Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Premiership Rugby out of Heineken Cup?

1…114115117119120…326

Comments

  • #3482
    Grandpa Hassan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,945 ✭✭✭Grandpa Hassan


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Care to share?

    I personally have no idea why any rational Union would actively look to work with two organisations that have done their utmost to dissolve their organisation and undermine them at every turn.

    Because otherwise their clubs won't get a decent game?


  • #3483
    irishbucsfan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,978 ✭✭✭✭irishbucsfan


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Care to share?

    I personally have no idea why any rational Union would actively look to work with two organisations that have done their utmost to dissolve their organisation and undermine them at every turn.

    Paul Goze was speaking about it in France, I believe it was in l'equipe. Every participant gets an equal share. Now what they do with that is of course up to them, and given the Unions control Leinster/Glasgow and the Welsh to some extent then there is no reason to suggest the Unions won't be involved. And if they aren't, it's their choice. I personally think Irish rugby would be far better off with Dawson and Logan representing themselves rather than Browne etc.

    It remains to be seen what level of Union control will exist out of France and England. The same relationship may apply in England an before. The French have miles to go before they even start talking about Europe it seems.


  • #3484
    Jazlynn Nutritious Bellboy
    Posts: 24,798 ✭✭✭✭ Jazlynn Nutritious Bellboy


    Grandpa Hassan wrote: »
    Because otherwise their clubs won't get a decent game?

    If the ERC is the only authorised governing board of competition (see IRB link on last page) - (unless the Unions vote it out of existence and into bed with another group where they have less control) then it is PRL and LNR who would have to come back with hat in hands to the table.

    I'm saying I can't see any reason why any Union would actively look to disband this solely authorised governing board of European Rugby to work with people who've made it abundantly clear that they have absolutely no interest in working with them?


  • #3485
    .ak
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 30,308 ✭✭✭✭.ak


    Grandpa Hassan wrote: »
    Because otherwise their clubs won't get a decent game?

    I don't think the unions will be held accountable for that - they still have their cash cow in the 6 Nations, plus I reckon if they really wanted they could out muscle the clubs and set up something to ensure a high level of elite club levels games is still held.


  • #3486
    Jazlynn Nutritious Bellboy
    Posts: 24,798 ✭✭✭✭ Jazlynn Nutritious Bellboy


    irishbucsfan wrote: »
    Paul Goze was speaking about it in France, I believe it was in l'equipe. Every participant gets an equal share. Now what they do with that is of course up to them, and given the Unions control Leinster/Glasgow and the Welsh to some extent then there is no reason to suggest the Unions won't be involved. And if they aren't, it's their choice. I personally think Irish rugby would be far better off with Dawson and Logan representing themselves rather than Browne etc.

    It remains to be seen what level of Union control will exist out of France and England. The same relationship may apply in England an before. The French have miles to go before they even start talking about Europe it seems.

    You'd be on your own there I think.

    I believe Leinster rugby would be miles and away better off without being under the umbrella of the IRFU, but Leinster and Ireland Rugby's goals are not always aligned or even nearly so.

    Mick Dawson's remit is to Leinster Rugby. Not Irish Rugby. (And he's the guy I want in charge at Leinster too, he's good)

    For an easy example of Leinster V Irish Rugby see NIQ rules which as a Leinster fan I hate (mostly for the imbalanced way in which they interfere with provincial squads) but as an Irish fan means that teams that don't actively create quality IQ players in their positions should be harshly penalised into doing just so.


  • Advertisement
  • #3487
    irishbucsfan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,978 ✭✭✭✭irishbucsfan


    .ak wrote: »
    I don't think the unions will be held accountable for that - they still have their cash cow in the 6 Nations, plus I reckon if they really wanted they could out muscle the clubs and set up something to ensure a high level of elite club levels games is still held.

    If the Unions prevent the clubs from conducting their business while no alternative exists they'll definitely be held accountable for that.


  • #3488
    irishbucsfan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,978 ✭✭✭✭irishbucsfan


    Deleted User wrote: »
    You'd be on your own there I think.

    I believe Leinster rugby would be miles and away better off without being under the umbrella of the IRFU, but Leinster and Ireland Rugby's goals are not always aligned or even nearly so.

    Mick Dawson's remit is to Leinster Rugby. Not Irish Rugby.

    See NIQ rules which as a Leinster fan I hate (mostly for the imbalanced way in which they interfere with provincial squads) but as an Irish fan means that teams that don't actively create quality IQ players in their positions will be harshly penalised into doing just so.


    NIQ rules have absolutely nothing to do with the organisation of the European tournament. What exactly do you think is up for discussion here?

    This has nothing to do with the Unions relationship with the provinces domestically.


  • #3489
    Jazlynn Nutritious Bellboy
    Posts: 24,798 ✭✭✭✭ Jazlynn Nutritious Bellboy


    irishbucsfan wrote: »
    NIQ rules have absolutely nothing to do with the organisation of the European tournament. What exactly do you think is up for discussion here?

    This has nothing to do with the Unions relationship with the provinces domestically.

    So if as a competition board 'The Clubs' decide to ban any and all quotas on foreign players from their tournament then the provinces wouldn't have 'HEC' NIQ players that play only HEC rugby?


  • #3490
    irishbucsfan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,978 ✭✭✭✭irishbucsfan


    Deleted User wrote: »
    So if as a competition board 'The Clubs' decide to ban any and all quotas on foreign players from their tournament then the provinces wouldn't have 'HEC' NIQ players that play only HEC rugby?

    How could the provinces sign a contract with such a player?


  • #3491
    Jazlynn Nutritious Bellboy
    Posts: 24,798 ✭✭✭✭ Jazlynn Nutritious Bellboy


    irishbucsfan wrote: »
    So effectively in Europe everyone would be equal, rather than Premiership and Top 14 sides all getting far less than Rabo sides. Conor O'Shea said it when we was on RTE, his Harlequins got 400k out of Europe while Zebre got 1.2m

    Conor O'Shea's Harlequins got 400k from the RFU which chose to split the money as it did.

    This point is so monumentally important that the constant washing over it is getting irritating. Especially given the Italian example as the ERC has been purposely giving the Italians more than any 'fair share' could be deemed due to the progressive vision of the ERC.

    Explained well here

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=86547135&postcount=2783


  • Advertisement
  • #3492
    Jazlynn Nutritious Bellboy
    Posts: 24,798 ✭✭✭✭ Jazlynn Nutritious Bellboy


    irishbucsfan wrote: »
    How could the provinces sign a contract with such a player?

    What could the IRFU do to stop them having a 6th NIQ player in their starting lineup for a HEC tie?


  • #3493
    irishbucsfan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,978 ✭✭✭✭irishbucsfan


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Conor O'Shea's Harlequins got 400k from the RFU which chose to split the money as it did.

    This point is so monumentally important that the constant washing over it is getting irritating. Especially given the Italian example as the ERC has been purposely giving the Italians more than any 'fair share' could be deemed due to the progressive vision of the ERC.

    Explained well here

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=86547135&postcount=2783


    You obviously ignored the rest of my post where I said the distribution of money is fair. The distribution of money is fair. The distribution of money is fair.

    Have I said that enough times? Because I've said it an awful lot. If needed I can say it a few more times.

    But as I said before, if you agree that the money should be based on participation, then you agree that the money is currently fair.

    If you also agree that participation should be changed, then you also agree that the money will change with it.


  • #3494
    irishbucsfan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,978 ✭✭✭✭irishbucsfan


    Deleted User wrote: »
    What could the IRFU do to stop them having a 6th NIQ player in their starting lineup for a HEC tie?

    I asked, how could they sign a contract with the player?


  • #3495
    Jazlynn Nutritious Bellboy
    Posts: 24,798 ✭✭✭✭ Jazlynn Nutritious Bellboy


    irishbucsfan wrote: »
    I asked, how could they sign a contract with the player?

    I'm afraid I'm not even able to tell you how a province can sign an IQ player from another province. Something which has been done on a regular basis.

    I'm not involved in any of those mechanisms.

    I'm not sure that not knowing this makes my point any less valid, especially given the legal minefield that are the IQ rules. The point being that given that Irish Rugby and Leinster Rugby's goals are not always aligned, and that the 'bigger picture' view of Irish Rugby vs Leinster Rugby is one that has an inherent interest in the development of the game across a broader area than the club's.


  • #3496
    Jazlynn Nutritious Bellboy
    Posts: 24,798 ✭✭✭✭ Jazlynn Nutritious Bellboy


    irishbucsfan wrote: »
    You obviously ignored the rest of my post where I said the distribution of money is fair. The distribution of money is fair. The distribution of money is fair.

    Have I said that enough times? Because I've said it an awful lot. If needed I can say it a few more times.

    But as I said before, if you agree that the money should be based on participation, then you agree that the money is currently fair.

    If you also agree that participation should be changed, then you also agree that the money will change with it.

    eh?
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=86691988&postcount=3480

    Also - leading the witness much?

    The distribution of money is purposely not wholly tied to participation or progress as the competition is not a Pools System. It is a cup to develop and spread European rugby. It holds Italy as an example in that regard. A Union receiving more than it's 'fair share' in order to develop that Union and to give it the opportunity to support itself for the greater good of the game.

    Perhaps it's not going far enough in people's opinions, and we should be pumping more money into Georgia and Romania too, but that's again increasing those Unions' 'fair share' of the distribution of European Rugby's earnings, not 'equalizing' payments by any stretch of the imagination.


  • #3497
    mooonpie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 255 ✭✭mooonpie


    Deleted User wrote: »
    I'm afraid I'm not even able to tell you how a province can sign an IQ player from another province. Something which has been done on a regular basis.

    I'm not involved in any of those mechanisms.

    I'm not sure that not knowing this makes my point any less valid, especially given the legal minefield that are the IQ rules. The point being that given that Irish Rugby and Leinster Rugby's goals are not always aligned, and that the 'bigger picture' view of Irish Rugby vs Leinster Rugby is one that has an inherent interest in the development of the game across a broader area than the club's.

    I think the point IBF is alluding to is IRFU contract all the players for the provinces? So even though the Tournament would allow Leinster to play another NIQ player, Leinster would have no way to actually contract that player


  • #3498
    Jazlynn Nutritious Bellboy
    Posts: 24,798 ✭✭✭✭ Jazlynn Nutritious Bellboy


    mooonpie wrote: »
    I think the point IBF is making is IRFU contract all the players for the provinces? So even though the Tournament would allow Leinster to play another NIQ player, Leinster would have no way to actually contract that player

    No, all that means is that there is no previous examples of it occurring. Not that it cannot be done.

    For a silly example, what happens if Leinster name a NIQ coach in their European playing squad?


  • #3499
    irishbucsfan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,978 ✭✭✭✭irishbucsfan


    Deleted User wrote: »
    I'm afraid I'm not even able to tell you how a province can sign an IQ player from another province. Something which has been done on a regular basis.

    I'm not involved in any of those mechanisms.

    I'm not sure that not knowing this makes my point any less valid, especially given the legal minefield that are the IQ rules. The point being that given that Irish Rugby and Leinster Rugby's goals are not always aligned, and that the 'bigger picture' view of Irish Rugby vs Leinster Rugby is one that has an inherent interest in the development of the game across a broader area than the club's.

    To play a player in European competition, they need to be in the squad. To be in the squad they need to be a contracted player who are already playing with the team when the squad is announced.

    For Leinster to sign any NIQ player, they need permission from the IRFU. Even if they're under quota (see: Matt Giteau).

    So if Leinster cannot sign a contract with an NIQ player, they can't play him in Europe.


    That is not something the ERC have any say in currently either. So you would need to give a much better example than that.


  • #3500
    irishbucsfan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,978 ✭✭✭✭irishbucsfan


    Deleted User wrote: »
    eh?
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=86691988&postcount=3480

    Also - leading the witness much?

    The distribution of money is purposely not wholly tied to participation or progress as the competition is not a Pools System. It is a cup to develop and spread European rugby. It holds Italy as an example in that regard. A Union receiving more than it's 'fair share' in order to develop that Union and to give it the opportunity to support itself for the greater good of the game.

    Perhaps it's not going far enough in people's opinions, and we should be pumping more money into Georgia and Romania too, but that's again increasing those Unions' 'fair share' of the distribution of European Rugby's earnings, not 'equalizing' payments by any stretch of the imagination.

    You quoted a post from Molloy earlier. Look back at this posts on the subject, which were very good. The money IS very closesly linked to participation. In fact this season it almost fell exactly along those lines.

    It's the only fair way to do it really, and the PRL and LNR guys have said (as recenly as this morning) that they don't disagree with that.


    As for Georgia and Romania being "protected" by the Unions. That's pretty laughable. If they cared about them, they wouldn't have suggested a compromise that completely cut them off. And Phillip Browne would have mentioned something about developing the game in those countries when he and George Hook were pontificating on Prime Time, rather than spending all the time talking about the IRFU's money and why international rugby is much more important than club rugby etc.


  • #3501
    Jazlynn Nutritious Bellboy
    Posts: 24,798 ✭✭✭✭ Jazlynn Nutritious Bellboy


    irishbucsfan wrote: »
    You quoted a post from Molloy earlier. Look back at this posts on the subject, which were very good. The money IS very closesly linked to participation. In fact this season it almost fell exactly along those lines.

    It's the only fair way to do it really, and the PRL and LNR guys have said (as recenly as this morning) that they don't disagree with that.


    As for Georgia and Romania being "protected" by the Unions. That's pretty laughable. If they cared about them, they wouldn't have suggested a compromise that completely cut them off. And Phillip Browne would have mentioned something about developing the game in those countries when he and George Hook were pontificating on Prime Time, rather than spending all the time talking about the IRFU's money and why international rugby is much more important than club rugby etc.

    just as well I didn't say anything along those lines whatsoever (in fact saying that it wasn't doing enough)


  • Advertisement
  • #3502
    ColmH81
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 365 ✭✭ColmH81


    irishbucsfan wrote: »
    To play a player in European competition, they need to be in the squad. To be in the squad they need to be a contracted player who are already playing with the team when the squad is announced.

    For Leinster to sign any NIQ player, they need permission from the IRFU. Even if they're under quota (see: Matt Giteau).

    So if Leinster cannot sign a contract with an NIQ player, they can't play him in Europe.


    That is not something the ERC have any say in currently either. So you would need to give a much better example than that.

    Sorry to jump in on this.. But what's with the Matt Giteau comment?


  • #3503
    irishbucsfan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,978 ✭✭✭✭irishbucsfan


    Deleted User wrote: »
    just as well I didn't say anything along those lines whatsoever (in fact saying that it wasn't doing enough)

    Oh sorry I thought your point was that increasing the Unions control would give more money to Georgia or Romania.

    I completely agree they should get more money, I'd be totally in favour of that. A competition where funding is based on pariticipation with fair entry criteria at least allows them the opportunity to get there. A competition where 6 Unions are given total control creates a barrier to entry on geographical grounds.

    If they do end up doing the shortened 3rd tier tournament as I've heard it described, it would effectively be a tournament taking place before the other tournaments start with qualification for the "Amlin" for the top placed sides. Which sounds much better to me. Although I haven't heard too much about it.


  • #3504
    irishbucsfan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,978 ✭✭✭✭irishbucsfan


    ColmH81 wrote: »
    Sorry to jump in on this.. But what's with the Matt Giteau comment?

    It's just an example that the IRFU can prevent a province from signing a NIQ player. Leinster wanted to sign Matt Giteau as an injury replacement for Sexton a couple of years ago, the IRFU said no and so they stuck with Shane Beirne (I think it was that season).


  • #3505
    ColmH81
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 365 ✭✭ColmH81


    irishbucsfan wrote: »
    It's just an example that the IRFU can prevent a province from signing a NIQ player. Leinster wanted to sign Matt Giteau as an injury replacement for Sexton a couple of years ago, the IRFU said no and so they stuck with Shane Beirne (I think it was that season).

    Everyday's a school day.. Just a couple of Qs(for my own knowledge and slightly off topic)

    How any NIQs do the IRFU allow?
    How many per team?
    And is Jimmy Gopperth a NIQ?


  • #3506
    danthefan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,770 ✭✭✭danthefan


    ColmH81 wrote: »
    Everyday's a school day.. Just a couple of Qs(for my own knowledge and slightly off topic)

    How any NIQs do the IRFU allow?
    How many per team?
    And is Jimmy Gopperth a NIQ?

    5 per team, 4 NIQs + 1 project player (a player who can become Irish qualified).

    Yes.


  • #3507
    Winters
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,762 ✭✭✭✭Winters


    IBF, you're not going to like this seeing as you aren't a big Gerry fan but I'm an avid reader of his.

    http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/anglo-french-club-alliance-means-war-over-future-of-european-rugby-1.1537664


  • #3508
    rrpc
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,244 ✭✭✭rrpc


    irishbucsfan wrote: »
    You obviously ignored the rest of my post where I said the distribution of money is fair. The distribution of money is fair. The distribution of money is fair.

    Have I said that enough times? Because I've said it an awful lot. If needed I can say it a few more times.

    But as I said before, if you agree that the money should be based on participation, then you agree that the money is currently fair.

    If you also agree that participation should be changed, then you also agree that the money will change with it.
    He quoted your post in its entirety. You said nothing about fairness in it. In fact you pretty clearly implied unfairness when you compared what Harlequins were getting compared to Zebre.


  • #3509
    Swiwi.
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,415 ✭✭✭Swiwi.


    Winters wrote: »
    IBF, you're not going to like this seeing as you aren't a big Gerry fan but I'm an avid reader of his.

    http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/anglo-french-club-alliance-means-war-over-future-of-european-rugby-1.1537664

    GT is off the mark at the moment. I mean he brings up the old chestnut that the Eng & French clubs are doing this in part because they are jealous of Irish success. I really don't think that has any part to play whatsoever. I've kind of given up reading the papers on this issue, all objectivity has been lost.


  • #3510
    irishbucsfan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,978 ✭✭✭✭irishbucsfan


    Winters wrote: »
    IBF, you're not going to like this seeing as you aren't a big Gerry fan but I'm an avid reader of his.

    http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/anglo-french-club-alliance-means-war-over-future-of-european-rugby-1.1537664

    Well given he was completely, objectively, wrong in an entire article, I just don't think he's too interested in looking at things with any fairness at all.


  • Advertisement
  • #3511
    irishbucsfan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,978 ✭✭✭✭irishbucsfan


    rrpc wrote: »
    He quoted your post in its entirety. You said nothing about fairness in it. In fact you pretty clearly implied unfairness when you compared what Harlequins were getting compared to Zebre.

    Sorry I mixed up my posts, just noticed.

    I didn't imply anything about fairness in the way money is distributed


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement
Advertisement