Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The European club rugby debacle continues part IV: the quest for peace

Options
24567…55

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 41,104 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    would it be too much trouble to add a little footnote, or in brackets beside the specific union, rep body etc.. of the names of the main people who are players here?

    for example:

    PRL - Premiership Rugby Limited (Mike McCafferty)


    ???


  • Options
    #33
    Larbre34
    Registered Users Posts: 23,849 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    So whatever the outcome is about to be, let the accord be all inclusive, let it be comprehensive, let it set European Rugby on the path of a 1,000 Year Rei....never mind...


  • Options
    #34
    irishbucsfan
    Registered Users Posts: 37,978 ✭✭✭✭irishbucsfan


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Except, if like he says, as head of the RFU he signed 'a participation agreement' with the clubs that is ongoing.

    So unless he's definitely lying, he's massively relevant.

    That you personally have come to the conclusion that he is lying, without anyone of substance (RFU or PRL) ever publicly refuting his statements, is what is irrelevant here. That is a question of faith, as opposed to anything tangible.

    Why is he the only one saying anything like this and why has no one paid him any notice whatsoever? Commenting on his claims just gives him more relevancy. He has a terrible reputation in England and the likes of Beaumont would have no trouble coming out to back him up if they considered him to have any legitimacy whatsoever.

    I can understand people believing him if they are unaware of who he is, or his background, based on the previous positions he held, I suppose.


  • Options
    #35
    irishbucsfan
    Registered Users Posts: 37,978 ✭✭✭✭irishbucsfan


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    would it be too much trouble to add a little footnote, or in brackets beside the specific union, rep body etc.. of the names of the main people who are players here?

    for example:

    PRL - Premiership Rugby Limited (Mike McCafferty)


    ???

    The main problem with doing that is that they continually change!


  • Options
    #36
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    irishbucsfan wrote: »
    Why is he the only one saying anything like this and why has no one paid him any notice whatsoever? Commenting on his claims just gives him more relevancy. He has a terrible reputation in England and the likes of Beaumont would have no trouble coming out to back him up if they considered him to have any legitimacy whatsoever.

    I can understand people believing him if they are unaware of who he is, or his background, based on the previous positions he held, I suppose.

    He was invited to speak in the BBC Scrum V debate, he made those claims on a National broadcast by the National Broadcaster.

    Surely the RFU would be looking for their €85k damages if there's absolutely not a drop of truth behind it?

    Why was he allowed make the same claim twice, more than 6 months apart, on a National Broadcast (first on BBC.co.uk) without being called up on it?
    For some comparison, look at the speed in which Roger Lewis responded to the Osprey's CEO's radio interview (one day).


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


    Deleted User wrote: »
    He was invited to speak in the BBC Scrum V debate, he made those claims on a National broadcast by the National Broadcaster.

    Surely the RFU would be looking for their €85k damages if there's absolutely not a drop of truth behind it?

    Why was he allowed make the same claim twice, more than 6 months apart, on a National Broadcast (first on BBC.co.uk) without being called up on it?
    For some comparison, look at the speed in which Roger Lewis responded to the Osprey's CEO's radio interview (one day).

    The BBC are a media outlet like any other, particularly when it comes to sports broadcasting.

    If Martyn Thomas' claims were true, the landscape would be very different to what it is at the moment. I think people can use their own judgement to view the complete lack of credibility the things he's said have been offered. It's madness, or wishful thinking, to include it in a breakdown of the current state of affairs between the RFU and PRL.

    If Martyn Thomas was the CEO of a club, or even remotely employable at all, then maybe someone like Roger Lewis might have responded to the things he's been saying since he was disposed of.


  • Options
    #38
    thomond2006
    Registered Users Posts: 45,433 ✭✭✭✭thomond2006


    irishbucsfan wrote: »
    Why is he the only one saying anything like this and why has no one paid him any notice whatsoever? Commenting on his claims just gives him more relevancy. He has a terrible reputation in England and the likes of Beaumont would have no trouble coming out to back him up if they considered him to have any legitimacy whatsoever.

    I can understand people believing him if they are unaware of who he is, or his background, based on the previous positions he held, I suppose.

    What has he said that makes you not believe/trust him?


  • Options
    #39
    ArmaniJeanss
    Registered Users Posts: 13,314 ✭✭✭✭ArmaniJeanss


    This link from the last page of the first thread (thread 1 of 4 as we will call it someday) was interesting for having another reference to the £2.5M/€3 Italy->CelticNations payment being a yearly charge for the last few seasons, not just a once-off warranty. A few people reckoned in the previous thread that it was just a one-off.
    http://www.walesonline.co.uk/sport/rugby/rugby-news/heineken-cup-peace-deal-moves-6692617


  • Options
    #40
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    irishbucsfan wrote: »
    The BBC are a media outlet like any other, particularly when it comes to sports broadcasting.

    If Martyn Thomas' claims were true, the landscape would be very different to what it is at the moment. I think people can use their own judgement to view the complete lack of credibility the things he's said have been offered. It's madness, or wishful thinking, to include it in a breakdown of the current state of affairs between the RFU and PRL.

    If Martyn Thomas was the CEO of a club, or even remotely employable at all, then maybe someone like Roger Lewis might have responded to the things he's been saying since he was disposed of.

    Not sure if you missed my reference to the €85k. National broadcasters have to be very careful, they are not akin to any media outlet.

    Also Martyn Thomas was Head of the RFU when the last agreement was signed. Not a journalist covering the agreement, he would have been implicitly involved in the minutiae. If he's wrong, or lying (as you are suggesting) someone else who was involved might be best pressed to comment.
    Until they do, I completely reserve the right to mention it as a potential battleground. Feel free to ignore that, but if you wan't me to remove it, I'll require something more tangible than a character assassination.


  • Options
    #41
    irishbucsfan
    Registered Users Posts: 37,978 ✭✭✭✭irishbucsfan


    thomond2006 wrote: »
    What has he said that makes you not believe/trust him?

    Well he's done plenty since he oversaw a clusterf*ck at the RFU while he was in charge, but in this case he is claiming that the Premiership Clubs are locked into the ERC next season and also that they didn't have the rights under the LTA to do various things that they've been doing with no obstruction from the RFU.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    English Lurker
    Registered Users Posts: 609 ✭✭✭English Lurker


    irishbucsfan wrote: »
    The BBC are a media outlet like any other, particularly when it comes to sports broadcasting.

    If Martyn Thomas' claims were true, the landscape would be very different to what it is at the moment. I think people can use their own judgement to view the complete lack of credibility the things he's said have been offered. It's madness, or wishful thinking, to include it in a breakdown of the current state of affairs between the RFU and PRL.

    If Martyn Thomas was the CEO of a club, or even remotely employable at all, then maybe someone like Roger Lewis might have responded to the things he's been saying since he was disposed of.

    I don't think this is true.

    The RFU clearly don't want to antagonise PRL and there are several things they could have done to try and force them into line which they haven't. That is the landscape. I don't find it inconsistent with the idea that the RFU could legally force PRL to stay in the Heineken Cup for another year but would prefer not to.


  • Options
    #43
    rrpc
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,244 ✭✭✭rrpc


    irishbucsfan wrote: »
    Well he's done plenty since he oversaw a clusterf*ck at the RFU while he was in charge, but in this case he is claiming that the Premiership Clubs are locked into the ERC next season and also that they didn't have the rights under the LTA to do various things that they've been doing with no obstruction from the RFU.
    obstruction???

    They certainly did some things that they didn't have the rights to under the LTA. Signing a 'domestic' TV deal for a season beyond the expiry of the LTA being one of them.


  • Options
    #44
    Podge_irl
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,605 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    English Lurker wrote: »
    I don't think this is true.

    The RFU clearly don't want to antagonise PRL and there are several things they could have done to try and force them into line which they haven't. That is the landscape. I don't find it inconsistent with the idea that the RFU could legally force PRL to stay in the Heineken Cup for another year but would prefer not to.

    I'd agree with that.

    The RFU know they'll face this problem sooner or later, even if they can force PRL to compete in the HEC for another season (or even a couple) they'll simply face the same problem with considerable more animosity between the two sides at a later date.


  • Options
    #45
    irishbucsfan
    Registered Users Posts: 37,978 ✭✭✭✭irishbucsfan


    rrpc wrote: »
    obstruction???

    They certainly did some things that they didn't have the rights to under the LTA. Signing a 'domestic' TV deal for a season beyond the expiry of the LTA being one of them.

    Where does it say they can't do that in the LTA, and if it does, how do you know the BT Contract's final year is not subject to the extension of the LTA?


  • Options
    #46
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    For reference.

    http://www.rfu.com/news/2007/november/news%20articles/rfuandprlsignneweightyearagreement

    Regarding Thomas' dates, an 8 year agreement from 1st July 2008 would certainly suggest that PRL are bound by RFU.

    This also worth a look.
    http://www.premiershiprugby.com/downloads/PRLTermsto_RFU270307.pdf


  • Options
    #47
    Neil3030
    Registered Users Posts: 17,016 ✭✭✭✭Neil3030


    Thanks emmet02 for the recap. When part three opens I'll pop back in again :pac:


  • Options
    #48
    thomond2006
    Registered Users Posts: 45,433 ✭✭✭✭thomond2006


    Will Part V be called The Empire Strikes Back?


  • Options
    #49
    LeinsterDub
    Registered Users Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    thomond2006 wrote: »
    Will Part V be called The Empire Strikes Back?

    Only if you agree to type it like this The Empire Strikes Back


  • Options
    #50
    [Jackass]
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,193 ✭✭✭[Jackass]


    I don't know why, but I just have a feeling that after all the drama, everything next season will be the same, same Pro12, same AP, same T14 and the only thing may be no English in the Heineken Cup for a season.


  • Options
    #51
    rrpc
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,244 ✭✭✭rrpc


    irishbucsfan wrote: »
    Where does it say they can't do that in the LTA, and if it does, how do you know the BT Contract's final year is not subject to the extension of the LTA?
    Why do I have to prove what it doesn't say in the LTA? Or for that matter what's in the BT contract?

    The RFU said it was outside the scope of the LTA, is that not good enough for you?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    Dave_The_Sheep
    Registered Users Posts: 7,337 ✭✭✭Dave_The_Sheep


    [Jackass] wrote: »
    I don't know why, but I just have a feeling that after all the drama, everything next season will be the same, same Pro12, same AP, same T14 and the only thing may be no English in the Heineken Cup for a season.

    Wishful thinking, perhaps. It's what I'd like to happen.

    I just hope things haven't gone too far and there's too much ****e thrown around.


  • Options
    #53
    .ak
    Registered Users Posts: 30,308 Mod ✭✭✭✭.ak


    I actually think that as well. Nothing will happen, apart from no English in the HEC ala 1999.


  • Options
    #54
    connemara man
    Moderators, Sports Moderators, Regional West Moderators Posts: 6,773 Mod ✭✭✭✭connemara man


    There will be a Heineken cup outside the ERC scope so that way tv deals can be worked around I'd say


  • Options
    #55
    English Lurker
    Registered Users Posts: 609 ✭✭✭English Lurker


    I think we'll be there tbh. The only issue is the TV deal and that could either be compromised away, or it could be agreed that a new governing body means new TV contracts and the BT one can be used. Something will get sorted. There's not much advantage to sitting a season out for PRL and not much for anyone else in us doing it. So they'll fudge something together.


  • Options
    #56
    Swiwi.
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,415 ✭✭✭Swiwi.


    thomond2006 wrote: »
    Will Part V be called The Empire Strikes Back?

    Whatever it's called, don't let Jar Jar Binks anywhere near the rugby forum please.


  • Options
    #57
    justsomebloke
    Registered Users Posts: 10,407 ✭✭✭✭justsomebloke


    thomond2006 wrote: »
    Will Part V be called The Empire Strikes Back?

    nah we'e going with RCC trek VI: the undiscovered competition, at least then we are in a franchise that has had a successful reboot


  • Options
    #58
    TheGoldenAges
    Registered Users Posts: 1,163 ✭✭✭TheGoldenAges


    And part VI can be "The Final Showdown".


  • Options
    #59
    Grandpa Hassan
    Registered Users Posts: 1,945 ✭✭✭Grandpa Hassan


    English Lurker wrote: »
    I think we'll be there tbh. The only issue is the TV deal and that could either be compromised away, or it could be agreed that a new governing body means new TV contracts and the BT one can be used. Something will get sorted. There's not much advantage to sitting a season out for PRL and not much for anyone else in us doing it. So they'll fudge something together.

    And neither Sky nor BT will want to be seen as the final insurmountable obstacle, so if it comes down to it I have absolutely no doubt that they will come to an agreement between each other


  • Options
    #60
    Winters
    Registered Users Posts: 14,761 ✭✭✭✭Winters


    An update from Gerry

    http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/mood-music-between-warring-factions-appears-to-be-more-pleasing-to-ears-1.1686706


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    LeinsterDub
    Registered Users Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    Swiwi. wrote: »
    Whatever it's called, don't let Jar Jar Binks anywhere near the rugby forum please.
    Messa think the train is leaving the station.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement