Premiership Rugby out of Heineken Cup?

keps · 01-10-2013 02:37PM

The new agreement on a 'revised' Heineken Cup will be for at least 10 years and probably 12.

Ugo Monye spacecraft experience · 01-10-2013 02:39PM

Could it now be likely that the HC will be saved?

Winters · 01-10-2013 02:45PM

keps wrote: »

The new agreement on a 'revised' Heineken Cup will be for at least 10 years and probably 12.

I bloody hope so. Rugby can't be held to ransom like this every 5 years. Also, what else would we all talk about..?

LeinsterDub · 01-10-2013 02:47PM

Winters wrote: »

I bloody hope so. Rugby can't be held to ransom like this every 5 years. Also, what else would we all talk about..?

Sexton V Maddigan V PJ

The Rooster · 01-10-2013 02:48PM

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm not trying to make it sound like anything.

the BT deal is with a single member of the ERC.

The Sky deal is with the entire ERC.

Emmet, are you not missing the point that these deals only come into play after England has left the ERC?

So the BT is not with a single member of the ERC. Its with England who won't be in the ERC.

The Sky deal is indeed with the ERC. The entire ERC (i.e. Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Italy) and nothing at all to do with France or England as they've told both the ERC and Sky that they will no longer be part of the ERC when the deal commences.

The Rooster · 01-10-2013 02:50PM

rrpc wrote: »

It's from the launch of the ERC Cups today I think.

Interesting table
Union/League|Amount|%age
France/LNR|12.1m|27.9%
England/PRL|10.8m|24.9%
Ireland|6.6m|15.2%
Wales|4.9m|11.3%
Scotland|4.9m|11.3%
Italy|4.1m|9.4%
Total|43.9m|100%

Ugo Monye spacecraft experience wrote: »

So basically this whole fairness aspect of the argument is bull!?

So you think...

Rabo 47.2%
Top 14 27.9%
Premiership 24.9%

..is fair?

Ugo Monye spacecraft experience · 01-10-2013 02:52PM

The Rooster wrote: »

So you think...

Rabo 47.2%
Top 14 27.9%
Premiership 24.9%

..is fair?

I don't know what to think tbh, there are numbers above these that contradict those numbers..

Pudsy33 · 01-10-2013 02:52PM

The Rooster wrote: »

So you think...

Rabo 47.2%
Top 14 27.9%
Premiership 24.9%

..is fair?

Yes, you're not comparing like with like

Larbre34 · 01-10-2013 02:55PM

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Sexton V Maddigan V PJ

FYP

irishbucsfan · 01-10-2013 02:57PM

Ugo Monye spacecraft experience wrote: »

I don't know what to think tbh, there are numbers above these that contradict those numbers..

No there arent't.

The numbers above are absolutely nothing new. They are still subject to the:

24%
24%
16%
16%
11%
9%

split. These are just the figures AFTER the English and French clubs got their money for performance (6 quarter finalists, 3 semi finalists, 2 finalists, winner etc.).

The English and French are still splitting that money between 26 teams, while the Rabo teams are splitting their money between 12. So it's completely unbalanced.

Clearlier · 01-10-2013 02:58PM

Winters wrote: »

I read that as being the revenue is that and will change to 33% each. Leaving cert French eh?

You're right. I should have read more carefully. Basically partitions the revenue by league. Not the progressive solution I would look for. I see the 25 - 25 - 50 split as already generous to French and English but as (un)equally unprogressive. Still I don't imagine that there's much danger of long term thinking breaking out.

The Cliq are real · 01-10-2013 03:00PM

Guys how can a new comp go ahead with out the french unions approval???

I genuinely believe this is the clubs playing hard ball the celtic regions need to hold fast and the ERC need to stay in the FFR's good books,the french union just said last week that they would veto a new comp!!

irishbucsfan · 01-10-2013 03:00PM

Clearlier wrote: »

You're right. I should have read more carefully. Basically partitions the revenue by league. Not the progressive solution I would look for. I see the 25 - 25 - 50 split as already generous to French and English but as (un)equally unprogressive. Still I don't imagine that there's much danger of long term thinking breaking out.

It partitions the revenue so that every team in the "Amlin" and "Heineken Cup" will be receiving the exact same amount for participation so long as their Unions split the money the same way as they currently do.

EDIT: Actually Dragons and Connacht wouldn't under the current way the money is split.

Larbre34 · 01-10-2013 03:02PM

The Rooster wrote: »

Emmet, are you not missing the point that these deals only come into play after England has left the ERC?

So the BT is not with a single member of the ERC. Its with England who won't be in the ERC.

The Sky deal is indeed with the ERC. The entire ERC (i.e. Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Italy) and nothing at all to do with France or England as they've told both the ERC and Sky that they will no longer be part of the ERC when the deal commences.

No and no, the RFU and FFR are England and France. PR and LNR are flags of convenience that like trying to sell snake oil that they have no right to sell

irishbucsfan · 01-10-2013 03:05PM

Larbre34 wrote: »

No and no, the RFU and FFR are England and France. PR and LNR are flags of convenience that like trying to sell snake oil that they have no right to sell

RFU and FFR have also withdrawn from the ERC in writing

The Cliq are real · 01-10-2013 03:07PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

RFU and FFR have also withdrawn from the ERC in writing

Link please?,i have googled the hell out of the unions stance on this and i never read that.

The FFR are going against their clubs and support the ERC.

bilston · 01-10-2013 03:10PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

This is exactly the figures we already knew, post meritocracy payments. It's all been discussed before and is patently unfair as has also been pointed out before. Or can this thread go around in another circle?

Well to be fair IBF it's not hard to miss stuff on this thread it's so big!;)

The Rooster · 01-10-2013 03:10PM

Ugo Monye spacecraft experience wrote: »

I don't know what to think tbh, there are numbers above these that contradict those numbers..

Don't think there's any contradiction.

Just some different ways of looking at the stats.
If you split it between the 6 unions, then France and England are doing well.
If you split it between the 3 leagues, France and England are getting ripped off.

I think the latter is closer to the truth, which is the cause of all the current problems. Course you'd have to ask what were the French and English thinking when they signed the deal in the first place!!

.ak · 01-10-2013 03:10PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

RFU and FFR have also withdrawn from the ERC in writing

What, really? News to me.

bilston · 01-10-2013 03:12PM

.ak wrote: »

Who uses black/navy/dark blue/slightly less dark blue on a pie chart?!

This is why the ERC needs wound up, the quality of their pie charts!

The Cliq are real · 01-10-2013 03:15PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

RFU and FFR have also withdrawn from the ERC in writing

Link please???

If this is true its massive and finally the end of the story!

Cookiemunster · 01-10-2013 03:17PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

It partitions the revenue so that every team in the "Amlin" and "Heineken Cup" will be receiving the exact same amount for participation so long as their Unions split the money the same way as they currently do.

EDIT: Actually Dragons and Connacht wouldn't under the current way the money is split.

Is it not PRL rather than the RFU that decides how the money is split?

Clearlier · 01-10-2013 03:18PM

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

So it's over? Back to the ERC table, agree a couple of changes and on we go? BT deal dead and Prem clubs lose out?

It's a newspaper article - that's all. Can't put too much faith in it's accuracy. It's also important to point out that nobody can force the English (or French) clubs to play in the ERC. The IRB can however prevent the English clubs from creating a competition under their auspices. The articles in the French press suggests that they will do just this. It would be logical to expect the clubs to negotiate a deal with the ERC then but nothing is certain and they obviously have pulled out of the competition to the point of not competing for a year on a previous occasion.

irishbucsfan wrote: »

This is exactly the figures we already knew, post meritocracy payments. It's all been discussed before and is patently unfair as has also been pointed out before. Or can this thread go around in another circle?

irishbucsfan wrote: »

No there arent't.

The numbers above are absolutely nothing new. They are still subject to the:

24%
24%
16%
16%
11%
9%

split. These are just the figures AFTER the English and French clubs got their money for performance (6 quarter finalists, 3 semi finalists, 2 finalists, winner etc.).

The English and French are still splitting that money between 26 teams, while the Rabo teams are splitting their money between 12. So it's completely unbalanced.

irishbucsfan wrote: »

It partitions the revenue so that every team in the "Amlin" and "Heineken Cup" will be receiving the exact same amount for participation so long as their Unions split the money the same way as they currently do.

EDIT: Actually Dragons and Connacht wouldn't under the current way the money is split.

You've made enough posts on this thread and displayed enough awareness to know that there's fundamental disagreement at the assumption level here which drives this. It's disingenuous not to acknowledge that disagreement however much you dislike it. To be clear - many of us think that revenues should be distributed at union level. You think that it should be distributed at club level. We can get into a few levels of detail but fundamentally it boils down to one side thinking that the competition should be controlled and run by the unions and the other thinking that it should be controlled and run by the clubs. There are diverging motives driving these beliefs that are not necessarily in conflict at a lower level but there's no argument that can be won - merely appeals made to fundamental beliefs.

I believe that the game as a whole will be better if the unions control all competitions. You (correct me if I'm wrong) believe that it's only fair that the clubs should control and get the full benefits from the competition. No argument/appeal you have put forward has persuaded me otherwise and I don't think that it's any great stretch to suggest that nothing I have said has changed your mind on this issue.

irishbucsfan · 01-10-2013 03:25PM

The Cliq are real wrote: »

Link please???

If this is true its massive and finally the end of the story!

It's not a new story, PRL are in the ERC on behalf of the RFU. Them withdrawing is the same thing as the RFU and PRL are linked by their 2007 agreement.

The Cliq are real · 01-10-2013 03:26PM

https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&ved=0CDUQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.scotsman.com%2Fsport%2Frugby%2Flatest%2Fheineken-cup-breakaway-labelled-irrelevant-by-ffr-1-3106448&ei=dtpKUpDwIZKQ7Aaq6IG4DA&usg=AFQjCNG7Ucm-ix76xfhGMZrugbR43_RaMw&bvm=bv.53371865,d.ZGU

heineken cup ''break away'' labelled irrelevant by FFR.

This is just media hype and scare tactics by the clubs. the french cant leave its just that simple.

The Cliq are real · 01-10-2013 03:29PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

It's not a new story, PRL are in the ERC on behalf of the RFU. Them withdrawing is the same thing as the RFU and PRL are linked by their 2007 agreement.

Ah man thats not the same at all.

.ak · 01-10-2013 03:48PM

There is an RFU rep on the ERC panel, stand alone from the PRL?

irishbucsfan · 01-10-2013 03:58PM

Clearlier wrote: »

You've made enough posts on this thread and displayed enough awareness to know that there's fundamental disagreement at the assumption level here which drives this. It's disingenuous not to acknowledge that disagreement however much you dislike it. To be clear - many of us think that revenues should be distributed at union level. You think that it should be distributed at club level. We can get into a few levels of detail but fundamentally it boils down to one side thinking that the competition should be controlled and run by the unions and the other thinking that it should be controlled and run by the clubs. There are diverging motives driving these beliefs that are not necessarily in conflict at a lower level but there's no argument that can be won - merely appeals made to fundamental beliefs.

I believe that the game as a whole will be better if the unions control all competitions. You (correct me if I'm wrong) believe that it's only fair that the clubs should control and get the full benefits from the competition. No argument/appeal you have put forward has persuaded me otherwise and I don't think that it's any great stretch to suggest that nothing I have said has changed your mind on this issue.

I don't think at all that Clubs should decide how the money is dispersed domestically. I think it's good that the Unions have that control, and realistically the Unions will always ultimately control that and would still control it under the new competition given their approval would be needed.

My problem is giving Premiership Rugby and Ligue Nationale de Rugby the same amount to split between 26 clubs as the Rabo Unions are splitting between 12 clubs, and then pretending the difference is the leagues' fault for splitting the money up wrong. When the difference is the ERC's fault for promising so many average Celtic teams Heineken Cup rugby every year.

rrpc · 01-10-2013 04:06PM

irishbucsfan wrote: »

My problem is giving Premiership Rugby and Ligue Nationale de Rugby the same amount to split between 26 clubs as the Rabo Unions are splitting between 12 clubs, and then pretending the difference is the leagues' fault for splitting the money up wrong. When the difference is the ERC's fault for promising so many average Celtic teams Heineken Cup rugby every year.

Since the decision on splitting the money is solely in the gift of the leagues/unions concerned, there's no other way of describing it other than in the way you say is 'pretending'.

And it's not a given that the Rabo clubs split it solely in the Rabo. The IRFU do not give out the money received from the ERC pro rata to the provinces. I'm also not sure the SRU do either and I'm not sure what exactly the Welsh or Italians do.

irishbucsfan · 01-10-2013 04:07PM

rrpc wrote: »

Since the decision on splitting the money is solely in the gift of the leagues/unions concerned, there's no other way of describing it other than in the way you say is 'pretending'.

And it's not a given that the Rabo clubs split it solely in the Rabo. The IRFU do not give out the money received from the ERC pro rata to the provinces. I'm also not sure the SRU do either and I'm not sure what exactly the Welsh or Italians do.

So what you're saying is that it's the Leagues fault that 24/12 is less than 52/12?

Premiership Rugby out of Heineken Cup?

Comments