English Domestic Rugby Ongoing

by Geordie Tue 04 Apr 2023, 7:52 am

First topic message reminder :

This is a statement from the Coventry Rugby Chairman and was posted on the falcons forum as it seems to point towards a big shake up that affects Prem and Championship teams. The paragraph in the top right is the interesting part for other English teams....

Thought you might like to read it...and if you have any knowledge of the shake ups coming?

https://www.coventryrugby.co.uk/an-open-letter-from-executive-chairman-jon-sharp/

by king_carlos Mon 16 Sep 2024, 12:33 pm

Italy is an interesting one there. Treviso are doing well but largely as a result of an increase in external funding and funnelling players towards one team. Outside of Treviso, their system is largely being used as a shop window to get players into French clubs early. Between the Top 14 and ProD2 there are a lot of fantastic academies. Which Italy are smartly taking advantage of in order to get Italy qualified players excellent coaching in professional environments on another boards dime. The French club system is such a powerhouse that the FFR understandably don't seem bothered. It just pumps up the quality of Espoirs from their perspective.

That model for Italy could feasibly continue with Treviso being transplanted into any league though. As they'd still use the U20s as a shop window for France deals, then funnel the talent they keep into Treviso.

I live in Scotland and was a STH at Edinburgh before life got busier. General feeling amongst fans I chat to here is that Scotland might be wandering into the dark days again. Their current golden generation has come together through three distinct pathways that might be on the wane. SRU academy grads - the U20s have been struggling for a while and club rugby isn't too healthy in Scotland. Prem academy grads who are SQP - if the Prem keeps upping EQP quotas due to fewer teams then might more of them opt for club security by staying EQP, rather than chasing a few Scotland caps? Then your kilted Saffas etc - residency has gone up to 5 years, SA rugby has much more money in it now to keep players, the French leagues will scoop up more and more SH players looking to go overseas. There's a realistic chance that all three of those player pathways are about to decline noticeably for the next crop coming through. This golden generation coming together feels more like luck than design from the SRU.

The RFU's view is that if they get a strong England team, then interest in club rugby will increase and it will strengthen. Which I think is largely horse s**t. A strong club system and strong Premiership will lead to a better England team. Not the other way round. It's no coincidence that when the Prem was strong and English teams won 4 out of 5 Champions Cups, the England team was also strong, won 3 out of 5 Six Nations, made a RWC final and set a record equalling run of wins. Sweeney has been obsessed with putting the cart before the horse for a while now. The systems needs root and branch reform. Tear up the RFU and create separate boards running the pro, semi pro and community games.

by Welshmushroom Mon 16 Sep 2024, 12:50 pm

[quote="geoff999rugby"]
You misunderstand me I am not having a go at the Welsh but I do think that there are a few facts that make my observations valid:

The Welsh are not happy with the situation that they find themselves in with respect to how their rugby is set up below international level
There are strong voices in Wales who would prefer playing English teams to playing teams from the other countries in the URC
The reduction in the English Premiership has thrown finance issues for them in terms of gate money and future TV revenue.
England will come under pressure to reduce their representation in Europe given the small league - 8th place out of 10 qualifying is a bit of a farce.
The discussions about merging league come from England (whether it was welcomed in Wales I don't know) that suggests, to me, a degree of dissatisfaction with their existing lot
The URC would, now, still be viable without the Welsh [quote]

Geoff, as far as I'm the only voices are the Welsh Media and some Retired ex-players who played in the non pro era. I rarely here this from anyone near my age. The real reason regional rugby is faltering has a number of factors in it. One is total lack of success. Lack of quality play/coaching is another. Value proposition for neutrals isnt there either.

Look as a Welsh guy I am fully aware that regional rugby could very well implode at any moment. But speaking as a fan of regional rugby my opinion is if we did leave the URC (which I hope they have the sense not to), it would likely lead to the end of Welsh rugby. I think we are better of in the URC and trying to improve our standards to compete than to move to the Premiership. The rugby in the URC will do a better job of preparing us for international rugby in my opinion in terms of travel conditions and standard of the league. It's not like any of the regions would win the Premiership either in the current climate so we would be talking about being in the bottom half of that league as well.

I also think the URC has the better pathway to better sponsorship deals and the rate it's developing I can see that league being significantly worth more in the long term. I would be truly gutted if we went that way as I have enjoyed URC rugby even when Welsh teams are not involved in games. But as I have learned you can't count on anything in Welsh rugby. I'm sure there will be some more stupid choices to come at some stage. There always are.

by Welshmushroom Mon 16 Sep 2024, 1:03 pm

I actually think the European competition is doomed after the deal in 2030 expires anyway. By that point I see a more likely scenario panning out where the Top14 expands itself and boycotting Europe. We probably are already at the point where club matches in the top14 have a better income stream than Europe.

I could see a viable British & Irish Cup style competition take place to replace it but I doubt that actually would peak the interest of fans.

I actually think if the EPCR does cancel there could be a amazing chance for the UCR to expand and turn itself into a proper conference Euro league. They could add some sides to help grow the game in Europe too. Spain & Portugal would be obvious target locations especially with the Ex-Pat communities there. I always thought that expansion for the URC would be the best avenue in the long term to combat the increasing threat from the Top14, Pro D2.

It's worth pointing out English rugby could probably condense their overseas contingent and actually reduce their teams to 4-5. The reality is even with the loss of teams they have had the % of overseas players is still around 50% in a lot of squads. Granted some are EQ players now but given the new 5 year qualifying period in the long term its going to be really hard for English clubs to maintain this. Especially when you consider how French clubs are now re-centering their recruitments through academies to fall in line with their new JIFF standards.

If England did that they probably could then join the URC. But that won't happen as none of the current sides would want to be on the chopping block. In reality though it's probably what English needs to do in the long term to survive the monster threat that is being built over the channel.

by mikey_dragon Mon 16 Sep 2024, 1:26 pm

Intotouch wrote:
mikey_dragon wrote:
geoff999rugby wrote:
formerly known as Sam wrote:
Intotouch wrote:From a URC perspective we already play the best 8 English clubs in the H Cup, 4 aren’t great, so what do we gain by including the two worst prem clubs and those same 8 sides in the URC? That’s 6 iffy sides.

The league would have to be played in conferences and the standard would be diluted. The top 8 teams in the URC are fairly even in standard now which keeps the competition unpredictable and exciting. We don’t need all these clubs. The H cup would be too repetitive too.

From the premiership point of view they’d suddenly have huge Tavel costs and less away fans at matches. And it would seriously p off all the championship clubs. I don’t get why either party would want this merge.

Apart from Some Welsh fans.

Yeah I don't think there's any appetite from Prem clubs or Prem fans for a merger with the URC for all those reasons.

Ditto for the URC, except perhaps the Welsh.
There is not a chance in hell the Irish will break from the Saffers - they consider them joining the league the best thing that has happened to it.
I understand all nations are delighted with the way the way the URC is going, again with the exception of the Welsh.

The URC would still have 12 teams without them - a perfectly viable league.

So what it boils down is:

The English have a problem as they only have 10 teams and the other two league are not happy they get 8 teams qualifying for Europe.
The Welsh are not where they want to be.

The other 4 URC nations will not compromise to help the English or Welsh out, particularly the Irish and the Saffers.

Blah blah the Welsh… and blah blah the Welsh

The Irish love the addition of the SA teams so much that Leinster have never taken their premier team to SAs backyard during the regular season, and have often been demolished for doing so.

Blah blah blah the Welsh? Use your words Mike’s Dragon! Are people wrong in thinking that many Welsh fans want the regions to join the prem? Do the majority want to stay in the URC? What?

As long as Leinster go anywhere after they’ve built up a big lead in the URC league they’ll field weakened sided knowing that they can still keep the lead. If they play haven to play in South Africa early in the season or when they are further down the table they’ll send a full strength side. And who can blame them? The fact is that the rest of the Orish teams don’t have that luxury because they’re not as good.

There's currently no way to measure this. Not unless you get enough people to take part in a poll I guess. All we have is what a few people with internet access say. Recently, there's been a few more articles on it (merging leagues with the English) again, whether that be Welsh teams joining their premiership, or a B&I league. I'm unsure why it's gathered a bit of momentum again. I think the URC is a great product but it does have a few flaws. I like the inclusion of South African teams, it's made the league whole lot more competitive. Wales' issues aren't to do with the league, it's a problem we created for ourselves.

Agree with you on Leinster, but slowly I think other teams are catching them up and they will no longer be able to change their line-up so often. I think they could have benefited greatly from sending their best team to SA and having a proper go at winning the tour (like Munster). I think that contributed to them 'choking' an all competitions again. I've explained previously why I think it's a choke and I know a few disagree.

by mikey_dragon Mon 16 Sep 2024, 1:40 pm

geoff999rugby wrote:
mikey_dragon wrote:
Blah blah the Welsh… and blah blah the Welsh

The Irish love the addition of the SA teams so much that Leinster have never taken their premier team to SAs backyard during the regular season, and have often been demolished for doing so.

You misunderstand me I am not having a go at the Welsh but I do think that there are a few facts that make my observations valid:

As to Leinster my observation is they still won the league twice in the three years since the Saffers joined.
However I do think they have have shown a degree of arrogance which has cost them - they sent up a weakened side against Ulster and paid the price.
If they had won that they would have had homes games through the play off stages - big mistake.
They have not one won in any of the three years it has existed - the competition is tough and they need to adapt.

You just did, and you're still generalising. I've condensed your post to make mine more visible just FYI.

I think your observations are valid, however the URC isn't the cause of it which is what you seem to be suggesting. I know a few Welsh blame the league too, but I just can't see any evidence for this being accurate. The issues in Welsh rugby were created by the WRU and Regions. The stories regarding the Welsh teams joining the English prem, or the creation of a B&I league seems to be gathering momentum again, but I'm sure this isn't the fault of 'the Welsh' as you keep putting it. Given the plight in England's club rugby in recent years, we might have reached a point where it could benefit them, I don't see the harm in discussing that. The fans get what the fans get given though.

I like the URC, and I like it even more with South African franchises. I can see why it would seem a bit odd when people are used to watching a domestic product. I get the issues around travelling as well, and this has been talked about a lot more ever since the SA teams joined the European competition. Hardly an issue for just 'the Welsh' but again this is what we've been given.

Leinster are still one of the standard bearers and it's impressive that they do it with mostly just Irish players. Are you sure about that? The main SA franchises that we are talking about joined in 2021, Stormers won it that year and Leinster were dispatched by Bulls in the play-offs. Munster and Glasgow have won it since, so in 3 years that is 3 champions that aren't Leinster. I've commented previously that I think others are slowly catching up to Leinster, and they might benefit from touring SA with their best team.

by Poorfour Mon 16 Sep 2024, 3:54 pm

Cumbrian wrote:From English fans’s point of view, I wouldn’t really want a B&I league. I like our self contained league and I feel that ten teams is the perfect size for it. It doesn’t put too much of a workload on the players and there are fewer ‘filler’ games.

I like the variety that the European cups bring, and I wouldn’t necessarily be against reducing our team quota. However, I agree with Sam, the H-Cup used to be the pinnacle of European rugby and I relished it, now I struggle to get excited about it. The format changes and the French and SA indifference to it men’s that you often get second string teams who don’t care. The move of channels could be the final nail unfortunately. It really feels like they’ve cooked the golden goose.

From an English point of view it really feels like we should be focusing on our second tier, rather than joining another closed shop league. It requires time and money, and it remains to be seen whether we ever have enough of either.

The problem with a 10 team league is financial sustainability. It's better for the players... but the clubs aren't filling their stadia enough to turn a profit. The solution to that is more teams in the league, but where do they come from? The Championship and phoenix teams aren't yet secure enough, so naturally PRL are turning to URC to see if there's a deal to be struck. However much we fans like our compact and bijou little league (Mostyn [1]), survival is likely to require change.

The interest for the URC is that while they've got a larger roster of teams, they're also suffering from the fragmentation and flatlining of TV revenues. And while the SA sides have brought some excitement to the competitions, they've also brought a lot of additional cost and complexity.

It's hard to see how this plays out, but with CVC on both sides, I can see them making a persuasive case that working consistently together and being able to offer a consolidated package to tv will maximise value and viewership all round. The current negotiation apparently grew out of discussions around sharing the back office to save costs, so there's been quite a bit of chat already.
--
[1] Allianz and Leicester, anyone?

by Welshmushroom Mon 16 Sep 2024, 4:04 pm

I think the wider issue Premiership are probably trying to deal with is that URC and Premiership rugby are starting to compete for similar sponsorship and broadcasters. It might not be an issue at the moment (although it is being reported the current TV deals in the URC are higher than the Premiership). The issue they have is if the URC does keep growing (which I think it will), it may impact the revenue their own TV deals will generate.

Premiership has however made a statement and confirmed that while discussions have taken place these are more explorative and given current commitments will likely not apply till 2030. Ironically this is also when Europe expires. That I think tells you Europe may be done at the next renewal.

by Geordie Mon 16 Sep 2024, 4:07 pm

Yeah interesting trio....dont know much about Laker.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/articles/cly337y44xjo

by Recwatcher16 Mon 16 Sep 2024, 4:57 pm

As far as the English Premiership goes, folk are forgetting that the PRL wanted a ten team league. If the TV deal like all TV deals has shrunk then that is just life. If revenue was an issue the salary cap would have remained frozen but it has gone up. If the URC want to reduce English team involvement in the European Cup, they would first have to get French agreement and then see how much the TV deal would drop before making that call. The current squeezed scheduling agreed by the Unions probably only pleases the French who have more important league games to consider.

Current URC financial confidence appears to stem from SA involvement, the long term future of which is not clear.

If SA were to join the 6N then the SA clubs would be in the URC long term. The SA fans preference however is to play the ABs in the Rugby Championship and despite the money available in the 6N from French and English TV. My guess would be that eventually they will return to Super Rugby but on a very different financial deal, rather than the original previous TV deals which got split three ways despite the significantly larger contribution from SA tv.

by Poorfour Mon 16 Sep 2024, 5:36 pm

Recwatcher16 wrote:As far as the English Premiership goes, folk are forgetting that the PRL wanted a ten team league.

I don't believe I have ever seen that said before. Where did you get that from?

by Recwatcher16 Mon 16 Sep 2024, 10:34 pm

The PRL never officially stated the intention, but it was well known in Bath circles that all the club owners were in the discussions. The timing simply got brought forward with the demise of the two clubs that didn't have their own grounds and whose balance sheets were not sufficiently resourced to survive the covid revenue drop, whilst having to fund debt payments on their new stadia. So the PRL didn't have to communicate anything and just simply did not replace with other teams as you would with any other league structure.
I have said before that if those good club players filtered into the Championship, that could have been a silver lining but unfortunately those players just went to the D2 or even D3 in France, who now have the biggest professional rugby structure by some distance.

by Intotouch Tue 17 Sep 2024, 2:16 pm

Hi Welshmushroom and Mikey dragon,
Thanks for clarifying a things for me. I didn’t know that the interest in some Welsh fans in joining the prem was predominantly from an older generation.

From the Irish Independent “the Top 14 receives €136m annually from its television deal. In contrast, the URC receives €63m and the Premiership gets €39m.”

That means that with at present an equal split each URC team gets just under €4million and the prem sides get a fraction less. Where things get hairy is looking into the future. The premiership has no guarantee of getting a better/ same tv deal when their current one runs out, neither has the URC but viewership is on the rise in the URC, as is it’s general popularity so it is I guess getting a better or at least equal deal is more likely. Given that some more premiership clubs may soon be killed off by debts too I think that financially, even with all the travel and lack of away fans, the URC is probably the better log term option for the Welsh regions.

by TJ Wed 18 Sep 2024, 11:42 am

This discussion might be better in its own thread but what does the English league have to offer the URC teams? Not a lot. We have a great league with financial stability and growing audience.

If the top 4 English teams want to join the URC then that might be a basis for discussion. If they want to take us over and ditch the italians and south africans then its a non starter. Its not up to the URC teams and unions to bail out a failing English league

by Welshmushroom Wed 18 Sep 2024, 12:55 pm

I do wonder how much of Premierships rugby issues right now have been down to 3 fundamental changes impacting the English game. Those are the 5 year residency rule, Brexit in terms of how overseas used to be excempted (Kolpak for example is no longer applicable) and more importantly the demise of funding in the Championship turning it into a semi pro league.

These three things have had an overall structural change to how the game in England works on a big scale. English clubs have never been able to sustain squads of home grown players. Historically speaking they used to be able to recruit players into the Championship from overseas clubs. Essentially have them work towards residency and then essentially bring them in as EQ players.

I've maintained for a long time that English rugby might have the fan base to have 10 teams but in reality they simply don't have enough home grown talent to sustain 10 rugby teams. In reality they probably should have just 4-5 clubs.

The actual changes above will almost make the recruitment side for English sides extremely challenging and that's before you really consider what is happening in France.

I actually think the issues facing English clubs has only just begun.....

by formerly known as Sam Wed 18 Sep 2024, 1:07 pm

TJ wrote:This discussion might be better in its own thread but what does the English league have to offer the URC teams? Not a lot. We have a great league with financial stability and growing audience.

If the top 4 English teams want to join the URC then that might be a basis for discussion. If they want to take us over and ditch the italians and south africans then its a non starter. Its not up to the URC teams and unions to bail out a failing English league

I don't know how financially secure the URC teams are. The Welsh are slashing budgets, Scottish are never flush and aren't Munster kept afloat by an interest free loan from the IRFU?

The South Africans are bringing the growth and revenue, though the extra travel costs are going to bite.

No fans are interested in combining. The English league has hit by the pandemic with the clubs run as businesses and not extensions of the union the loss of income was tough. The three obviously weak teams failed though one of those was mainly due to the cowboys running it. Wasps were on the edge of going under through iffy management for years. The English game will benefit from a period of stability, the age grade system is throwing out talent that should see the league start to improve as the teams improve internally. I'm not particularly worried about the future of the league, I'm worried about the inefficient RFU ballsing things up mind.

by Welshmushroom Wed 18 Sep 2024, 1:14 pm

I have it on good authority there are another 2-3 clubs currently in England who are in trouble on top of that. I think their survival may very well depend on their next tv contract.

by TJ Wed 18 Sep 2024, 1:51 pm

I don't know how financially secure the URC teams are. The Welsh are slashing budgets, Scottish are never flush and aren't Munster kept afloat by an interest free loan from the IRFU?

the models are different in the different unions. For the Scottish clubs they get a budget and that is it. NO deficits, no debts, just a budget to work within. That keeps them stabler and tho their funding is lower than the average English club they are reasonably well funded in their league with a couple of the Irish clubs having a bit more but comparable to the top funded welsh teams and better funded than some teams

If as above the income from TV deals is the main source of income ( league and international) how can the english clubs spend twice as much as the URC clubs and be sustainable?

the main difference is with the teams being partly or totally owned by the unions they have a stability in funding and cannot spend beyond their means which I believe is the English clubs problems. A steak appetite on a burger income

by Welshmushroom Wed 18 Sep 2024, 2:11 pm

Sorry but I know for a fact Glasgow & Edinburgh's playing budgets are substantially are higher than the Premiership currently. They also have a bigger budget than half the Irish sides.

Player Agents have already come around and said currently Scottish rugby is probably in terms of player offers behind Top14 & Japan. This has been well documented as well on multiple media platforms.

Not sure why people think Scottish teams dont have big budgets?

by TJ Wed 18 Sep 2024, 2:39 pm

Share your info then. Because that is nothing like the reality I know. I bet its all social media speculation.

Its laughable to suggest so. We cannot afford top flight stars. We just do not have the budget. We instead spend wisely to get a deep squad. Name all these huge international stars we have playing for us?

There is no way on earth our playing budget is similar to the top English clubs. Remember to include all the marquee players and so on. the scots budgets are fairly transparent.

by Welshmushroom Wed 18 Sep 2024, 2:51 pm

You realize Glasgow & Edinburgh have 28 internationals in their roster each. There are very few squads in the URC or Premiership that come anywhere near those numbers.

by Welshmushroom Wed 18 Sep 2024, 3:07 pm

Also your post assumes that despite the increase in the salary cap to English rugby for this season they have in fact increased playing budgets. I've already stated Premiership rugby is in a massive discussion with the Government on their repayments as they want their repayments to be stalled to next year. The Government has sighted the increase as reason to repay this season.

The majority of Premiership sides have not increased last years spends. Based on the transfer lists alone its safe to say that the following clubs have not increased their spending this year:-

Bath
Bristol
Exeter
Gloucester
Harlequins
Newcastle
Northampton
Sale
Saracens

Probably only Leicester have seen a uptake in recruitment in the summer. And even then your talking about only a marginal increase.

So if you assuming English clubs are spending to the caps now which clubs you think are the ones that are - and if recruitment hasn't brought the increase your essentially suggesting their current squads all have had pay rises in the off season?

by Poorfour Wed 18 Sep 2024, 4:29 pm

At the start of the pandemic, the Prem agreed to reduce the cap, but with the proviso that deals signed before the new cap would be (partially) exempted.

A lot of clubs chose to sign up their start players to long term deals in the weeks before the new caps come in, probably trading reduced pay during the pandemic for increases later, knowing it was outside the cap. So in short, lots of clubs were (without actually cheating) spending well above the notional cap to maintan their squads.

What I think we have seen over the summer is clubs having to let players go in order to get back under the cap even though it has risen. Most clubs have smaller squads and have lost players who are more expensive than their replacements.

In terms of overall finances, the URC clubs wouldn't be in discussions with the Prem if they were completely financially secure. Sure, they have a better tv deal and more support from their unions, but attendances are comparable, and squad costs are likely to be higher given the concentration of internationals.

Most important, they're looking ahead to the renewal of the tv deal and this time around it seems likely that it will make sense to pull all the product together rather than have the fragmented approach we see today. The URC teams may (or may not) be in better financial shape today, but if they can't keep tv revenue high, they are going to struggle.

by TJ Wed 18 Sep 2024, 6:01 pm

the URC clubs wouldn't be in discussions with the Prem if they were completely financially secure.

Are they actually in discussions tho?

by TJ Wed 18 Sep 2024, 6:33 pm

and squad costs are likely to be higher given the concentration of internationals.

Leinster yes. the rest of them no. Glasgow and Edinburgh certainly not compared to the top half of the English leagues

With the scots teams we do not overpay - over the years there has been numerous examples of players asking for more because they can get more elsewhere - in which case its " off you toddle chum"

We retain our players thru a combination of things but we do not and cannot compete on salaries for the top players. We just do not have the money. This is why we lose a lot of the players we develop. We do not have all blacks and SA stars. We pick up young players on the upside of their career and have to wave them goodbye when they get big offers elsewhewre. think of Bill Mata

by geoff999rugby Wed 18 Sep 2024, 6:36 pm

TJ wrote:
the URC clubs wouldn't be in discussions with the Prem if they were completely financially secure.

Are they actually in discussions tho?

No they are not.

It appears some elements of the English game approached the URC and the URC said its all of us or none of us.

Discussion ended

by mikey_dragon Wed 18 Sep 2024, 7:14 pm

Welshmushroom wrote:I have it on good authority there are another 2-3 clubs currently in England who are in trouble on top of that. I think their survival may very well depend on their next tv contract.

Would hope not, it was awful seeing what happened to Wasps and Irish, among others. I think England Rugby has the potential to be like France due to their wealth, number of players and pro clubs. Since France went back to grassroots and built it up, which I think was roughly 10 years ago, they look like they could become unstoppable. Do France have more billionaire rugby fans than England? I’m thinking that might be the difference.

by formerly known as Sam Wed 18 Sep 2024, 10:29 pm

Welshmushroom wrote:

Probably only Leicester have seen a uptake in recruitment in the summer. And even then your talking about only a marginal increase.

Depends how much new contracts are costing. The signings aren't particularly more expensive. Probably on par or a reduction.

Nicky Smith but he replaced two squad props in van Wyk and Richardson
Dolly wasn't replaced
Carter replaced by Joussain on a dual contract with Notts
Weise replaced by Beets who's yet to place URC so should be a massive saving
Wilkinson and Atkinson out for Volavola again a saving
Porter and Scott out for Perese and Wand, that's pretty like for like given Perese won't be cheap but Wand was from the Championship.

There's been a few development guys around the squad out as well but then some came through so much or a muchness.

by Welshmushroom Thu 19 Sep 2024, 7:35 am

mikey_dragon wrote:
Welshmushroom wrote:I have it on good authority there are another 2-3 clubs currently in England who are in trouble on top of that. I think their survival may very well depend on their next tv contract.

Would hope not, it was awful seeing what happened to Wasps and Irish, among others. I think England Rugby has the potential to be like France due to their wealth, number of players and pro clubs. Since France went back to grassroots and built it up, which I think was roughly 10 years ago, they look like they could become unstoppable. Do France have more billionaire rugby fans than England? I’m thinking that might be the difference.

At least 3 are looking for new owners to take them over and are not getting anyone to bite. I think Newcastle are still trying to make the Saudi deal happen but that looks a long shot. Basically nobody really wants in on Premiership rugby.

The major difference between France and England is there are massive parts of France where rugby is their primary sport. I recently seen some stats as well to suggest that rugby has now become the number 1 sport in France hence their massive TV contracts. By contrast Football in England completely dominates almost every facet of the English sporting countryside. It's fundamentally English rugby's greatest issue and probably the main reason nobody can be bothered to invest in the sport in the country.

by formerly known as Sam Thu 19 Sep 2024, 7:59 am

Welshmushroom wrote:
mikey_dragon wrote:
Welshmushroom wrote:I have it on good authority there are another 2-3 clubs currently in England who are in trouble on top of that. I think their survival may very well depend on their next tv contract.

Would hope not, it was awful seeing what happened to Wasps and Irish, among others. I think England Rugby has the potential to be like France due to their wealth, number of players and pro clubs. Since France went back to grassroots and built it up, which I think was roughly 10 years ago, they look like they could become unstoppable. Do France have more billionaire rugby fans than England? I’m thinking that might be the difference.

At least 3 are looking for new owners to take them over and are not getting anyone to bite. I think Newcastle are still trying to make the Saudi deal happen but that looks a long shot. Basically nobody really wants in on Premiership rugby.

The major difference between France and England is there are massive parts of France where rugby is their primary sport. I recently seen some stats as well to suggest that rugby has now become the number 1 sport in France hence their massive TV contracts. By contrast Football in England completely dominates almost every facet of the English sporting countryside. It's fundamentally English rugby's greatest issue and probably the main reason nobody can be bothered to invest in the sport in the country.

Tigers are one of the three looking for new investors but the owners won't just sell the club unless they think the buyer is a fan and able to offer long term stability. They turned down offers of amounts around their valuation.

Ideally they wanted the owners of Leicester City to take an interest I think but they didn't seem up for it. Shame.

The Falcons owner runs the club sustainably but they aren't competitive and that's why he's after the additional investment. Though Diamond coming in might give them a hard edge above their spending power.

I don't think rugby is the number 1 sport in France, it's still football. It's just that with the their bigger population and it still being a popular sport there's more sponsors, local support and hence TV rights on offer.

by Welshmushroom Thu 19 Sep 2024, 11:48 am

formerly known as Sam wrote:
Welshmushroom wrote:
mikey_dragon wrote:
Welshmushroom wrote:I have it on good authority there are another 2-3 clubs currently in England who are in trouble on top of that. I think their survival may very well depend on their next tv contract.

Would hope not, it was awful seeing what happened to Wasps and Irish, among others. I think England Rugby has the potential to be like France due to their wealth, number of players and pro clubs. Since France went back to grassroots and built it up, which I think was roughly 10 years ago, they look like they could become unstoppable. Do France have more billionaire rugby fans than England? I’m thinking that might be the difference.

At least 3 are looking for new owners to take them over and are not getting anyone to bite. I think Newcastle are still trying to make the Saudi deal happen but that looks a long shot. Basically nobody really wants in on Premiership rugby.

The major difference between France and England is there are massive parts of France where rugby is their primary sport. I recently seen some stats as well to suggest that rugby has now become the number 1 sport in France hence their massive TV contracts. By contrast Football in England completely dominates almost every facet of the English sporting countryside. It's fundamentally English rugby's greatest issue and probably the main reason nobody can be bothered to invest in the sport in the country.

Tigers are one of the three looking for new investors but the owners won't just sell the club unless they think the buyer is a fan and able to offer long term stability. They turned down offers of amounts around their valuation.

Ideally they wanted the owners of Leicester City to take an interest I think but they didn't seem up for it. Shame.

The Falcons owner runs the club sustainably but they aren't competitive and that's why he's after the additional investment. Though Diamond coming in might give them a hard edge above their spending power.

I don't think rugby is the number 1 sport in France, it's still football. It's just that with the their bigger population and it still being a popular sport there's more sponsors, local support and hence TV rights on offer.

Tigers were not one of the 3 I was on about. If that's true then your looking at 4 in total but to be fair Leicester I would imagine won't have a issue with getting investors.

Regarding France half the country are Rugby only zones with no real football support in those areas. Sure some of the central french cities have massive football support but in terms of area's in France, rugby not football is the primary sport played. Its also showing in viewership on TV in those parts of France. There isn't any football areas in those territories. This is why its fundamentally different to England. England is covered with football clubs in almost every town and city in the country with some of those having multiple teams. To be fair as a league the Premier Football does seem to be the biggest football league in the world at this point.

It's why England can never succeed at replicating France.

Eventually if Top14 does grow I expect the Premiership to become nothing but a development league much like what I expect will happen to Super Rugby (especially if All Blacks/Australia lift their overseas restrictions). I think URC teams probably can stave this off a bit longer but at some stage if that monster french league is not restricted in some way they will essentially do the same to URC clubs as well.

by **Rugby Fan** Fri 20 Sep 2024, 12:15 am

Telegraph "exclusive" on worries about new England player match season limits.

Premiership clubs fear 30-game limit could see top players regularly benched
Exclusive: With a new, reduced limit on appearances over a season, there is concern that key players may end up being left out unnecessarily

There is growing concern among Premiership clubs that the new beefed-up 30-game limit for players as part of the new professional game partnership will force them into odd tactical selections during the season.

Under the previous deal between the Rugby Football Union and Premiership Rugby, players were meant to feature in fewer than 35 matches a season and play fewer than 30 sets of 80 minutes.

However, the ‘player rest and load principles’ in the new eight-year agreement now limits players to 30 match involvements per season, which represents significant reduction. Even if a player takes the field as a replacement for one minute it will count as one of their 30 match involvements.

The reduction comes after a study of player game time undertaken by Bath University revealed players were at a greater risk of sustaining an injury if they were involved in more than 30 games a season.

Yet with the 10-game British and Irish Lions tour of Australia next summer set to be included within 30 match involvement limit, and the club’s leading England players potentially involved in nine Tests this season, clubs are facing the prospect of having to predict when to leave senior players out of match-day squads without knowing if they are guaranteed to be involved on the international stage, or in the knock-out stages of the Gallagher Premiership and Investec Champions Cup.

The most obvious change could see senior players left out of the match-day squad entirely for games that will not have a major bearing on the result of the fixture, or the return of only using replacements in the case of injuries rather than tactical switches to preserve their match count for the season.

‘There are so many unknowns’
There is a concern that particularly for younger players, the match involvement limit will overly restrict their game-time minutes across the season. For example, Theo Dan, the Saracens and England hooker, was involved in 37 games last season but only played around 1,300 minutes, which was around half the limit.

At a time when club rugby desperately needs its international players to be involved in as many matches as possible to grow interest in the game, it could lead to an immediate effect. Harlequins, for example, might choose to rest Marcus Smith for their home game against Newcastle in the second round on September 28.

The situation is further complicated by the introduction of up to 25 enhanced elite player squad contracts that will give England head coach Steve Borthwick the final decision on medical treatment for players and also oversight of individual development programmes for those contracted.

“There are so many unknowns at the minute,’ said one source. “Nobody knows how this is going to play out. We are being asked to look ahead to the business end of the season and predict if we are going to be involved in Premiership play-offs or semi-finals of the European Cup.

“The concern is that by the time we get to Christmas, the senior guys have already played around 11 or 12 games.”

And while the professional game partnership said that “sanctions for breaching welfare principles will be included in new regulations” it is not clear what they might be or if the guilt will lie with the club or national side.

“If the 30-game limit is to be respected there needs to be a clear process about how we arrive at it, and how that load is balanced between club and country,” said another source.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union/2024/09/19/premiership-clubs-30-game-limit-top-players-bench/

by formerly known as Sam Fri 20 Sep 2024, 12:25 pm

Welshmushroom wrote:
formerly known as Sam wrote:
Welshmushroom wrote:
mikey_dragon wrote:
Welshmushroom wrote:I have it on good authority there are another 2-3 clubs currently in England who are in trouble on top of that. I think their survival may very well depend on their next tv contract.

Would hope not, it was awful seeing what happened to Wasps and Irish, among others. I think England Rugby has the potential to be like France due to their wealth, number of players and pro clubs. Since France went back to grassroots and built it up, which I think was roughly 10 years ago, they look like they could become unstoppable. Do France have more billionaire rugby fans than England? I’m thinking that might be the difference.

At least 3 are looking for new owners to take them over and are not getting anyone to bite. I think Newcastle are still trying to make the Saudi deal happen but that looks a long shot. Basically nobody really wants in on Premiership rugby.

The major difference between France and England is there are massive parts of France where rugby is their primary sport. I recently seen some stats as well to suggest that rugby has now become the number 1 sport in France hence their massive TV contracts. By contrast Football in England completely dominates almost every facet of the English sporting countryside. It's fundamentally English rugby's greatest issue and probably the main reason nobody can be bothered to invest in the sport in the country.

Tigers are one of the three looking for new investors but the owners won't just sell the club unless they think the buyer is a fan and able to offer long term stability. They turned down offers of amounts around their valuation.

Ideally they wanted the owners of Leicester City to take an interest I think but they didn't seem up for it. Shame.

The Falcons owner runs the club sustainably but they aren't competitive and that's why he's after the additional investment. Though Diamond coming in might give them a hard edge above their spending power.

I don't think rugby is the number 1 sport in France, it's still football. It's just that with the their bigger population and it still being a popular sport there's more sponsors, local support and hence TV rights on offer.

Tigers were not one of the 3 I was on about. If that's true then your looking at 4 in total but to be fair Leicester I would imagine won't have a issue with getting investors.

Regarding France half the country are Rugby only zones with no real football support in those areas. Sure some of the central french cities have massive football support but in terms of area's in France, rugby not football is the primary sport played. Its also showing in viewership on TV in those parts of France. There isn't any football areas in those territories. This is why its fundamentally different to England. England is covered with football clubs in almost every town and city in the country with some of those having multiple teams. To be fair as a league the Premier Football does seem to be the biggest football league in the world at this point.

It's why England can never succeed at replicating France.

Eventually if Top14 does grow I expect the Premiership to become nothing but a development league much like what I expect will happen to Super Rugby (especially if All Blacks/Australia lift their overseas restrictions). I think URC teams probably can stave this off a bit longer but at some stage if that monster french league is not restricted in some way they will essentially do the same to URC clubs as well.

By the time that happens to the Prem, Scotland and Wales will have already long since become development leagues. England have generally kept most of the high profile players in England for the bulk of their prime years by using appearance fees and now the central contracts. Not in England and no selection. It's the way Ireland have protected their league.

Re Tigers and funding. No rugby side will find funding that easy to come by. Very few if any make. Profit and so most normal investment firms won't take a second look. Tigers had offers because they are a huge hospitality business in the centre of Leicester which doesn't have many comparable options in the city. COVID hammered that area of the business but thankfully Tigers owners are focussed on sustainability of the club more than getting out or just getting money in.

In France football is the biggest sport, there's definitely huge areas that love rugby but the big cities are hotbeds of football and that brings a lot of people into the game. In Toulouse the football team has a bigger average attendance than the rugby team. Rugby has a bigger audience there than it does in B&I where it's a niche sport though.

by mountain man Thu 26 Sep 2024, 12:52 pm

Owner of Sixways wants to get Worcester back into pro rugby :

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/articles/c0jw7pvgwx1o

by mountain man Thu 10 Oct 2024, 12:18 pm

Wasps owner (same owner of Worcester) says he wants Wasps to enter Championship next season.
Seeing as Wasps went under with debt of £95M must be some interesting accounting going on.

Anyway, if legit it would be good to see clubs that went under resurfacing if viable.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/articles/cm2yrxdn3r0o

by WELL-PAST-IT Sun 13 Oct 2024, 10:31 am

I was just reading that with the Championship being enlarged from 12 to 14 clubs next season, Wasps, Irish and Worcester have all submitted an "Expression of Interest", how is that going to work as both Wasps and Worcester are owned by the same person, Chris Holland. Does it mean that one of Wasps or Worcester will not be allowed in or does he have to "sell" one of them.

It cannot be right that someone has the potential to manipulate one team to the others advantage i.e. Wasps need 4 points to go up and are playing Worcester, so Worcester send a weakened team out for the fixture. There is just to much conflict of interest there.

by formerly known as Sam Sun 13 Oct 2024, 10:45 am

Sell the Wasps name and logo for a small sum and then liquidate the old company. New co has name and brand then can rebuild. Wasps have no assets bar the training ground which is leased to Birmingham City I believe. The training ground isn't in the area of the country they want to operate in either. Wasps also forfeited the ownership of the ground which probably helped clear sum of the debt.

Worcester are in theory the best places to bounce back, dependent on how much damage the cowboys did before they bankrupted it.

LI are in a similar position to Wasps in that they just have the training ground and it's currently being leased out.

by Heaf Sun 13 Oct 2024, 10:52 am

Heaf wrote:So with LI a distant memory and having recently moved to Devon I guess I should be supporting Chiefs now?

Starting to think I may be a 'Jonah' - anyone want to fund me to NOT support their team?

by Geordie Mon 14 Oct 2024, 10:05 am

i see the prem are considering Away ends at rugby?

Surely not....

by formerly known as Sam Mon 14 Oct 2024, 10:23 am

Geordie wrote:i see the prem are considering Away ends at rugby?

Surely not....

Would remove some fun from the game. Exchanging some banter with opposition fans is good fun. Trying to artificially generate a football style atmosphere is not what I'd like to see. It's not harmonious for a family sport.

by Poorfour Mon 14 Oct 2024, 10:33 am

formerly known as Sam wrote:
Geordie wrote:i see the prem are considering Away ends at rugby?

Surely not....

Would remove some fun from the game. Exchanging some banter with opposition fans is good fun. Trying to artificially generate a football style atmosphere is not what I'd like to see. It's not harmonious for a family sport.

As I understand it they're not talking about complete segregation but reserving some blocks specifically for travelling fans to help with the atmosphere.

Allegedly it is all Quins' fault - after Bristol put the Quins fans in one block for Bristanbul [1] and they outsang the Bristol fans, our supporters' association has negotiated with the other clubs to secure a block of tickets for away games in a more systematic manner, and now at least some of the clubs think it's a good idea.

I don't have a problem with it as long as it is an option rather than something that becomes a de facto or official segregation policy over time.

---

[1] I still insist it's Quinstantinople.

by king_carlos Mon 14 Oct 2024, 10:45 am

Poorfour wrote:I don't have a problem with it as long as it is an option rather than something that becomes a de facto or official segregation policy over time.

Exactly my view too. Having certain fan areas works very well in other sports. In cricket, especially the big series, you often have sections that are mainly away fans by design. Not entirely so. If an Aussie wants to sit with the barmy army at the Ashes then they aren't getting glassed. Creating those areas can aid the overall atmosphere in my experience.

If it became a genuine segregation of home and away then I think it would be a terrible thing and to the detriment of the experience overall. Being able to sit next to an informed opposition fan and just chat rugby with them is something I love about seeing live rugby. Be that at international or club games.

by Sponsored content