The English Big Four

I should start this piece by saying I have no real allegiances to any top level club.

In the last week, Saracens have signed a Wasps academy product in Billy Vunipola and Northampton have signed a London Irish academy product in Alex Corbisiero. Vunipola, 20, has represented England Under 20s, has been called up to the England Saxons EPS and is currently training with the Senior Squad to cover injuries. Corbisiero, 24, has represented the England senior team a number of times. Both moves pleased me. Here, we have two young England players moving from clubs who this season both competed in the Amlin Challenge Cup to clubs who have competed in the Heineken Cup in the last few seasons, and look set to do so again. Surely it's best to have our best young players playing for teams that are regularly competing in the play-offs and in the Heineken Cup?

Which got me thinking, are we on the verge of an English Big Four? Looking at the last few years domestically:

Leicester: 5 final appearances in the last 5 years, culminating in 2 Championships. Heineken Cup qualification every year.
Saracens: Not much to shout about in 2008 or 2009, but in the last 3 years they have been in the play-offs each year, getting to the final twice and winning once.
Harlequins: Heineken Cup qualification in 4 of the last 5 years and two top 4 finishes. They've won 1 Championship, the most recent one in 2012.
Northampton: Qualified for the Heineken Cup in their first year back in the Premiership by virtue of winning the Amlin, have appeared in the semi-finals of the Premiership each year since then.

It comes as little surprise to me that these 4 teams are all currently in the top 5 of the Premiership (including 1, 2 and 3) - and this is all while showing good performances in the Heineken Cup (Harlequins qualified, Saracens favourites to qualify from their pool, Leicester have it in their own hands at home in the last game and Northampton have an outside shot if results go their way).

For the rest of the teams, Bath have the most consistent record over the last 5 years with 3 semi-final appearances and 1 other top 6 appearance. But they finished 8th last term and are sitting their again at the moment. Gloucester, Wasps and London Irish also have play-off appearances over the last 5 years (and Wasps even a Championship), but again none of the three clubs qualified for this season's Heineken Cup. Of our two teams that finished in the Heineken Cup spots last season, Exeter are doing okay in 7th, but Sale are down to 12th. Success from other clubs appears to be, to various degrees, unsustainable.

This got me thinking, is a "Big Four" desirable? And actually, for me anyway, it would be. The over-riding advantage is, as eluded to earlier, having the best players playing for clubs that regularly compete at the sharp ends of competitions. To address some of the negatives: the "Big Four" in football was seen as bad for the Premiership as it was believed that only one of those teams could win the league. However, in the Aviva we have play-offs, so you don't have to beat the entire big four over a league season to win the league, just one of them to get in the play-offs, then it's anyone's trophy. There are also 6 Heineken Cup spots, so even if the "Big Four" did finish in the top 4 spots, two other times would also get a Heineken Cup spot. The other advantage would be that - with the talent concentrating into these clubs, we would be more likely to win European Competition and get a 7th Heineken Cup spot.

So are we now witnessing an Aviva Premiership "Big Four" developing? In 5 years time, will these 4 teams still be at the top of English rugby? And if we are seeing a Big Four developing, is it a good thing?

5 years ago none of Sarries, Saints or Quins would have been considered a too 4 team.

Good discusson material.

If we go back further than the last few years, out of the clubs you mentioned, there has only been a top spot. Leicester Tigers have consistently proved their mettle time & time again since the dawn of professionalism. All other clubs in your list have, at some point, gone down into the Championship for a season - it's an interesting side bar that they all came back stronger (yes Falcons, i'm looking at you!) after having a really good think about what they're doing.

If we go back 10 years, there was a 'Big 2', with Tigers and Wasps far ahead of the pack and winning silverware aplenty, both domestic and European.

If anything i'd say that the AP is closer than ever. If any of the 'Big 4' slip, even for half a season, then the likes of Wasps, Glaws, Bath & arguably The Chiefs will up their game enough to replace them.

I don't think there will be a nailed on top 4, forever & ever amen, but the 4 teams you mention are certainly doing well for themselves as it stands.

Leicester, Bath, Wasps and Gloucester. The originals.

At the moment yes but as Alastair say's it's still quite a fragile balance for three of those teams. Saints in particular are looking like they may struggle to stay top four and Glos look like they have the team and coaching to make the biggest challenge for a play off position.

It's worth noting that bar Leicester the other three teams all figured out a simple game plan and then executed it well to get where they are. It's also worth noting that the lower placed teams don't seem to even have a gameplan half the time. Could this be a big factor? Get a gameplan that works for the players you have, get them all to buy in to it (that's the most important bit in my mind) and then keep using it even if it lets you down on occasion as you know it'll come good in the end.

Saracend have the wolf pack and a very strong aggressive defence to win them points coupled with a smooth runnign lineout.

Saints have/had a monstrous pack and centres who beat up the opposition before throwing the ball out wide to strike runners and couple that with a nasty scrum.

Quins have a very fast off loading game to create holes in the opposition and if needed run them off their feet. Again coupled with a nasty scrum.

Not sure what Tigers game plan is...

EnglishReign wrote:Leicester, Bath, Wasps and Gloucester. The originals.

Old news mate, three of those teams times have gone now, they should be in a museum!

yappysnap wrote:

EnglishReign wrote:Leicester, Bath, Wasps and Gloucester. The originals.

Old news mate, three of those teams times have gone now, they should be in a museum!

Bit harsh. Tigers grinding out wins, Bath and Wasps doing well in the Amlin. Hardly gone!

EnglishReign wrote:

yappysnap wrote:

EnglishReign wrote:Leicester, Bath, Wasps and Gloucester. The originals.

Old news mate, three of those teams times have gone now, they should be in a museum!

Bit harsh. Tigers grinding out wins, Bath and Wasps doing well in the Amlin. Hardly gone!

I see what you've done there...

The big four in football, came about as only 4 teams got into Champions league, and hence got more money than other teams, and better able to get top 4 spot the next year, to get more money again, untill it was mostly the same 4 teams each year, (odd time someelse may break in but would fail to constantly get in), untill big money men came along and pushed Chelsea and Man city, into this.

In rugby terms its more difficult, since top 6 get into Europe, but the teams only get to keep money from the knock out rounds, the rest is shared between them all, so the same kind of oligopoly, is unlikley to develop. Add in the salary cap, and it makes a top 4 less likley to form, keeping the Aviva prem competative.

Teams go through peaks and troughs. I don't think a top 4 is necessarily set in stone but of course those 4 teams you say are doing well.

Except for Leicester though, none of the other 3 teams have had sustained success in the AP.

I have been saying for some time Sale could do with relegation. It helps get rid of the dead wood.

As AlastairW says sides can come back stronger - Quins and Saints certainly have!

Wasps have turned things around. Sure they'll lose Billy next season to Saracens but they'll still have Haskell,Johnson and Poff in their backrow. They still have a strong team.

It's amazing looking at the 2009/10 Saracens squad who caused such a stir and comparing them to their 2012/13 squad.


Yappysnap I disagree. I think those 4 sides have that mental strength, ability to win consistently. Saints are a bit more erratic but still capable of great away victories like Ulster,Exeter,Bath and Gloucester this season.

Look at Saracens in the HC on the weekend they were 3 tries to 0 down - 22-9 down, 2 men in the sin bin throughout the game yet prevailed away in France - won 37-28.

Leicester went to one of the toughest away venues in the HC and got the draw.

Quins have swaggered their way throughout the HC - putting sides to the sword.


Leicester,Quins and Saracens have iron will that I think puts them above the other AP sides. They have the belief they can beat anyone anywhere.

Look at the amount of tight matches they have won.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_Premiership_(rugby_union)

This link is great for an overview of the English Premiership.

Of those teams only Leicester can really say they are a big' club in terms of being at the top for years. The same article 3 years ago would have different teams in it. Or a few years before that Wasps were top dogs and Gloucester were always up there too.

But certainly Tigers, Quins and Sarries are the top 3 English sides at the moment, Saints are on the edge but I think that of the teams listed they have the highest chance of not making the top 4.

The trick for Sarries and Quins will be to turn into the team which is always in with a chance at the end of the season like Leicester are, which with the cap etc. will be harder to do than in football. I think this is good by the way a real 'top 4' league where half the games are irrelevant wouldn't be particularly good to watch.

Bath, Bristol, Gloucester and Exeter !

We'll be back aswell...we're stronger already...

sirtidychris wrote:Bath, Bristol, Gloucester and Exeter !

Well Gloucester is west midlands so I'd replace them with the Cornish Pirates!

Always ment to ask GeordieFalcon, was there ever a fall out of fans, in 1996/7 when the name was changed from Gosforth to Newcastle Falcons, and the strip was changed from Green and white hoops to the Black and white (more like newcastle utd)?

I just ask cos in 1997–98 they were getting crowds of 4000/5000 ish which, would indicate Gosforth were fairly well supported before that, it wsn't that they changed and became well supported, looks like supports carried over.

I'd say most were happy to have the city name in and being Newcastle fans, the black and white would be seen as the city colours and would have liked that better.

I ask because it can be seen maybe as a way the regions could change without alienating fans, though not sure now much?

Not alot of problems mate...well not from my knowledge anyway...it was often known as Newcastle Gosforth anyway...

Support has always been fairly steady...and i think us going down will do wonders for the club...its just been nice to actually see us winning and playing some decent stuff.
I think the crux will come in the summer..to see who they bring in..we need a couple of positions, and most of us will watch with interest the quality they bring in...

As for regions...we pretty much cover the Borders, Northumberland,Tyneside (North and South) Wearside, Boro, Cumbria...so a big region...Nothern Falcons you could say.

I for one would not cross their door if they were still 'Gosforth'.

Changing their name to Newcastle (and eventually dropping the Newcastle perhaps) has allowed supporters of the smaller local clubs to come and watch them and not feel 'unclean'.

Gosforth were a bight high handed (arrogant some would say) in their perception of the other clubs in the NE and - when Iplayed at least - they were not well liked. An club that was riddled with blazers and old farts in quite a working class area.

Nothing against the players, but the odd few times we played them in the county cup their committe men and othe hangers on would look at you like you were dog sh1t on their shoe.


And yes, I am seeking therapy.

Class Trailape...i know what you mean about their being a bit snooty...but i just ignored that...

Out of curiosity who was your local club...

Bathman_in_London wrote:

sirtidychris wrote:Bath, Bristol, Gloucester and Exeter !

Well Gloucester is west midlands so I'd replace them with the Cornish Pirates!

Always happy to replace gloucester !

Bathman_in_London wrote:

sirtidychris wrote:Bath, Bristol, Gloucester and Exeter !

Well Gloucester is west midlands so I'd replace them with the Cornish Pirates!

but Pirates baint English, they'm furriners. Best be Albion, oi reckon.

Bathman_in_London wrote:

sirtidychris wrote:Bath, Bristol, Gloucester and Exeter !

Well Gloucester is west midlands so I'd replace them with the Cornish Pirates!

Bathman, I know we beat you all the time but you don't have to be like that

To be honest in my mind real West Country is west of Taunton anyway, never get why places like Swindon are counted as west...

Its a sad reflection of the current state of Bath that my banter is about the geographical location of Glaws and Forest of Dean inbreeding rather than rugby related!

Bathman, in a perverse way I think many Glaws fans miss the banter about Barbours and landed gentry!

You aren't the Earl of the Cotswalds are you HKC?!

Whilst I'm convinced of my blue blood lineage, my only official title is Serf of Gloucester