Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Ireland Team Talk XII: Farrell's First Fifteen

1150015011503150515061510

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,894 ✭✭✭Paul Smeenus


    I wonder if a province could offer a player and non-subsidised, non-CC contract separately with terms they were happier with. That'd be an interesting conversation.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,894 ✭✭✭Paul Smeenus


    As I understand it, the new money and the pathways themselves will be administered by the IRFU themselves, to schools and clubs. The professional provincial bodies will not see the money.

    So we'll see how simple it is to improve the situation without the mismanagement of the various provincial CEOs and boards and so on.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,546 ✭✭✭niallm77


    Nor really. Its more likely going to mean 2 or 3 guys on the periphery move elsewhere, be it to another province or overseas.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,856 ✭✭✭✭AbusesToilets


    Could the AIL not be improved as a pathway for developing players? If there's not equivalent schools in the other provinces to replicate Leinster's system, are there clubs that could be invested in instead?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,523 ✭✭✭✭aloooof


    I got fairly slaughtered on here around this time last season for suggesting something needed to change with the Central Contract situation. That was before the “up to 30%” came in, and I’m glad to have seen both that and now this change going to be implemented; it has to be for the good of Irish Rugby in the medium to long-term. The status quo just wasn’t tenable.

    Post edited by aloooof on


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,481 ✭✭✭Former Former Former


    Well that sounds reasonable. Having three separate schemes means lots of duplication, lots of waste and lots of conflict of interests. Whatever this plan is, it’s better being centrally administered.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,240 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    So like when Hump spoke about props, he was again talking out of his arse when he said:

    "For me, it’s about making sure that Leinster remain where they are."

    Leinster had the foresight to use outside money to invest in their pathways, rather than big money NIQs, reaped the rewards but now will be paying a tax on the current model to fund the shortcomings of other provinces.

    This is a definite hit to Leinster but to the annoyance of many they'll work their way through it and still be the most successful province. If it comes to it they'll find more money from outside backers to top up contracts or bring in NIQs, like other provinces were celebrated for.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,527 ✭✭✭Lost Ormond


    You would be fifty times better just funding more development officers in the provinces instead of that. Theres no guarantees kids who move to these schools would progress to top level. The irfu/provinces shouldnt be funding scholarships to these schools.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,523 ✭✭✭✭aloooof


    You'd be hard pushed to argue Leinster haven't "remained where they are" this season, after the 30% was introduced…



  • Subscribers Posts: 42,861 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    I think we're seeing today the result of the hit on Leinsters finances. Smaller senior squad, quicker academy progression and top level marquee signings. There must have been SOME kind offering presented back to Leinster in those funding conversations



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 29,524 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    Which, by and large, I'm fine with. I genuinely think our senior squad was a bit bloated with 3rd tier players. It was a nice luxury to have, but not necessary and potentially counterproductive to academy progression.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 529 ✭✭✭johnh6767


    Yes the leaner format is good for all and ensures more game time for the guys on periphery or academy



  • Subscribers Posts: 42,861 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    yes absolutely luxury, but I think the previous experiences with the likes of Thorn, Elsom and now Barrett showed / will show that these short term marquee signings are incredibly valuable for player progression and learning.

    "Reducing academy player / novice player playing time" is a very negative way to look at these (not saying that that's your opinion, but definitely something used by others as a whinge against)



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 29,524 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    Oh I have zero issue with the marquee signings, I think we should probably have been doing more of them over the years.

    But I think we can manage with our third choice players being more akin to academy level than seasoned provincial players. As indeed we have been doing this year in many cases anyway, with an academy player in every single squad so far.

    Post edited by Podge_irl on


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,612 ✭✭✭theVersatile


    This aged well after today's news

    There's zero fear of Leinster not being "kept where they are" so let's stop pretending that these measures are going to/intended to kneecap Leinster in any way.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,546 ✭✭✭niallm77


    What benefit would the IRFU kneecapping Leinster have?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,597 ✭✭✭crossman47


    Very true. The IRFU threw a sop to the other provinces yesterday and then allowed todays deal to go through. Leinster will dominate Irish rugby for the foreseeable future and the other provinces will gradually fall away to the detriment of Irish rugby.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,523 ✭✭✭✭aloooof


    Can't speak for the Versatile, but pretty sure his point is that this isn't kneecapping Leinster, and any suggestion of as much is wide of the mark.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,546 ✭✭✭niallm77


    Thats my point. The annoucnement yesterday isn't going to make a whole lot of difference to Leinster. I think we will just see a few guys less in the squad in the longer term with no real impact



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,523 ✭✭✭✭aloooof


    Exactly. So going back to the OP that the Versatile was replying, how is this "a definite hit to Leinster"? It's not.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,240 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    I have to presume you aren't being sarcastic with the aging of my post…

    I specifically reference them being able to work their way through this extra cost and still being able to bring in NIQs

    Sounds like you fall into the bold from my post:

    This is a definite hit to Leinster but to the annoyance of many they'll work their way through it and still be the most successful province.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,240 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    Utter nonsense. How do you describe a 500k reduction in budget, on top of a 1.5m reduction recently announced?

    If anything I was being conservative in my language by using the term 'hit'.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,240 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    The other provinces are falling away in the most part due to their own mismanagement over the years.

    The blazers who drove each one into the ditch over the years must be laughing away as the most vocal members of their fanbases spend most of their time blaming Leinster and the IRFU.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,523 ✭✭✭✭aloooof


    To be clear; it's a hit that I don't think will materially impact Leinster results-wise.

    Much like this season. The introduction of the "up to 30%" hasn't materially impacted them.

    Leinster aren't "paying a tax on the current model". It's a change to the model.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,240 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    One minute you say:

    "So going back to the OP that the Versatile was replying, how is this "a definite hit to Leinster"? It's not."

    Now its:

    "To be clear; it's a hit"

    🤣



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,523 ✭✭✭✭aloooof


    None of which changes my substantive point; I don't think it will be a material hit, which is all that really matters.

    Much like they clearly haven't been hit this season with the 30%.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,240 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    Just put your hands up that you completely contradicted yourself rather than squirming around like you are.

    You clearly wanted to have a dig at what you felt I said rather than what was actually in my post.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,523 ✭✭✭✭aloooof


    So you don't think it will materially hit Leinster either? Great. Then where's the problem.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,240 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    I know it is a tough day for you but you've tied yourself in such a knot here.

    My OP spoke about 'a definite hit' and you responded:

    "It's not"

    It is crystal clear why you're now scrambling to move the goal posts and talk about 'materially' or not. You had your usual dig at my post without realising you actually agreed with me so just put your hands up that you were wrong and leave it there.

    I have no interest in validating you original nonsense response by discussing your freshly moved goal posts, as you'll just move them again.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,523 ✭✭✭✭aloooof


    With respect, at this time last year prior to the 30% change, I suggested the Central Contract distribution was problematic and a changed was needed. I was met with the following from you:

    So you're just using that most annoying politician tactic:

    Stoke up flames of resentment about a huge problem that you claim to exist - Huge inequity between the provinces where they'll never ever be able to catch Leinster unless something is done by the IRFU

    Say you favour a magical solution, where the huge problem is solved but it involves no one taking any significant pain - the playing field needs to leveled but not in a way that drags back Leinster

    Refuse to propose your own magical solution - Claim in your post other solutions are needed but have only giving us the gem of sharing Barrett's 6 month salary across 3 provinces

    Get annoyed when those in power do not have the magical solution that resolves the issue - we haven't gotten to this part yet but I presume we'll see it post the CC review process

    I'm just glad the IRFU weren't as fantastical and fatalistic towards something that, they seem to have agreed with me, was a problem.

    And, much like I suggested last season, it hasn't appeared to materially impact Leinster.

    I'm done with this, it's clear you have no interest in a good-faith discussion on the substantive topic.



Advertisement