Merger of URC & English Prem considered

First topic message reminder :

Tuesday 8 October 2024

https://www.walesonline.co.uk/sport/rugby/rugby-news/two-choices-tabled-urc-english-30094854

A merger of the United Rugby Championship and English Premiership split into two divisions with promotion and relegation is being considered.

Both competitions are looking at ways of increasing the value of future broadcasting deals with neither the URC or the Gallagher Premiership achieving the level of commercial success it wants. Talks are taking place between the relevant powerbrokers from both competitions, along with private equity firm CVC, who own a 27% share on the Premiership and 28% of the URC.

One option being seriously considered is merging both leagues into two divisions with promotion and relegation. All sides would play each other home and away with play-offs at the end of the season.

The other option is an Anglo-Welsh conference sitting within the URC where Wales' four professional clubs - Cardiff, Dragons, Ospreys and Scarlets - would essentially play English sides throughout the season until the end of season play-offs. One potential sticking point here could be the number of Welsh clubs, with some English sides favouring two and others three.

WalesOnline understands there is a difference of opinion among the English clubs with some preferring the Anglo-Welsh conference and others wanting regular fixtures against heavyweight Irish provinces, while there are also those who would prefer not to have Italian or South African sides involved. Wales' clubs would prefer an Anglo-Welsh conference because it would cut out travelling, reignite historic rivalries and potentially lead to improved attendances while there is also a salary cap in England which would increase the chances of the Welsh sides being competitive.

TAFKA The Oracle wrote:

Rugby Fan wrote:From WOL

An Anglo-Welsh competition is off the table for now, WalesOnline has learnt.

The United Rugby Championship and Premiership Rugby had held serious talks about merging both competitions. One idea that was considered was an Anglo-Welsh conference sitting within the URC which would have been the best scenario for Wales' four professional clubs - Cardiff, Dragons RFC, Ospreys and Scarlets.

Both competitions have been looking at ways of increasing the value of future broadcasting deals, with neither the URC or the Gallagher Premiership achieving the level of commercial success it wants. Along with an Anglo-Welsh conference, a two-division competition between the URC and the Premiership with promotion and relegation has also been discussed.

But WalesOnline understands there has been a significant difference of opinion within PRL as to what is the best course of action and as a result an Anglo-Welsh competition is no longer on the agenda of English clubs. The Premiership clubs are unconvinced an Anglo-Welsh conference would result in the significant uplift in broadcast income it needs, while according to well-placed sources the number of Welsh clubs has also been a sticking point.

Good.  While I would enjoy games in a close proximity and the availability of travelling fans, I do not think we should bow to PRL demands just to get this off the ground (I've heard that one demand was that we cut 2 of our teams).  I'm happy with the URC, and if the powers that be want the English teams to join it at some point then so be it.  

My only bugbear with the URC is the travel both in terms of financial burden to the teams and the environmental cost  (and as an aside, the fact that it limits travelling fans).  If we could work out a way to improve that then I would be very happy.

If it was a two tier league I'd imagine space in the upper league would have been found for two Welsh sides with the other two going into the second tier. With promotion and relegation neither of those things would have been permanent.

Always sounded like a non-starter to be honest and given the mess the WRU is in I'm not sure getting them into bed with the PRL would be good for English rugby bar some good away days for the fans.

formerly known as Sam wrote:  

If it was a two tier league I'd imagine space in the upper league would have been found for two Welsh sides with the other two going into the second tier. With promotion and relegation neither of those things would have been permanent..

No way that would happen - on the assumption we are talking about 13 team divisions.
Lets say 5 English teams - they would certainly not accept any less.
That would mean 2 Irish, 2 Saffers, 2 Welsh, 1 Italian, 1 Scottish.
No way the Irish and Saffers would accept being reduced to the same number of teams as the Welsh given there respective performances.

Merit is the only way to go.
As you mention it would not be permanent.
A team wants to play in the top tier - simple - Earn it !

geoff999rugby wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:  

If it was a two tier league I'd imagine space in the upper league would have been found for two Welsh sides with the other two going into the second tier. With promotion and relegation neither of those things would have been permanent..

No way that would happen - on the assumption we are talking about 13 team divisions.
Lets say 5 English teams - they would certainly not accept any less.
That would mean 2 Irish, 2 Saffers, 2 Welsh, 1 Italian, 1 Scottish.
No way the Irish and Saffers would accept being reduced to the same number of teams as the Welsh given there respective performances.

Merit is the only way to go.
As you mention it would not be permanent.
A team wants to play in the top tier - simple - Earn it !

No, I was thinking more of the Welsh teams joining the Prem. The Welsh clubs struggle to make money in the URC, joining the English league would provide several teams with another round of almost Derby games and easy away days.

Don't think the Prem clubs have any interest in joining the URC and incurring the costs and travelling and weakened sides that comes with bringing in Italian, South African and Irish sides.

Bottom line, if you can run your own pro domestic league then just do it. Some nations have no choice but to link up with others but when that grows and grows it starts to spiral out of control a bit, e.g. where we are now with the URC going from a uk league (Welsh Scottish league), to a uk and Ireland league (Celtic league), to a European league when Italy joined, to what we have now which is an international league when you add SA in, with all of the logistical issues that this throws up (financial, player welfare, environmental, etc.). I’ve even seen talk of adding in teams for Georgia and Argentina.

If England can find a way to maintain what they’ve got then I would wholeheartedly suggest going it alone. There‘s always the cup comps for a bit of cross border action. I’d say the same to South Africa too. I’ve got nothing against them and love watching their teams play, and have really enjoyed them in the league. But I’d love to see them back to having their own pro league. Maybe joining us up north for the cup competitions only.

The bigger nations (population wise) should be able to go it alone.

TAFKA The Oracle wrote:Bottom line, if you can run your own pro domestic league then just do it. Some nations have no choice but to link up with others but when that grows and grows it starts to spiral out of control a bit, e.g. where we are now with the URC going from a uk league (Welsh Scottish league), to a uk and Ireland league (Celtic league), to a European league when Italy joined, to what we have now which is an international league when you add SA in, with all of the logistical issues that this throws up (financial, player welfare, environmental, etc.). I’ve even seen talk of adding in teams for Georgia and Argentina.

If England can find a way to maintain what they’ve got then I would wholeheartedly suggest going it alone. There‘s always the cup comps for a bit of cross border action. I’d say the same to South Africa too. I’ve got nothing against them and love watching their teams play, and have really enjoyed them in the league. But I’d love to see them back to having their own pro league. Maybe joining us up north for the cup competitions only.

The bigger nations (population wise) should be able to go it alone.

From a South African perspective I wholeheartedly agree with you. I have been advocating South Africa leave Super Rugby when the conferences came in during 2013 I think it was.

Whilst I enjoy keeping up with the URC I am no fan of conferences. The issue for most countries is revenue, and they feel these cross border tournaments will provide more revenue.

If you wind the clock back to pre 1993, the Currie Cup was a monster competition with rivalries between the provinces that I have not yet seen in any competition we participated in since.

Due to the fact that SARU cannot compete with overseas salaries they feel compelled to venture into these cross border comps.

The way I see it, our best players will always play overseas, and even though the URC have helped in bringing back a number of stars, I have gotten used to them playing overseas.

We have fourteen provincial rugby teams, in the past we had six teams in the premier Currie Cup and eight in the first division.

It changed a few times and had a couple of seasons with all fourteen in one league. Predictably there were many runaway games. However it can be easily addressed with a draft system.

Often times you would find three top halfbacks at one franchise where some would getvery little game time.

By having a draft talent can be spread around. Now many would think the quality would dilute and thus be bad for the Springboks.

Argentina does not have a professional league and yet have proven they can be successful

There are many ieerations for the Currie Cup.

If unions don't agree with a fourteen team league, you could still make it an eight team premier league and six team first division.

That would provide 14 weeks of regular season and two weeks of finals.

Then have an allstar tourament with four teams selected by popular vote for a home and away six match riund tournament. It can be hosted in the four major city centres of Capetown, Durban, Johannesburg and Pretoria.

It will be higher intensity and thus replace the "URC" quality aspect.

20-22 weeks of rugby is about the right number per season outside of tests.

There are also many ways revenue can be improved upon,

Plus the expenses will be a hell of a lot less.

One last thought. Familiarity breeds contempt, and our particular brand of rugby is best left as a surprise for test matches. The more teams play us, the more they get accustomed to our physical brand.

Old Man wrote:One last thought. Familiarity breeds contempt, and our particular brand of rugby is best left as a surprise for test matches. The more teams play us, the more they get accustomed to our physical brand.

Except the SA teams in the URC are certainly chucking it about a lot more than they traditionally have.

I have not seen any of them starting with a 7:1 bench yet either

Old Man, I think Scotland will be feeling reasonably confident going into Sunday's game as the Glasgow players all know they can win against South African sides.
Mind, I still think the Boks will win.

jimbopip wrote:Old Man, I think Scotland will be feeling reasonably confident going into Sunday's game as the Glasgow players all know they can win against South African sides.
Mind, I still think the Boks will win.

I mentioned earlier in the week that I am nervous about this game

BigGee wrote:

Old Man wrote:One last thought. Familiarity breeds contempt, and our particular brand of rugby is best left as a surprise for test matches. The more teams play us, the more they get accustomed to our physical brand.

Except the SA teams in the URC are certainly chucking it about a lot more than they traditionally have.

I have not seen any of them starting with a 7:1 bench yet either

That is a bit of a misnomer. SA domestic rugby has been playing entertaining rugby for years.

If you look at rugby from varsity cup through currie cup, through franchise rugby the style of rugby has always been more exciting.

The Bulls have traditionallly been the one side more conservative.

jimbopip wrote:Old Man, I think Scotland will be feeling reasonably confident going into Sunday's game as the Glasgow players all know they can win against South African sides.
Mind, I still think the Boks will win.

Scotland think they are playing England again????

Old Man wrote:

jimbopip wrote:Old Man, I think Scotland will be feeling reasonably confident going into Sunday's game as the Glasgow players all know they can win against South African sides.
Mind, I still think the Boks will win.

I mentioned earlier in the week that I am nervous about this game

IIRC you are an South Africa fan - I wouldn't be worried at all if I were you. We will score a try or two but we do not have the answer to the power of the bokke forwards

Old Man wrote:

TAFKA The Oracle wrote:Bottom line, if you can run your own pro domestic league then just do it. Some nations have no choice but to link up with others but when that grows and grows it starts to spiral out of control a bit, e.g. where we are now with the URC going from a uk league (Welsh Scottish league), to a uk and Ireland league (Celtic league), to a European league when Italy joined, to what we have now which is an international league when you add SA in, with all of the logistical issues that this throws up (financial, player welfare, environmental, etc.). I’ve even seen talk of adding in teams for Georgia and Argentina.

If England can find a way to maintain what they’ve got then I would wholeheartedly suggest going it alone. There‘s always the cup comps for a bit of cross border action. I’d say the same to South Africa too. I’ve got nothing against them and love watching their teams play, and have really enjoyed them in the league. But I’d love to see them back to having their own pro league. Maybe joining us up north for the cup competitions only.

The bigger nations (population wise) should be able to go it alone.

From a South African perspective I wholeheartedly agree with you. I have been advocating South Africa leave Super Rugby when the conferences came in during 2013 I think it was.

Yes I had you in mind when I posted that, Old Man! I know it’s not as simple as just population levels. But SA strikes me as somewhere that should be able to sustain its own pro league. Massive population, rugby mad nation, huge player numbers, excellent schools set up churning out lots of players. As I said, I have no issue with SA. Love watching the Boks and the club sides. Especially love watching games in SA in the sunshine on fast pitches. It’s just such a long way away that, for me, makes it prohibitive to play in northern leagues (and vice versa for northern teams to come south). Although we’re all managing it currently, and it’s worse for the SA teams than for those in the north. But I’m not sure whether it will be sustainable long term.

The format helps.
The Saffers teams play 6 games away from South Africa and the northern teams play 2 games in South Africa.

On the assumption who do them in batch of two, the total additional cost is not that great in the scheme of things.
Covered by the higher TV revenues compared to a Saffers only league and a return to a Celtic/Italian only league.