Sam Warburton discusses European Competition

First topic message reminder :

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/24069627

"I can understand from the English and French point of view," said Warburton.
"I do agree there should be a qualifying system from the Rabodirect.
"I don't think they should hand it out to each country, it should be the top six to qualify and it would make the Rabo more interesting.
"I can agree with the English and French perspective that there should be tougher qualification."

"Hopefully, whatever happens, the Cardiff Blues will be playing in the top tier of European rugby next season," said Warburton.
"If that was the case, then at least the standard of the Rabo would be improved because there would have to be full teams.
"I have always said if all the top teams fielded their best sides in the Rabo, it would be a competitive and great league.
"So there are pros and cons and hopefully the Blues will remain in Europe somehow.
"I cannot really imagine it happening and I am sure something will be worked out - and that the regions will play European rugby and I hope that is the case."

Now I have to disagree that places shoudl not be handed out to each country. If it is a EUROPEAN competition, then there should be at least one entry from each of the 6Ns countries - expanding if European club rugby grows.

maestegmafia wrote:What is not addressed in this piece and what is the crux of much vented anger is that we do not trust the LNR or PRL to set up a fair and even competition.

Exactly. ERC aren't perfect but at least the unions - all unions - have an input.

GunsGerms wrote:Yes but you can regulate it and structure it properly so it serves its purpose rather than allowing it to suffocate everything else. Thats what the ERC are for and they do a good job IMO.

that the thing, as it currently stands it is suffocating everything. It's can't improve without change.

maestegmafia everyone knows the rankings are rubbish in general.

Toulouse 3rd best?

Biarritz ranked 5th? Stade Francais ranked 8th? Cardiff 11th? Perpignan 14th? Edinburgh 15th?

Leicester and Sarries below Saints and Quins?

Plus you fail to acknowledge that because Pro12 sides get into the HC every season they automatically have a higher chance of more points.

Realistically who would your money be on in a Bath vs Connacht game?

Risca Rev wrote:

Cyril wrote:

whocares wrote:

Cyril wrote:Qualification should be by league NOT by nation.

disagree. all nations should have a minimum of participants. otherwise there is no point of calling that a european competition. in my opinion playoffs to decide who else qualifies if the way forward so that all countries get a shot (including romania, russia, georgia or whoever wants in).

Where do you draw the line? The competition already isn't 'elite' and this will just make it worse.

When a side languishing at the bottom of a league with no wins can still automatically qualify for the 'premier' European competition it's a bit odd.

What would your split be from the Rabo? 8 or 6 teams? Personally, as I've said 8 is a fair qualification from the Rabo (in my opinion), so then teams like Zebre have a chance of making a realistic step from 12th to 8th.

I could even live with 7 and the Amlin winner stepping up (if they haven't qualified from their league).

am with you Risca. could even do playoffs for say 5-6 from T14 and AP against 7-10 Rabo for instance so that everybody get a chance. woudl bring some excitement to the preseason as well.

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:What is not addressed in this piece and what is the crux of much vented anger is that we do not trust the LNR or PRL to set up a fair and even competition.

Exactly. ERC aren't perfect but at least the unions - all unions - have an input.

there is no reason why something similar couldn't be set up in the new competition with a representative from each league/nation

maestegmafia wrote:

Scrumpy wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:

Scrumpy wrote:

Cyril wrote:Qualification should be by league NOT by nation.

Correct, it's the fairest way and it means that the HC is the best of the best not 'oh we only have two teams as we're a poor union so we deserve two places in the HC'

Completly incorrect. If thats the case whats stopping the Irish teams just set up their own league with just four teams and get a guarenteed 4 spots every year? Should Italy set up a league with 6 teams and have a guarenteed 6 teams in the HC every year. Same as the number of English and French teams?

Greed, Greed, Greed!!!!!!!!!!!!

  but we would still have teams that haven't earned the right to be there which is wrong, the HC is meant to be the best european clubs playing for the right to be crowned the best team in europe.

Looking at the European Rankings of the best 20 teams in Europe seven are T14, eight are RP12 and five are AP teams.

Why should the league qualification not be based around that if we want the best teams involved?

The euro rankings are not a fair syatem to go on, some top teams get to play weak teams that have not earned the right to be there on merit, hence the problem.

nathan wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:Yes but you can regulate it and structure it properly so it serves its purpose rather than allowing it to suffocate everything else. Thats what the ERC are for and they do a good job IMO.

that the thing, as it currently stands it is suffocating everything. It's can't improve without change.

Exactly what is it damaging at the moment? The HCup is probably the best club cup competition in the world and this years six nations was one of the most evenly matched and competitive in 20 years. There are structures in place for a reason and they work very well.

Italy's progression is testament to the structures in place. This year they beat Ireland for the first time ever in the six nations and they also beat France. This would not be possible if they dont get automatic inclusion in the HCup.

The popularity of rugby in Italy is actually growing all the time. Do we really want to pull the plug on them now?

There's no harm at all in freshening things up.

It keeps it all interesting.

lostinwales wrote:

Risca Rev wrote:
I could even live with 7 and the Amlin winner stepping up (if they haven't qualified from their league).

7 and 1 sounds good - I dont believe that the HEC champion should get the right to defend automatically, but keeping a place for the Amlin winner at least gives some tangible reward for that competition.

The next question is do you have runners up in the HEC dropping down to the Amlin or not? (surely not would be better for that competition.)

I wouldn't.

My thoughts are that the Heineken winner would qualify through his league position 9/10 times anyway. It also ensures that teams don't just put all their eggs in one basket (like Edinburgh did when they made the semis a few seasons back).

I think the Amlin winner should step up, so it's natural progression and 7/8 teams for the RABO so it does offer teams like Treviso a realistic chance of qualifying anyway. I don't believe it really does Zebre any favours to automatically qualify.

I know as a Dragons supporter, I'd rather it if I could almost guarantee that I'd be seeing better standard of players at RP because every league game would mean something more, when places had to be scrapped for.

GunsGerms wrote:The HCup is probably the best club cup competition in the world.

I'm sure Carlsburg would have sometihing to say about that.

But on a serious point the HC could be the best if all the teams taking part have earned the right to be there!

I don't disagree with any of this- but it's become apparent the debate about places is a smokescreen for a wider debate about money, broadcasting rights and power.

I do think the Pro12 should have more places than the other leagues as it represents 4 nations instead of 1, but 8 qualifiers (Top 6/7/8, with at least one place for all nations) and 6 from each of the Aviva and Top14 would be entirely fair.

The way I see it;

-Top 6 in Top14 automatically qualify
-Top 6 in Aviva Prem automatically qualify
-Top 6 in Pro12 automatically qualify

Remaining two places;
-If Italy, Scotland, Ireland and Wales all have representation in the Top 6, the places go to 7th and 8th in the Pro12
-If three nations are represented in the Top 6 of the Pro12, one place goes to 7th in the Pro12 and one place goes to the highest ranked team of the nation that hasn't made it into automatic qualifying.
-If only two nations make up the Top 6 in the Pro12, the two highest ranked teams from the nations who didn't make it into the Top 6 qualify.

That would ensure that the best 18-20 clubs in Europe are competing and that all nations are guaranteed to be represented.

beshocked wrote:Realistically who would your money be on in a Bath vs Connacht game?

Whoever has home advantage. Connacht raise their game for the big ones and Bath are streaky enough in terms of consistency. Would anyone bet against Connacht in the scenario? At the REC, Bath. Sportsground, Connacht

Risca Rev wrote:

lostinwales wrote:

Risca Rev wrote:
I could even live with 7 and the Amlin winner stepping up (if they haven't qualified from their league).

7 and 1 sounds good - I dont believe that the HEC champion should get the right to defend automatically, but keeping a place for the Amlin winner at least gives some tangible reward for that competition.

The next question is do you have runners up in the HEC dropping down to the Amlin or not? (surely not would be better for that competition.)

I wouldn't.

My thoughts are that the Heineken winner would qualify through his league position 9/10 times anyway. It also ensures that teams don't just put all their eggs in one basket (like Edinburgh did when they made the semis a few seasons back).

I think the Amlin winner should step up, so it's natural progression and 7/8 teams for the RABO so it does offer teams like Treviso a realistic chance of qualifying anyway. I don't believe it really does Zebre any favours to automatically qualify.

I know as a Dragons supporter, I'd rather it if I could almost guarantee that I'd be seeing better standard of players at RP because every league game would mean something more, when places had to be scrapped for.

If the Amlin could be made more mainstream - would it be more exciting for the Dragons to be in that competition where they might have a chance of going a long way through it, or to be whipping boys in the HC?

Why should there be guarranteed representation by all nations?

I just don't understand it. It produces mis-matches and is unhelpful in the long term.

GunsGerms wrote:

nathan wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:Yes but you can regulate it and structure it properly so it serves its purpose rather than allowing it to suffocate everything else. Thats what the ERC are for and they do a good job IMO.

that the thing, as it currently stands it is suffocating everything. It's can't improve without change.

Exactly what is it damaging at the moment? The HCup is probably the best club cup competition in the world and this years six nations was one of the most evenly matched and competitive in 20 years. There are structures in place for a reason and they work very well.

Italy's progression is testament to the structures in place. This year they beat Ireland for the first time ever in the six nations and they also beat France. This would not be possible if they dont get automatic inclusion in the HCup.

The popularity of rugby in Italy is actually growing all the time. Do we really want to pull the plug on them now?

Whats the six nations got to with the HC?

Can the Italians not improve by playing in the Rabo? perhaps if there wasn't auto qualification the Rabo would be of higher intensity, there's more games in the rabo than the HC so perhaps they would gain more experience from that. they could then drop down to the amlin (where they have more chance of beating teams) and build from there.

I see no reason why teams should get a free pass into the premier competition, they should just build up like in 99% of the leagues around the world.

I don't agree with the point that there has to be representation of every country guaranteed every year in the Heineken. I agree with the proposal of a 6, 6, 6 split with the remaining 2 places going to the winners of both Euro cups.

I fail to see peoples point about Zebra needing to play in Heineken to grow. Why is it so much more beneficial for them to play Harlequins as apposed to Bath in the Amlin?? The exposure of playing big French or English teams with big fan bases and histories should be experience enough and also by making the Amlin a worthwhile and respected tournament.

When Exeter got promoted to the premiership, they were gifted no place in the Heineken, they earn't it in what is not a level playing field in the Premiership with how the shares are distributed (a debate for another day). They grew the club properly.

By devaluing the places available in the HEC by giving them out to some and not always earned it is having a knock on effect of devaluing the Amlin which is not good for growth.

nathan wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:What is not addressed in this piece and what is the crux of much vented anger is that we do not trust the LNR or PRL to set up a fair and even competition.

Exactly. ERC aren't perfect but at least the unions - all unions - have an input.

there is no reason why something similar couldn't be set up in the new competition with a representative from each league/nation

The problem is exactly this 'league / nation' bit. The PRL / LNR are not the equivalent of a national rugby union. To be frank, they need to know their place, which is below that of the RFU / FFR, who need to bring them to heel.

Yes Gunsgerms. Ulster won it when there were no English sides. Plus everyone would want a HC semi vs Edinburgh!

I beg to differ. I don't think Ulster as good as Leinster or Munster. Just look at respective records vs English sides in the HC and overall win rates.

Ulster - 39% vs English sides, 46% win rate overall.

Munster and Leinster are vastly superior in both areas.

I suppose it depends what you want the HC. It seems as if you want it as a development competition. I and other English club fans see the HC as a chance to challenge ourselves against the best sides in Europe.

It's strange you call the HC a club competition yet don't want clubs to run it/influence the competition.

Sam Warburton discusses European Competition

So him and many others completely miss the point then, the qualification is just a red herring, the Pro 12 unions have stated before they are open to dropping a few more teams into the Amlin even the PRL and LNR have made concessions on this front by allowing 1 top team from each nation minimum to be in the top tier rest by league placing.

The Major issues are PRL/LNR don't want the unions involved they never have, go back to 98-99 06-07 its the same issues, which is pretty hard to do since SRU/IRFU/FIR and to WRU wholly own or have big stakes in there teams, they ain't gonna walk away and give up there place at the table.

BT or Sky, PRL are adamant it should be BT with exclusive rights, Pro 12 Unions are adamant it should be Sky with exclusive rights.
With BT and Sky backing the others leagues it makes this position even more difficult. Also depending on which broadcaster you choose change the revenue split issue.

FFR and RFU need to step up and clarify there positions, FFR have used stronger language against the Top 14 but the RFU have been pretty much silent the whole time.

Cyril wrote:Why should there be guarranteed representation by all nations?

I just don't understand it. It produces mis-matches and is unhelpful in the long term.

because otherwise it is not an european cup anymore...

whocares wrote:

Cyril wrote:Why should there be guarranteed representation by all nations?

I just don't understand it. It produces mis-matches and is unhelpful in the long term.

because otherwise it is not an european cup anymore...

you could say it isn't now then, what about all the other european countries....

Cyril wrote:Why should there be guarranteed representation by all nations?

I just don't understand it. It produces mis-matches and is unhelpful in the long term.

For the good of the wider game? Because giving these Unions the money and pull to keep top home-grown players is in the interests of rugby fans across Europe? Because exposing a number of these players to Heineken Cup level is in the interests of the national teams, hence contributing to a better and more competitive Six Nations? Because it's incredibly unfair if the English and French get guaranteed representation and nobody else does?

If you look at it right now the top Welsh team are Ospreys, the top Irish team are Leinster, the top Scottish team are Glasgow and the top Italian team are Treviso.

Any of those sides could hold their own in the Aviva Prem or Top14 and if you don't think they could- you're an idiot. They are not weak sides. I would be surprised if any of them finished lower than 7th in the Pro12 this season and I view all of them as realistic contenders for the playoffs so its quite some distance from giving the Zebres of this world a free pass.

beshocked wrote:maestegmafia everyone knows the rankings are rubbish in general.

Toulouse 3rd best?

Biarritz ranked 5th? Stade Francais ranked 8th? Cardiff 11th? Perpignan 14th? Edinburgh 15th?

Leicester and Sarries below Saints and Quins?

Plus you fail to acknowledge that because Pro12 sides get into the HC every season they automatically have a higher chance of more points.

Realistically who would your money be on in a Bath vs Connacht game?

Seeing how well Connacht did vs an AP top four team like Harlequins you would have to agree that Connacht would likely be Evens with a mid level AP team like Bath RFC.

Don't mind if all nations are represented but think it should be 2 Irish,2 Welsh,1 Scottish, 1 Italian with next two spots going by league position in the Pro12.

6 English and 6 French meaning a competition of 20 teams.

maestegmafia but you forget that Gloucester comfortably did the double over Connacht in that HC season. I think Connacht's head to head with Quins reads 5-1. Occasionally a weaker side can upset a bigger side if they are complacent.

Exeter hammered Quins twice in the AP. Does that make Exeter the better side?

Notch wrote:

Cyril wrote:Why should there be guarranteed representation by all nations?

I just don't understand it. It produces mis-matches and is unhelpful in the long term.

For the good of the wider game? Because giving these Unions the money and pull to keep top home-grown players is in the interests of rugby fans across Europe? Because exposing a number of these players to Heineken Cup level is in the interests of the national teams, hence contributing to a better and more competitive Six Nations? Because it's incredibly unfair if the English and French get guaranteed representation and nobody else does?

If you look at it right now the top Welsh team are Ospreys, the top Irish team are Leinster, the top Scottish team are Glasgow and the top Italian team are Treviso.

Any of those sides could hold their own in the Aviva Prem or Top14 and if you don't think they could- you're an idiot. They are not weak sides. I would be surprised if any of them finished lower than 7th in the Pro12 this season and I view all of them as realistic contenders for the playoffs so its quite some distance from giving the Zebres of this world a free pass.

So your saying the the HC is a development tournament for the unions?

nathan wrote:

whocares wrote:

Cyril wrote:Why should there be guarranteed representation by all nations?

I just don't understand it. It produces mis-matches and is unhelpful in the long term.

because otherwise it is not an european cup anymore...

you could say it isn't now then, what about all the other european countries....

That is a ridiculous argument as you well know most of them don't play rugby.

maestegmafia wrote:

beshocked wrote:maestegmafia everyone knows the rankings are rubbish in general.

Toulouse 3rd best?

Biarritz ranked 5th? Stade Francais ranked 8th? Cardiff 11th? Perpignan 14th? Edinburgh 15th?

Leicester and Sarries below Saints and Quins?

Plus you fail to acknowledge that because Pro12 sides get into the HC every season they automatically have a higher chance of more points.

Realistically who would your money be on in a Bath vs Connacht game?

Seeing how well Connacht did vs an AP top four team like Harlequins you would have to agree that Connacht would likely be Evens with a mid level AP team like Bath RFC.

didnt harlequins rest most of there players though?

beshocked wrote:Yes Gunsgerms. Ulster won it when there were no English sides. Plus everyone would want a HC semi vs Edinburgh!

Yes, indeed- Edinburghs achievement in getting to a semi-final doesn't matter. It only matters when English sides succeed in Europe.

If that was the case, then at least the standard of the Rabo would be improved because there would have to be full teams.

Can get behind this idea, the standard of the Rabo matches is way too low considering the quality of the clubs involved. You would think multiple HC winners Leinster and Munster and even Ulster would make the league more competitive than it is.

Notch wrote:

Cyril wrote:Why should there be guarranteed representation by all nations?

I just don't understand it. It produces mis-matches and is unhelpful in the long term.

For the good of the wider game? Because giving these Unions the money and pull to keep top home-grown players is in the interests of rugby fans across Europe? Because exposing a number of these players to Heineken Cup level is in the interests of the national teams, hence contributing to a better and more competitive Six Nations? Because it's incredibly unfair if the English and French get guaranteed representation and nobody else does?

If you look at it right now the top Welsh team are Ospreys, the top Irish team are Leinster, the top Scottish team are Glasgow and the top Italian team are Treviso.

Any of those sides could hold their own in the Aviva Prem or Top14 and if you don't think they could- you're an idiot. They are not weak sides. I would be surprised if any of them finished lower than 7th in the Pro12 this season and I view all of them as realistic contenders for the playoffs so its quite some distance from giving the Zebres of this world a free pass.

I agree that all 4 teams look like good sides and would be able to perform in the HEC. But as they are such good teams they would qualify as of right into the premier competition from the league they compete in annually, and be worthy of their place. They would then face equally worthy teams who just like them have gone through the same qualification process from their annually competed league and now meet to determine who can call themselves the premier team of the premier competition.

nathan wrote:

Notch wrote:

Cyril wrote:Why should there be guarranteed representation by all nations?

I just don't understand it. It produces mis-matches and is unhelpful in the long term.

For the good of the wider game? Because giving these Unions the money and pull to keep top home-grown players is in the interests of rugby fans across Europe? Because exposing a number of these players to Heineken Cup level is in the interests of the national teams, hence contributing to a better and more competitive Six Nations? Because it's incredibly unfair if the English and French get guaranteed representation and nobody else does?

If you look at it right now the top Welsh team are Ospreys, the top Irish team are Leinster, the top Scottish team are Glasgow and the top Italian team are Treviso.

Any of those sides could hold their own in the Aviva Prem or Top14 and if you don't think they could- you're an idiot. They are not weak sides. I would be surprised if any of them finished lower than 7th in the Pro12 this season and I view all of them as realistic contenders for the playoffs so its quite some distance from giving the Zebres of this world a free pass.

So your saying the the HC is a development tournament for the unions?

 

ALL RUGBY AT THIS LEVEL IS TO SOME DEGREE ABOUT DEVELOPING PLAYERS TO THE HIGHEST LEVEL, WHICH IS TEST RUGBY.

Thats not all it's about. But it's part of an ecosystem, it feeds into the levels above club rugby and the levels below. If you rig the game against certain unions it will have consequences for rugby at other levels which are not desirable. European competitions don't exist in some splendid isolation. What happens here will affect the future of the Six Nations and the grassroots game in various countries. There is much more at stake here than the interests of a few club chairmen behaving like spoilt children.

Student-A1 wrote:

Notch wrote:

Cyril wrote:Why should there be guarranteed representation by all nations?

I just don't understand it. It produces mis-matches and is unhelpful in the long term.

For the good of the wider game? Because giving these Unions the money and pull to keep top home-grown players is in the interests of rugby fans across Europe? Because exposing a number of these players to Heineken Cup level is in the interests of the national teams, hence contributing to a better and more competitive Six Nations? Because it's incredibly unfair if the English and French get guaranteed representation and nobody else does?

If you look at it right now the top Welsh team are Ospreys, the top Irish team are Leinster, the top Scottish team are Glasgow and the top Italian team are Treviso.

Any of those sides could hold their own in the Aviva Prem or Top14 and if you don't think they could- you're an idiot. They are not weak sides. I would be surprised if any of them finished lower than 7th in the Pro12 this season and I view all of them as realistic contenders for the playoffs so its quite some distance from giving the Zebres of this world a free pass.

I agree that all 4 teams look like good sides and would be able to perform in the HEC. But as they are such good teams they would qualify as of right into the premier competition from the league they compete in annually, and be worthy of their place. They would then face equally worthy teams who just like them have gone through the same qualification process from their annually competed league and now meet to determine who can call themselves the premier team of the premier competition.

If we think we fairly split it up into 6, 6 and 8 for the Pro12 all four sides would qualify automatically in fact.

Spot on Notch.

Notch wrote:

beshocked wrote:Yes Gunsgerms. Ulster won it when there were no English sides. Plus everyone would want a HC semi vs Edinburgh!

Yes, indeed- Edinburghs achievement in getting to a semi-final doesn't matter. It only matters when English sides succeed in Europe.

It was shown to be a flash in the pan. Semi finalists to 0 wins is pretty extreme.

maestegmafia also Quins don't have a particularly good record in the HC. 40% win rate in the HC hardly points to the most stellar of scalps for Connacht.

Notch wrote:

nathan wrote:

Notch wrote:

Cyril wrote:Why should there be guarranteed representation by all nations?

I just don't understand it. It produces mis-matches and is unhelpful in the long term.

For the good of the wider game? Because giving these Unions the money and pull to keep top home-grown players is in the interests of rugby fans across Europe? Because exposing a number of these players to Heineken Cup level is in the interests of the national teams, hence contributing to a better and more competitive Six Nations? Because it's incredibly unfair if the English and French get guaranteed representation and nobody else does?

If you look at it right now the top Welsh team are Ospreys, the top Irish team are Leinster, the top Scottish team are Glasgow and the top Italian team are Treviso.

Any of those sides could hold their own in the Aviva Prem or Top14 and if you don't think they could- you're an idiot. They are not weak sides. I would be surprised if any of them finished lower than 7th in the Pro12 this season and I view all of them as realistic contenders for the playoffs so its quite some distance from giving the Zebres of this world a free pass.

So your saying the the HC is a development tournament for the unions?

 

ALL RUGBY AT THIS LEVEL IS TO SOME DEGREE ABOUT DEVELOPING PLAYERS TO THE HIGHEST LEVEL, WHICH IS TEST RUGBY.

Thats not all it's about. But it's part of an ecosystem, it feeds into the levels above club rugby and the levels below. If you rig the game against certain unions it will have consequences for rugby at other levels which are not desirable. European competitions don't exist in some splendid isolation. What happens here will affect the future of the Six Nations and the grassroots game in various countries. There is much more at stake here than the interests of a few club chairmen behaving like spoilt children.

no need to be a toss pot about it!

What i'm trying to say is that shoving teams in the HC that are not ready to be there yet devalues the HC. These teams should build up from the amlin, they'll learn quicker from playing teams of there own ilk than just getting whipped everytime in the HC.

nathan wrote:

Notch wrote:

nathan wrote:

Notch wrote:

Cyril wrote:Why should there be guarranteed representation by all nations?

I just don't understand it. It produces mis-matches and is unhelpful in the long term.

For the good of the wider game? Because giving these Unions the money and pull to keep top home-grown players is in the interests of rugby fans across Europe? Because exposing a number of these players to Heineken Cup level is in the interests of the national teams, hence contributing to a better and more competitive Six Nations? Because it's incredibly unfair if the English and French get guaranteed representation and nobody else does?

If you look at it right now the top Welsh team are Ospreys, the top Irish team are Leinster, the top Scottish team are Glasgow and the top Italian team are Treviso.

Any of those sides could hold their own in the Aviva Prem or Top14 and if you don't think they could- you're an idiot. They are not weak sides. I would be surprised if any of them finished lower than 7th in the Pro12 this season and I view all of them as realistic contenders for the playoffs so its quite some distance from giving the Zebres of this world a free pass.

So your saying the the HC is a development tournament for the unions?

 

ALL RUGBY AT THIS LEVEL IS TO SOME DEGREE ABOUT DEVELOPING PLAYERS TO THE HIGHEST LEVEL, WHICH IS TEST RUGBY.

Thats not all it's about. But it's part of an ecosystem, it feeds into the levels above club rugby and the levels below. If you rig the game against certain unions it will have consequences for rugby at other levels which are not desirable. European competitions don't exist in some splendid isolation. What happens here will affect the future of the Six Nations and the grassroots game in various countries. There is much more at stake here than the interests of a few club chairmen behaving like spoilt children.

no need to be a toss pot about it!

What i'm trying to say is that shoving teams in the HC that are not ready to be there yet devalues the HC. These teams should build up from the amlin, they'll learn quicker from playing teams of there own ilk than just getting whipped everytime in the HC.

Well said Nathan.

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

nathan wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:What is not addressed in this piece and what is the crux of much vented anger is that we do not trust the LNR or PRL to set up a fair and even competition.

Exactly. ERC aren't perfect but at least the unions - all unions - have an input.

there is no reason why something similar couldn't be set up in the new competition with a representative from each league/nation

The problem is exactly this 'league / nation' bit. The PRL / LNR are not the equivalent of a national rugby union. To be frank, they need to know their place, which is below that of the RFU / FFR, who need to bring them to heel.

How exactly would you do that then? If there was a chance for the relative unions to take more direct control of the professional game in England and France it came and went a long time ago.

If they can't or won't bring the PRL and LNR to heel, then I don't see how any other current Heino / Amlin sides can possibly join this proposed new league, as they're governed by their national unions. The IRFU and RFU, say, are equals. The IRFU and the PRL are not.

Notch wrote:

Student-A1 wrote:

Notch wrote:

Cyril wrote:Why should there be guarranteed representation by all nations?

I just don't understand it. It produces mis-matches and is unhelpful in the long term.

For the good of the wider game? Because giving these Unions the money and pull to keep top home-grown players is in the interests of rugby fans across Europe? Because exposing a number of these players to Heineken Cup level is in the interests of the national teams, hence contributing to a better and more competitive Six Nations? Because it's incredibly unfair if the English and French get guaranteed representation and nobody else does?

If you look at it right now the top Welsh team are Ospreys, the top Irish team are Leinster, the top Scottish team are Glasgow and the top Italian team are Treviso.

Any of those sides could hold their own in the Aviva Prem or Top14 and if you don't think they could- you're an idiot. They are not weak sides. I would be surprised if any of them finished lower than 7th in the Pro12 this season and I view all of them as realistic contenders for the playoffs so its quite some distance from giving the Zebres of this world a free pass.

I agree that all 4 teams look like good sides and would be able to perform in the HEC. But as they are such good teams they would qualify as of right into the premier competition from the league they compete in annually, and be worthy of their place. They would then face equally worthy teams who just like them have gone through the same qualification process from their annually competed league and now meet to determine who can call themselves the premier team of the premier competition.

If we think we fairly split it up into 6, 6 and 8 for the Pro12 all four sides would qualify automatically in fact.

I don't think 6, 6, and 8 is fair. I believe 6, 6, and 6 is fair. 3 leagues with each the same number of guaranteed spots. I fail to see how anyone can deem that anything but fair.

Student-A1 wrote:

Notch wrote:

Student-A1 wrote:

Notch wrote:

Cyril wrote:Why should there be guarranteed representation by all nations?

I just don't understand it. It produces mis-matches and is unhelpful in the long term.

For the good of the wider game? Because giving these Unions the money and pull to keep top home-grown players is in the interests of rugby fans across Europe? Because exposing a number of these players to Heineken Cup level is in the interests of the national teams, hence contributing to a better and more competitive Six Nations? Because it's incredibly unfair if the English and French get guaranteed representation and nobody else does?

If you look at it right now the top Welsh team are Ospreys, the top Irish team are Leinster, the top Scottish team are Glasgow and the top Italian team are Treviso.

Any of those sides could hold their own in the Aviva Prem or Top14 and if you don't think they could- you're an idiot. They are not weak sides. I would be surprised if any of them finished lower than 7th in the Pro12 this season and I view all of them as realistic contenders for the playoffs so its quite some distance from giving the Zebres of this world a free pass.

I agree that all 4 teams look like good sides and would be able to perform in the HEC. But as they are such good teams they would qualify as of right into the premier competition from the league they compete in annually, and be worthy of their place. They would then face equally worthy teams who just like them have gone through the same qualification process from their annually competed league and now meet to determine who can call themselves the premier team of the premier competition.

If we think we fairly split it up into 6, 6 and 8 for the Pro12 all four sides would qualify automatically in fact.

I don't think 6, 6, and 8 is fair. I believe 6, 6, and 6 is fair. 3 leagues with each the same number of guaranteed spots. I fail to see how anyone can deem that anything but fair.

Because the quality of the teams placed 5th and 6th in the AP is not as good as the ones placed 7th and 8th in the RP12.

maestegmafia wrote:

Student-A1 wrote:

Notch wrote:

Student-A1 wrote:

Notch wrote:

Cyril wrote:Why should there be guarranteed representation by all nations?

I just don't understand it. It produces mis-matches and is unhelpful in the long term.

For the good of the wider game? Because giving these Unions the money and pull to keep top home-grown players is in the interests of rugby fans across Europe? Because exposing a number of these players to Heineken Cup level is in the interests of the national teams, hence contributing to a better and more competitive Six Nations? Because it's incredibly unfair if the English and French get guaranteed representation and nobody else does?

If you look at it right now the top Welsh team are Ospreys, the top Irish team are Leinster, the top Scottish team are Glasgow and the top Italian team are Treviso.

Any of those sides could hold their own in the Aviva Prem or Top14 and if you don't think they could- you're an idiot. They are not weak sides. I would be surprised if any of them finished lower than 7th in the Pro12 this season and I view all of them as realistic contenders for the playoffs so its quite some distance from giving the Zebres of this world a free pass.

I agree that all 4 teams look like good sides and would be able to perform in the HEC. But as they are such good teams they would qualify as of right into the premier competition from the league they compete in annually, and be worthy of their place. They would then face equally worthy teams who just like them have gone through the same qualification process from their annually competed league and now meet to determine who can call themselves the premier team of the premier competition.

If we think we fairly split it up into 6, 6 and 8 for the Pro12 all four sides would qualify automatically in fact.

I don't think 6, 6, and 8 is fair. I believe 6, 6, and 6 is fair. 3 leagues with each the same number of guaranteed spots. I fail to see how anyone can deem that anything but fair.

Because the quality of the teams placed 5th and 6th in the AP is not as good as the ones placed 7th and 8th in the RP12.

Ridiculous comment but you do keep to form so I admire you consistency it is to be commended. You know any other split other than completely equal is not fair. If anything it is harsh on the French league, but they are willing to agree to it.

maestegmafia wrote:

Student-A1 wrote:

Notch wrote:

Student-A1 wrote:

Notch wrote:

Cyril wrote:Why should there be guarranteed representation by all nations?

I just don't understand it. It produces mis-matches and is unhelpful in the long term.

For the good of the wider game? Because giving these Unions the money and pull to keep top home-grown players is in the interests of rugby fans across Europe? Because exposing a number of these players to Heineken Cup level is in the interests of the national teams, hence contributing to a better and more competitive Six Nations? Because it's incredibly unfair if the English and French get guaranteed representation and nobody else does?

If you look at it right now the top Welsh team are Ospreys, the top Irish team are Leinster, the top Scottish team are Glasgow and the top Italian team are Treviso.

Any of those sides could hold their own in the Aviva Prem or Top14 and if you don't think they could- you're an idiot. They are not weak sides. I would be surprised if any of them finished lower than 7th in the Pro12 this season and I view all of them as realistic contenders for the playoffs so its quite some distance from giving the Zebres of this world a free pass.

I agree that all 4 teams look like good sides and would be able to perform in the HEC. But as they are such good teams they would qualify as of right into the premier competition from the league they compete in annually, and be worthy of their place. They would then face equally worthy teams who just like them have gone through the same qualification process from their annually competed league and now meet to determine who can call themselves the premier team of the premier competition.

If we think we fairly split it up into 6, 6 and 8 for the Pro12 all four sides would qualify automatically in fact.

I don't think 6, 6, and 8 is fair. I believe 6, 6, and 6 is fair. 3 leagues with each the same number of guaranteed spots. I fail to see how anyone can deem that anything but fair.

Because the quality of the teams placed 5th and 6th in the AP is not as good as the ones placed 7th and 8th in the RP12.

whats that based on exactly?

maestegmafia wrote:Because the quality of the teams placed 5th and 6th in the AP is not as good as the ones placed 7th and 8th in the RP12.

Pretty sure Gloucester and Exeter would turn over Treviso and Connacht (based on last years standings)

nathan wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:

Student-A1 wrote:

Notch wrote:

Student-A1 wrote:

Notch wrote:

Cyril wrote:Why should there be guarranteed representation by all nations?

I just don't understand it. It produces mis-matches and is unhelpful in the long term.

For the good of the wider game? Because giving these Unions the money and pull to keep top home-grown players is in the interests of rugby fans across Europe? Because exposing a number of these players to Heineken Cup level is in the interests of the national teams, hence contributing to a better and more competitive Six Nations? Because it's incredibly unfair if the English and French get guaranteed representation and nobody else does?

If you look at it right now the top Welsh team are Ospreys, the top Irish team are Leinster, the top Scottish team are Glasgow and the top Italian team are Treviso.

Any of those sides could hold their own in the Aviva Prem or Top14 and if you don't think they could- you're an idiot. They are not weak sides. I would be surprised if any of them finished lower than 7th in the Pro12 this season and I view all of them as realistic contenders for the playoffs so its quite some distance from giving the Zebres of this world a free pass.

I agree that all 4 teams look like good sides and would be able to perform in the HEC. But as they are such good teams they would qualify as of right into the premier competition from the league they compete in annually, and be worthy of their place. They would then face equally worthy teams who just like them have gone through the same qualification process from their annually competed league and now meet to determine who can call themselves the premier team of the premier competition.

If we think we fairly split it up into 6, 6 and 8 for the Pro12 all four sides would qualify automatically in fact.

I don't think 6, 6, and 8 is fair. I believe 6, 6, and 6 is fair. 3 leagues with each the same number of guaranteed spots. I fail to see how anyone can deem that anything but fair.

Because the quality of the teams placed 5th and 6th in the AP is not as good as the ones placed 7th and 8th in the RP12.

whats that based on exactly?

That there is more RP12 teams at the top of the European Rankings than AP teams. That Lower placed RP12 teams like Connacht can give top AP teams like Quins a run for their money.

Student-A1 wrote:

Notch wrote:

Student-A1 wrote:

Notch wrote:

Cyril wrote:Why should there be guarranteed representation by all nations?

I just don't understand it. It produces mis-matches and is unhelpful in the long term.

For the good of the wider game? Because giving these Unions the money and pull to keep top home-grown players is in the interests of rugby fans across Europe? Because exposing a number of these players to Heineken Cup level is in the interests of the national teams, hence contributing to a better and more competitive Six Nations? Because it's incredibly unfair if the English and French get guaranteed representation and nobody else does?

If you look at it right now the top Welsh team are Ospreys, the top Irish team are Leinster, the top Scottish team are Glasgow and the top Italian team are Treviso.

Any of those sides could hold their own in the Aviva Prem or Top14 and if you don't think they could- you're an idiot. They are not weak sides. I would be surprised if any of them finished lower than 7th in the Pro12 this season and I view all of them as realistic contenders for the playoffs so its quite some distance from giving the Zebres of this world a free pass.

I agree that all 4 teams look like good sides and would be able to perform in the HEC. But as they are such good teams they would qualify as of right into the premier competition from the league they compete in annually, and be worthy of their place. They would then face equally worthy teams who just like them have gone through the same qualification process from their annually competed league and now meet to determine who can call themselves the premier team of the premier competition.

If we think we fairly split it up into 6, 6 and 8 for the Pro12 all four sides would qualify automatically in fact.

I don't think 6, 6, and 8 is fair. I believe 6, 6, and 6 is fair. 3 leagues with each the same number of guaranteed spots. I fail to see how anyone can deem that anything but fair.

With all due respect, you're not very intelligent if you can't see how 6 teams for one nation, 6 teams for another, and then 6 to be divided between FOUR nations wouldn't be perceived as fair. To the extent that you nearly come across as a WUM in making that statement. We already accept that the English and French should have more places and larger share of the money. We're already dealing with a system that is weighted towards the English and French, we're prepared to further compromise on that and you think that 6, 6, 8 isn't fair... jesus wept.

When we talk about 6, 6, 8 that represents a MASSIVE compromise from the nations that constitute the Pro12. As in, we're giving away loads and gaining very little in return. It would require a lot of change on our side and almost no change whatsoever in France and England. It would benefit the English and French to a much great extent than anyone else. All indicators are that the other unions (IRFU, WRU, SRU, FIR) are willing to accept that. If the people in the boardrooms of the PRL and LNR have the same attitude as you then compromise is literally impossible. If thats how they look on a deal that favours them, then the process is already doomed.

maestegmafia wrote:

Student-A1 wrote:

Notch wrote:

Student-A1 wrote:

Notch wrote:

Cyril wrote:Why should there be guarranteed representation by all nations?

I just don't understand it. It produces mis-matches and is unhelpful in the long term.

For the good of the wider game? Because giving these Unions the money and pull to keep top home-grown players is in the interests of rugby fans across Europe? Because exposing a number of these players to Heineken Cup level is in the interests of the national teams, hence contributing to a better and more competitive Six Nations? Because it's incredibly unfair if the English and French get guaranteed representation and nobody else does?

If you look at it right now the top Welsh team are Ospreys, the top Irish team are Leinster, the top Scottish team are Glasgow and the top Italian team are Treviso.

Any of those sides could hold their own in the Aviva Prem or Top14 and if you don't think they could- you're an idiot. They are not weak sides. I would be surprised if any of them finished lower than 7th in the Pro12 this season and I view all of them as realistic contenders for the playoffs so its quite some distance from giving the Zebres of this world a free pass.

I agree that all 4 teams look like good sides and would be able to perform in the HEC. But as they are such good teams they would qualify as of right into the premier competition from the league they compete in annually, and be worthy of their place. They would then face equally worthy teams who just like them have gone through the same qualification process from their annually competed league and now meet to determine who can call themselves the premier team of the premier competition.

If we think we fairly split it up into 6, 6 and 8 for the Pro12 all four sides would qualify automatically in fact.

I don't think 6, 6, and 8 is fair. I believe 6, 6, and 6 is fair. 3 leagues with each the same number of guaranteed spots. I fail to see how anyone can deem that anything but fair.

Because the quality of the teams placed 5th and 6th in the AP is not as good as the ones placed 7th and 8th in the RP12.

The Blues(who finished 9th) couldnt beat Sale(who finished 10th) home or away in the HC.

woah woah woah woah woah woah woah woah ....woah!

The blues beat sale at home  

Notch wrote:

Student-A1 wrote:

Notch wrote:

Student-A1 wrote:

Notch wrote:

Cyril wrote:Why should there be guarranteed representation by all nations?

I just don't understand it. It produces mis-matches and is unhelpful in the long term.

For the good of the wider game? Because giving these Unions the money and pull to keep top home-grown players is in the interests of rugby fans across Europe? Because exposing a number of these players to Heineken Cup level is in the interests of the national teams, hence contributing to a better and more competitive Six Nations? Because it's incredibly unfair if the English and French get guaranteed representation and nobody else does?

If you look at it right now the top Welsh team are Ospreys, the top Irish team are Leinster, the top Scottish team are Glasgow and the top Italian team are Treviso.

Any of those sides could hold their own in the Aviva Prem or Top14 and if you don't think they could- you're an idiot. They are not weak sides. I would be surprised if any of them finished lower than 7th in the Pro12 this season and I view all of them as realistic contenders for the playoffs so its quite some distance from giving the Zebres of this world a free pass.

I agree that all 4 teams look like good sides and would be able to perform in the HEC. But as they are such good teams they would qualify as of right into the premier competition from the league they compete in annually, and be worthy of their place. They would then face equally worthy teams who just like them have gone through the same qualification process from their annually competed league and now meet to determine who can call themselves the premier team of the premier competition.

If we think we fairly split it up into 6, 6 and 8 for the Pro12 all four sides would qualify automatically in fact.

I don't think 6, 6, and 8 is fair. I believe 6, 6, and 6 is fair. 3 leagues with each the same number of guaranteed spots. I fail to see how anyone can deem that anything but fair.

With all due respect, you're not very intelligent if you can't see how 6 teams for one nation, 6 teams for another, and then 6 to be divided between FOUR nations wouldn't be perceived as fair. To the extent that you nearly come across as a WUM in making that statement. We already accept that the English and French should have more places and larger share of the money. We're already dealing with a system that is weighted towards the English and French, we're prepared to further compromise on that and you think that 6, 6, 8 isn't fair... jesus wept.

When we talk about 6, 6, 8 that represents a MASSIVE compromise from the nations that constitute the Pro12. As in, we're giving away loads and gaining very little in return. It would require a lot of change on our side and almost no change whatsoever in France and England. It would benefit the English and French to a much great extent than anyone else. All indicators are that the other unions (IRFU, WRU, SRU, FIR) are willing to accept that. If the people in the boardrooms of the PRL and LNR have the same attitude as you then compromise is literally impossible. If thats how they look on a deal that favours them, then the process is already doomed.

it could be argued that it would be fair as the Pro12 have a MASSIVE advantage as it stands.

"All indicators..."
What does that exactly mean? where are these indicators you speak off?

Notch wrote:

Student-A1 wrote:

Notch wrote:

Student-A1 wrote:

Notch wrote:

Cyril wrote:Why should there be guarranteed representation by all nations?

I just don't understand it. It produces mis-matches and is unhelpful in the long term.

For the good of the wider game? Because giving these Unions the money and pull to keep top home-grown players is in the interests of rugby fans across Europe? Because exposing a number of these players to Heineken Cup level is in the interests of the national teams, hence contributing to a better and more competitive Six Nations? Because it's incredibly unfair if the English and French get guaranteed representation and nobody else does?

If you look at it right now the top Welsh team are Ospreys, the top Irish team are Leinster, the top Scottish team are Glasgow and the top Italian team are Treviso.

Any of those sides could hold their own in the Aviva Prem or Top14 and if you don't think they could- you're an idiot. They are not weak sides. I would be surprised if any of them finished lower than 7th in the Pro12 this season and I view all of them as realistic contenders for the playoffs so its quite some distance from giving the Zebres of this world a free pass.

I agree that all 4 teams look like good sides and would be able to perform in the HEC. But as they are such good teams they would qualify as of right into the premier competition from the league they compete in annually, and be worthy of their place. They would then face equally worthy teams who just like them have gone through the same qualification process from their annually competed league and now meet to determine who can call themselves the premier team of the premier competition.

If we think we fairly split it up into 6, 6 and 8 for the Pro12 all four sides would qualify automatically in fact.

I don't think 6, 6, and 8 is fair. I believe 6, 6, and 6 is fair. 3 leagues with each the same number of guaranteed spots. I fail to see how anyone can deem that anything but fair.

With all due respect, you're not very intelligent if you can't see how 6 teams for one nation, 6 teams for another, and then 6 to be divided between FOUR nations wouldn't be perceived as fair. To the extent that you nearly come across as a WUM in making that statement. We already accept that the English and French should have more places and larger share of the money. We're already dealing with a system that is weighted towards the English and French, we're prepared to further compromise on that and you think that 6, 6, 8 isn't fair... jesus wept.

When we talk about 6, 6, 8 that represents a MASSIVE compromise from the nations that constitute the Pro12. As in, we're giving away loads and gaining very little in return. It would require a lot of change on our side and almost no change whatsoever in France and England. It would benefit the English and French to a much great extent than anyone else. All indicators are that the other unions (IRFU, WRU, SRU, FIR) are willing to accept that. If the people in the boardrooms of the PRL and LNR have the same attitude as you then compromise is literally impossible. If thats how they look on a deal that favours them, then the process is already doomed.

With no respect warranted or given I believe that the lack of intelligence is on your part, I never mentioned a nation competing in this club/region/province competition. I mentioned 3 competing leagues all gunning for positions in the premier European cup, with those clubs who don't manage qualification for that year being put into a worthy 2nd tier European competition. They will then have the right to go for a place the following year. No one nation will miss out on Europe and no one nation or team is given anything without it being earned. I really don't know how I can dumb that down any further so you are capable of understanding but if you need to I will strive to.

Maestegmafia Gloucester beat Connacht x 2 in the HC two season ago. Exeter beat Scarlets x2 in the HC last season.

1 win for Connacht vs Quins in 6 matches I should add means they are better than most sides in the AP? That's a bit deluded no? I don't remember Connacht giving Quins a run for their money last season in the HC.