Champions Cup 2023

Red Silurian

I'm not against a round of 16 but the 2 pools of 12 isn't great... With that being said, if you had 16 qualifiers from the old format (5 groups of 4) you would have the bottom of one of the groups progressing to the knockout stages. An annoying thing about the 5 groups of 4 format is we had a lot of repetition of group games in the KO's

A R16 from 6 groups of 4 would guarantee the top 2 in each group + 4 3rd place finishers which might be more exciting long term

sensitive1960

So all 8 URC teams made the last 16-not bad for such an uncompetitive league

crisco10

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120145163#Comment_120145163

Not at all, 100% success. With 5 of them being away though, the representation in the quarters may drop a bit! :-)

OldRio

Out of the 8 URC teams, 2 host other URC teams. Therefore a guaranteed 2 into the quarters.

Interested Observer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120145163#Comment_120145163

Must be the lack of relegation!!!

Hard to know how the leagues compare. To my mind the Premiership is now the sick man of Europe without doubt. Top 14 can still claim to having the best players and the most intense league.

I think the URC might have the strongest top 10 teams and teams who travel quite well. The teams at the bottom of the URC however would be bottom of the other two leagues so that's something to keep in mind.

Very happy with it though - has been said load of times but South African rugby aligning with Europe has been massive. I think the calls for them to join the six nations will get louder every year their clubs compete here.

Neil3030

Got a sneaky feeling Stormers could make it to the semis. A lot will depend on how they manage the time off for their players, and how sharp they are coming back. But I'd fancy them to beat Quinns at home, and then go to (probably Exeter) and have the best chance of an away win out of all the likely QF matches.

Akrasia

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120144687#Comment_120144687

Well if the goal is to have an entertaining tournament, I'd prefer to watch a game where there is less than one score in it at the end vs a team winning by 60 points

Akrasia

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120144769#Comment_120144769

This is exactly what I have been saying since last year.

People say 'we've qualified for the knockout stages' as if getting to the last 16 is the same as getting to a QF in the old pools system

If you think of it as We're losing 2 rounds of pool games of varying quality, and replacing them with 1 extra knockout game where every single team has something to play for.

The downside to the 2 pools format is that if you are lucky enough to get one easy team who don't bother to turn up, you're basically 'qualified' by just turning up and getting the 10 points. but you can still be found out in the R-16 where in the old pool stage, that team could get almost a free pass to a home QF

I'm definitely coming around on the format. Every round has had a couple of belters, even if it took until round 4 for Leinster to get a decent game.

Neil3030

My only gripe with the format is that it requires a whole new bunch of crap to explain to anybody getting into a game that's already too complex for most people. And for that reason, they really now just need to decide if this is the format, and stick with it for at least a decade. Let it become more familiar and normal.

Digifriendly

The format is bad and reducing the pool stages to 4 games means only 2 rather than 3 home games for every team involved. Ask any rugby fan would they prefer guaranteed 3 home games or 2 they will tell you the former. What was wrong with the previous format? If it ain't broken don't fix it.

Dave_The_Sheep

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120146602#Comment_120146602

Too many games for the English and French.

irelandrover

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120146602#Comment_120146602

I found the previous version where 3 of 5 second placed teams going through even more unfair. You were penalised for a close group where all teams take point off each other.

roverjoyce

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120145163#Comment_120145163

Proves it is uncompetitive,

French and English have to rest in Europe so they can stay competitive in their own leagues which is their main goal at the start of each year

Akrasia

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120145910#Comment_120145910

I worked out the ratios for this season

In the URC this season the home team wins 63%

away team won 34%

2% draws

In the Top 14 so far this year

Home team won 73%,

away team won 23%

and 4% of games were draws

I think more games are competitive in the URC with fewer teams fielding weakened sides on the road

pickarooney

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120146615#Comment_120146615

The English have lost 4 league games now. Wonder if they're still happy with it.

I agree, I don't consider a league competitive because teams tactically throw their away games. In a competitive league teams should be going away, giving it their best shot and at the very least making a tight game of it.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120146853#Comment_120146853

I don't think that's what that data is telling you. More away teams win in the URC precisely because there are more very poor teams in the URC, rather than to do with selections etc. Zebre are still winless (so every away side has beaten them at home), equally Leinster sent a second/third string side away to Scarlets and still got a win too.

If you look at the URC and the Gallagher Premiership, which makes for easy comparison as both leagues have seen 12 league rounds so far, the gap from top to bottom in points is 51. The bottom side sits 25 points out of QF progression in 8th as well.

In the Premiership, 31 points separate first and last, with 11th place Bristol only 10 points behind joint 3rd placed Harlequins (with a game at hand).

I don't think there is any doubt that the other leagues are more competitive domestically (as in more teams at a roughly similar level) than the URC at present.

pickarooney

Top 14 2022 - 52 point spread from top to bottom

Top 14 2021 - 79 point spread from top to bottom

Top 14 2020 - 36 point spread from top to bottom (shortened season)

Top 14 2019 - 86 point spread from top to bottom

Is this a useful metric for a competitive league?

Shehal

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120146922#Comment_120146922

The only thing other leagues have is media willing pump out nonsense about how great their league despite all the evidence proving the opposite and when their theory is debunked they quickly move the goalposts to another theory that excuses them for being embarrassed in Europe consistently.

hold my beer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120146615#Comment_120146615

Is it not the same amount of games with a 2 leg round of 16. I think it's only 1 leg this year due to World Cup.

Not all teams obviously, but anyone that qualifies for R of 16.

CIARAN_BOYLE

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120145163#Comment_120145163

7/8 urc teams in the challenge cup progressed as well.

Jump_In_Jack

So, assuming each league wants 8 teams in it, and they want a max of 6 matches before quarter-finals, what system would be better?

The only thing I would prefer is playing 4 different teams instead of the same two teams home and away.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120146942#Comment_120146942

Not necessarily, no, but the gap in the URC right now (after 12 rounds of games) is pretty much at where the gap was in the Top14 after a full season last year.

The stat that is more meaningful is how many places out of the playoffs lower down teams are. There are a number of URC teams who's season is effectively done for weeks now.

pickarooney

If we ignore the bottom team (Zebre/Perpignan), who are effectively out of contention for anything as of a long time ago, the difference between second bottom and the playoffs in the URC is 16 points currently. The difference between second bottom and the playoffs in the Top14 is 13 points, with two fewer teams.

It's not a significant gap.

Shehal

All I remember is in 2016 when 5 English teams were in the last 8 the media outlets such as the Guardian adamantly said that the reason for this was because of how strong the Premiership is...didnt take long for them to move those goalposts though.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120147194#Comment_120147194

Yeah, much of a muchness. Two fewer teams but two fewer teams make the playoffs too.

Do you think the three leagues are roughly level in terms of competitiveness so?

Neil3030

I look at it like this: how many teams from the URC could you add to the Prem or Top14, and NOT expect them to be finishing in the top 8?

For me it's Zebre, Dragons, Scarlets, Lions, Glasgow and Connacht. And a 2 or 3 of those teams would come damn close, and have been good enough to do it as recently as the last 5 years.

Akrasia

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120146922#Comment_120146922

Its one thing for Leinster to send the youngsters to Benetton or Zebre expecting to win over there with a rotated side, it's another thing to send a weakened team expecting to lose because you're focused on winning your home games

Zebre don't throw games, they try their best every week. They almost beat Leinster this September. Leinster would have been shocked to have lost that game if they had, it would have been a big miscalculation as they would have sent a team that they figured could beat their best team

Akrasia

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120146957#Comment_120146957

I'd prefer if the Irish and welsh media promoted the URC instead of constantly **** on it tbh

Why isn't there a weekly highlights show for the URC that shows all the games, not just the games involving Irish teams?