Champions Cup 2019/20

connachta

Former Former wrote: »

But... didn't you think that the top 6 from each league was completely unfair?

Yes because clubs 7th and 8th could have finished 6th in the end. (9th too maybe, but you have to get a balance as you can't spread the Cup over 24 qualified)



That's not my argument, that's the whole French League argument, and English don't want to hear it becaue it suits their agenda of reduction. That's so obvious and you know it.

Celtic League doesn't care because 7th/8th spot is about Connacht, Treviso and Dragons. Would have been different story if Munster or Glasgow were in that position

Rigor Mortis

Under the leaked re-opening plan Connacht can finish in the top 6. You can do it by winning the games you have to play. Beat Ulster and you will have a head to head with Munster. Do it on the pitch.

Conveniently you leave Cardiff out of your assesment. Are you arguing that WRU dont care about Cardiff and Dragons? Celtic League is the Unions.

sydthebeat

connachta wrote: »

Yes because clubs 7th and 8th could have finished 6th in the end. (9th too maybe, but you have to get a balance as you can't spread the Cup over 24 qualified)



That's not my argument, that's the whole French League argument, and English don't want to hear it becaue it suits their agenda of reduction. That's so obvious and you know it.

Celtic League doesn't care because 7th/8th spot is about Connacht, Treviso and Dragons. Would have been different story if Munster or Glasgow were in that position

meh

teams that are 7th or 8th in their domestic leagues would only be whipping boys for the better teams in the champions league... better off without them.

players play less games, less chances of injuries, better quality games.

Cookiemunster

sydthebeat wrote: »

meh

teams that are 7th or 8th in their domestic leagues would only be whipping boys for the better teams in the champions league... better off without them.

players play less games, less chances of injuries, better quality games.

In France those two teams include current home quarter finalists and French champions Toulouse who with 9 games to go sat 1 point behind Clermont in 6th and 6 points off Racing in 3rd. The top two might have been a struggle, but the barrage has been won from 6th. So to say that they're whipping boys is complete rubbish.

sydthebeat

Cookiemunster wrote: »

In France those two teams include current home quarter finalists and French champions Toulouse who with 9 games to go sat 1 point behind Clermont in 6th and 6 points off Racing in 3rd. The top two might have been a struggle, but the barrage has been won from 6th. So to say that they're whipping boys is complete rubbish.

if they played out the season youd find it wouldn't include them...but they arent.. ergo the only reason they are calling for 8 teams to be included.

i don't want to see 8 of the 12 english premiership teams in the so called "champions" cup... nor do i want to see 8 of the 12 eligible pro 14 teams in it...

thats 4 teams that would be whipping boys (London Irish FFS)

toulouse record this season is abysmal.... feck them.
Montpellier have done fcuk all in the HC over last few years so feck them too.

id be much happier to see bordeaux and the other 5 in there.

we called for years to meritocracy in qualification for the competition, now that we have it we have whingers complaining that their team wont be in next seasons cup because they did poorly in the truncated season so far. My reaction to that is always "suck it up" and try to win better next time.

connachta

sydthebeat wrote: »

meh

teams that are 7th or 8th in their domestic leagues would only be whipping boys for the better teams in the champions league... better off without them.

players play less games, less chances of injuries, better quality games.

And that not true at all. Connacht were not whipping boys in ANY of the CC games they played, except Saracens away. Same for Harlequins. Not to talk about Toulouse.
That's the nonsense English argument. Simpy not true. There's room for a homogenous 24-club competion based on merit.

Podge_irl

connachta wrote: »

Qualification on merit.
As the season could not go the the end, enlarge to those would could have qualified



Top 8 on each league. Fair. Full-blank

Any particular reason Connacht could have qualified but Cardiff Blues couldn't?

connachta

Rigor Mortis wrote: »

Under the leaked re-opening plan Connacht can finish in the top 6. You can do it by winning the games you have to play. Beat Ulster and you will have a head to head with Munster. Do it on the pitch.

Conveniently you leave Cardiff out of your assesment. Are you arguing that WRU dont care about Cardiff and Dragons? Celtic League is the Unions.

Scarlets will defend 6th place vs Dragons and Connacht vs Munster, yeah totally fair.
We were virtually qualified as 7th. No offence to Dragons but we would have very probably won the home play-off.
Now this stupid way to change rules. If it's 24, ok, it's about involving more clubs during crisis. Logic. The other way is like America : more Darwinism added to the crisis itself.

Cookiemunster

sydthebeat wrote: »

if they played out the season youd find it wouldn't include them...but they arent.. ergo the only reason they are calling for 8 teams to be included.

i don't want to see 8 of the 12 english premiership teams in the so called "champions" cup... nor do i want to see 8 of the 12 eligible pro 14 teams in it...

thats 4 teams that would be whipping boys (London Irish FFS)

toulouse record this season is abysmal.... feck them.
Montpellier have done fcuk all in the HC over last few years so feck them too.

id be much happier to see bordeaux and the other 5 in there.

we called for years to meritocracy in qualification for the competition, now that we have it we have whingers complaining that their team wont be in next seasons cup because they did poorly in the truncated season so far. My reaction to that is always "suck it up" and try to win better next time.

So you can predict the future now can you? They're a team who could win the competition this year and sat 1 point off 6th when the league was abandoned. Doing poorly so far in a truncated season with over a third of the games to be played is no indication that they wouldn't have made the barage.

I'm all for merit based qualification, but there's no merit in awarding qualification on an unfinished season. I've no issue with the possibility of a one off expanded competition as none of the leagues will be finished in a meritocratic way.

And whether you like it or not in a normal season the 7th and 8th best teams in the Pro14 would have qualified on merit.

Burkie1203

Cookiemunster wrote: »

I've no issue with the possibility of a one off expanded competition as none of the leagues will be finished in a meritocratic way.

connachta wrote: »

Scarlets will defend 6th place vs Dragons and Connacht vs Munster, yeah totally fair.
We were virtually qualified as 7th. No offence to Dragons but we would have very probably won the home play-off.
Now this stupid way to change rules. If it's 24, ok, it's about involving more clubs during crisis. Logic.

The issue with a bigger competition is logistics. 24 teams v 18 teams, cross border competition ...... Connachta, maybe if you existed in the real world you would have some grasp of how serious the situation is and how likely it is going to be impacting normal every day life for the next 18 month's.



- multiple different approaches from different govts will make things very tricky.

- some govt guidelines may allow crowds, others may not. Is that a fair competition?

- testing requirements (and who foots that bill) if all players have to be tested once or twice a week to be allowed to travel. What if in one country there is testing delays which then means 2 or 3 teams cannot fulfil fixtures as they cannot send a squad overseas?

- chartering flights because teams cannot travel on regular commercial scheduled flights (again who foots that bill). Some clubs may have travel partners but plenty wont.

- How do match officials get appointed and travel safely (or do we go with local refs) as they cannot travel by regular commercial scheduled flights (?).


EPRC may try to have a full competition next season, but the form that takes Is going to have to be considered very carefully. I fully expect DFAT advice of essential travelling only to remain in place until early 2021 at the earliest.

thomond2006

I think the AYES have it, the AYES have it.

connachta

thomond2006 wrote: »

I think the AYES have it, the AYES have it.

Sadly no, new massive intervention:D


Here's the official French League Proposal :


24 clubs


2 pools of 12


4 of each qualified to QF


5 to 9 qualified to Challenge Cup QF


Brillant!


The English are about to conceed!


I'm glad!

thomond2006

https://www.rugbyrama.fr/rugby/champions-cup/2018-2019/champions-cup-deux-poules-de-12-et-8-equipes-francaises-la-proposition-des-presidents-du-top-14_sto7748277/story.shtml

French proposing 2 pools of 12 teams.
What horse****.

Podge_irl

How on earth could you have pools of 12. Also apparently with no inter-league matches. Sounds absolutely bonkers.

thomond2006

Podge_irl wrote: »

Where are you getting that from? How on earth could you have pools of 12

First 4 from each go through to the Champions Cup QFs.
Next 4 from each go through to the Challenge Cup QFs.
No games between teams from the same league in the pool.

What an awful idea.

Burkie1203

thomond2006 wrote: »

https://www.rugbyrama.fr/rugby/champions-cup/2018-2019/champions-cup-deux-poules-de-12-et-8-equipes-francaises-la-proposition-des-presidents-du-top-14_sto7748277/story.shtml

French proposing 2 pools of 12 teams.
What horse****.

11 pool games?

Played when exactly given that finishing this seasons comp in October seems to be high on the EPRC agenda

Edit
Ok no inter league games. Even more bizarre

thomond2006

Burkie1203 wrote: »

11 pool games?

Played when exactly given that finishing this seasons comp in October seems to be high on the EPRC agenda

Edit
Ok no inter league games. Even more bizarre

7 pool games if I understand it correctly. Home and away aren't balanced then. This is laughable stuff. It's so bad that I'm going to assume the French just want out and this is a pisstake offer.

I think this warrants its own thread tbh.

sydthebeat

french teams cant meet each other.... hummm

i wonder who does that suit???

Podge_irl

thomond2006 wrote: »

First 4 from each go through to the Champions Cup QFs.
Next 4 from each go through to the Challenge Cup QFs.
No games between teams from the same league in the pool.

What an awful idea.

Its more the number of games I couldn't understand.

If there is 4 from each league per group how can you have 7 games!? Surely you would need to have 8 - i.e. play each team from the other leagues. Even 7 seems an unusual shift from the current 6 seeing as the French mostly don't care about the Euro Cup and struggle to participate properly in it as is.

connachta

Podge_irl wrote: »

Its more the number of games I couldn't understand.

If there is 4 from each league per group how can you have 7 games!? Surely you would need to have 8 - i.e. play each team from the other leagues. Even 7 seems an unusual shift from the current 6 seeing as the French mostly don't care about the Euro Cup and struggle to participate properly in it as is.

I don't think everyone will meet each other in a pool..

Podge_irl

connachta wrote: »

I don't think everyone will meet each other in a pool..

Well yeah. You will apparently meet 7 of the 8 non-same league teams in your pool. Which is stupid.

Panda Killa

Can't see anyone else voting for this idea... If it was to follow... England would want 8 sides also
That means the other 4 unions would have 2 teams each...
Anything to be said for making it a 32 team tourney and letting in the Saffers too!

Podge_irl

Panda Killa wrote: »

Can't see anyone else voting for this idea... If it was to follow... England would want 8 sides also
That means the other 4 unions would have 2 teams each...
Anything to be said for making it a 32 team tourney and letting in the Saffers too!

The idea is presumably 8 each. The EPCR has long sinced moved to being based on a "per league" basis rather than a "per union" basis.

sydthebeat

Podge_irl wrote: »

Well yeah. You will apparently meet 7 of the 8 non-same league teams in your pool. Which is stupid.

So do you play everyone twice?
14 games before the QFs?

If you only play them once, who decides who gets home advantage?

Podge_irl

sydthebeat wrote: »

So do you play everyone twice?
14 games before the QFs?

If you only play them once, who decides who gets home advantage?

No, apparently it is 7 group games and you don't play anyone from the same league. But there are 8 teams not in your league per group so for some reason you don't play one of them and you also have an uneven home-away ratio. It is beyond ridiculous how hare-brained this idea is if it is accurate.

Panda Killa

Podge_irl wrote: »

The idea is presumably 8 each. The EPCR has long sinced moved to being based on a "per league" basis rather than a "per union" basis.

Indeed, but I can't see us voting for this.... even as it stands, the format is unworkable...
On top of that it can be not more than 6 French or English teams otherwise the other 4 nation's won't want to know imo

The Lost Sheep

sydthebeat wrote: »

So do you play everyone twice?
14 games before the QFs?

If you only play them once, who decides who gets home advantage?

you could only play everyone once with that kind of set up.
If playing everyone once I would assume home advantage decided by a draw or by qualifying position and same final positions of the domestic leagues play each other each season. 1st pro14 v 7th English prem v 8th top14

sydthebeat

Podge_irl wrote: »

No, apparently it is 7 group games and you don't play anyone from the same league. It is beyond ridiculous how hare-brained this idea is if it is accurate.

I know you don't play 3 of the 12 teams in your group, as they are from your league...

So that leaves 8 teams that you play.

I assume it only makes sense to play each team once... Who decides who's at home or away

sydthebeat

Meh.....

All this cos Toulouse had a sh!t 2/3rds of a season.

Burkie1203

sydthebeat wrote: »

I know you don't play 3 of the 12 teams in your group, as they are from your league...

So that leaves 8 teams that you play.

I assume it only makes sense to play each team once... Who decides who's at home or away

This seasons knockouts
An expanded comp next season
This season's 6n to be completed
Next season's 6n

Next season's top 14, GP, Pro14

International window in November
Talk of summer tours in October

Then a Lions tour


Player welfare obviously means nothing

thomond2006

Podge_irl wrote: »

Well yeah. You will apparently meet 7 of the 8 non-same league teams in your pool. Which is stupid.

Sorry it would be 8 games of course, not sure why I thought 7.
It's not actually confirmed in the article.

connachta

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

you could only play everyone once with that kind of set up.
If playing everyone once I would assume home advantage decided by a draw or by qualifying position and same final positions of the domestic leagues play each other each season. 1st pro14 v 7th English prem v 8th top14

IMO there's a system to face 4 teams only


the 8 pools of 3 were not retained for now bacause of crossing schedule with international windows, can't see this being heavier...

thomond2006

24 teams in a supposed elite European tournament would be farcical. The pool stages would be full of massacres between the haves and have-nots. The depth in teams simply isn't there. The Pro14 and Premiership will I hope tell the French to piss off with themselves and come back with a serious offer.

connachta

thomond2006 wrote: »

24 teams in a supposed elite European tournament would be farcical. The pool stages would be full of massacres between the haves and have-nots.

Teams 7th and 8th are



Montpellier and Toulouse



Harlequins and rich London Irish


Connacht and Treviso who proved being tough opposion in most games in Europe (and are better and better)



Very homogenous competion


Times have change guys. And we're not talking about involving Zebre, Dragons, Pau or Agen in it

Bridge93

The dragons are the 4th eligible side from Pool A. As it stands they’re the 8th team in.

connachta

Bridge93 wrote: »

The dragons are the 4th eligible side from Pool A. As it stands they’re the 8th team in.

Certainly not.


Dragons are 5th, on far lower point total than Treviso, 5th of the other pool (adding the points of cancelled game vs Ulster)

At best they could hope an away play-off

Bridge93

connachta wrote: »

Certainly not.


Dragons are 5th, on far lower point total than Treviso, 5th of the other pool (adding the points of cancelled game vs Ulster)

At best they could hope an away play-off

They’re the 4th eligible side. The cheetahs can’t qualify. The competition rules are currently that the 3 highest ranked sides in each conference qualify excluding South Africans. The 7th spot goes to a playoff. If you’re expanding to 8 it’s fair to assume it goes to the top 4 from each side excluding South Africans. So the dragons qualify. Unless of course you want to make up some new qualification system whereby 5 sides come from one conference

connachta

Bridge93 wrote: »

They’re the 4th eligible side. The cheetahs can’t qualify. The competition rules are currently that the 3 highest ranked sides in each conference qualify excluding South Africans. The 7th spot goes to a playoff. If you’re expanding to 8 it’s fair to assume it goes to the top 4 from each side excluding South Africans. So the dragons qualify. Unless of course you want to make up some new qualification system whereby 5 sides come from one conference

I think it can't reasonnably be otherwise
Rules are about the 7th, nothing is said about an 8th.


Dragons are fifth with 22 points. It would be against any sense of logic they are qualified above ANOTHER 5Th, with higher total (double condition)
Had they been real 4th with low-point total, or 5th behind Cheetahs with more points than Treviso, it would have been your way. But there... Challenge Cup is their only way IMO

Bridge93

I’m telling you the Pro14 competition rules. You are making up a hypothetical scenario. This exact situation happened 2 years ago.

Conference A:
Glasgow
Munster
Cheetahs
Cardiff (54 points)
Ospreys (44 points)

Conference B:
Leinster
Scarlets
Edinburgh
Ulster (62 points)
Treviso (55 points)

Top 6 qualified automatically for Europe. That was: Glasgow, Munster, Cheetahs, Leinster, Scarlets and Edinburgh

The cheetahs were ineligible. So Cardiff automatically qualified despite having less points than the other 4th placed team Ulster and even 5th placed Treviso.

Ulster beat the Ospreys in a playoff for the last spot. Treviso got nothing despite having more points than the two Welsh.

This year is identical just a place lower as more teams are proposed. The Dragons will take the Cheetahs spot like Cardiff despite having less points than the equivalent side in the other conference.

It’s always been the top eligible sides from both conferences when it was 7 teams. Why would they change that now when it fits even neater than before? There’s no odd number of teams to separate into, just a straight 4 and 4. Why with all going on would they go through a convoluted playoff system, which given the pandemic crisis, may not be possible to play?

connachta

Bridge93 wrote: »

I’m telling you the Pro14 competition rules. You are making up a hypothetical scenario. This exact situation happened 2 years ago.

Conference A:
Glasgow
Munster
Cheetahs
Cardiff (54 points)
Ospreys (44 points)

Conference B:
Leinster
Scarlets
Edinburgh
Ulster (62 points)
Treviso (55 points)

Top 6 qualified automatically for Europe. That was: Glasgow, Munster, Cheetahs, Leinster, Scarlets and Edinburgh

The cheetahs were ineligible. So Cardiff automatically qualified despite having less points than the other 4th placed team Ulster and even 5th placed Treviso.

Ulster beat the Ospreys in a playoff for the last spot. Treviso got nothing despite having more points than the two Welsh.

WOW that's totally unfair. Didn't know that happened. Thank you for the piece of recap...

Bridge93

It’s pretty rough alright. Once the league was split in two this was always likely to happen. They were always going to offer equal spots to both conferences regardless of points or merit. Although you could argue it’s on merit from another angle I suppose

Cookiemunster

connachta wrote: »

I think it can't reasonnably be otherwise
Rules are about the 7th, nothing is said about an 8th.


Dragons are fifth with 22 points. It would be against any sense of logic they are qualified above ANOTHER 5Th, with higher total (double condition)
Had they been real 4th with low-point total, or 5th behind Cheetahs with more points than Treviso, it would have been your way. But there... Challenge Cup is their only way IMO

That's not how the conference system works. It's currently the top 3 eligible teams in each conference regardless of points.

In 2017/18 Cheetahs finished 3rd in Conf. A so 4th place Cardiff qualified for the Champions Cup ahead of 4th in Conf. B Ulster who had 8 points more than them. Ulster had to play Ospreys in the play off.

Podge_irl

thomond2006 wrote: »

Sorry it would be 8 games of course, not sure why I thought 7.
It's not actually confirmed in the article.

damn you thomond! I took your work and ran with it

8 games makes more sense competition wise, but makes no sense in terms of fitting it into the season.

thomond2006

Podge_irl wrote: »

damn you thomond! I took your work and ran with it

8 games makes more sense competition wise, but makes no sense in terms of fitting it into the season.

I still think the whole "offer" is a pisstake.

Eod100

EPCR looking into 24 team competition for next season and this season's final to be played in October.

https://twitter.com/RuaidhriOC/status/1260964691213520901

connachta

Here we are !!!

Next step : Pro14 to give up the unthinkable project of faking a finish based on derbies only, when Treviso takes 5 points vs Zebre again and again, when Connacht face Munster or Ulster, and Cardiff on a lesser extent Scarlets or Dragons

Nobody can contest it's purely unfair (adding in an already unfair division in pools and home-and-away derbies)
If derbies happen, it should be on a non-qualifying way, just playing domestic Rugby for fans/TV/economy, if permited.

If the season restarts, it should be fully completed

Buer

I can't believe the EPCR are going to cave in to the ridiculous pressure and online campaign from Connacht. Not for the first time, the level of complaining has taken advantage of the generosity of the game's governing bodies. Not since the IRFU bowed down and agreed to keep Connacht afloat to the detriment of the game in Ireland has there been such an example of bullying.

Squidgy Black

I, for one, am delighted that the IRFU have decided to grow a backbone and called a halt to the persecution of Connacht rugby, and forseen the absolute atrocity they would have committed by excluding them from the Champions Cup. And anyone who says otherwise is smelly.

connachta

Bridge93 wrote: »

Cardiff automatically qualified despite having less points than the other 4th placed team Ulster and even 5th placed Treviso.

Ulster beat the Ospreys in a playoff for the last spot. Treviso got nothing despite having more points than the two Welsh.

Why with all going on would they go through a convoluted playoff system, which given the pandemic crisis, may not be possible to play?

Your example is just crazy, thanks for having reminded it. But this year :



1) there's no rule about 8th, one or 2 play-off may be a solution to break the deadlock (just like in France if Top8 has not been accepted)


2) the scandal would be bigger and brought to court as the season is unfinished and there's no rule fixed

Dragons can't qualify directly with 22 points when Connacht have 35 (13 more!), Treviso 31 theorical, and Cardiff 29. That's just INSANE, 3 teams widely above them, no-one can contest this...




So



Hypothesis 1 (best)



Finish the entire season before next CC starts (in Nov/December). But won't solve every issues there...


Hypothesis 2 (at worst)



2 spots to take

Play-off between those four (2-by-2, home and away, fair)
Connacht (most points)-Dragons (less points) BUT home and return
Treviso-Cardiff (home and return)

Only 2 games played by any of these 4. Realistic

Buer

Squidgy Black wrote: »

I, for one, am delighted that the IRFU have decided to grow a backbone and called a halt to the persecution of Connacht rugby, and forseen the absolute atrocity they would have committed by excluding them from the Champions Cup. And anyone who says otherwise is smelly.

I'll have you know I have an enchanting musk.