, simply to ensure the Blazers remain 'in control'.

The Irish, through their huge spend, are able to pay, train and executive super second teams so they aren't so negatively affected by the international game.

PhilBB wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Is what Brendan said contradictory? Think its a fair reflection that the pull of English qualified players not being considered for internationals (bar exceptional circumstances) if they play outside of England has what's kept the majority here. And it's certainly true a good foreign recruit can make all the difference. With the salary cap the way it is it's not really possible to have all the top English talent at one club, though clubs have tried through cheating to get more than their share! On the other hand I can see where the quote 'league is surviving because of cheap SA imports' has come from other than yourself Phil.

Now you've fallen into the trap you set yourself with the payment for the EPS players that you claimed were different from the WRU 80% nonsense.

Brendan's contradictory comment was based on his inability to differentiate between numbers and quality. It's pretty clear in the explanation I gave.

Plus, the quote is directly lifted from his post.

So, you're doing your normal trick of pretending to not understand a clear and simple point. It's a boring trick.

Searched for the post you pulled out and it only brought up your post. The league would of course survive but bringing in players of quality from abroad is a good thing.

What trap? Did you not understand the point I was making? Seems not!

As you said the WRU pay money that needs to be then paid to the players, the RFU do not.

PhilBB wrote:

Old Man wrote:

Why aren’t the Welsh teams more competitve if they have more money than other teams?

Because the demands of the international game remove the best (hence most expensive) players from those three teams for large parts of the season. When Sale thumped the Scarlets, the Sale coach noted he had prepared his team for 11 weeks for that match. The Scarlets coach had 1 week with his players.

The International game rips the club game apart, simply to ensure the Blazers remain 'in control'.

The Irish, through their huge spend, are able to pay, train and executive super second teams so they aren't so negatively affected by the international game.

They could just recruit players to cover then as Sale have.

Re Cyrils point above would be great to involve the SA teams in the European comps, would definitely need to be done on the basis of results rather than geography though in my view.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

They could just recruit players to cover then as Sale have.

Could they? From where?

PhilBB wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

They could just recruit players to cover then as Sale have.

Could they? From where?

Same place as every club/team.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

They could just recruit players to cover then as Sale have.

Could they? From where?

Same place as every club/team.

Really? Tell me. And please don't forget to use the context of the WRU imposing a limit of non-Welsh qualified players (that you're clearly unaware of)

Go for it. I'll look forward to your response.

So the wage of the Welsh teams is forced up by the WRU limiting the player base, wasn't aware of that. Even if games were cancelled during the internationals then its unlikely they could compete with the Sales of the world as they're able to get better players cheaper.

No 7&1/2 wrote:So the wage of the Welsh teams is forced up by the WRU limiting the player base, wasn't aware of that. Even if games were cancelled during the internationals then its unlikely they could compete with the Sales of the world as they're able to get better players cheaper.

That's it. Shafted by the WRU at every angle.

Although I don't understand your "games were cancelled during the internationals" point

What are the limits?

Poor choice of word on cancelled; moved to a different time/date so that internationals are available.

No 7&1/2 wrote:
As you said the WRU pay money that needs to be then paid to the players, the RFU do not.

You keep writing this as though you're unaware of the salary cap credit that comes with an EPS payment, meaning the money clearly goes to the player


Why do you keep doing this?

No 7&1/2 wrote:What are the limits?

Poor choice of word on cancelled; moved to a different time/date so that internationals are available.

As you're not using the quote function, I have no idea what you're on about

PhilBB wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:
As you said the WRU pay money that needs to be then paid to the players, the RFU do not.

You keep writing this as though you're unaware of the salary cap credit that comes with an EPS payment, meaning the money clearly goes to the player


Why do you keep doing this?

It doesn't though. The clubs can use it for anything they want, car parks, extra burger stands, drainage. You yourself have pointed out thats not the case for the WRU and welsh teams.

What are the limits of non-Welsh qualified players Phil within the Welsh teams? Or what is the agreement ie do the WRU not give the 80% of wage to the clubs if they play for example 3 english players in the side? Can't find it through google.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:
As you said the WRU pay money that needs to be then paid to the players, the RFU do not.

You keep writing this as though you're unaware of the salary cap credit that comes with an EPS payment, meaning the money clearly goes to the player


Why do you keep doing this?

It doesn't though. The clubs can use it for anything they want, car parks, extra burger stands, drainage. You yourself have pointed out thats not the case for the WRU and welsh teams.

It's clearly called a credit because it goes as part of the salary. You keep ignoring the WRU's 80% payment allows the employer to spend that 80% on car parks, drainage etc.

No 7&1/2 wrote:What are the limits of non-Welsh qualified players Phil within the Welsh teams? Or what is the agreement ie do the WRU not give the 80% of wage to the clubs if they play for example 3 english players in the side? Can't find it through google.

The 80% refers to only the top 38 players. The equivalent of the EPS payment and EPS salary cap credit.

The limit on nWq is, from memory, 6 per squad although the Scarlets were allowed an exemption because they provided more to the 38. I think they had 7 nWq at one point, maybe more because of injury to Samson Lee.

You were the one that said the 80% must be spent directly on those wages Phil.

The money from the RFU doesn't.

PhilBB wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:What are the limits of non-Welsh qualified players Phil within the Welsh teams? Or what is the agreement ie do the WRU not give the 80% of wage to the clubs if they play for example 3 english players in the side? Can't find it through google.

The 80% refers to only the top 38 players. The equivalent of the EPS payment and EPS salary cap credit.

The limit on nWq is, from memory, 6 per squad although the Scarlets were allowed an exemption because they provided more to the 38. I think they had 7 nWq at one point, maybe more because of injury to Samson Lee.

Just match day squad or people on the books?

No 7&1/2 wrote:Re Cyrils point above would be great to involve the SA teams in the European comps, would definitely need to be done on the basis of results rather than geography though in my view.

Absolutely agree with that, it must have credibility.

Well PhilBB, it seems to me this is a WRU issue, not a Pro whatever issue.

PhilBB wrote:

Brendan wrote:

Your gerrymandering falls flat when you consider that the Scots have Regions since 1872 competing in a competition.  The Irish have been around since 1946 as district teams who played in a competition.  Can you advise when the 4 private teams in the league were created and their first year in a competition, and how their boarders weren't gerrymandered to create them.

Mate, gerrymandered refers to the central body affecting the quality of the teams they control via budget restrictions and moving their employees to a different department.

It seems that you missed the comprehension of the main word.

From Britannica
Gerrymandering, in U.S. politics, the practice of drawing the boundaries of electoral districts in a way that gives one political party an unfair advantage over its rivals (political or partisan gerrymandering) or that dilutes the voting power of members of ethnic or linguistic minority groups (racial gerrymandering). The term is derived from the name of Gov. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts

So I think my understanding was correct. Schools in Munster feed in Munster. Schools in Leinster feed into Leinster. Boundaries have been what they are since the 1100s and the Provinces have been representive teams since 1940s.

Again please advise how the teams of Scarlets, Ospreys, Blues/Cardiff and Benetton aren't lines drawn on a map to make sure each Region covered certain areas. Unless the 4 teams covering that area since before 2000.

PhilBB wrote:

Brendan wrote:
Regarding the WRU and the league.  Just like the league doesn't care that the SRU have imposed a player wage cap which hinders the Scottish teams it doesn't care that the Regions take money to compensate them for giving up players outside the international window.  The Regions obviously considers it a good deal or they would only allow players to leave during the window and take them back on rest weeks as would be their right.

When did the SRU impose a wage cap? Or do you mean that it won't pay certain salaries?

And I really don't understand why you wrote the above, either. The point was that the actions of the shareholders negatively affect the quality of the competition. You've just confirmed that with the above.

So why did you write it?

Scotland doesn't pay players above a certain wage. Therefore they have a wage cap. It is not a squad wage cap but a player wage cap.

Believe it or not lots of shareholders have shares in companies but negatively affect the company they hold shares in. That could be like owning shares in a betting company but choosing to use another betting company because they give better odds.

I wasn't aware that the league was offered two prices by sponsers/tv That said they would pay move if the WRU acted differently. Do you have news on what the league has lost out on directly because of the WRU

PhilBB wrote:

Brendan wrote:
The league's purpose is to provide games in a structured manner that is cost effective to the teams.  It is not their job to make the competition fair so that Zebre and Leinster have the same access to players and budget because it is not what the shareholders want.  Again it highlights that your issue is with the WRU and not the league (or you don't understand what the league admistrators are paid to do).

If you think that's the league purpose then you have that wrong, too. Very, very, very wrong. The travel budget alone for each team is not cost effective. English clubs laugh at the travel budget of Welsh teams.

I've also no idea why you mentioned teams having access to the same players. You don't half write some weird, disconnected, nonsense at times.

You don't even seem to understand that administrators undertake the desired actions of the shareholders. You know, the point I made above that you don't seem to have grasped.

When all the teams signed up to the league they signed up to the travel costs. When the SA teams joined each team got 500k extra plus travel to SA covered because teams hadn't signed up to SA.

Again I wasn't aware that there was a choice of Welsh team to either pick to be part of the Pro16 or do something themselves. Were they offered a competition that would allow them to have English travel costs.

PhilBB wrote:

Old Man wrote:

Well, I am not a climate change protectionist, but those planes fly across the world either way, so I highly doubt the carbon footprint is influenced by teams travelling.

I would love SA teams to play by themselves, I would also like us to retain our stars to play in our domestic teams, but both are pie in the sky, as neither is going to happen the way I want.

Not sure why you believe Italy should play in the French comp, or even why the French would want them, same with the Welsh teams in the Premiership.

So what we would like or prefer isn’t attainable, so I suppose in the end we accept compromises and all that is left is to enjoy the rugby, as crooked as it seems.

The alternative is what?

Fewer planes fly with lower demand, Old Man, so "those plans fly either way" is economically plain wrong.

Italian teams should play in the French competition and Welsh in the English because of simple geography and because of ownership structures, as noted above.

The alternative is doing things properly which, whilst Blazers hold the Keys, is utterly impossible.

I doubt the FIR would sign up to join the 3rd division and I doubt the Pro16 would give up the potential of Italy and solely focus on the Celtic Nations. Add in that Italy now has more player number and larger economic potential compared to Wales and Scotland. Glad you don't run the league.

PhilBB wrote:

Brendan wrote:
Benetton fans don't seem to care about being a private team in with all the unions.
Banning union owned teams would mean that all but England, France, Japan the 3 Welsh and 1 Italian would all be illegal.

I'm not sure how many Benetton fans you know in order to write on behalf of them so, judging solely by your output in this thread, I'm calling you out on that drivel.

Banning Union owned teams would mean the existing set ups would be sold off, Brendan. It's not a difficult concept. The Scottish teams are, as much as I am aware, still up for sale.

I think if the Private owned teams demanded that the other 12 teams be sold off the other 12 teams would stay in the league and the 4 private teams would have to deciede if it was a rock to die on.

Are you saying you want a repeat of the Kings and Aronini instead of the stability of Zebre and Dragons. Lets remember the last team that told its players it could keep going and mighr not be around after the end of a season was a private owned team. Your problem with union owned teams seems to be they are too strong which surely improves the league not weaken it.

Again why would you ban the shareholders from having teams in the league and why would you change the league rules when each team happily signed up to the rules.

PhilBB wrote:

Brendan wrote:Playing in a competition that no one cares about that is not able to help retain players.

Hmmm. Not sure the WRU agree with you there.

Not aware that the Pro16 faced the same challenges as the Tasman tournament.

Pro16 is the 3rd richest league in terms of squad spends. It happily could afford players from the SR league and the Tasman cup pays even less. Japan may pay a couple of players alot but not the squad.

The reason the WRU created the Celtic league was because the Welsh domestic league couldn't. If the Pro16 did not exist can you advise how many of the 160 players in Wales would not be professional players. I would guess about 50+% as their choices would be the Russian League or French 2nd and 3rd division.

Did you ever think the Pro16 is a blessing for having 160 professional players being able to be based in Wales not be curse.

Phill I'm sure there was others but I think that will do for now. Not really going to reply more as we aren't going to see eye to eye and you always take it back to the WRU and Wales and I think that should have its own thread

Just to clarify my point on the wage cap in England and strenghting teams.

Of the 14 professional teams there are about 560 professional players and maybe another 100 around the place.

One thing overlooked with the English wage cap is helping to have more English players be professional.  If the cap doubled it would be English players that would end up unemployed not non-English players Because they are rarely the lower squad players.

Second point is if the English teams had a 12m wage cap doesn't mean every team in the league would get better.  My view is the top 4 would and everyone else would get weaker.
1. Every player's wages would go up by 50+%. Wouldn't make them better teams just better paid players. So Worcester would have to pay 150% for the same squad. If they wanted to make the same current massive losses they would have to have a weaker squad. Doesn't improve the league and pushes Woecsester closer to being like Welsh.
2. Only Bristol, Bath, Sarries could afford the new wage cap.  It is debatable if Exeter Quinn's or Sale could add 4m to their wages. The reducing wage cap would imply not and certain teams already can't afford the wage cap what happens when they are hit by wage inflation..  That means we have three Sarries maybe 4 with 6-7 English and 3-4 NEQ.  Would they be stronger than Toulouse, Stade, Leinster etc, of course not as the French teams and Sarries have shown.
3. The league would become uncompetitive.  As it is Exeter and Sarries are better than everyone else.  Bristol may join them but not sure they will with the new cap, can't spend half your wages on about 4-5 players.  Sale might be getting there but they're built of cheap SA imports that get more expensive next renewal if it wasn't them renewing wages before the deadline so as to avoid they cap reduction could they afford it now.  If the cap was not there they would cost 50% more just to have them and it would be debatable they wouldn't end up at one of the richer teams.
4. The Premership is not really out performing the Pro14.  Sale excluding their Scarlets result didn't blow Edinbrugh away (won by 1pt).  Bath didn't do amazing against Zebre. Zebre got a win and draw v Brive and Bayonne.  Outside of the two horse race teams of Exeter and Sarries when have the Prem teams been a challange in the Champions Cup quarters.

Feel free to day where I am wrong but the French league a good example of what players would go to the Premership if higher wages were on offer. The result would be more SH players coming in and are they better than the English player they replace. Not really just cheap to employ.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

Old Man wrote:

Why aren’t the Welsh teams more competitve if they have more money than other teams?

Because the demands of the international game remove the best (hence most expensive) players from those three teams for large parts of the season. When Sale thumped the Scarlets, the Sale coach noted he had prepared his team for 11 weeks for that match. The Scarlets coach had 1 week with his players.

The International game rips the club game apart, simply to ensure the Blazers remain 'in control'.

The Irish, through their huge spend, are able to pay, train and executive super second teams so they aren't so negatively affected by the international game.

They could just recruit players to cover then as Sale have.

7.5 to you and most others that answer makes sense but others don't seem to see it and you would think that would be seen by the underperforming teams. Again it's easier to blame the League and other Unions

Over the last few years we have seen the Scottish and Italian teams doing better in the international window.  We even have had the 2 Italian teams both in on the same international weekend and both Scottish teams finish top of their Conference.

This year the problem the two nations had was the Covid Bubble that meant players could be released to the team.  Benetton as a result had 20 players who couldn't play during the international window, Glasgow similar.  No surprise that those two teams (Ospreys probably in the same boat) have been the big improvers in the Rainbow Cup.

It not rocket science.  Have two players for each position who can do a job and have coaches that are good at what they do.  The Italians and Scots seem to have worked that out.

Again issue might go back to the WRU

Easy to find players like Edinburgh have done

Edinburgh Rugby from Wiki so might not be 100%
Atalifo - Fiji via Jersey
Schoeman - SA via Bulls
Venter - SA via Cheetahs
Williams - NZ via Otago
Ferreira - SA is Bulls
Kunavula - Fiji via Fiji 7s
Mata - Fiji via Fiji 7s
Savala - Aus via NRL
Jordan Venter is SA no details
Sau - Fiji via Perpignan
V D Walt - SA via Lions
D V D Merwe - SA via Montpellier
WP Nell - SA via Cheetahs

Two points.
1. You have to wonder what the Fijians think when they see Cockers game plan. I am sure the SA players love it.
2. Of the 46 listed 13 are as above or 28% are cheap SH imports. Add in 3 of those are now Scottish Quailifed. Would Edinburgh have topped their Conference with those players

I am sure they had some terrible signings but at Munster I would happily take DVDM, Mata, WP Nell and probably Schoeman who let's be honest are at key positions. Not sure who some of the others are.