Premiership Rugby out of Heineken Cup?

27-09-2013 02:29PM

Eponymous wrote: »

If that clause in the BT deal is true, then maybe the Pro 12 should go to BT and say "Hey, we have a competition involving four tier one nations".

Two more than the PRL and LNR have.

A lot is being made of the four union thing, and while it might go a long way to explaining the increasingly erratic behaviour of McCafferty and co, it's not massively relevant.

Regardless of what is stipulated in the BT agreement, a cup involving just English and French teams will be a non runner commercially anyway. It will be far less financially lucrative than the current Heineken cup and it would be struggle for mindshare amongst rugby fans.

irishbucsfan · 27-09-2013 02:33PM

The BT contract also includes a clause that says no matches can be played on a full moon. This is due to Nigel Wray being a werewolf.

irishbucsfan · 27-09-2013 02:35PM

rrpc wrote: »

You really do swallow everything that comes out of these people's mouths as if it was written in stone.

They say it was their lawyers, that could just be a convenient excuse.

But if we're to take it at face value, then it's very worrying if lawyers are advising their clients along these lines. You have to then think of the reasons why this would be prudent or necessary.

I can think of a few, I've drawn attention to them on this thread as have others.

It could be a convenient excuse. Which is why I said the word supposedly.

molloyjh · 27-09-2013 02:42PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

This is due to Nigel Wray being a werewolf.

Winters · 27-09-2013 02:43PM

I've a solution..

Based on the 6, 6, 8 model or the 6, 6, 6 + 2 model.

If the clubs that play in the Heineken Cup all receive €1 million each and €500,000 for the Amlin teams.

Meritocracy payments would be seperate.

Then any additional revenue is split equal ways amongst the 6 shareholders to divide however they wish.

Rip up all all the ERC contracts and go out to tender again.

Eponymous · 27-09-2013 02:43PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

The BT contract also includes a clause that says no matches can be played on a full moon. This is due to Nigel Wray being a werewolf.

Where is the evidence that he is a werewolf?

I need links to credible articles!

rrpc · 27-09-2013 02:49PM

Eponymous wrote: »

Where is the evidence that he is a werewolf?

I need links to credible articles!

This do?

elguapo · 27-09-2013 02:50PM

Whatever way this shakes out, the utter arrogance of some of the English club reps has been nauseating.
They can pontificate about promoting rugby all they want, they really couldn't give a s**t about anyone else.
Nothing more than contemptible schoolyard bullies.

irishbucsfan · 27-09-2013 02:59PM

Winters wrote: »

I've a solution..

Based on the 6, 6, 8 model or the 6, 6, 6 + 2 model.

If the clubs that play in the Heineken Cup all receive €1 million each and €500,000 for the Amlin teams.

Meritocracy payments would be seperate.

Then any additional revenue is split equal ways amongst the 6 shareholders to divide however they wish.

Rip up all all the ERC contracts and go out to tender again.

That's a very long way from being a compromise! If the pot was 70m, that'd mean the SRU would be splitting a minimum of 8.17m between their 2 clubs (4m each) while the IRFU would (assuming 2 teams in HEC and 2 in ECC) be splitting 9.67 between 4 (2.4m each). And PRL teams would be just over 1m each. So not a compromise in any way at all.

Just use the 6, 6, 8 model or the 6, 6, 6 + 2 model and continue to split the money based on participation. That's an effective way of splitting the money and it's a good compromise.

Mal-Adjusted · 27-09-2013 03:09PM

Eponymous wrote: »

Where is the evidence that he is a werewolf?

I need links to credible articles!

They don't say he isn't a werewolf. isn't that all the evidence you need!?

who_me · 27-09-2013 03:10PM

So what compromises would people be willing to consider, in order to get this resolved?

Personally, I don't care if the ERC runs the 'next Euro competition'. The HEC has been a massive success, but the ERC is just a company set up by the Unions to run it. If it's club or Union run, it doesn't bother me.

There certainly seems to be a lot of potential for increased revenue from TV deals, particularly in England* and France. Given how the PRL - BT Sports deal has been handled I can't see THAT deal remaining in place; but I wouldn't have a problem with a new BT Sports deal if it was inclusive.

If the total revenue increased sufficiently, I think it would be fine if the nations which are contributing less, receiving a smaller cut. Not drastically smaller, but smaller. Their income could still be greater, even if the percentage they receive is smaller.

However, some things I couldn't accept:

A strict meritocratic setup which benefits the stronger sides over the weaker.

Any system which ring-fences 6 places for English and French clubs but where the other nations have no guaranteed participation (or just 1).

Any system where England or France have equal voting power to the other 4 Unions combined.

rrpc · 27-09-2013 03:14PM

who_me wrote: »

So what compromises would people be willing to consider, in order to get this resolved?

Personally, I don't care if the ERC runs the 'next Euro competition'. The HEC has been a massive success, but the ERC is just a company set up by the Unions to run it. If it's club or Union run, it doesn't bother me.

It would bother me very greatly if it were club run. I don't care who the clubs are or how pretty their clubhouse, you just have to look at what the clubs have done so far to shudder at the thought.

irishbucsfan · 27-09-2013 03:17PM

rrpc wrote: »

It would bother me very greatly if it were club run. I don't care who the clubs are or how pretty their clubhouse, you just have to look at what the clubs have done so far to shudder at the thought.

Please give an example of what they would do, something that is currently within the scope of the ERC.

I think there are people out there (not you) who think the ERC is like UEFA and governs the sport in Europe. It's not the case.

danthefan · 27-09-2013 03:17PM

I also don't think it should be club run. Self interest will take precedence over anything else imo, and I don't see how the English set up with private clubs and the Irish setup with the IRFU in control could mesh well.

Winters · 27-09-2013 03:19PM

rrpc wrote: »

It would bother me very greatly if it were club run. I don't care who the clubs are or how pretty their clubhouse, you just have to look at what the clubs have done so far to shudder at the thought.

Agree 100% with you rrpc.

irishbucsfan · 27-09-2013 03:49PM

Personally, ultimately, I'm not too pushed on how it's controlled. If the clubs want to control their own competition and the Unions are happy to approve it then that's fine. Even if the clubs control their own European competition they will always be accountable to the Unions involved and I don't think people realise that.

I would like to see coefficiency decide participation, however that seems unlikely so 6 places minimum across the 3 leagues. I wouldn't mind if 2 extra spots were given to the Pro 12 but I'd prefer them to go to the winners of the competitions.

The money should be split based on participation. I'd like to see the French and English confirm in writing that they will continue to split their money across their leagues as they currently are. And I would like to see the Pro 12 undertake that approach as well. (I'd also like the Celtic nations to stop charging the FIR 3m per year to play in the Rabo). After that all the 38 participants will be equally funded so I can't see a problem with that. If you want to give the votes for each nation to their Union to decide what to do with them then I'd be very happy with that.

I'd like to see the 3rd tier competition funded out of the main pot. And I'd like to see some form of accommodation for the FIRA countries in the governance of the whole thing. Overall I think it'd be a good idea to have 40 "votes," 38 from the leagues and 2 from FIRA to begin with.

who_me · 27-09-2013 03:57PM

danthefan wrote: »

I also don't think it should be club run. Self interest will take precedence over anything else imo, and I don't see how the English set up with private clubs and the Irish setup with the IRFU in control could mesh well.

I think self-interest has been the order of the day anyway. I think the only question is whether it'll be club or Union self-interest.

molloyjh · 27-09-2013 04:13PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

That's a very long way from being a compromise! If the pot was 70m, that'd mean the SRU would be splitting a minimum of 8.17m between their 2 clubs (4m each) while the IRFU would (assuming 2 teams in HEC and 2 in ECC) be splitting 9.67 between 4 (2.4m each). And PRL teams would be just over 1m each. So not a compromise in any way at all.

Just use the 6, 6, 8 model or the 6, 6, 6 + 2 model and continue to split the money based on participation. That's an effective way of splitting the money and it's a good compromise.

Thing is if the PRL could bring their skills at getting TV deals etc to bear within the confines of the ERC this whole thing could be so much more palatable to everyone.

I also think that the financial distribution could be far more dynamic and could include the Amlin sides based on what Winter is saying. So say for example the Amlin sides get 50% of what the HEC sides get and we base the 6/6/8 on the 12/13 standings in the Pro12 (and the 70m figure is what is split between the participants):

|HEC|Amlin|Share of Revenue|Total Revenue|Per Team|Per HEC Team|Per Amlin Team
English|6|6|30.00%|21.00|1.75|2.33|1.17
French|6|8|33.33%|23.33|1.67|2.33|1.17
Irish|4|0|13.33%|9.33|2.33|2.33|0
Welsh|2|2|10.00%|7.00|1.75|2.33|1.17
Scottish|1|1|5.00%|3.50|1.75|2.33|1.17
Italian|1|3|8.33%|5.83|1.46|2.33|1.17

The "Per Team" figure would be if the Union decided to split the money evenly between their sides (as the RFU/PRL do) while the "Per HEC Team" and "Per Amlin Team" figures work for where the money gets split based on competition. In 12/13 Connacht would have qualified on their own by coming 8th. However if the following season Cardiff came 8th and Connacht 9th the WRU would get an extra 1.17m at the IRFUs expense:

|HEC|Amlin|Share of Revenue|Total Revenue|Per Team|Per HEC Team|Per Amlin Team
English|6|6|30.00%|21.00|1.75|2.33|1.17
French|6|8|33.33%|23.33|1.67|2.33|1.17
Irish|3|1|11.67%|8.17|2.04|2.33|1.17
Welsh|3|1|11.67%|8.17|2.04|2.33|1.17
Scottish|1|1|5.00%|3.50|1.75|2.33|1.17
Italian|1|3|8.33%|5.83|1.46|2.33|1.17

So (in this example) it would be very much in the Welsh interests to be competitive in the Pro12 as the more competitive they are the greater reward they get from the HEC. Rather than giving a flat amount to the Pro12 and getting them to divide it up, this could actually add a massive amount to the league.

And COS would be happy too because instead of 400k he'd be getting (at worst) 1.75m to (at best) Trevisos 2.33m. And the only source for the differences here would be based on how they decided to split their revenue internally.

Obviously this is all based on a 70m pot, and I don't think you could apply this to anything less than a 50-55m pot really....

Winters · 27-09-2013 04:31PM

Every thread needs a good table!

irishbucsfan · 27-09-2013 04:32PM

I think the French and English would be happy with that after some negotiation.

I don't think you'll see 3 Italian sides in the Amlin. And no way FIR are going to start giving their Super 10 sides that money! But that would be my only quibble.

I still think I'd prefer Rabi teams to share their money for the sake of the Scots and Italians. But the financial incentive is a good reason not to do it.

themont85 · 27-09-2013 04:34PM

My preference is for:

7 Pro 12 with 1 from each Union guaranteed
5 Premiership
5 Top 14

1 spot to be played between the sixth ranked teams between England and France. (The logistics of this are a nightmare I know, only if it works)

2 spots for Heineken/Amlin winners.

It's a win win imo. The French want less teams. We get a more competitive Rabo and Amlin.

Revenues would have to remain guaranteed. It has to be a Union comp. Something like minimum baselines for each Union with extras based on the more teams you provide. This would provide an incentive for Scottish and Italian rugby to sort out their professional base but also give them security.

Radioheader · 27-09-2013 04:41PM

Could the ERC not blow the English out of the water by stating now how far they are willing to compromise. I don't think we have heard this yet. I know it is showing their hand, but it could win the PR battle for them hands down. At the moment there are two extremes at play - the current comp and the proposed comp. If the ERC showed how far they bent over backwards to accomodate the English it could be a strong hand to play; given the quagmire we are in anyhow.

rrpc · 27-09-2013 04:43PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Please give an example of what they would do, something that is currently within the scope of the ERC.

They've overspent massively. As an example, Saracens have made a whopping 75% loss last year. Maybe that's not why they're after more money from Europe, but it's a very straight line for me.

What would they do? Well they're doing it right now. What happens if that all goes pear shaped and they need more money?

irishbucsfan · 27-09-2013 04:49PM

rrpc wrote: »

They've overspent massively. As an example, Saracens have made a whopping 75% loss last year. Maybe that's not why they're after more money from Europe, but it's a very straight line for me.

What would they do? Well they're doing it right now. What happens if that all goes pear shaped and they need more money?

And Saracens have moved into their own ground. I don't like Wray at all but I do like Sarries fans and they seem happy. They've finally sorted out a ground and they're marketing themselves in the local area and they seem to me to be moving in the right direction as a club. They're delivering on the pitch now as well.

But I still don't see exactly what you're saying they would do. What changes are you saying they would implement? Remember it would still need to be approved by the majority of participants.

themont85 · 27-09-2013 04:49PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I think the French and English would be happy with that after some negotiation.

I don't think you'll see 3 Italian sides in the Amlin. And no way FIR are going to start giving their Super 10 sides that money! But that would be my only quibble.

I still think I'd prefer Rabi teams to share their money for the sake of the Scots and Italians. But the financial incentive is a good reason not to do it.

They won't negotiate with a mediator even.

The PRL need the ERC to collapse.

Leaks to The Scotsman for example, said the SRU and Pro12 were willing to look at qualification but couldn't handle a major reduction in cash.

themont85 · 27-09-2013 04:51PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

And Saracens have moved into their own ground. I don't like Wray at all but I do like Sarries fans and they seem happy. They've finally sorted out a ground and they're marketing themselves in the local area and they seem to me to be moving in the right direction as a club. They're delivering on the pitch now as well.

But I still don't see exactly what you're saying they would do. What changes are you saying they would implement? Remember it would still need to be approved by the majority of participants.

A 10k capacity ground.

A real show of strength from a financial and well supported powerhouse.

Winters · 27-09-2013 04:53PM

rrpc wrote: »

They've overspent massively. As an example, Saracens have made a whopping 75% loss last year. Maybe that's not why they're after more money from Europe, but it's a very straight line for me.

What would they do? Well they're doing it right now. What happens if that all goes pear shaped and they need more money?

Good point. If they aren't able to balance the books when 80% of their revenue comes from PRL then the Rugby Champions Cup isn't the solution.

Inflation of wages is another.

Player welfare is also a huge issue.

Lack of home grown players in the AP and Top14 clubs. If only they put more time, effort and trust into their academies rather than signing foreigners.

molloyjh · 27-09-2013 05:00PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I think the French and English would be happy with that after some negotiation.

I don't think you'll see 3 Italian sides in the Amlin. And no way FIR are going to start giving their Super 10 sides that money! But that would be my only quibble.

I still think I'd prefer Rabi teams to share their money for the sake of the Scots and Italians. But the financial incentive is a good reason not to do it.

How would you make up the Amlin numbers so? There would be 2 spots left to fill in it assuming you're going for a 20 team tournament.

I also think the financial incentive is important as a driver for league performance. Imagine Cardiff came over to Dublin with the sort of attitude they showed last year if there was £1m on the line for the WRU? Nevermind that it could convince the Scots that if they took the league a bit more seriously (and didn't pull internationals out in the build up to RWCs) they could earn money for doing it.

Winters · 27-09-2013 05:01PM

Jeff Probyn you beaut. Bookmark this lads, an inspired read.

http://www.therugbypaper.co.uk/features/columnists/jeff-probyn/11120/jeff-probyn-money-is-not-the-root-of-all-success-in-europe/

rrpc · 27-09-2013 05:02PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

But I still don't see exactly what you're saying they would do. What changes are you saying they would implement? Remember it would still need to be approved by the majority of participants.

That's the current system too. But look what's happened. They've just basically pulled the plug and walked away because they can't get their agenda pushed through.

But what you've got when you've a club run competition with no external oversight is a race to the bottom. We had exactly that happen in the banking system here.

Premiership Rugby out of Heineken Cup?

Comments