Premiership Rugby out of Heineken Cup?

Rightwing · 24-09-2013 09:29PM

Phonehead wrote: »

Well let's call a spade a spade here about participation - less Pro12 does not mean more chance of English or French winners! as it stands you'll only cut the Pro12 teams that were never going to win the tournament. The English businesses (that's what they are) need to compete financially against the French and not just compete to get the box office players because they can't but they risk even losing the good players. They were offered huge sums by BT but BT want's the European games with this, something the English can't provide so they are now looking to remove the ERC and wrestle control away. The English are trying to make out that they are in a strong position but they could in the long run commit financial suicide if this bluff ends in everybody going their seperate ways.

That's a good point. Maybe instead of cutting the pro12 teams they could give the Fr and Eng another few teams each.

irishbucsfan · 24-09-2013 09:33PM

Rightwing wrote: »

That's a good point. Maybe instead of cutting the pro12 teams they could give the Fr and Eng another few teams each.

They're cutting the tournament size to 20, not increasing it.

Almaviva · 24-09-2013 09:39PM

Phonehead wrote: »

Well let's call a spade a spade here about participation - less Pro12 does not mean more chance of English or French winners! as it stands you'll only cut the Pro12 teams that were never going to win the tournament.

Why not? Does eliminating the pro 12 teams that wont win it as you say, not lead to an increased number of French or English teams ?

Phonehead · 24-09-2013 09:41PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Ultimately, the only functional difference for viewers will be a smaller H Cup with a more equal distribution of sides between the 3 European leagues. And hopefully an improved Amlin tournament that the Celtic nations will no longer completely ignore.

Of course there are the hystericals who believe this will destroy rugby as we know it and will lead to us all living in some sort of post apocalyptic wasteland.

The bigger issue here seems to have escaped you, this is not about less teams. I can guarantee if the Pro12 participation was cut the English owners would still say NO DEAL.... why? because the ERC still controls the game and with it the TV rights, merchandise, competition sponsorship (how much would that get if they had a new comp that the naming rights could be sold) etc

Team numbers is a nothing issue here but seems like a nice valid horse to ride on for the poor English and French, this is all business and the owners really don't care if rugby in Italy and the Celtic nations goes back to the amateur era.

Rightwing · 24-09-2013 09:45PM

Phonehead wrote: »

The bigger issue here seems to have escaped you, this is not about less teams. I can guarantee if the Pro12 participation was cut the English owners would still say NO DEAL.... why? because the ERC still controls the game and with it the TV rights, merchandise, competition sponsorship (how much would that get if they had a new comp that the naming rights could be sold) etc

Team numbers is a nothing issue here but seems like a nice valid horse to ride on for the poor English and French, this is all business and the owners really don't care if rugby in Italy and the Celtic nations goes back to the amateur era.

Absolutely.

There's always a few knowledgeable posters on the ball. Well said.

McCBrian · 24-09-2013 09:46PM

Phonehead wrote: »

The bigger issue here seems to have escaped you, this is not about less teams. I can guarantee if the Pro12 participation was cut the English owners would still say NO DEAL.... why? because the ERC still controls the game and with it the TV rights, merchandise, competition sponsorship (how much would that get if they had a new comp that the naming rights could be sold) etc

Team numbers is a nothing issue here but seems like a nice valid horse to ride on for the poor English and French, this is all business and the owners really don't care if rugby in Italy and the Celtic nations goes back to the amateur era.

Welcome to the madhouse Phonehead, nail on head:cool:

irishbucsfan · 24-09-2013 09:46PM

Phonehead wrote: »

The bigger issue here seems to have escaped you, this is not about less teams. I can guarantee if the Pro12 participation was cut the English owners would still say NO DEAL.... why? because the ERC still controls the game and with it the TV rights, merchandise, competition sponsorship (how much would that get if they had a new comp that the naming rights could be sold) etc

Team numbers is a nothing issue here but seems like a nice valid horse to ride on for the poor English and French, this is all business and the owners really don't care if rugby in Italy and the Celtic nations goes back to the amateur era.

Not certainly hasn't escaped me at all. Which is why I said the functional difference for viewers.

But of course they do care about rugby in those countries because it also hugely influences their bottom lines. There is a reason their first proposal included a 3 tier competition while the Celtic Nations was a 32 team competition which abolished the Amlin. There is a reason that the premiership clubs are doing development work in Easter Europe. There is a financial motive for the clubs to support development of the game, the more people who watch on TV, the more money they make.

24-09-2013 09:50PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Not certainly hasn't escaped me at all. Which is why I said the functional difference for viewers.

But of course they do care about rugby in those countries because it also hugely influences their bottom lines. There is a reason their first proposal included a 3 tier competition while the Celtic Nations was a 32 team competition which abolished the Amlin. There is a reason that the premiership clubs are doing development work in Easter Europe. There is a financial motive for the clubs to support development of the game, the more people who watch on TV, the more money they make.

It marginally affects their bottom lines.

Whether or not Edinburgh are a club or a memory is probably worth less than the price of one of their season tickets to Harlequinns RFC.

irishbucsfan · 24-09-2013 09:53PM

Deleted User wrote: »

It marginally affects their bottom lines.

It could massively affect it actually. You can't be so certain. If rugby became widespread in Italy, it would be massive to have another big party interested in TV. Same as Russia. Hence the Russian "Saracens"

irishbucsfan · 24-09-2013 09:54PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Whether or not Edinburgh are a club or a memory is probably worth less than the price of one of their season tickets to Harlequinns RFC.

The same is true of the SRU given their recent history it would seem

Phonehead · 24-09-2013 09:55PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Not certainly hasn't escaped me at all. Which is why I said the functional difference for viewers.

But of course they do care about rugby in those countries because it also hugely influences their bottom lines. There is a reason their first proposal included a 3 tier competition while the Celtic Nations was a 32 team competition which abolished the Amlin. There is a reason that the premiership clubs are doing development work in Easter Europe. There is a financial motive for the clubs to support development of the game, the more people who watch on TV, the more money they make.

They care about the business side of expanding to newer markets and selling their own product, we all know their intention is the very same as soccer clubs having academys in less developed countries.. it's not to make Romania great again but it's to be able to cherry pick the best players in their Academies and get them into their Premiership sides! This is all business, we have owners looking at ways to maximise profits and emerging markets is one way to do it!

24-09-2013 09:57PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

It could massively affect it actually. You can't be so certain. If rugby became widespread in Italy, it would be massive to have another big party interested in TV. Same as Russia. Hence the Russian "Saracens"

That it could isn't in doubt.

That it does is.

There's almost no tangible worth to an individual club in England for the game to develop well elsewhere.

McCBrian · 24-09-2013 09:58PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

There is a reason their first proposal included a 3 tier competition while the Celtic Nations was a 32 team competition which abolished the Amlin.

ibf do you know what the 3rd tier consisted of?

The 32 team competition was an alternative to 20 as a bargaining tool for a continued 24 team tournament or increased representation than the PRL proposal in a 20 team competition (ie 4 teams dropped from Italy/Scotland/Ireland/Wales while the English and French keep all their teams)

Where did the ERC or any of the members propose the abolition of the Amlin never seen that

irishbucsfan · 24-09-2013 10:07PM

Phonehead wrote: »

They care about the business side of expanding to newer markets and selling their own product, we all know their intention is the very same as soccer clubs having academys in less developed countries.. it's not to make Romania great again but it's to be able to cherry pick the best players in their Academies and get them into their Premiership sides! This is all business, we have owners looking at ways to maximise profits and emerging markets is one way to do it!

The motives for the Unions is the exact same I'm afraid.

The only difference is that the Unions admit that club rugby is an afterthought but still demand to be able to run the competitions themselves. In England and France, they handed the coordination of tournaments to the clubs and it allows them to focus on running the amateur game and also the international side. And that is one method that works.

But the ERC is an afterthought for those who sit on that board. They've had.. What 3 meetings this year? They can't get the next one going until October 23rd? It's not good enough. The competition should be run by people who treat it as a priority. Look back at the interviews from September 2012 going forward to September 2013 and you won't see McCafferty a saying they won't deal with the ERC. You'll see a group who started out happy to negotiate and confident of getting a positive result, and then slowly changing and complaining about how long it took to do anything, followed by them saying they'd given up on the ERC.

Prime Time on RTE consisted of Phillip Browne reminding everyone how much money the IRFU make out of international rugby. He didn't talk about developing rugby in Romania. He didn't talk about governance. He talked about our money. Our unions are just as selfish as the clubs (not always a bad thing) but the difference is they are busy with international rugby as a priority and are only slowly embracing the club game below that. That is why you've had Romania involved in European comeptition every year since 1995 but are STILL somehow not good enough for a place at the ERC table. Why? Because they're a financial threat to the other minorities.

irishbucsfan · 24-09-2013 10:12PM

McCBrian wrote: »

ibf do you know what the 3rd tier consisted of?

The 32 team competition was an alternative to 20 as a bargaining tool for a continued 24 team tournament or increased representation than the PRL proposal in a 20 team competition (ie 4 teams dropped from Italy/Scotland/Ireland/Wales while the English and French keep all their teams)

Where did the ERC or any of the members propose the abolition of the Amlin never seen that

3rd tier is still proposed I believe.

I think there are different proposals. One was for a shortened 3rd tier competition of less teams which takes place before the start of the Amlin, with the finalists filling out the Amlin. I guess the other was just another concurrent comeptition but I haven't heard more about it,

That 32 team competition was including the scrapping of the Amlin. 12/10/10... I suppose there would actually be no teams left to take part in the Amlin anyway. It would be a really poor competition, the pools would be completely uneven.

bilston · 24-09-2013 10:15PM

Apologies if it's been brought up already but this thread is so big now I wouldn't even begin to look for this info but how much is the BT deal worth and how much is the Sky deal worth?

I think it might be £70m for BT and £40m for Sky but that is probably just specualtion. Anyway whatever it is would that per season or is that over a 3 or 4 year contract?

McCBrian · 24-09-2013 10:15PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

It could massively affect it actually. You can't be so certain. If rugby became widespread in Italy, it would be massive to have another big party interested in TV. Same as Russia. Hence the Russian "Saracens"

So your/PRL's idea to encourage the Italians to grow the game in Italy, is to join them RCC and reduce revenue currently 4.5M pa to 3.3M if the purported 70M is actually there

Italian teams currently get 4.5M from the ERC
Under the PRL proposal they would get (70M*.85/3/12*2) 70M less 15% for bonuses for making the knockout stages divided by the 3 leagues and then Rabo split it evenly between all Rabo teams (which you have stated on numerous occassions is the fair way) and because Italy have 2 teams multiply by 2 = 3.3M

How is this "everyone is better off going with us" under that scenario? Although PRL would be better off by C10M

irishbucsfan · 24-09-2013 10:21PM

McCBrian wrote: »

So your/PRL's idea to encourage the Italians to grow the game in Italy, is to join them RCC and reduce revenue currently 4.5M pa to 3.3M if the purported 70M is actually there

Italian teams currently get 4.5M from the ERC
Under the PRL proposal they would get (70M*.85/3/12*2) 70M less 15% for bonuses for making the knockout stages divided by the 3 leagues and then Rabo split it evenly between all Rabo teams (which you have stated on numerous occassions is the fair way) and because Italy have 2 teams multiply by 2 = 3.3M

How is this "everyone is better off going with us" under that scenario? Although PRL would be better off by C10M

Do you think throwing more money at Italian rugby would be the alternative answer to that?

I think it would lead to Zebre competing at a level they can win in Europe at, not lose game after game. And they'd have a domestic target (finishing above their Italian brethren) for the first time also. So that's an improvement on both fronts.

It's a start. I would say the next step would be telling the Celtic Nations to cop on and stop charging them money to take part in the Rabo if they want them to develop... and then they'll actually be better off by 1.8m!

irishbucsfan · 24-09-2013 10:22PM

bilston wrote: »

Apologies if it's been brought up already but this thread is so big now I wouldn't even begin to look for this info but how much is the BT deal worth and how much is the Sky deal worth?

I think it might be £70m for BT and £40m for Sky but that is probably just specualtion. Anyway whatever it is would that per season or is that over a 3 or 4 year contract?

It's per season, but it from the entire pot not just the Uk rights. It includes things like the proposed amount of this big new French contract I think? It's not a solid figure.

McCBrian · 24-09-2013 10:25PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

3rd tier is still proposed I believe. No mention of it in the RCC press releases and has not been mentioned in over a year

I think there are different proposals. One was for a shortened 3rd tier competition of less teams which takes place before the start of the Amlin, with the finalists filling out the Amlin. I guess the other was just another concurrent competition but I haven't heard more about it,It was for a 4 team tournament to be played in Aug/Sept and there was no guarantee of promotion to the Amlin. Your guess would be wrong on the concurrent competition

That 32 team competition was including the scrapping of the Amlin. 12/10/10... I suppose there would actually be no teams left to take part in the Amlin anyway. It would be a really poor competition, the pools would be completely uneven.As I said the 32 team comp was a bargaining tool, you have heard of compromise, PRL have compromised so far on nothing afaik

.

irishbucsfan · 24-09-2013 10:32PM

There are 2 different proposals for the 3rd tier tournament currently. Maybe you've heard of an older proposal. They absolutely don't know how many teams will be in it, are you talking of the proposal to the ERC last year?

It is certainly still proposed though. But obviously at the moment they're not going to include it in any press releases because they don't even have enough teams for 2 tiers!

Although according to that Welsh guy Simon Thomas (who is very pro ERC iirc) there are 2 welsh regions who are in "advanced negotiations" or "very interested." So my money has shifted from Scotland to Wales on being the first to break ranks if anyone does.

irishbucsfan · 24-09-2013 10:40PM

Saw this on another forum and laughed. If I made this my avatar would this thread explode?!

Edit: can't link to it

it's a picture of McCafferty!

McCBrian · 24-09-2013 10:47PM

bilston wrote: »

Apologies if it's been brought up already but this thread is so big now I wouldn't even begin to look for this info but how much is the BT deal worth and how much is the Sky deal worth?

I think it might be £70m for BT and £40m for Sky but that is probably just specualtion. Anyway whatever it is would that per season or is that over a 3 or 4 year contract?

Nobody knows Bilston
PRL have negotiated a £152M deal for 4 years domestic rights and 3 years of European exclusive rights
Sky have offered £72M for 3 years European rights
As PRL have not shown the split between Domestic and European monies to most of the other parties in the ERC it is all supposition
But lets say BT offered the same for AP rights as ESPN/SKY (even though they would have been negligant imho to not negotiate an increase), so that takes £72M out of the equation
Which leaves £80M over 3 years for Euro Rugby

Is a £2.67M pa increase worth it to the FIR/IRFU/WRU/SRU when they are being asked to give up 51.75% of not only the slightly increased BT money but all the other ancillaries sponsorship, revenue from SF's and Final etc

So the only ones to gain are RPL and LNR

Although things have moved on and monetary matters are of little consequence now. It is all to do with Control of the competition

.ak · 24-09-2013 11:01PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Saw this on another forum and laughed. If I made this my avatar would this thread explode?!

Edit: can't link to it it's a picture of McCafferty!

Do it.

McCBrian · 24-09-2013 11:08PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

There are 2 different proposals for the 3rd tier tournament currently. Maybe you've heard of an older proposal. They absolutely don't know how many teams will be in it, are you talking of the proposal to the ERC last year?

It is certainly still proposed though. But obviously at the moment they're not going to include it in any press releases because they don't even have enough teams for 2 tiers!

Although according to that Welsh guy Simon Thomas (who is very pro ERC iirc) there are 2 welsh regions who are in "advanced negotiations" or "very interested." So my money has shifted from Scotland to Wales on being the first to break ranks if anyone does.

So what are these proposals for the 3rd tier currently, that are still proposed as I have not seen any since the initial pronuncement

Oh you mean Simon Thomas the Welsh journalist who writes for the Western Mail and provides more objectively rather than being a puppet of the PRL media machine. Not seen anything from him saying the above but not on twitter. Can you provide the link for that assertion plus anything else he has said in the last 24hours to counterbalance

Phonehead · 24-09-2013 11:23PM

irishbucsfan can you please stop trying to play the fairness and equality for the poor Italians card. Do you honestly believe that the Premiership Businesses care at all about fairness and equality for anybody except for themselves?

Facts that you can't argue

1) Let's not bs about whose looking out for the little guy, the PRL is not and has no care for Italian rugby! and as for the PRO12 Unions... individually probably they don't care if they were guaranteed their revenue but because they are the small guys they need to pull together and that means by extension keeping the Italian Union happy.

2) PRL is purely business based, owners want returns and they also want to control the competitions they play in, they want control of all the marketing/TV and other associated revenue making decisions.

3) Please stop your nonsense about Premiership clubs doing a concern on it and trying to help out the poor Eastern Europeans... they are not Mother Teresa and it's all business orientated, pure talent pillage and foreign fan base tactics.

4) Is the current system fair and equitable to all parties, No because in a pure democracy we'd have the same amount of teams from each competition with every team there on domestic league merit! However Rugby is a marginal game and 4 Unions of the 6 in Europe do not have the domestic structures to have a professional game capable of competing with the Premiership and Top 14. Is asking the French and English to maybe chose ethics over business right.... well I don't know but I think the ethical one stands up to the greater good of the game debate.

5) Are the Premiership Clubs in a strong position here? NO and clearly if anyone looks at this from a business point of view this could backfire and leave them with just the rights to their domestic league and no doubt BT looking for a huge discount.

irishbucsfan · 24-09-2013 11:37PM

Phonehead wrote: »

1) Let's not bs about whose looking out for the little guy, the PRL is not and has no care for Italian rugby! and as for the PRO12 Unions... individually probably they don't care if they were guaranteed their revenue but because they are the small guys they need to pull together and that means by extension keeping the Italian Union happy.

Let's start with this one.

If the Celtic Unions care about Italian rugby then why do they charge them 3 million euro each year to take part in the Rabo Pro 12 while giving them none of the sponsorship money from the tournament and none of the existing tv money? (including the new Sky deal I believe).

Phonehead · 24-09-2013 11:42PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Let's start with this one.

If the Celtic Unions care about Italian rugby then why do they charge them 3 million euro each year to take part in the Rabo Pro 12 while giving them none of the sponsorship money from the tournament and none of the existing tv money? (including the new Sky deal I believe).

Well the English want to just do the same but by pushing them into some meaningless competitions - so stop with the entire one side good the other bad talk...
Plus where did I suggest that The charging was fair? you simply don't debate the points at hand! I'm debating the European Competiton not the Pro12 fairness.

irishbucsfan · 24-09-2013 11:47PM

Phonehead wrote: »

Well the English want to just do the same but by pushing them into some meaningless competitions - so stop with the entire one side good the other bad talk...

No the English absolutely do not want to do the same.

The English AND French want a competition where everyone receives the same amount from the pot but where qualification is by merit from the respective 3 leagues in Europe. If the Italians aren't strong enough to qualify for the top competition then they will play in the 2nd competition and receive whatever funding goes along with that, and that is the level they should be playing at if they can't qualify on their own merits anyway. They will probably receive less than they do now, but not nearly the amount that they are charged every year by Celtic nations.

I have never said that PRL are good while the Unions are bad (I think they're effectively the same). If you're going top say that again, I'd like you to point to a quote or something along those lines.

Phonehead · 24-09-2013 11:56PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

No the English absolutely do not want to do the same.

The English AND French want a competition where everyone receives the same amount from the pot but where qualification is by merit from the respective 3 leagues in Europe. If the Italians aren't strong enough to qualify for the top competition then they will play in the 2nd competition and receive whatever funding goes along with that, and that is the level they should be playing at if they can't qualify on their own merits anyway. They will probably receive less than they do now, but not nearly the amount that they are charged every year by Celtic nations.

I have never said that PRL are good while the Unions are bad (I think they're effectively the same). If you're going top say that again, I'd like you to point to a quote or something along those lines.

Once again you ignore the HUGE fact that the English Business Owners want Control and the money printing machine that goes along with it.... how you fail to see this is the main issue is beyond me

Premiership Rugby out of Heineken Cup?

Comments