Things are looking brighter

First topic message reminder :

After all the recent woes in Scottish rugby, some reasons to be cheerful:

• A new SRU Chairman, who seems to have some sensible ideas: Sir Moir Lockhead;
  
• A new SRU Chief Executive - a replacement for McKie with a better sense of what is required for the game in Scotland to develop;
  
• A commitment to a full-time 7s squad;
  
• A fairly radical restructuring of the league system to reflect current economic realities: League changes voted thru;
  
• Alan Lawson's appointment as a Vice-President to the SRU ;
  
• A better than expected showing from the U20s at the JWC;
  
• Restoration of the Museum of Scottish Rugby at Murrayfield: SRU Museum;
  
• Promotion for London Scottish to the RFU Championship.
  

Anything that I've missed?

You've got to stop imagining that this is England Portnoys. Firstly, rugby is far more popular south of Hadrian's Wall. Secondly, Scotland is a far less populous nation.

They simply can't sustain any more than two professional sides. They couldn't sustain three. They need the Pro12. It is what it is, their teams are what they make of them. You'd be better looking at the management skills of the SRU when it comes to the second tier of rugby in Scotland than what you call 'the Celtic Venture' if you want to see the root of the problem.

Portnoy wrote:The franchise route is failing whilst the love of rugby persists in the essential parts of of the nation.

What does that even mean?

What is in the Scottish DNA is a stubbourness to accept change, and when the Celtic venture commenced, there was a lot of protest in Scotland and a lot of fans refusing to get on board. Yes, mistakes were made at that time, but going professional and concentrating our talent into 3 teams was not one of them. We had to consolidate to compete. Failing to structure it in such a way that the old clubs sides weren't more closely linked to a professional side such that old fans didn't buy into the new structure was the key failure, along with the mismanagement of funds at the SRU and the creation of crippling debt.

Agree with Notch.

Regionalism/Franchises would be horrible for England but with the right markeitng they can succeed in other nations.

I think Scarlets for example are on the right track and the Ospreys looked to be at one stage.

funnyExiledScot wrote:

Portnoy wrote:The franchise route is failing whilst the love of rugby persists in the essential parts of of the nation.

What does that even mean?

It means exactly what it says.

The ML (or waddevva it's being branded as currently) has done Scotland no favours at all. In fact it has shrunk.

And as for Wales - Humph - Let's say they've got it a bit. (which is in realty to say that they've bought the puppies and the dogs they got are not exactly the Golden Labradors they were expecting).

That's all well and good, but you've yet to propose a credible alternative.

Er. Notch I believe I have. But I'll spell it out.

Withdraw from the Magners.

Re-tie the Solitaire to the tree where the roots lie.

If you want a flourishing farm you wouldn't chose a desert would you?

Perhaps a better turn of phrase might have been You have yet to explain how your alternative is credible. I have read and understood your points but you haven't explained how that is at all sustainable.

Right now, the SRU is struggling to fund 2 teams. Is Scottish rugby is any more capable of sustaining a professional league than it was 15 years ago? How many teams? 10? Where does the money come from? What is your business plan here?

Are there enough club grounds in Scotland capable of accommodating the kind of crowds a professional side needs to make a decent turnover? Is the player pool deep enough to be stretched over 10 sides? Will the clubs be able to offer salaries tempting enough to prevent top players moving overseas? How will the new sides be marketed to an indifferent Scottish public?

These are the questions that any decision would be based on and I haven't seen you address them, this is the point I was trying to make.

Portnoy wrote:The franchise route is failing whilst the love of rugby persists in the essential parts of of the nation.

I honestly believe that club rugby is in the Scottish DNA.

And that the Celtic venture has failed them.

Jesus...!

Do you ever watch the magners league?

Admittedly Edinburgh and Glasgow had a poor season but they have been doing well for the last few years. Edinburgh were 2nd a couple of years ago quarter finalists in the Heineken Cup mid table most years in the Magners league Glasgow didnt lose a game in six months a few seasons back, 3rd in the Magners last year, Quarter Finalists in the HEC.

maesteg - just a quick interim response to your reaction.

Yes I do watch some ML.

But the salient point is does Scotland benefit?

(Or Wales for that matter)

Scotland has at best one wheel in the ditch and one wheel on the track.
And Wales have never really had all wheels on the tarmac. Otherwise we'd have seen them at the sharp end of the HEC.

Notch wrote:Perhaps a better turn of phrase might have been You have yet to explain how your alternative is credible. I have read and understood your points but you haven't explained how that is at all sustainable.

1. Right now, the SRU is struggling to fund 2 teams. Is Scottish rugby is any more capable of sustaining a professional league than it was 15 years ago? How many teams? 10? Where does the money come from? What is your business plan here?

2. Are there enough club grounds in Scotland capable of accommodating the kind of crowds a professional side needs to make a decent turnover? Is the player pool deep enough to be stretched over 10 sides? Will the clubs be able to offer salaries tempting enough to prevent top players moving overseas? How will the new sides be marketed to an indifferent Scottish public?

These are the questions that any decision would be based on and I haven't seen you address them, this is the point I was trying to make.

Notch,
I'll try to elaborate by itemising your points:

1. Right now, the SRU is struggling to fund 2 teams. Is Scottish rugby is any more capable of sustaining a professional league than it was 15 years ago? How many teams? 10? Where does the money come from? What is your business plan here?"

Well the Scottish plan is and always has been too grandiose. When professionalism came in Scotland were already behind the trend as shamateurism in the leading countries was already well-established.

Do the Scots really have to compete at European side level?* Really? I don't think so. What the over-riding prerogative is national success. Re-build the national ethos through the 6Ns. Play the game though the clubs and develop from the roots.

The unnecessary long journeys can wait until you're ready. Keep the local rugby simmering on the hob at a semi-professional level and let the best players ply their trade abroad.

*They don't anyway at any serious level.

2. Are there enough club grounds in Scotland capable of accommodating the kind of crowds a professional side needs to make a decent turnover? Is the player pool deep enough to be stretched over 10 sides? Will the clubs be able to offer salaries tempting enough to prevent top players moving overseas? How will the new sides be marketed to an indifferent Scottish public?
abroad
On a semi-professional basis the Scottish could easily survive - like the Argentinians. Top squad abroad and local league players being hot-housed in an academy. So you don't need the spread over ten sides,

And I'm sure that the likes of Hawick, Melrose, Gala and Watsonians will more than support a semi-pro set-up.

You're essentially just talking about axing the two professional sides to concentrate on the national side and slightly upgrading the current Scottish league? This seems very contrary to the systems that have been most successful since professionalism. The more control over the player pool a nation has, the more cohesion it can build into it's national side. The more flexibility you can have with training camps, players playing with and against each other at professional level etc. The more people it can interest in watching it's regional teams the more stuff it can market, the more tickets it can sell, the more people it can convert to the game. A semi-professional league with names that are utterly obscure to the vast swathes of the Scottish public playing rugby at a low level deprived of the national teams leading lights... how is the game every going to catch on in Scotland in this way?

I can't see that a semi-professional league will ever sustain public interest. It will be like the football over here with everybody with an interest in the sport following teams from overseas or down south, following the top stars of the national side in their careers. It's not going to capture the public imagination, or pull in money for the SRU through sponsorship or TV deals.

Why should Scotland not dream of having teams people can actually get behind? Why shouldn't they dream of being able to watch their best players on home soil outside the Six Nations? A professional structure that exposes the cream of Scottish talent to a higher level of rugby both in the Celtic League and on the European stage? More than ever, they need to make this work.

You've said that the system is tailor made for the Irish, but bad for the Scots and Welsh... in 1996 Ireland weren't in a stronger position. We had our four provincial sides, Scotland had their four district sides. Rugby was very much a minority sport in both countries, viewed as the preserve of a wealthy elite and not really an important part of the national sporting consciousness. If anything, rugby in Scotland was ahead of Ireland.

Scotland's problems are not a symptom of the system. They need the system, it's their only hope of ever getting the average Scottish sports fan to actually get behind the game. It would be better for the Scots to manage their current sides a little better... that much is true.

Scotland cannot support a professional circus.

It can however put up a credible national side.

The pretence that it can support two artificial sides is a matter of self-delusion.

The parts (clubs) are greater than the franchises,

Cut your cloth. I'm sure that you'd gain some Celtic consensus.

Portnoy wrote:maesteg - just a quick interim response to your reaction.

Yes I do watch some ML.

But the salient point is does Scotland benefit?

(Or Wales for that matter)

Scotland has at best one wheel in the ditch and one wheel on the track.
And Wales have never really had all wheels on the tarmac. Otherwise we'd have seen them at the sharp end of the HEC.

Welsh teams have won both the Celtic league and the Magners, so yes I would say that the league and the Welsh effort there is worthwhile.

HEC is vaguely connected to the domestic League, Englands Premierships best team were knocked out of Europe early on and the the team that went furthest in the HEC managed fourth in the domestic league.

Likewise, Munster won the League at a canter this year but did nothing in the HEC.

Anyway...! I thought this thread was about Scottish rugby not Welsh?

It will be a much less credible national side without their professional teams. A credible second tier representation is the key to international success.

It's the key to growing the game in Scotland.

Portnoy wrote:Scotland cannot support a professional circus.

It can however put up a credible national side.

The pretence that it can support two artificial sides is a matter of self-delusion.

The parts (clubs) are greater than the franchises,

Cut your cloth. I'm sure that you'd gain some Celtic consensus.

Are you suggesting that Scotland forget professional rugby when they have two competitive regional teams that are full of scottish qualified players? THe teams are 95% scots...!

YOu are going quickly down a moronic tangent

maestegmafia wrote:

Portnoy wrote:Scotland cannot support a professional circus.

It can however put up a credible national side.

The pretence that it can support two artificial sides is a matter of self-delusion.

The parts (clubs) are greater than the franchises,

Cut your cloth. I'm sure that you'd gain some Celtic consensus.

Are you suggesting that Scotland forget professional rugby when they have two competitive regional teams that are full of scottish qualified players? THe teams are 95% scots...!

YOu are going quickly down a moronic tangent

It's not so long ago Glasgow made the playoffs, it's not so long ago that Edinburgh were a top six side. A bad season and a few ahead, but no-time for quitters in Scottish Rugby. They have a lot more to gain than they have to lose.

Really don't see your point at all Portnoys.

Scottish rugby is if anything restructuring and looking better for it, more Scottish players in the Regions than I can ever remember, good quality young talent emerging.

The Warriors and Edinburgh's lowly placing in the magners last year was more due to missing some star Scottish players for the first six months than anything else.

maestegmafia wrote:Really don't see your point at all Portnoys.

Scottish rugby is if anything restructuring and looking better for it, more Scottish players in the Regions than I can ever remember, good quality young talent emerging.

The Warriors and Edinburgh's lowly placing in the magners last year was more due to missing some star Scottish players for the first six months than anything else.

Very good then.

I've put my view. You can believe whatever you want to about the management of Scottish (or Welsh for that matter) rugby. I'm not going to concur.

Murray done good though.

Portnoy wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:Really don't see your point at all Portnoys.

Scottish rugby is if anything restructuring and looking better for it, more Scottish players in the Regions than I can ever remember, good quality young talent emerging.

The Warriors and Edinburgh's lowly placing in the magners last year was more due to missing some star Scottish players for the first six months than anything else.

Very good then.

I've put my view. You can believe whatever you want to about the management of Scottish (or Welsh for that matter) rugby. I'm not going to concur.

Murray done good though.

What has Welsh rugby got to do with this?

Underperformance. Another franchise discussion.

England's reasons are different and require a separate debate.

Portnoy wrote:Underperformance. Another franchise discussion.

England's reasons are different and require a separate debate.

If i were you Id watch the magners league for a season before you enter that debate mate...!

So if I committed myself to a whole season of the 'Pro-12', will I be delighted by a Welsh HEC win? No to be frank.

Or at any time in the next five years? Probably not.

Almost everything that could be wrong with Welsh rugby is. Apart that is - like Scotland - the national side.

Portnoy wrote:So if I committed myself to a whole season of the 'Pro-12', will I be delighted by a Welsh HEC win? No to be frank.

Or at any time in the next five years? Probably not.

Almost everything that could be wrong with Welsh rugby is. Apart that is - like Scotland - the national side.

I think that sounds more like a pathetic insult rather than debate.

Jeez man. Do you want me to run round the block again?

Chill folks . Plenty of vigourously expressed opinion so far which is great. Just remember don't get personal, and don't take it personally if it isn't personal.

Kiwi, I'm not sure that anything's getting out of hand here. Robust and gentlemanly is the way to describe it.

But it has drifted from Scotland to Wales a bit. Sorry.

Portnoy wrote:Kiwi, I'm not sure that anything's getting out of hand here. Robust and gentlemanly is the way to describe it.

But it has drifted from Scotland to Wales a bit. Sorry.

I just had a twitchy feeling it was about to Portnoy. And I'd rather put a quick friendly note in early than have to wield a big stick later . IMO it means less work and stress for me

Bliwdy drifters, I hates it when they hijacks my threads, I do, see ;-)

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:Bliwdy drifters, I hates it when they hijacks my threads, I do, see ;-)

Aye it's a bit of shame when a discussion about the improvements we are hoping to see implemented in Scottish rugby turns into a debate on the Magners Lea.....I meand the Pro 12.

Well thankfully the direction being taken by the SRU bears no resemblance to the proposals from Portnoy.

As discussed at the outset of the thread, there are some positives coming through at the moment, and there are foundations to build on in terms of the players we have, both at the clubs and at the national level. Both Edinburgh and Glasgow have very young squads, and the average age of Andy Robinson's Scotland squad is pretty low. Getting the support levels up at the club level remains the key, and whilst there are generations of Scottish fans wedded to the old clubs, taking the longer term view, that won't always be the case.

Portnoy wrote:

Notch wrote:Perhaps a better turn of phrase might have been You have yet to explain how your alternative is credible. I have read and understood your points but you haven't explained how that is at all sustainable.

1. Right now, the SRU is struggling to fund 2 teams. Is Scottish rugby is any more capable of sustaining a professional league than it was 15 years ago? How many teams? 10? Where does the money come from? What is your business plan here?

2. Are there enough club grounds in Scotland capable of accommodating the kind of crowds a professional side needs to make a decent turnover? Is the player pool deep enough to be stretched over 10 sides? Will the clubs be able to offer salaries tempting enough to prevent top players moving overseas? How will the new sides be marketed to an indifferent Scottish public?

These are the questions that any decision would be based on and I haven't seen you address them, this is the point I was trying to make.

Notch,
I'll try to elaborate by itemising your points:

1. Right now, the SRU is struggling to fund 2 teams. Is Scottish rugby is any more capable of sustaining a professional league than it was 15 years ago? How many teams? 10? Where does the money come from? What is your business plan here?"

Well the Scottish plan is and always has been too grandiose. When professionalism came in Scotland were already behind the trend as shamateurism in the leading countries was already well-established.

Do the Scots really have to compete at European side level?* Really? I don't think so. What the over-riding prerogative is national success. Re-build the national ethos through the 6Ns. Play the game though the clubs and develop from the roots.

The unnecessary long journeys can wait until you're ready. Keep the local rugby simmering on the hob at a semi-professional level and let the best players ply their trade abroad.

*They don't anyway at any serious level.

2. Are there enough club grounds in Scotland capable of accommodating the kind of crowds a professional side needs to make a decent turnover? Is the player pool deep enough to be stretched over 10 sides? Will the clubs be able to offer salaries tempting enough to prevent top players moving overseas? How will the new sides be marketed to an indifferent Scottish public?
abroad
On a semi-professional basis the Scottish could easily survive - like the Argentinians. Top squad abroad and local league players being hot-housed in an academy. So you don't need the spread over ten sides,

And I'm sure that the likes of Hawick, Melrose, Gala and Watsonians will more than support a semi-pro set-up.

What this essential boils down to is the english clubs wanting the scottish to go semi-pro so the english clubs can hoover up the best scottish players. By underming the celtic league they undermine the welsh and irish sides also. I can clearly rember on 606v1 pourtney questioning why the scottish clubs got heinken places. His suggestions are not for the benifit of scottish rugby the changes he suggests would benifit only one nation and its not scotland.

Well I'd certainly agree that Portnoy's proposals would have a positive impact on the England clubs.

Firstly if his proposals gained traction, the top Scottish players north of the border (Ford, Gray, Kellock, Barclay, Beattie, Cusiter, Morrison et al) would be on the market for new clubs, and the English clubs would be in prime spot to hoover them up.

Secondly there would be no Scottish representation in the money spinning HC (whilst the Irish, Welsh and Italian teams would remain there), so presumably there extra two places would be up for grabs for an extra French and English side. Again, beneficial to the English system.

Finally, there's a question of player control. It's already a small issue at the moment with the exiled community, but imagine the difficulties Andy Robinson (not that a coach of his calibre would remain under the semi-pro system proposed - more like Rob Moffatt) would have in controlling his players if they were entirely scattered across Europe (or perhaps further afield).

Thats exactly right exile all of it. I do not want to go down the road of whats gone wrong etc in scottish rugby in the past as its been hashed over to many times. Pourtneys ideals are laughable and are not in the best interests of scottish rugby. What i would suggest is more or less the strategy that they plan to adopt. Keep the two pro franchises, work on imroving the structure of the semi-pro game. What i also thing would be good is if the clubs had strong ties with the franchises dual registration of player so you have young players and academy players playing for your jedburghs galas etc. Have the pros when coming back form injury go on loan for a few week to the clubs. Long term say in 15-20 they need to be planning for the development of another pro team

Agreed - I think the SRU proposals are on the right tracks. The last season wasn't a great one for the Scottish sides, but Edinburgh were horribly mismanaged (which the SRU have tried to resolve), and Glasgow were struck down by injuries for most of the season.

Hopefully this coming year will show that the two sides can at least be in the right half of the table. I fear for Glasgow because of the players they'll lose at the WC, but Edinburgh have a good shot this year at the playoffs in my view.

tecphobe wrote: What this essential boils down to is the english clubs wanting the scottish to go semi-pro so the english clubs can hoover up the best scottish players. By underming the celtic league they undermine the welsh and irish sides also. I can clearly rember on 606v1 pourtney questioning why the scottish clubs got heinken places. His suggestions are not for the benifit of scottish rugby the changes he suggests would benifit only one nation and its not scotland.

That my friend is just plain untrue.

The English don't need to hoover up Scottish talent. In fact historically the tendency has been more the reverse.

As for the Celtic league, only one nation has thrived.

And I never questioned Scottish HEC entry either here or on 606v1. I may have questioned the automatic right for both clubs to be entered irrespective of performance. The door is left flapping off it's remaining hinge it's been been left open so long on that point.

Italy and Scotland - two clubs each and two HEC places guaranteed each. That's no incentive for improvement.
It's a disability sticker.

Portnoy wrote: As for the Celtic league, only one nation has thrived.

??? Do you mean in the Celtic League itself or the actual national side ?

"The English don't need to hoover up Scottish talent. In fact historically the tendency has been more the reverse."


Portnoy, I don't think he's talking about the national level (where you're of course right, Scotland has tended to plunder English talent rather than the reverse), but rather at the club level (which England clubs have nearly always sought to get hold of the best Scottish players). If you dismantle the professional game in Scotland as you suggest, then professional Scottish rugby players will need to play elsewhere, with the English clubs the traditional beneficiaries.


"Italy and Scotland - two clubs each and two HEC places guaranteed each. That's no incentive for improvement.
It's a disability sticker."


No more than the 6 Nations not having relegation (which I'd be completely against). If you want a European competition, then you need to have European representation. It's exactly the same in football as well. Under your model, the HEC would omit the Scottish and Italian sides next year. Personally I think the tournament would suffer. In any case, there's always an incentive for improvement, these are competitive rugby players we're talking about. Do you honestly think they have no incentive to improve at present? The Italian teams are newly constructed, and the Scottish sides have money issues and cannot purchase the same level of success as the top sides. Taking them out of the HEC (where all the money is) sends exactly the wrong message in terms of developing the game.

i thing glasgow may surprise you, the irish big 3 wont have there international players back playing i rekon until the end of november start of december not sure on the position of the welsh. It may do glasgow no harm to blood some young guys give them a good chance to get experience when the other teams dont have internationals available. Realisitically the target for both scottish regions this season should be top half of the league and win there home heinken pools games. Then have a look at were they are post christmas.


Portney you questioned there right to particape in the heinken cup due to poor performance and as i explained to you at the time the unions are the stakeholders in erc not the clubs and the unions nominate who they want to repesent them in that competion. Nohttpw 8 of scotlands squad that was selected for the 6 nations(http://www.espnscrum.com/scotland/rugby/story/132689.html) alreadly ply there trade in england do you not think that that english clubs wouldnt be interested in signing up the ross fords and ricige grays of this world

Without regional sides there will be no professional rugby in Scotland and all the best palyerswill be palying elsewhere. With restrictions on the number of foreign players elsewhere a number of potential players will be lost to the professional game - further eroding the pool of players to select from.
There will be no European competition or meaningless defeats of 63-3 or so.
The national team will undoubtly suffer as a result - they will slip behind Italy.

They need to determine what the best structure is for professional rugby.

- Are Glasgow and Edinburgh the best locations for the professional teams ?
- Get out of Firhill and Murrayfield both are depressing places to play non International rugby
- Work out a way to make a Borders team work

Need to take a long hard look at how to turn some of the club rugby tradition into viable professional outfits.
My gut feeling is a team in soccer mad Glasgow is never going to work - a team at a small ground in Edinburgh and a Borders team which shares matches between two of the top Borders grounds would be my view but those with full knowledge of the club scene would need to decide.

One thing is for sure throwing the baby out with the bath water by ditching professional rugby is definitely not the answer.

tecphobe - a while back I conducted an exercise in looking at what the two pro sides will look like during the WC. Edinburgh came out pretty well, whereas Glasgow were threadbare.

Naming a full squad of players is hard enough, let alone a competitive one. Taking Low, Hall, Thomson (injured), Gray, Kellock, Muldowney (leaving), Barclay, Beattie, Vernon (leaving anyway), Cusiter, Jackson, Morrison, Bennett (leaving), Evans (leaving anyway), Stortoni (leaving), O'Hare (leaving) and DTH (WC) out of the picture leaves matters looking pretty bleak. That's assuming the squad doesn't have any further injuries. I realise other sides will be hit, but I can't think of a side worse hit and so ill funded and ill equiped to do anything about it.

'tecphobe' Glasgow will not have their international either and the players will back early in November for the HC not late November. All 3 Irish teams will be capable of putting out reasonable sides. I'd back:

McAllister, Kyriacou, Fitzpatrick, Muller (I dont think he will make the SA cut) , Tuohy, Henry, Wannenberg, Faloon, Marshall, Humphreys, Marshall, Cave, Spence, Gilroy, Payne against a weakened Glasgow side.

There will be no easy ridesagainst theIrish

I'm hoping for an early home draw against Glasgow for sure

And the Italian sides. I expect those three to be propping up the table for the first two months before becoming a lot more competitive around late November/early December.

geoff i wasnt suggesting that it would be an easy ride against the irish sides just that it might give them the chance to bring in and blood new players. As for the heineken cup by the time that starts the internationals will have returned.

Scotland need a ring fenced regional league below their 2 Magners clubs. Failing that they should speak to the Welsh Union and set up a joint Premiership.

How is the bank balance at the SRU? I thought I read that the huge debt of upgrading Murrayfield is almost fully paid off either during last season or early on next season. That would mean the SRU are about to be flush with some extra money to............ (what are the options)
- fund grass roots
- develop a better structure from club/school age level into the professional teams
- try to bring back some of the exiled players to bolster the rugby brand in Scotland
- develop better facilities in Glasgow
- think about setting up a new Borders/3rd club

I don't know the current facts on the SRU bank balance, but I doubt we'll ever be in the position where we can describe ourselves as "flush with some extra money"!

AlynDavies wrote:Scotland need a ring fenced regional league below their 2 Magners clubs. Failing that they should speak to the Welsh Union and set up a joint Premiership.

Wales are in two years time. 8 club premiership.

I think the Celtic model is fine, under the regional system, which gears the players towards performance at International level more than HEC level there has been success. Wales two Grandslams and a handful of wins over Oz, pus some of the closest results against southern hem teams in three decades. Ireland same, a Grandslam, several triple crowns, Wins over SH teams. Scotland have not had a Grandslam in a while, but they have become more and more difficult to beat in the Six nations, home or away, plus wins over SH teams.

Below regional level is still in a period of adjustment to get the rewards we want, the regional academies and premiership clubs are turning out more good young players but we need to create more competitive rugby below regional level.

maestegmafia wrote:

AlynDavies wrote:Scotland need a ring fenced regional league below their 2 Magners clubs. Failing that they should speak to the Welsh Union and set up a joint Premiership.

Wales are in two years time. 8 club premiership.

I think the Celtic model is fine, under the regional system, which gears the players towards performance at International level more than HEC level there has been success. Wales two Grandslams and a handful of wins over Oz, pus some of the closest results against southern hem teams in three decades. Ireland same, a Grandslam, several triple crowns, Wins over SH teams. Scotland have not had a Grandslam in a while, but they have become more and more difficult to beat in the Six nations, home or away, plus wins over SH teams.

Below regional level is still in a period of adjustment to get the rewards we want, the regional academies and premiership clubs are turning out more good young players but we need to create more competitive rugby below regional level.

maesteg, likewise Scotland (well, effectively 2 ring-fenced national league system, with regional leagues below that) - see the comments re League restructuring above

yes thats correct, i should have acknowledged that in my post.

maestegmafia wrote:Wales are in two years time. 8 club premiership.

I think the Celtic model is fine, under the regional system, which gears the players towards performance at International level more than HEC level there has been success. Wales two Grandslams and a handful of wins over Oz, pus some of the closest results against southern hem teams in three decades. Ireland same, a Grandslam, several triple crowns, Wins over SH teams. Scotland have not had a Grandslam in a while, but they have become more and more difficult to beat in the Six nations, home or away, plus wins over SH teams.

Below regional level is still in a period of adjustment to get the rewards we want, the regional academies and premiership clubs are turning out more good young players but we need to create more competitive rugby below regional level.

Yup mate what I was saying is the clubs are complaining that 8 teams in a league will not be enough as it gives the clubs that are semi pro only 7 Home games in the league a year! They want to condense the numbers and talent to make Welsh rugby stronger but they also want a decent sized league so they can generate revenue to be able to afford the semi-professional aspect of the players. So wouldnt it be an idea to try and find a couple of other clubs from different countries who are close buy to increase the talent and strength in the league. Possibly even asking the 3 main Irish provinces if theyd like to include second teams in it.