The European club rugby debacle continues part IV: the quest for peace

thomond2006

Calm down lads. Allow the rage turn into happiness when the Irish sides beat Saracens.

.ak

Enough of the abuse - regardless of who it's intended for. Try to keep to a reasoned level of debate.

CatFromHue

I didn't know that next season will be the last of the current LV Cup.

I do wonder what'll happen with it as the attendance levels at the games aren't bad but it means the Welsh clubs have a 32 game regular season.

Larbre34

In fairness, PRL never kept a reasoned level of debate. It was somewhere between coercion and racketeering.

Winters

I wasn't intending to be abusive at all. I'm not a fan of the private owners but my comment about rage was tongue in cheek.

Larbre34

Winters wrote: »

I wasn't intending to be abusive at all. I'm not a fan of the private owners but my comment about rage was tongue in cheek.

I'm pretty sure I was! As Dylan Hartley would say, worth the sin-bin;)

Winters

Larbre34 wrote: »

I'm pretty sure I was! As Dylan Hartley would say, worth the sin-bin;)

Sinbin, Lions Tour..

irishbucsfan

Larbre34 wrote: »

In fairness, PRL never kept a reasoned level of debate. It was somewhere between coercion and racketeering.

Of course people will read into it however they want to. Apart from Wray they were all generally honest and straightforward the whole way through, and it turned out the their expectations were completely reasonable.

Your comments however are childish, and really it's a shame that it became the norm around here. Luckilly the people representing us at the actual negotiations had a lot more class.

jjpep

[QUOTE=irishbucsfan;89950166 the people representing us at the actual negotiations had a lot more class.[/QUOTE]

Was good that at least somebody at the negotiations did....;)

bilston

Interesting mention that Irish sides may want to get into the LV Cup or whatever it's successor may be.

irishbucsfan

bilston wrote: »

Interesting mention that Irish sides may want to get into the LV Cup or whatever it's successor may be.

The B&I Cup is a better competition imo

stpaddy99

Larbre34 wrote: »

Correct you are.

The patronising, mealy mouthed little gob****e. How naive the Welsh must be not to realise they have just been used as one would use a roll of Andrex and condescended to like a child with chronic special needs.

"The way they (the Welsh regions) have handled themselves over the last six months has been very impressive"

Yes, in its amateurishness.

"People love Anglo-Welsh competition and I think we can build that"

No they dont, and no you dont.

moderators this post is an absolute disgrace

stpaddy99

well we can slag off the English welsh and French but were all richer from the deal .......
in fact Cardiff who have been pathetic for years, have made millions already from this new deal
(an extra £700k per annum from the euro/tv deals, an extra £1.5 million (over 4 years) from selling arms park name to BT, now an extra £500k from the WRU coffers per annum towards contracting their test players)
total = £1.575million increase per annum (for at least the next 5 years)

additionally we all have a profit share if and when the new tournament expands further

the fact is the English French and welsh have wrestled more control from the unions.
yes its a gamble what was the alternative? the unions are incapable and unmotivated to hammer out the best commercial deals for the provinces

we cannot simply stand still....clubs across Europe are losing millions.
personally I hope we see a british and Irish league when the pro 12 deal ends
so we can get big matches every week

were in a very strong position in Ireland but we cant get complacent and must keep reinvesting in our academies

marienbad

stpaddy99 wrote: »

well we can slag off the English welsh and French but were all richer from the deal .......
in fact Cardiff who have been pathetic for years, have made millions already from this new deal
(an extra £700k per annum from the euro/tv deals, an extra £1.5 million (over 4 years) from selling arms park name to BT, now an extra £500k from the WRU coffers per annum towards contracting their test players)
total = £1.575million increase per annum (for at least the next 5 years)

additionally we all have a profit share if and when the new tournament expands further

the fact is the English French and welsh have wrestled more control from the unions.
yes its a gamble what was the alternative? the unions are incapable and unmotivated to hammer out the best commercial deals for the provinces

we cannot simply stand still....clubs across Europe are losing millions.
personally I hope we see a british and Irish league when the pro 12 deal ends
so we can get big matches every week

were in a very strong position in Ireland but we cant get complacent and must keep reinvesting in our academies

The key factor in the increased revenue was the entry of BT not the negotiating skills of any particular group.

That coupled with the effort everyone put in for the last 15 years in making the Heineken Cup such a saleable commodity.

stpaddy99

marienbad wrote: »

The key factor in the increased revenue was the entry of BT not the negotiating skills of any particular group.

That coupled with the effort everyone put in for the last 15 years in making the Heineken Cup such a saleable commodity.

getting some control from the unions was crucial and will continue to be so for years to come. yes the emergence of bt was a huge factor I agree and gave sky a run for its money. but with the unions running everything the monies would never have been so great

marienbad

stpaddy99 wrote: »

getting some control from the unions was crucial and will continue to be so for years to come. yes the emergence of bt was a huge factor I agree and gave sky a run for its money. but with the unions running everything the monies would never have been so great

Who can say what the revenue might have been, you have no way of knowing that .I for one prefer the unions in control . I have no interest in the game becoming the plaything of millionaires as in the Premier League

stpaddy99

marienbad wrote: »

Who can say what the revenue might have been, you have no way of knowing that .I for one prefer the unions in control . I have no interest in the game becoming the plaything of millionaires as in the Premier League

its a balancing act. if we are really professional we cannot expect a bunch of commitees at the unions to optimise all of pro ruby....the top clubs are entities in their own right and must be autonomous to be profitable and successful. I don't want it to end up like th eenglish prem BUT I don't want the whole game run like some archaic civil services middle class boys brigade either. either were pro or were not.

marienbad

stpaddy99 wrote: »

its a balancing act. if we are really professional we cannot expect a bunch of commitees at the unions to optimise all of pro ruby....the top clubs are entities in their own right and must be autonomous to be profitable and successful. I don't want it to end up like th eenglish prem BUT I don't want the whole game run like some archaic civil services middle class boys brigade either. either were pro or were not.

I think you are describing an Union mentality closer to the 70's 80's and 90's than to the present day. There is even a significant difference between the different unions .

There is absolutely no evidence that the clubs will do a better job. Just the notion that private enterprise is better, and indeed it might me .But the question is better at what ?

Why should a part take a better overall view than the whole ? And if the 'product' hadn't become so successful they would'nt have come within an asses roar of it in the first place.

irishbucsfan

marienbad wrote: »

I think you are describing an Union mentality closer to the 70's 80's and 90's than to the present day. There is even a significant difference between the different unions.

I think he is describing the Unions about as accurately as some have been describing the "millionaire plaything" clubs.

bilston

marienbad wrote: »

I think you are describing an Union mentality closer to the 70's 80's and 90's than to the present day. There is even a significant difference between the different unions .

There is absolutely no evidence that the clubs will do a better job. Just the notion that private enterprise is better, and indeed it might me .But the question is better at what ?

Why should a part take a better overall view than the whole ? And if the 'product' hadn't become so successful they would'nt have come within an asses roar of it in the first place.

I'm not a fan of club control and while they don't have exclusive powers over the RCC we have already seen an increase in monies with them having more say.

The danger of course can be seen in France. Their national team has gone to the dogs and I don't think it's a coincidence that it is occurred when their league has been throwing money around like confetti for big name overseas players so more money doesn't necessarily mean good times. However the clubs are private enterprises and the profit line is what matters most to them. They will probably be pretty good at getting more money. If we can piggy back that money in Europe while retaining union control in Ireland then arguably we will be stronger than before. It's the Scots and Italians who I'm worried about.

irishbucsfan

bilston wrote: »

The danger of course can be seen in France. Their national team has gone to the dogs and I don't think it's a coincidence that it is occurred when their league has been throwing money around like confetti for big name overseas players so more money doesn't necessarily mean good times.

I don't see how this is the case myself. They still have far more players available for selection than any other side in the 6 Nations other than England, so I don't see how overseas players in the Top 14 comes into it at all. Their terrible standard of coaching is surely far more relevant. If there were no good French players available due to the overseas players then it would be relevant.

If you swapped Lancaster for PSA and France were playing well while England were looking awful, then the same would be said about England's private ownership, it's a red herring. It has about as much relevance to France's performances as Union control had relevance to Ireland's dire performances in 2013.

marienbad

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I don't see how this is the case myself. They still have far more players available for selection than any other side in the 6 Nations other than England, so I don't see how overseas players in the Top 14 comes into it at all. Their terrible standard of coaching is surely far more relevant. If there were no good French players available due to the overseas players then it would be relevant.

If you swapped Lancaster for PSA and France were playing well while England were looking awful, then the same would be said about England's private ownership, it's a red herring. It has about as much relevance to France's performances as Union control had relevance to Ireland's dire performances in 2013.

The more qualified players playing at the highest levels in any sport must increase that countries overall quality levels . I would have thought that was so obvious as to not need stating.

And we have a perfect case study in another code just across the water.

irishbucsfan

marienbad wrote: »

The more qualified players playing at the highest levels in any sport must increase that countries overall quality levels . I would have thought that was so obvious as to not need stating.

And we have a perfect case study in another code just across the water.

It is not that simple at all. There is also benefit from increasing the overall quality of the competition they are in.

The "perfect" case study is completely, utterly, different. It's a terrible example. There are plenty of French players playing at the highest level of the Top 14 every week. Is there even a single position where they don't have a handful of starting French qualified players to select from? It's absolutely nothing like the soccer.

marienbad

irishbucsfan wrote: »

It is not that simple at all. There is also benefit from increasing the overall quality of the competition they are in.

The "perfect" case study is completely, utterly, different. It's a terrible example. There are plenty of French players playing at the highest level of the Top 14 every week. Is there even a single position where they don't have a handful of starting French qualified players to select from? It's absolutely nothing like the soccer.

It is that simple - if you have 1000 qualified players consistently playing at the top level rather than 750 or 500 or 250 the national team must benefit.

Why otherwise does NZ restrict their selection to homebased players if not to keep the standard of domestic players at the highest levels .

And of course the Premier League is a valid template of the future .Why wouldn't it be ?

irishbucsfan

marienbad wrote: »

It is that simple - if you have 1000 qualified players consistently playing at the top level rather than 750 or 500 or 250 the national team must benefit.

There is a diminishing return. The national squad is only ever going to be so big. If you are picking 15 international players from 210 then you're picking the top 7% of players. If you then add 3 foreign starters to those 14 teams you're picking 15 from 180 and you're picking the top 8% or so.

There is a difference, but it's not as pronounced as it would be if they were picking from 3 sides as we do.

You then make the conceit that if your league only consists of the best players from one country, then the quality of the rugby is held back. If you admit top players from across the world, the quality of the rugby is increased, and the French players who are there benefit. Non-French players do not just benefit the clubs.


Here in Ireland we until recently allowed 5 NIQ players per team. If those NIQ players played every week we'd have had just have 40 starting Irish players in the country (30 at Leinster, Munster, Ulster) to select a national squad from. The same number would allow 140 starting French players to select a national squad from, I don't see how that's a problem. If it went completely unchecked and there were no French players starting then you would have a point in comparing it to the EPL. But it is not going unchecked, and there is no comparison to be made. The fact PSA can't put together a competent squad says everything about his own ability and very little about the playing pool available to him.

marienbad

irishbucsfan wrote: »

There is a diminishing return. The national squad is only ever going to be so big. If you are picking 15 international players from 210 then you're picking the top 7% of players. If you then add 3 foreign starters to those 14 teams you're picking 15 from 180 and you're picking the top 8% or so.

There is a difference, but it's not as pronounced as it would be if they were picking from 3 sides as we do.

You then make the conceit that if your league only consists of the best players from one country, then the quality of the rugby is held back. If you admit top players from across the world, the quality of the rugby is increased, and the French players who are there benefit. Non-French players do not just benefit the clubs.




Here in Ireland we until recently allowed 5 NIQ players per team. If those NIQ players played every week we'd have had just have 40 starting Irish players in the country (30 at Leinster, Munster, Ulster) to select a national squad from. The same number would allow 140 starting French players to select a national squad from, I don't see how that's a problem. If it went completely unchecked and there were no French players starting then you would have a point in comparing it to the EPL. But it is not going unchecked, and there is no comparison to be made. The fact PSA can't put together a competent squad says everything about his own ability and very little about the playing pool available to him.

The PSA situation is irrelevant , even the very best will underperform if you have a crap coach,we are talking longterm .

Why do NZ do as they do ?

And why is the premier league football not a valid indicator of the future ? A former giant like Leeds United continuously flirting with dissolution ,Southampton providing possible 3 players to the England squad, top clubs frequently fielding teams with little or no English representation.

I have never advocated only indigenous players so you can let that 'conceit' aside , but what is to prevent us ending up like Chelsea or Arsenal or even as we saw recently with PSG with only two French players on the team. After all those owners with the good of the game at heart must also protect their investment -no ?

Anyway it is immaterial at this stage , we will all just have to wait and see how the coming years unfold.

irishbucsfan

marienbad wrote: »

Why do NZ do as they do ?

As in selecting only NZ based players? They have very little money available to them and so they use the lure of AB rugby to keep their best players in NZ.

marienbad wrote: »

And why is the premier league football not a valid indicator of the future ?

What is the Premiership's equivalent of JIFF regulations?

Winters

The idea that the latest move to cede majority commercial power from elected rugby offices to private individuals will benefit rugby as a sport in the long term is delusional. We will wait and see what damage it really does but the question is who really owns a sport?

Personally I'm staggered that there hasn't been a backlash but I suppose people just want to see rugby.

irishbucsfan

Winters wrote: »

The idea that the latest move to cede majority commercial power from elected rugby offices to private individuals will benefit rugby as a sport in the long term is delusional.

This is just more melodrama with no explanation.

There may be a solid argument for why clubs shouldn't be involved in running club rugby, but it has yet to be made.

jm08

bilston wrote: »

I'm not a fan of club control and while they don't have exclusive powers over the RCC we have already seen an increase in monies with them having more say.

The danger of course can be seen in France. Their national team has gone to the dogs and I don't think it's a coincidence that it is occurred when their league has been throwing money around like confetti for big name overseas players so more money doesn't necessarily mean good times. However the clubs are private enterprises and the profit line is what matters most to them. They will probably be pretty good at getting more money. If we can piggy back that money in Europe while retaining union control in Ireland then arguably we will be stronger than before. It's the Scots and Italians who I'm worried about.

They are paying for their say with guaranteeing the Pro12 teams their money up front. At the moment they don't have an organisation to run the competition and they don't have any sponsors. Not many companies around who will not have committed their marketing/sponsorship budgets at this stage of the year. The PRL & LNR will have to carry that loss for a few years or maybe we will have the launch of the BT Cup shortly!