troyzer wrote: » Those are the choices you make. You rob Peter to pay Paul. But the IRFU can't pretend to care about the women's game if it's willing to forgo a transformative change for an extra 1-5% in performance for the men's team. You could start by contracting the bulk of the starting team. The professionalisation of the team makes it easier to attract sponsors who will top them up. You have to spend money to make money.
D14Rugby wrote: » 4/17 players in the original Ireland squad playing provincial rugby outside leinster play their club rugby in leinster, maybe loads was an overstatement but that's still quite a few. It's not their sole focus though and I know that for a fact. The likes of larissa Muldoon as I mentioned her title is Co-female development but she also does some work in boys/men's rugby. The primary schools ones you've mentioned aren't female only either. As I said their focus is women's rugby but it's not exclusively their area. What are you on about generating money isn't an issue, of course it is. The international men's team are earning pretty much as much as possible so for women's rugby to get more money it needs to generate at least some of it, you can't just print money and it's not as if the IRFU are sitting on a big pile of cash and just not using it.
D14Rugby wrote: » Then you run the risk of losing key international players and thus risk the men's team not being as competitive and as a knock on effect the popularity of rugby and the income that props up so much of the system. And for perspective an international prop is on 300-400,000 per year the women's team in England are on around 30k each so you could maybe get a 15 on one players salary but that's nowhere near sufficient for training and that's a pretty modest wage so would have to increase at some point in the near enough future and also doesn't include match fees etc.
The Lost Sheep wrote: » overwhelmingly will be their sole focus. They will work on womens game be it through schools during day primary and secondary and clubs in evening through looking at structures as well as everything else. It overwhelmingly will be their area. If we're to go down route of generating money then virtually all sectors of game here are in trouble. As they dont. How much do you want womens game to be generating for it not to be an issue. Reducing wages etc for a few mens players and putting it into other areas of the game can have big swing towards increasing interest etc in sport from other areas. And 15 players on near full time wages would be far better than anything thats available at present for the womens set up.
D14Rugby wrote: » I have quite literally asked some of them this question and I'm telling you exactly what they told me. 90% but not solely. All sectors of the game everywhere need to generate more money, including our men's national team. I don't know I'm not an account, I'm not privy to the IRFU finances I just know the IRFU aren't exactly sitting in a pile of cash so propping another area of the game up may not be feasible, hell the men's 7s aren't even professional and I'm sure they'd love to be too. I'll say the same for them once they generate it they can too, like the women's 7s do. Robbing Peter to pay Paul is a dangerous game when you plan to do it on a regular basis and it can have a negative effect on Peter. 15 players being pro is absolutely useless.
sydthebeat wrote: » So the question the irfu have to ask are they there to make a profit, or to grow the game?
The Lost Sheep wrote: » The IRFU exist to grow develop and enhance the sport across the country. Being profitable has to happen but profitability cant be first and foremost. You would be getting rid of a lot of parts of the sport if you are to be too concerned by profit margins. Its very much to grow the game obviously IRFU has to make money to continue with the growth of the game but growing the game has to be first.
D14Rugby wrote: » I'm not talking about being profitable I'm talking about breaking even which is something the IRFU need to do to exist and currently are just about doing. So to be able to spend more they currently need to earn more.
martingriff wrote: » Who is the lady in the middle in the studio. The other 2 seem the most dominant.
Burkie1203 wrote: » Jenny Murphy
irishbucsfan wrote: » Driving a successful women's team would be profitable in the long term, not the other way around. Not only would it drive revenue, it would be building a stream of revenue that is relatively independent of the success of the men's team, adding to their sustainability in year's where we are weak in the men's game. Look at US women's soccer for an example of just how incredibly valuable that can be, after their men failed to qualify for that world cup. But all that's irrelevant in the end. The IRFU are the NGB of the sport in this country and receive special status because of that, they can not and will not be allowed to neglect women's sports forever. The only question is whether they'll take steps forward before they're forced to by external factors. If Eddy and Nucifora remain there, I'd doubt it.
D14Rugby wrote: » As I said originally I'm not saying don't spend money with an eye to making money but it is very easy for that to fall into bankrolling which isn't sustainable. It wasn't that long ago remember that connacht was nearly shut down until they started earning a bit of money themselves. You don't necessarily need to Rob Peter to pay Paul. Women's rugby is really undersold all over at the minute, the potential for better sponsors, more big games, etc is all there it's just about tapping into it and getting the ball rolling. Abbottstown should be used more too when it's done.
D14Rugby wrote: » The irfu should expand the interpros, home and away, two games in each of October, Christmas, May, ie just before each meet up of the national squad, a June series of some sort, make the interpros an event get crowds at them, get them on TV, that'll attract more and bigger sponsors which will have knock on effect and then you can work towards bigger goals. Just as an after point last season the irfu money towards women's rugby increased by a million euro for the year, they could have paid salaries for a professional squad there with that but it went to grassroots which I think we can all agree was the right decision.
The Lost Sheep wrote: » I wouldnt have it like that but 6 interpros is a must and having a June series isnt necessarily the answer but a proper november series every year. Basically provinces play August/September 3 games then AIL and the other club games until November with 2/3 internationals then 3 more interpros in December/January with club games before 6 nations. Getting games on tv is a bit of stretch but they should be streamed. Games will all be videod but streaming them would be a start.
