How will the Rabo respond to the Franglos now?

by Portnoy's Complaint Tue 10 Sep 2013, 9:33 pm

First topic message reminder :

Well the French LNR and the English PRL weren't joking after all. Whither the Rabo?

The door remains open.

by ScarletSpiderman Mon 16 Sep 2013, 3:32 pm

hawalsh wrote:
ScarletSpiderman wrote:
Notch wrote:Smeg it. Offer them a 6-6-6 split, last two places reserved for the Pro12 to make sure every nation has at least one entrant with the two extra sides entering as bottom seeds, and an even amount of money for each team in Aviva Prem, Top14 and Pro12.

So 38 equal slices going 38 ways. Same qualification rules and every nation represented. Sorted.
Money goes to the regions/club/province directly and not to the union/prl/lnr. Add that in and I would shake hands on that
That's practically what the French & English clubs have been after from the off, you wouldn't have seen any hesitation in their acceptance if that was on the table.

Providing the money went to those who took part that would not be an issue. However if the money were split 33% to RFU/PRL, 33% FFR/LNR, 8.25%WRU/RRW, 8.25% IRFU, 8.25% SRU, 8.25% FIR then I would be against it. The money should be split to the teams involved, so that if the Rabo reps for a season are Ulster, Munster, Leinster, Treviso, Ospreys, Glasgow (for example) the Rabo share of the money should be split evenly to those teams. So half to the Irish (1/6 to Leinster, Munster & Ulster each), and a 6th to the other three teams.

That way the teams will be properly encouraged to take part. If it is the Rabo's share split evenly to four unions, and then split evenly to each of their teams then teams like Zebre (and Dragons and Connacht etc) will be getting the same funding as top flight teams.

by the-goon Mon 16 Sep 2013, 5:29 pm

beshocked wrote:
GunsGerms wrote:
Mad for Chelsea wrote:that's a bit like saying the Football CL is unfair because England have 4 spots (3 guaranteed) whereas Lithuania have to scrap to just get one. OK not exactly but you get the point... Are you seriously saying the current arrangement is unfair to the Rabo teams? Refusing to concede any grounds gets you exactly where we are today (though we're not sure that's how we got there): in a big, deep mess...
Of course it is. The more clubs you have in top competition the stronger your international team should be in theory. Having three times more teams in the Hcup than Scotland can only be a good thing for Englands chances in the 6N.
No it's not the same. In the Irish clubs/regions all the best players fit into 4 clubs. The talent pool and money is shared among 4 clubs.

In the AP the talent pool and money is shared among 12 teams.

Imagine how strong Saraquins and Northampton Tigers would be if these 4 clubs combined. Also Bathster would probably be quite strong too.

The best of Scotland - Edinburgh and Glasgow should do better than 1 win in 12 matches!

Go ahead, restructure!

Why should the RABO teams have to change?? All the "disadvantages" the English (and French) teams "suffer" can be fixed internally. The thing is that you don't want to change as it hurts your pocket, so why should the rabo teams change to suit you??

English teams have to face relegation- ring fence the Jeff
Less rotation than the RABO teams- less teams in the jeff, perhaps regionalise..
"Fairer" distribution of wealth- less teams, more cash per team.
"Fairer" qualification (i.e. league placing)- you already have 6 guarranteed places, the RFU can simply nominate teams to enter regardless of league placing. You already have more places, you can distribute however you want.

The arrogance to demand changes of other unions' structures to suit your own needs is unbelievable.

Why don't we talk about the advantages you have over the RABO teams?

Higher wage cap
Less current internationals
Suger daddies pouring money into clubs

You don't hear us asking you to change when you were winning.

by beshocked Mon 16 Sep 2013, 5:42 pm

the-goon wrote:
beshocked wrote:
GunsGerms wrote:
Mad for Chelsea wrote:that's a bit like saying the Football CL is unfair because England have 4 spots (3 guaranteed) whereas Lithuania have to scrap to just get one. OK not exactly but you get the point... Are you seriously saying the current arrangement is unfair to the Rabo teams? Refusing to concede any grounds gets you exactly where we are today (though we're not sure that's how we got there): in a big, deep mess...
Of course it is. The more clubs you have in top competition the stronger your international team should be in theory. Having three times more teams in the Hcup than Scotland can only be a good thing for Englands chances in the 6N.
No it's not the same. In the Irish clubs/regions all the best players fit into 4 clubs. The talent pool and money is shared among 4 clubs.

In the AP the talent pool and money is shared among 12 teams.

Imagine how strong Saraquins and Northampton Tigers would be if these 4 clubs combined. Also Bathster would probably be quite strong too.

The best of Scotland - Edinburgh and Glasgow should do better than 1 win in 12 matches!
Go ahead, restructure!

Why should the RABO teams have to change?? All the "disadvantages" the English (and French) teams "suffer" can be fixed internally. The thing is that you don't want to change as it hurts your pocket, so why should the rabo teams change to suit you??

English teams have to face relegation- ring fence the Jeff
Less rotation than the RABO teams- less teams in the jeff, perhaps regionalise..
"Fairer" distribution of wealth- less teams, more cash per team.
"Fairer" qualification (i.e. league placing)- you already have 6 guarranteed places, the RFU can simply nominate teams to enter regardless of league placing. You already have more places, you can distribute however you want.

The arrogance to demand changes of other unions' structures to suit your own needs is unbelievable.

Why don't we talk about the advantages you have over the RABO teams?

Higher wage cap
Less current internationals
Suger daddies pouring money into clubs

You don't hear us asking you to change when you were winning.

the-goon Rabo sides should have to change because you have had things far too cosy. Virtual Auto qualification for every man and his dog despite performing woefully in the HC. You should not be given money and auto qualification on a platter.

It's arrogant to believe you have an automatic right to a HC place despite having awful win rates in the HC in general.

I don't like the arrogance of the Rabo teams personally. You think 4 unions can bully 2.

Less current internationals is an advantage? Surely international rugby is good development for players?

Higher wage cap - not much higher in the AP actually. There is a bigger difference between the French and English than the Rabo and the English.

Sugar daddies pouring money into clubs? In some - yes but not all. Perhaps if Pro12 sides were attractive prospects they might get some sugar daddies too.

Our clubs and the French clubs generate more of the revenue in the HC than the Pro12 clubs sides in general too.

Rabo clubs hang on the coat tails of Leinster and Munster.

by AsLongAsBut100ofUs Mon 16 Sep 2013, 5:47 pm

beshocked wrote:
GunsGerms wrote:
Mad for Chelsea wrote:that's a bit like saying the Football CL is unfair because England have 4 spots (3 guaranteed) whereas Lithuania have to scrap to just get one. OK not exactly but you get the point... Are you seriously saying the current arrangement is unfair to the Rabo teams? Refusing to concede any grounds gets you exactly where we are today (though we're not sure that's how we got there): in a big, deep mess...
Of course it is. The more clubs you have in top competition the stronger your international team should be in theory. Having three times more teams in the Hcup than Scotland can only be a good thing for Englands chances in the 6N.
No it's not the same. In the Irish clubs/regions all the best players fit into 4 clubs. The talent pool and money is shared among 4 clubs.

In the AP the talent pool and money is shared among 12 teams.

Imagine how strong Saraquins and Northampton Tigers would be if these 4 clubs combined. Also Bathster would probably be quite strong too.

The best of Scotland - Edinburgh and Glasgow should do better than 1 win in 12 matches!

beshocked, this is incredibly naive thinking on your part, I am surprised - do you wish to take no account of other factors than might mitigate on the performance of rugby in different countries?

by alcoombe Mon 16 Sep 2013, 6:06 pm

the-goon wrote:
Less rotation than the RABO teams- less teams in the jeff, perhaps regionalise.. Both are unworkable. There isn't a functioning league in the world with less than 12 teams. Regionalising would cover far too big an area in France and England and decimate the club loyal fan base.

"Fairer" distribution of wealth- less teams, more cash per team. We could both pull the clubs in the Amlin, meaning no Amlin and the money it brings in, equalling less money for all the Rabo teams from the ERC

by the-goon Tue 17 Sep 2013, 9:42 am

alcoombe wrote:
the-goon wrote:
Less rotation than the RABO teams- less teams in the jeff, perhaps regionalise.. Both are unworkable. There isn't a functioning league in the world with less than 12 teams. Regionalising would cover far too big an area in France and England and decimate the club loyal fan base.

"Fairer" distribution of wealth- less teams, more cash per team. We could both pull the clubs in the Amlin, meaning no Amlin and the money it brings in, equalling less money for all the Rabo teams from the ERC

Now you see how ludicrous the RABO teams see the PRL's demands to be. As you say "Completely unworkable".

So what are the PRL willing to comprimise in these negotiations? Especially considering you already have the most teams and the most money....

by beshocked Tue 17 Sep 2013, 10:02 am

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:
beshocked wrote:
GunsGerms wrote:
Mad for Chelsea wrote:that's a bit like saying the Football CL is unfair because England have 4 spots (3 guaranteed) whereas Lithuania have to scrap to just get one. OK not exactly but you get the point... Are you seriously saying the current arrangement is unfair to the Rabo teams? Refusing to concede any grounds gets you exactly where we are today (though we're not sure that's how we got there): in a big, deep mess...
Of course it is. The more clubs you have in top competition the stronger your international team should be in theory. Having three times more teams in the Hcup than Scotland can only be a good thing for Englands chances in the 6N.
No it's not the same. In the Irish clubs/regions all the best players fit into 4 clubs. The talent pool and money is shared among 4 clubs.

In the AP the talent pool and money is shared among 12 teams.

Imagine how strong Saraquins and Northampton Tigers would be if these 4 clubs combined. Also Bathster would probably be quite strong too.

The best of Scotland - Edinburgh and Glasgow should do better than 1 win in 12 matches!
beshocked, this is incredibly naive thinking on your part, I am surprised - do you wish to take no account of other factors than might mitigate on the performance of rugby in different countries?

Other factors like automatic qualification for the HC every season you mean? What is the salary cap in Scotland?

alasbut100ofus I just can't understand how Grant is supposedly one of the best looseheads in the world. Hogg perhaps one of the greatest full backs in the world Whistle

, Tim Visser - the greatest winger the Pro12 has ever seen yet went it comes to the HC they don't deliver.

by Sin é Tue 17 Sep 2013, 10:19 am

The salary cap for the Irish clubs is to live within your means. You may have no noticed there are no more Doug Howletts or Jean de Villiers in Munster or Rocky Elsoms or Brad Thorn's in Leinster.

In Wales you probably noticed that George North is now with Northampton and quite a few of their top players are all in France.

by beshocked Tue 17 Sep 2013, 10:24 am

Sin e that's only happened recently.

The bulk of the team that make up the Welsh national side still play in Wales.

by Sin é Tue 17 Sep 2013, 10:33 am

beshocked wrote:Sin e that's only happened recently.

The bulk of the team that make up the Welsh national side still play in Wales.

Well, they can't all up sticks at the same time - most would have had contracts going back 2 or 3 years and will probably move on as they come up for renewal. The Scarlets managed to 'sell' on George North to Northampton. 3 of the team gone for this season - Roberts, Lydiate & North.

by GunsGerms Tue 17 Sep 2013, 10:43 am

Warburton and 1/2p will be playing England or France by next year by the sounds of things in recent interviews.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/article-2420872/Sam-Warburton-set-leave-Wales.html

by beshocked Tue 17 Sep 2013, 10:46 am

Sin e it's sort of irrelevant though in a sense because that's only happened very recently. It will have more of an effect on the HC this season but of course doesn't impact on previous HCs.

Scarlets didn't need to sell North. They just wanted to make some money out of him.

There isn't a huge difference in salary caps between the English clubs and the Irish for example.

by Sin é Tue 17 Sep 2013, 10:59 am

beshocked wrote:Sin e it's sort of irrelevant though in a sense because that's only happened very recently. It will have more of an effect on the HC this season but of course doesn't impact on previous HCs.

Scarlets didn't need to sell North. They just wanted to make some money out of him.

There isn't a huge difference in salary caps between the English clubs and the Irish for example.

I don't know what the difference is. Munster's budget is E12m per year (that includes running the amateur game, under age, refs, schools cups etc. in Munster). What's Leicester's budget (similar overheads like stadium, calibre of player etc).

edit: actually Munster have two bases/stadia - one in Limerick & one in Cork.

Why would Scarlets sell North if they didn't need or want the money?

by Portnoy's Complaint Tue 17 Sep 2013, 11:58 am

Sin é wrote:
beshocked wrote:Sin e it's sort of irrelevant though in a sense because that's only happened very recently. It will have more of an effect on the HC this season but of course doesn't impact on previous HCs.

Scarlets didn't need to sell North. They just wanted to make some money out of him.

There isn't a huge difference in salary caps between the English clubs and the Irish for example.
I don't know what the difference is. Munster's budget is E12m per year (that includes running the amateur game, under age, refs, schools cups etc. in Munster). What's Leicester's budget (similar overheads like stadium, calibre of player etc).

edit: actually Munster have two bases/stadia - one in Limerick & one in Cork.

Why would Scarlets sell North if they didn't need or want the money?

£19.5m reported turnover in 2012, Sin é.

Tigers wrote:FOR THE YEAR ENDED 30 JUNE 2012
2012 2011
Note £000 £000 £000 £000
Turnover 2 17,333 19,502
Ground and match expenses (6,843) (8,110)
Administrative expenses (2,045) (1,972)
Staff costs 5 (8,879) (8,075)
Depreciation and amortisation (643) (812)
Other operating income 40 66
(18,370) (18,903)
Operating (loss)/profit before transfer fees (1,037) 599
Net transfer fees receivable/(payable) - (40)
Total operating (loss)/profit (1,037) 559
Interest receivable 6 11 7
Interest payable 7 (516) (359)
(Loss)/profit before taxation 3 (1,542) 207
Tax on (loss)/profit on ordinary activities 8 231 (164)
Retained (loss)/profit for the year (1,311) 43

http://www.leicestertigers.com/club/agm/index.php

by the-goon Tue 17 Sep 2013, 2:07 pm

So the Tigers have nearly double the budget of Munster AND have no restrictions on recruitment and yet English clubs are complaining that the balance is tipped against them??? Rolling Eyes

Here's a thought, recruit smarter or/and improve your youth Acedamy to beat us!!

What next you'll be asking us to play with 2 players less???

by Irish Londoner Tue 17 Sep 2013, 2:10 pm

One thing that the above figures show is that altough there are serious money issues for all sides, compared to the budgets for assocation football all the clubs are bald men fighting for a bigger piece of the comb....

by Portnoy's Complaint Tue 17 Sep 2013, 2:38 pm

the-goon wrote:So the Tigers have nearly double the budget of Munster AND have no restrictions on recruitment and yet English clubs are complaining that the balance is tipped against them???

Here's a thought, recruit smarter or/and improve your youth Acedamy to beat us!!

What next you'll be asking us to play with 2 players less???

That's the problem with caps, goon. Tigers are bound by them although their academy is not exactly failing to produce any goods.

Plus I wouldn't want to comment on the IRFU's recruitment policy. That would be like telling other leagues how to organise themselves. That wouldn't do would it?

by mbernz Tue 17 Sep 2013, 4:35 pm

Lets not confuse the terms budget and turnover here, they're quite different things. We also have to be careful about what is and isn't in any reported accounts and what aspects of clubs/provinces operating costs (wages, club development, loan facilitation) are picked up by external bodies.

by Sponsored content

How will the Rabo respond to the Franglos now?

How will the Rabo respond to the Franglos now?

Re: How will the Rabo respond to the Franglos now?

Re: How will the Rabo respond to the Franglos now?

Re: How will the Rabo respond to the Franglos now?

Re: How will the Rabo respond to the Franglos now?

Re: How will the Rabo respond to the Franglos now?

Re: How will the Rabo respond to the Franglos now?

Re: How will the Rabo respond to the Franglos now?

Re: How will the Rabo respond to the Franglos now?

Re: How will the Rabo respond to the Franglos now?

Re: How will the Rabo respond to the Franglos now?

Re: How will the Rabo respond to the Franglos now?

Re: How will the Rabo respond to the Franglos now?

Re: How will the Rabo respond to the Franglos now?

Re: How will the Rabo respond to the Franglos now?

Re: How will the Rabo respond to the Franglos now?

Re: How will the Rabo respond to the Franglos now?

Re: How will the Rabo respond to the Franglos now?

Re: How will the Rabo respond to the Franglos now?

Re: How will the Rabo respond to the Franglos now?