Premiership Rugby out of Heineken Cup?

irishbucsfan · 23-09-2013 10:36PM

rrpc wrote: »

And what about the bit quoted by McBrian above? That's pretty clear wouldn't you say?

They had permission from 2007 to negotiate their own TV rights, so I don't think it really affects them. If it did, they'd probably get out of it by asking which match or matches the rights had been sold for.

rrpc · 23-09-2013 10:36PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

It's exactly what it says isn't it?

Yes, but you're defining International within very strict boundaries.

You didn't respond to my other question. What about rules 13.2 and 13.3?

rrpc · 23-09-2013 10:39PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

They had permission from 2007 to negotiate their own TV rights, so I don't think it really affects them. If it did, they'd probably get out of it by asking which match or matches the rights had been sold for.

What? They sold rights for matches in other territories.

irishbucsfan · 23-09-2013 10:39PM

rrpc wrote: »

Yes, but you're defining International within very strict boundaries.

Again, haven't seen it myself, but supposedly that's the IRB's definition.

irishbucsfan · 23-09-2013 10:42PM

rrpc wrote: »

What? They sold rights for matches in other territories.

Which matches? In which territories? Where in their contract does it say it and in what way exactly? Without being able to see the contract, it's impossible whether to say if it does or doesn't break the regulations, which they have said quite clearly it doesn't.

McCBrian · 23-09-2013 10:55PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Which matches? In which territories? Where in their contract does it say it and in what way exactly? Without being able to see the contract, it's impossible whether to say if it does or doesn't break the regulations, which they have said quite clearly it doesn't.

Well PRL seem to think they have "Exclusive Rights to all AP teams matches in the RCC"

According to thier website

"BT will also have exclusive live broadcast rights to matches played by Aviva Premiership Rugby clubs in any future European competitions from 2014-15 for three years."

http://www.premiershiprugby.com/news/20493.php#.UkCx6p4ueGQ

McCBrian · 23-09-2013 10:58PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

They had permission from 2007 to negotiate their own TV rights, so I don't think it really affects them. If it did, they'd probably get out of it by asking which match or matches the rights had been sold for.

DOMESTIC up until 2015/16 I think even though the new BT deal goes a year beyond this, but not EUROPEAN RIGHTS at all, it is in the accord that they have no authority to negotiate anything other than domestic competitions

irishbucsfan · 23-09-2013 11:00PM

McCBrian wrote: »

Well PRL seem to think they have "Exclusive Rights to all AP teams matches in the RCC"

According to thier website

"BT will also have exclusive live broadcast rights to matches played by Aviva Premiership Rugby clubs in any future European competitions from 2014-15 for three years."

http://www.premiershiprugby.com/news/20493.php#.UkCx6p4ueGQ

Yes but unless the IRB regulations includes something about making press releases then we still don't know if they've broken any rules or regulations.

irishbucsfan · 23-09-2013 11:01PM

McCBrian wrote: »

DOMESTIC up until 2015/16 I think even though the new BT deal goes a year beyond this, but not EUROPEAN RIGHTS at all, it is in the accord that they have no authority to negotiate anything other than domestic competitions

Isn't that an issue between them and the RFU? And the RFU seem happy with what they've done.

And under their agreement with the RFU, the RFU would support Premiership Rugby on all European TV and financial issues so long as Premiership Rugby ceded governance issues to the RFU, right?

McCBrian · 23-09-2013 11:02PM

And just to clarify IRB reg 16.7

Take out the red bit and it is clearer plus the blue is crucial

Reading and interperting legal docs helped fund me through Uni, my god it was boring

16.2.7 When any tournament is planned where it is proposed that teams, at any
level, from two or more Unions will participate, the approval of the Unions
concerned must be obtained in writing through the Secretaries of those
Unions before applying for the consent of the Council, where such
tournament is an International Tournament involving the senior National
Representative Team or the next senior National Representative Team of
a High Performance Union(s), or the CEO, where such tournament is an
International Tournament which does not involve the senior National
Representative Team or the next senior National Representative Team of
a High Performance Union[, or finalising the arrangements or issuing
invitations.

16.2.8 Any Match, Series of Matches, tour or tournament which does not fully
comply with the requirements of the Bye-Laws, Regulations and Laws of
the Game shall be deemed unofficial. The Union within whose territory
such an unofficial event takes place (and the visiting Union or Unions)
and/or the Union or Unions of participating Provincial, County, District,
Clubs or Rugby Bodies will be held responsible and will be liable to
sanction in accordance with the Regulations and/or Bye-Laws.

irishbucsfan · 23-09-2013 11:06PM

McCBrian wrote: »

And just to clarify IRB reg 16.7

Take out the red bit and it is clearer plus the blue is crucial

Reading and interperting legal docs helped fund me through Uni, my god it was boring

16.2.7 When any tournament is planned where it is proposed that teams, at any
level, from two or more Unions will participate, the approval of the Unions
concerned must be obtained in writing through the Secretaries of those
Unions before applying for the consent of the Council, where such
tournament is an International Tournament involving the senior National
Representative Team or the next senior National Representative Team of
a High Performance Union(s), or the CEO, where such tournament is an
International Tournament which does not involve the senior National
Representative Team or the next senior National Representative Team of
a High Performance Union, or finalising the arrangements or issuing
invitations.

16.2.8 Any Match, Series of Matches, tour or tournament which does not fully
comply with the requirements of the Bye-Laws, Regulations and Laws of
the Game shall be deemed unofficial. The Union within whose territory
such an unofficial event takes place (and the visiting Union or Unions)
and/or the Union or Unions of participating Provincial, County, District,
Clubs or Rugby Bodies will be held responsible and will be liable to
sanction in accordance with the Regulations and/or Bye-Laws.

IRB Definitions:

International Tournament means a tournament in which teams representing Unions at any level meet to participate in a Series of Matches whether at 15-a-side or an abbreviated version of the Game.

McCBrian · 23-09-2013 11:07PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Yes but unless the IRB regulations includes something about making press releases then we still don't know if they've broken any rules or regulations.

IBF a couple of questions for you yes/no or don’t know will suffice,
1. Have PR negotiated and entered into a contract with BT Vision to show Matches AP teams will play, in the Rugby Champions Cup from which they will benefit?
2. Did they get written consent from all the Unions where matches will be played prior to negotiating with BT (Or are they intending playing all matches in England, assuming they had written consent from the RFU before starting negotiations with BT)?

McCBrian · 23-09-2013 11:09PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

IRB Definitions:

I raise you a 16.2 Matches, tours and tournaments below National Representative level

irishbucsfan · 23-09-2013 11:11PM

McCBrian wrote: »

IBF a couple of questions for you yes/no or don’t know will suffice,
1. Have PR negotiated and entered into a contract with BT Vision to show Matches AP teams will play, in the Rugby Champions Cup from which they will benefit?
2. Did they get written consent from all the Unions where matches will be played prior to negotiating with BT (Or are they intending playing all matches in England, assuming they had written consent from the RFU before starting negotiations with BT)?

1. I don't know. The competition doesn't even really exist yet. We know they have a contract with BT Group though. I would be fairly sure when the competition exists, the rights for it will be included in the existing contract they have with BT Group. Whether or not this will be done with written permission from the Unions involved, I have no idea.

2. Given that there are no matches or Unions behind the competition, which doesn't exist yet, then it would be impossible for them to have written anything for anything.

23-09-2013 11:11PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Yes but unless the IRB regulations includes something about making press releases then we still don't know if they've broken any rules or regulations.

Ah here, you can't cherry pick the press releases that suit your argument and expect not to be called up on it constantly.

Are we now not to take the PRL press release at face value?

Every positive press release is believable, but every other is discountable?

irishbucsfan · 23-09-2013 11:13PM

McCBrian wrote: »

I raise you a 16.2 Matches, tours and tournaments below National Representative level

Where is their definition of tournaments below National Representative level?

It's quite specific in the regulation that it has to be a tournamanet involving teams representing the Unions. This competition is not that. That is why it doesn't apply. That is why Gosper said it's up to the RFU and FFR.

irishbucsfan · 23-09-2013 11:13PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Ah here, you can't cherry pick the press releases that suit your argument and expect not to be called up on it constantly.

Are we now not to take the PRL press release at face value?

Every positive press release is believable, but every other is discountable?

I never said anything like that. I said the Press Release doesn't break IRB regulations.

McCBrian · 23-09-2013 11:17PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Isn't that an issue between them and the RFU? And the RFU seem happy with what they've done.

And under their agreement with the RFU, the RFU would support Premiership Rugby on all European TV and financial issues so long as Premiership Rugby ceded governance issues to the RFU, right?

It is and that is between the RFU and PRL, if the RFU are happy for them to negotiate DOMESTIC rights beyond the remit of the current accord that is between them to agree.

The 2nd part is where I have a problem with your interpretation, I have never seen anything that backs up your assertion, but will be happy if you can provide evidence to the contrary

irishbucsfan · 23-09-2013 11:20PM

McCBrian wrote: »

It is and that is between the RFU and PRL, if the RFU are happy for them to negotiate DOMESTIC rights beyond the remit of the current accord that is between them to agree.

The 2nd part is where I have a problem with your interpretation, I have never seen anything that backs up your assertion, but will be happy if you can provide evidence to the contrary

I'm afraid I'd never be able to find it, but someone posted a BBC article from Martyn Thomas listing the terms of the revisions they were making to the accord, and that was the part included in the ERC section, basically RFU support PRL on financial stuff etc. and PRL support RFU on governance of the game etc.

McCBrian · 23-09-2013 11:22PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Where is their definition of tournaments below National Representative level?

It's quite specific in the regulation that it has to be a tournamanet involving teams representing the Unions. This competition is not that. That is why it doesn't apply. That is why Gosper said it's up to the RFU and FFR.

I re-raise you 16.2.3:)

McCBrian · 23-09-2013 11:24PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I'm afraid I'd never be able to find it, but someone posted a BBC article from Martyn Thomas listing the terms of the revisions they were making to the accord, and that was the part included in the ERC section, basically RFU support PRL on financial stuff etc. and PRL support RFU on governance of the game etc.

So no proof. You want everyone else to provide links to everything to back up their arguments but that does not apply to you:rolleyes:

23-09-2013 11:25PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I never said anything like that. I said the Press Release doesn't break IRB regulations.

Well if the press release is to be believed as its worded, then it directly implicates PRL as doing just so (and since they wrote and host it that'd be a bit silly right?)

Or else, the press release is to be disbelieved and PRL have done no such thing.

Or the press release is misleading and we've all been wound up for no reason and BT and PRL have managed to confuse everyone?

What other option is there here?

irishbucsfan · 23-09-2013 11:28PM

McCBrian wrote: »

I re-raise you 16.2.3:)

Yes, that's exactly it! 16.2.3 is the relevant regulation. The permission of both unions is required. No reference to IRB council or CEO.

16.2.7 refers to International Tournaments, which by the IRBs definition is not this tournament.

So when Gerry Thornley wrote this article: http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/irb-insists-breakaway-needs-its-approval-1.1531186 he really should have looked up the correct regulation. And Brendan Fanning should know better as well, I'm more disappointed in him.

irishbucsfan · 23-09-2013 11:29PM

McCBrian wrote: »

So no proof. You want everyone else to provide links to everything to back up their arguments but that does not apply to you:rolleyes:

Well I think it was rrpc who posted the orginal article but I can't remember, but it was from about 2007 so finding it would take me all night. I'm sure other posters here saw it.

irishbucsfan · 23-09-2013 11:34PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Well if the press release is to be believed as its worded, then it directly implicates PRL as doing just so (and since they wrote and host it that'd be a bit silly right?)

Or else, the press release is to be disbelieved and PRL have done no such thing.

Or the press release is misleading and we've all been wound up for no reason and BT and PRL have managed to confuse everyone?

What other option is there here?

But if Premiership Rugby signed a contract with BT Group promising them the domestic rugby and European rugby, any part of that deal could be subject to the rights being available in many different ways. And that would be in line with IRB regulations. It's absolutely impossible to say without seeing the contract.

Quentin Smith and that lot are all strong lawyers, and they were asked straight if the contract voided IRB regulations, and they said it didn't. So either they were lying and it does, or they have structured it in such a way that it doesn't.

McCBrian · 23-09-2013 11:47PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Yes, that's exactly it! 16.2.3 is the relevant regulation. The permission of both unions is required. No reference to IRB council or CEO.

16.2.7 refers to International Tournaments, which by the IRBs definition is not this tournament.

So when Gerry Thornley wrote this article: http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/irb-insists-breakaway-needs-its-approval-1.1531186 he really should have looked up the correct regulation. And Brendan Fanning should know better as well, I'm more disappointed in him.

After raising you with Reg 16 and re-raising you with 16.2.3 I am going all in with 16.2.7 again:D

16.2.7 When ANY tournament is planned where it is proposed that teams, at ANY level, from two or more Unions will participate, the approval of the Unions concerned must be obtained in writing through the Secretaries of those Unions before applying for the consent of the CEO, or finalising the arrangements or ISSUING INVITATIONS.

As an aside have PRL got approval from the RFU/FFR and the CEO of the IRB for the RCC as they have already sent out invitations to other clubs/provinces /regions to join their proposed competition

irishbucsfan · 23-09-2013 11:51PM

McCBrian wrote: »

After raising you with Reg 16 and re-raising you with 16.2.3 I am going all in with 16.2.7 again:D

16.2.7 When ANY tournament is planned where it is proposed that teams, at ANY level, from two or more Unions will participate, the approval of the Unions concerned must be obtained in writing through the Secretaries of those Unions before applying for the consent of the CEO, or finalising the arrangements or ISSUING INVITATIONS.

As an aside have PRL got approval from the RFU/FFR and the CEO of the IRB for the RCC as they have already sent out invitations to other clubs/provinces /regions to join their proposed competition

So basically, if you need to apply for IRB Council or CEO permission, you need to obtain permission from the Union first. You also need this before issuing invitations to the competition.

Doesn't apply to this competition in this case though, as the full regulation explains.

McCBrian · 24-09-2013 12:03AM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

So basically, if you need to apply for IRB Council or CEO permission, you need to obtain permission from the Union first. You also need this before issuing invitations to the competition.

Doesn't apply to this competition in this case though, as the full regulation explains.

Correct
and Incorrect

That also does not take into account the breach of Reg 13

So are you ready to fold as I have gone all in.:)

Off to bed now but will be back tomorrow evening to see how you want to spin McCafferty's postulations that the RCC is way forward despite everything pointing to the contrary;)

irishbucsfan · 24-09-2013 12:05AM

McCBrian wrote: »

Correct
and Incorrect

That also does not take into account of breach of Reg 13

So are you ready to fold as I have gone all in.:)

Off to bed now but will be back tomorrow evening to see how you want to spin McCafferty's postulations that the RCC is way forward despite everything pointing to the contrary;)

Actually you have a point about the invitations. They need written permission from the Unions, before they can offer invitations.

But how can they know which Unions they need permission from without offering invitations first? Seems that is supposed to be aimed at international tournaments as well, but it says any tourmanents.

McCBrian · 24-09-2013 12:13AM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I'm afraid I'd never be able to find it, but someone posted a BBC article from Martyn Thomas listing the terms of the revisions they were making to the accord, and that was the part included in the ERC section, basically RFU support PRL on financial stuff etc. and PRL support RFU on governance of the game etc.

Did a quick search of BBC Sport came up with these for Martyn Thomas not had time to read any of them

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/24074931

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/19669758

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/19628134

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/19630929

So you should be able to find where he said RFU support PRL on financial stuff etc. and PRL support RFU on governance of the game etc.

Although from the headlines does not look like the most positive PR for PRL from MT or Bill Beaumont

Premiership Rugby out of Heineken Cup?

Comments