Champions Cup Potential Changes 2022

Podge_irl

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2019/dec/16/champions-cup-revamp-18-teams-two-legged-semi-finals

From the very bottom of my heart....please **** off with this ****.

Eod100

Here we go again.. https://amp.theguardian.com/sport/2019/dec/16/champions-cup-revamp-18-teams-two-legged-semi-finals?__twitter_impression=true

Neil3030

How long before the final is held in Saudi Arabia, I wonder.

Felix Jones is God.

Eod100 wrote: »

Here we go again.. https://amp.theguardian.com/sport/2019/dec/16/champions-cup-revamp-18-teams-two-legged-semi-finals?__twitter_impression=true

A 2 legged semi final is definitely an improvement on the current situation

sydthebeat

Felix Jones is God. wrote: »

A 2 legged semi final is definitely an improvement on the current situation

Really??

Aggregate scores?

testtech05

Podge_irl wrote: »

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2019/dec/16/champions-cup-revamp-18-teams-two-legged-semi-finals

From the very bottom of my heart....please **** off with this ****.

Sounds like a mess.

Eod100

Felix Jones is God. wrote: »

A 2 legged semi final is definitely an improvement on the current situation

If anything it would mean less chance of an upset. Weaker team on paper could beat stronger team in one off . Granted doesn't happen too often but 2 legs would think it would be even rarer

irishbucsfan

It's a very silly idea particularly in a competition that spans such a large geographical distance. I'd doubt it'll get far

Felix Jones is God.

Eod100 wrote: »

If anything it would mean less chance of an upset. Weaker team on paper could beat stronger team in one off . Granted doesn't happen too often but 2 legs would think it would be even rarer

Quite the opposite would be true

Exclamation Marc

Felix Jones is God. wrote: »

A 2 legged semi final is definitely an improvement on the current situation

Couldn't disagree more. Two leg games can be absolutely awful to watch where away teams are simply looking to concede as little as possible rather than score or where a team savages another in the first leg and the second leg becomes a sleepwalk.

It also severely limits the chances of any upsets and takes away the frenetic nature of knock out rugby.

aloooof

Exclamation Marc wrote: »

Couldn't disagree more. Two leg games can be absolutely awful to watch where away teams are simply looking to concede as little as possible rather than score or where a team savages another in the first leg and the second leg becomes a sleepwalk.

It also severely limits the chances of any upsets and takes away the frenetic nature of knock out rugby.

This would be my take as well, tbh. It would probably also hand an advantage to the likes of Racing, where an indoor stadium is possibly more likely to result in higher scoring games*.


*I've zero actual evidence to back this up.

Shefwedfan

A 2 leg semi would be a mess. The first leg the away team would spend the 80 mins trying to kill the game and the opposition...then in second match try to play a bit at home

Another stupid idea from the English to ruin a good competition

Former Former

What an awful, awful idea.

awec

Doesn't sound too bad to be honest. Dropping to 18 teams is not that big of a deal.

awec

I do think that there needs to be some tweaks to the knockout stages of the competition. The semi final situation right now is influenced too much by the sheer luck of the draw at pool stage time.

I would personally change it so that there is a draw after the pool stages, rather than the current automatic pairings. Top 4 teams can get any of the bottom 4 teams. Then at the semi final stage it should be another open draw.

Cookiemunster

awec wrote: »

Doesn't sound too bad to be honest. Dropping to 18 teams is not that big of a deal.

Three team pools? Only four group games? The two groups with the weakest teams guaranteed to get two of the three into the quarter finals before the comp even kicks off? Yeah, that's a hug improvement :rolleyes:

prawnsambo

awec wrote: »

Doesn't sound too bad to be honest. Dropping to 18 teams is not that big of a deal.

The motivation is obvious though. Cut down pool games to just four and leave room in the calendar for an expanded Premiership; which has been mooted for some time now and looks like a done deal.

awec

Cookiemunster wrote: »

Three team pools? Only four group games? The two groups with the weakest teams guaranteed to get two of the three into the quarter finals before the comp even kicks off? Yeah, that's a hug improvement :rolleyes:

Only 4 group games is not a bad thing. It would be a good thing for the Pro14 IMO, as our better players can then play in the league more often. These sort of changes will force the pro14 to up it's game.

Cookiemunster

awec wrote: »

Only 4 group games is not a bad thing. It would be a good thing for the Pro14 IMO, as our better players can then play in the league more often. These sort of changes will force the pro14 to up it's game.

It completely changes the competition in a way that dropping to 20 didn't. And they're talking about adding two legged knock out games. You're fooling yourself if you think it will change anything in the Pro14.

Podge_irl

awec wrote: »

Only 4 group games is not a bad thing. It would be a good thing for the Pro14 IMO, as our better players can then play in the league more often. These sort of changes will force the pro14 to up it's game.

How?

Loss of gate receipts from one game? Throw in one extra home Pro14 game - albeit with a lower attendance probably - and job done. Not entirely sure how it forced them to confront the structural problems of the Pro14.

The English and French as a collective value their own leagues higher than Europe. None of the Pro14 nations do. I think its a bit short-sighted of the other leagues but that's their choice. But nothing they suggest will be to our benefit.

awec

Cookiemunster wrote: »

It completely changes the competition in a way that dropping to 20 didn't. And they're talking about adding two legged knock out games. You're fooling yourself if you thing it will change anything in the Pro14.

They're talking about adding a two legged semi final, which will only affect teams that actually get to the semi final.

For most teams, they'll play less games in Europe. Which means players are available to play more games in the league.

awec

Podge_irl wrote: »

How?

Loss of gate receipts from one game? Throw in one extra home Pro14 game - albeit with a lower attendance probably - and job done. Not entirely sure how it forced them to confront the structural problems of the Pro14.

The English and French as a collective value their own leagues higher than Europe. None of the Pro14 nations do. I think its a bit short-sighted of the other leagues but that's their choice. But nothing they suggest will be to our benefit.

This attitude will have to change.

Seriously, long term I really do believe the Pro14 is going to have to be taken more seriously, and teams are going to have to stop seeing it as the competition to fill in the weeks between europe. I do not think today's approach is sustainable.

Cookiemunster

awec wrote: »

They're talking about adding a two legged semi final, which will only affect teams that actually get to the semi final.

For most teams, they'll play less games in Europe. Which means players are available to play more games in the league.

As I said, if you think it will make any change to the Pro14, you're fooling yourself. Do you honestly believe that internationals possibly being available for 10 or 11 games out of 21 rather than 8 or 9 will change the league?

thomond2006

I'm intrigued by the Champions League SF idea, though that works via the away goals rule in football. I'm not sure if it fits rugby.

The six pools of three idea is daft. Burn it with fire.

Interested Observer

Another inescapable issue in the Pro14 is there are 4 international teams worth of players to be taken from it vs 1 in England and 1 in France. The impact of taking all the English players out of the Premiership is obviously far less than taking all the Irish, Welsh, Scottish and Italian internationals out of the Pro14.

awec

Cookiemunster wrote: »

As I said, if you think it will make any change to the Pro14, you're fooling yourself. Do you honestly believe that internationals possible being available for 10 or 11 games out of 21 rather than 8 or 9 will change the league?

It's a start.

The league must change. This move helps, rather than hinders that. Is it going to solve every issue? No.

Cookiemunster

awec wrote: »

It's a start.

The league must change. This move helps, rather than hinders that. Is it going to solve every issue? No.

The league exists to feed players into the national teams of the Celtic unions. That is not going to change any time soon. It has the same modus operandi as Super Rugby and cannot be compared to the Premiership or Top 14, no matter how much you want it to be.

Podge_irl

awec wrote: »

This attitude will have to change.

Seriously, long term I really do believe the Pro14 is going to have to be taken more seriously, and teams are going to have to stop seeing it as the competition to fill in the weeks between europe. I do not think today's approach is sustainable.

I do not agree with this at all. The attitude to the Pro14 needs to change, I agree. But it is the French and English attitude towards Europe which should change to benefit everyone. There is nothing wrong with valuing European competition higher - it makes perfect sense and in a properly functioning set up Europe-wide would be the logical outcome. And constantly tinkering with it won't help anything.

Groups of 3 would be utterly crap on so many levels - not least scheduling.

awec

Podge_irl wrote: »

I do not agree with this at all. The attitude to the Pro14 needs to change, I agree. But it is the French and English attitude towards Europe which should change to benefit everyone. There is nothing wrong with valuing European competition higher - it makes perfect sense and in a properly functioning set up Europe-wide would be the logical outcome. And constantly tinkering with it won't help anything.

Groups of 3 would be utterly crap on so many levels - not least scheduling.

Why?

Seriously, why should French and English clubs give a damn that Pro14 teams can't rely on their league? It's not their problem.

Podge_irl

awec wrote: »

Why?

Why should French and English clubs give a damn that Pro14 teams can't rely on their league?

I have not suggested they should. They should give a damn about having a proper competition at a higher level than their domestic league. European rugby should be the highest level of competition and it is being damaged by the actions of French and English clubs. And now they are at it again.

I would like to see a more serious Pro14. But I can't understand how you could think further and further sidelining the European cup is a worthwhile way or achieving that.

awec

Cookiemunster wrote: »

The league exists to feed players into the national teams of the Celtic unions. That is not going to change any time soon. It has the same modus operandi as Super Rugby and cannot be compared to the Premiership or Top 14, no matter how much you want it to be.

Well then our goose is cooked. Stubbornness will end us.

Right now this league is sustained through test and european rugby. It is clear that our eggs are in these baskets. It is also clear that our partners in european rugby are seeing it as less important than we are.

If we continue to put all our eggs in this basket, and refuse to make changes to our own league, there will only be one eventual outcome.