Heineken Cup - General Discussion Thread

castie

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Well from what I've heard that article is incorrect in that Premier Rugby aren't pushing for the smaller competition, the Top 14 are and that's one of the things the two differ on, hence no joint proposal.

I'd like to see the following:

7 teams from each league. Top 3 teams from Rabo plus highest finishing from each nation (IE this season would have been Leinster, Ospreys, Munster, Glasgow, Scarlets, Ulster, Treviso). Then whatever you want for France/England plus competition winners and H Cup finalist. If H Cup finalists are already qualified the extra place gets awarded to the league as opposed to the nation, so Cardiff and Edinburgh would have also qualified thanks to Ulster and Leinster.

Actually why Cardiff and Edinburgh? Should be Cardiff and Conn no?
And if we include Amlin winners and they have already qualified then does the league get a 10th spot?

If its the league then Dragons get in and that makes 10 from Rabo.

Edinburgh and Aironi missout and Dragons plus extra English team get in.

Riskymove

castie wrote: »

If its the league then Dragons get in and that makes 10 from Rabo.

under the present system, nearly all of the Rabo gets in anyway, especially if an Irish or welsh team wins the HEC.

as mentioned several times, changes would likely only really result in a scottish or italian (based on there being 2) team losing out

it all seems pretty pointless for such little change in outcomes

Tox56

castie wrote: »

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Well from what I've heard that article is incorrect in that Premier Rugby aren't pushing for the smaller competition, the Top 14 are and that's one of the things the two differ on, hence no joint proposal.

I'd like to see the following:

7 teams from each league. Top 3 teams from Rabo plus highest finishing from each nation (IE this season would have been Leinster, Ospreys, Munster, Glasgow, Scarlets, Ulster, Treviso). Then whatever you want for France/England plus competition winners and H Cup finalist. If H Cup finalists are already qualified the extra place gets awarded to the league as opposed to the nation, so Cardiff and Edinburgh would have also qualified thanks to Ulster and Leinster.

Actually why Cardiff and Edinburgh? Should be Cardiff and Conn no?
And if we include Amlin winners and they have already qualified then does the league get a 10th spot?

If its the league then Dragons get in and that makes 10 from Rabo.

Edinburgh and Aironi missout and Dragons plus extra English team get in.

I don't understand, Dragons get in how? If it's from the league of the Amlin winners it should be in the French league this year (hypothetically)?

pajunior

Supposedly this change is a front by the English in order to get a bigger share of the tv money, not sure if there is any truth behind that or just a way of bashing the changes.

Anyway I am 100% for a change of qualification but I think there should always be at least 1 representative from each country.

irishbucsfan

castie wrote: »

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Well from what I've heard that article is incorrect in that Premier Rugby aren't pushing for the smaller competition, the Top 14 are and that's one of the things the two differ on, hence no joint proposal.

I'd like to see the following:

7 teams from each league. Top 3 teams from Rabo plus highest finishing from each nation (IE this season would have been Leinster, Ospreys, Munster, Glasgow, Scarlets, Ulster, Treviso). Then whatever you want for France/England plus competition winners and H Cup finalist. If H Cup finalists are already qualified the extra place gets awarded to the league as opposed to the nation, so Cardiff and Edinburgh would have also qualified thanks to Ulster and Leinster.

Actually why Cardiff and Edinburgh? Should be Cardiff and Conn no?
And if we include Amlin winners and they have already qualified then does the league get a 10th spot?

If its the league then Dragons get in and that makes 10 from Rabo.

Edinburgh and Aironi missout and Dragons plus extra English team get in.

Cardiff and Edinburgh because its top 5 plus top from each country. Ulster would be top from.Ireland... Although wait I'm wrong there because they qualify as H Cup finalists so yes you are correct! Cardiff and Connacht.

Yes, I guess every league could potentially have 10 qualifiers. You could put a cap on that though similar to the current system.

Winters

Currently the maximum any country can have in the Heineken Cup is 7 teams. The RFU/AP and FFR/Top 14 are guaranteed 6 each. As it is it's 6+6+3+3+2+2 plus winners of HEC and Amlin.

I for one really enjoy the current format. The idea that reducing from 24 to 20 (6 groups to 5) has surfaced but that wouldn't reduce the number of game weekends which the LnR are looking for in order to find room for their Top 16 format.

One solution would be to allocate the Pro 12 Unions' places more competitively which make some sense. Something like, as posted before, 6 (RFU/AP), 6 (FFR/LnR), 2 (IRFU), 2 (WRU), 1 (SRU) and 1 (FIR). The remaining 4 places allocated based on Pro 12 table and the status quo of HEC and Amlin winners stays the same.

Alternatively tell McCafferty and Blanco to feck off and stop meddling with the Pro 12.

Oh to be a fly on the wall during those meetings.

justsomebloke

Truthfully I could see the Italians leaving the rabo to keep their spots in the HEC as there would be more money in it for them

castie

You cant make the Rabo divide places up between different countries.

For one it punishes teams like Aironi who may not qualify.
So by entering one league they risk a different competition.
Makes no sense.

If they want 20 then Wales,Ireland,England and France should lose one spot.
Same rules then remain in force and lose the cap at 7 as then it would be meaningless.

Ireland then has a qualification headache with 3 good teams.
Wales also has its qualification made harder.
Hence the Rabo gains more power in qualification terms.
You wont see Ulster sending a team of youngsters down to Leinster with that format! (just picking one example there are plenty from other teams.

The logic of not removing the Italian and Scotish places is just down to numbers. One team representing a country is not enough in a supposed 6 nation setup.

This obviously is unfair to Ireland as we boast the best record in the competition in recent years but its one solution to appease the majority.

Sindri

Making qualification more competitive though would mean the necessity of bigger squads. Can the Italians, Welsh, Scots afford bigger squads, can we ourselves actually afford bigger squads? Is the quality there at the moment? We may develop it but it would take time and where would we find the money to pay more players of a questionable quality, or where would the other teams find the money or the players?

We don't have the luxury to buy players and neither do may other teams.

Podge_irl

If this is going to be pushed through I can see the Italians leaving the Rabo to keep their two spots - which would be a shame.

irishbucsfan

If the Italians leave then they could just end up taking a spot off them anyway. This notion of the unions "owning" their places doesn't really hold up now that everythings up for negotiation again.

Podge_irl

irishbucsfan wrote: »

If the Italians leave then they could just end up taking a spot off them anyway. This notion of the unions "owning" their places doesn't really hold up now that everythings up for negotiation again.

No, but the English and French would have a hard time arguing an Italian league should get zero places when they're currently moaning about the Rabo getting too many.

Not that I imagine hypocrisy would stop them.

jacothelad

castie wrote: »

You cant make the Rabo divide places up between different countries.

For one it punishes teams like Aironi who may not qualify.
So by entering one league they risk a different competition.
Makes no sense.

If they want 20 then Wales,Ireland,England and France should lose one spot.
Same rules then remain in force and lose the cap at 7 as then it would be meaningless.

Ireland then has a qualification headache with 3 good teams.
Wales also has its qualification made harder.
Hence the Rabo gains more power in qualification terms.
You wont see Ulster sending a team of youngsters down to Leinster with that format! (just picking one example there are plenty from other teams.

The logic of not removing the Italian and Scotish places is just down to numbers. One team representing a country is not enough in a supposed 6 nation setup.

This obviously is unfair to Ireland as we boast the best record in the competition in recent years but its one solution to appease the majority.

You still might if Ulster have to play Leinster and 4 days later, Munster when Ulster have an effective squad of just 30 players.

I've an idea. The English want to see a 'fairer' system, i.e. a system where they don't have to be any better but which allows them more money and more teams. At the same time they want fewer 'Celtic' teams as they inherently sneer at us and make all kinds of baseless assumptions about the level of commitment of the teams.

Give them fewer teams. Amalgamate all of Ulster and Leinster in their entirety. Lock stock and barrel. Do the same with Munster and Connacht. Keep all the players and academies etc and run two 'super teams'.
I wonder what they would think of that.

irishbucsfan

Podge_irl wrote: »

No, but the English and French would have a hard time arguing an Italian league should get zero places when they're currently moaning about the Rabo getting too many.

Not that I imagine hypocrisy would stop them.

They could argue for one though.

irishbucsfan

irishbucsfan wrote: »

They could argue for one though.

stalemate surely though?

I.e
France - we want this vs Italy - VETO!
England - we want this vs Scotland - VETO!
Wales & Ireland - "Ah sure it's grand"

Podge_irl

Deleted User wrote: »

stalemate surely though?

I.e
France - we want this vs Italy - VETO!
England - we want this vs Scotland - VETO!
Wales & Ireland - "Ah sure it's grand"

Stalemate ends in no HEC though. Then English and French will organise an Anglo-French tournie and wait for the Celts/Italians to come begging. And we'll all suffer in the interim.

Podge_irl

Podge_irl wrote: »

Stalemate ends in no HEC though. Then English and French will organise an Anglo-French tournie and wait for the Celts/Italians to come begging. And we'll all suffer in the interim.

there's bound to be appeasement, but it certainly wont all be taken from the Celt/Italy side of things.


How about they make it easy.

T14 - 7 places (0.5 of league)
Premiership - 6 places (0.5 of league)
RBP12 - 6 places of which
Italy - 1 place (0.5 of league)
Scotland - 1 place (0.5 of league)
Ireland - 2 places (0.5 of league)
Wales - 2 places (0.5 of league)

and the last available slot (if 20 team tournament) goes to the winner of the previous tournament, thereby pushing an extra spot into their allocation.

if a 24 team tournament remains, give the Amlin winners entry too, and then one more qualification from each league ( or give playoff positions - could be very interesting! 3 qualifier games, so 7 and 8 in Premiership and RBP12, and 8 and 9 in T14 have once off play off between each other to get qualified - takes place weekend after HEC final)

We need to retain Scottish and Italian qualification though.

irishbucsfan

There'll be no stalemate if the French and English take the same side against us. Whatever about the constitution of the panel and the mechanics of the committee, they, individually, represent a far far far larger population of rugby fans (and therefore tv money) than we do combined.

Which is why we should be a bit more realistic and come up with a decent compromise.

irishbucsfan

Deleted User wrote: »

there's bound to be appeasement, but it certainly wont all be taken from the Celt/Italy side of things.


How about they make it easy.

T14 - 7 places (0.5 of league)
Premiership - 6 places (0.5 of league)
RBP12 - 6 places of which
Italy - 1 place (0.5 of league)
Scotland - 1 place (0.5 of league)
Ireland - 2 places (0.5 of league)
Wales - 2 places (0.5 of league)

and the last available slot (if 20 team tournament) goes to the winner of the previous tournament, thereby pushing an extra spot into their allocation.

if a 24 team tournament remains, give the Amlin winners entry too, and then one more qualification from each league.

We need to retain Scottish and Italian qualification though.

That doesn't address their request at all though. All you've done is reassign the allocations!

rrpc

irishbucsfan wrote: »

There'll be no stalemate if the French and English take the same side against us. Whatever about the constitution of the panel and the mechanics of the committee, they, individually, represent a far far far larger population of rugby fans (and therefore tv money) than we do combined.

Which is why we should be a bit more realistic and come up with a decent compromise.

Appeasement. It worked for Chamberlain...

Seems like today is groundhog day :rolleyes:

irishbucsfan

rrpc wrote: »

Appeasement. It worked for Chamberlain...

Seems like today is groundhog day :rolleyes:

Yep you're right, finding a compromise is always the worst course of action.

irishbucsfan

irishbucsfan wrote: »

That doesn't address their request at all though. All you've done is reassign the allocations!

Italian A side needs to finish above Italian B
Scottish A side needs to finish above Scottish B
Ireland A and B need.....

etc etc.

There is now a "relegation" effect that can't be ignored. Edinburgh this season would not qualify for HEC rugby next.

If it got to December, and they were 20 points behind Glasgow, but still interested in HEC glory, they could still do so by completely and totally ignoring the league, and winning the HEC to do so.

However, that is literally no different from what could happen to a Saracens side 6 points off the bottom of the Premiership, as we've seen the "thread of relegation" doesn't really exist...

rrpc

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Yep you're right, finding a compromise is always the worst course of action.

You're not advocating a compromise. A compromise is where everyone feels they've lost something.

irishbucsfan

Deleted User wrote: »

Italian A side needs to finish above Italian B
Scottish A side needs to finish above Scottish B
Ireland A and B need.....

etc etc.

There is now a "relegation" effect that can't be ignored. Edinburgh this season would not qualify for HEC rugby next.

If it got to December, and they were 20 points behind Glasgow, but still interested in HEC glory, they could still do so by completely and totally ignoring the league, and winning the HEC to do so.

However, that is literally no different from what could happen to a Saracens side 6 points off the bottom of the Premiership, as we've seen the "thread of relegation" doesn't really exist...

It's not the threat of relegation they are complaining about, that is just what people who haven't bothered to listen properly to their argument assume. Or what English/French people who don't understand the argument might say.

However you're right, there would be more competition this way. Not the same as in the Other leagues though (personally I'd like to see us all on a level playing field or they'll keep complaining).

irishbucsfan

rrpc wrote: »

You're not advocating a compromise. A compromise is where everyone feels they've lost something.

I advocated a 24 team competition involving qualification based on places in the Rabo/Premiership/Top 14 except with the highest place nation of every Committee member guaranteed at least one place. A compromise.

irishbucsfan

irishbucsfan wrote: »

It's not the threat of relegation they are complaining about, that is just what people who haven't bothered to listen properly to their argument assume. Or what English/French people who don't understand the argument might say.

However you're right, there would be more competition this way. Not the same as in the Other leagues though (personally I'd like to see us all on a level playing field or they'll keep complaining).

It is not possible to retain a European competition and apply merit-only inclusion. All sports know this. Ridiculous to think otherwise tbh!

If that was the case, the Champions League would consist of the Spanish league, a handful of Italians, 3 English teams and Bayern Munich.

Wrt to the competitiveness, the example I've given explains the setup fully. If an AP team started a season poorly, but won 3 of the first 3 HEC matches, they have just as much incentive as Edinburgh did this season. There is no difference, no matter what they tell you.

rrpc

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I advocated a 24 team competition involving qualification based on places in the Rabo/Premiership/Top 14 except with the highest place nation of every Committee member guaranteed at least one place. A compromise.

You're leaving out an important little detail aren't you?

irishbucsfan

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I advocated a 24 team competition involving qualification based on places in the Rabo/Premiership/Top 14 except with the highest place nation of every Committee member guaranteed at least one place. A compromise.

that's not a compromise though. It's a garrotte.

I've given a fair way, where each country's representation is determined by the previous winner, and then half of their professional teams in top flight rugby.

irishbucsfan

Deleted User wrote: »

It is not possible to retain a European competition and apply merit-only inclusion. All sports know this. Ridiculous to think otherwise tbh!

If that was the case, the Champions League would consist of the Spanish league, a handful of Italians, 3 English teams and Bayern Munich.

Wrt to the competitiveness, the example I've given explains the setup fully. If an AP team started a season poorly, but won 3 of the first 3 HEC matches, they have just as much incentive as Edinburgh did this season. There is no difference, no matter what they tell you.

If an English team finds themselves out of the heineken cup places they are under far more pressure to perform in the Aviva. Having lived here now I can see that they get extremely worried about not qualifying and the financial implications. Rabo teams (for the most part) don't have that incentive. There are plenty of examples from this season that show it.

And I absolutely agree that it can't be entirely merit based, I'd doubt there's any competition of this nature in the world that is so. Again, I'd like to see every nation guaranteed at least one place in the competition.

irishbucsfan

Deleted User wrote: »

that's not a compromise though. It's a garrotte.

I've given a fair way, where each country's representation is determined by the previous winner, and then half of their professional teams in top flight rugby.

It's a compromise between what we all want. You are comparing it to what we "had" which is misguided. Nothing is promised in a system where these clubs are held up by television money that predominantly comes from England and France. The accord had such a short life for that reason.