End in sight to Euro Mess?

Reports in the Times today that agreement may be close for pan-European competitions for the next 8 seasons including Pro12/AP/T14 teams. (cannot link due to paywall).

It seems that in the last few weeks Ian Ritchie has been hosting a series of private meetings with all relevant parties to try and thrash out a deal. Interestingly PRLs representative in these meetings has been Bruce Craig - Mark McCafferty being sidelined?
Any way it seems that compromises have been reached on qualification methods, division of finances and management of the new competition. It would seem ERC are out, but the clubs will only have a say in the new competition not the full control they demanded. It even suggests we may see BT and SKY operate as joint broadcasters!!

Supposedly this new competition is almost agreed by all the relevant stakeholders (primarily the 6 Unions but also PRL/LNR). It may all be journalistic bluster - but I see no reason why a NewsCorp paper should be peddling this line if they did not believe it. After all until very recently their stories have always been heaping the utmost scorn on PRL/RFU.


So if a deal is struck that gives us a true set of pan-European competitions I can only be really pleased. I do hope that the story is true about the private meetings - as there has been far too much public posturing from people that only serves to antagonise. A public argument is much harder to heal than a private one.

So if true I guess congrats to Ian Ritchie who has kept RFU out of the limelight. Accused of sticking his head in the sands, it would suggest that he has actually been doing something useful away from the glare of the press and internet.

I need a shower now, cannot believe I just said something decent about the RFU.

If the ERC are out, and the clubs are only going to have a say, it must be the unions who are controlling matters, well anyway, I am glad that this has all been resolved, and now perhaps we can all get on with talking about RUGBY again, now, lets talk about the bluddy biased Irish refs. 

Indeed that would be good news for all

It would be pretty amusing if an agreement has been sorted out amicably behind the scenes while this forum has gone into meltdown arguing over suppositions, half-truths and complete hogwash

There is hope and thank god it's run by the unions not the club owners lackies.

Good work Ritchie...!

I guess we are all still waiting for an official announcement...!!!

The financial side of this will be interesting...?

Cyril wrote:It would be pretty amusing if an agreement has been sorted out amicably behind the scenes while this forum has gone into meltdown arguing over suppositions, half-truths and complete hogwash

Too true. Even funnier it was the middle ground that most of us have been saying would be a good solution, before we started to get side tracked into bickering.

I really hope this is true - and as VietGwent says, it wouldn't make sense for a Murdoch-owned paper to be making it up.

Fingers crossed!

It was always going to be a compromise

100% guaranteed money and qualification will not be the current ERC arrangement
100% guaranteed money and qualification will not be split equally three ways

Was there a question mark in the headline as well?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge's_law_of_headlines

LordDowlais wrote:If the ERC are out, and the clubs are only going to have a say, it must be the unions who are controlling matters, well anyway, I am glad that this has all been resolved, and now perhaps we can all get on with talking about RUGBY again, now, lets talk about the bluddy biased Irish refs. 

If the ERC are out, so are the Unions. The ERC is the organising company for European rugby for the Unions.

Or they form a new organising body?

VietGwentRevisited wrote:Or they form a new organising body?

.... with the same board of directors?

The only reason the Premiership Clubs want rid of the ERC is because they are in deep Poopie with the ERC & Sky for selling ERC's property to BT.

Sin é wrote:

VietGwentRevisited wrote:Or they form a new organising body?

.... with the same board of directors?

The only reason the Premiership Clubs want rid of the ERC is because they are in deep Poopie with the ERC & Sky for selling ERC's property to BT.

While that may be a reason I'm fairly sure it's not the only reason, there has been a lot of discontent before this

ChequeredJersey wrote:

Sin é wrote:

VietGwentRevisited wrote:Or they form a new organising body?

.... with the same board of directors?

The only reason the Premiership Clubs want rid of the ERC is because they are in deep Poopie with the ERC & Sky for selling ERC's property to BT.

While that may be a reason I'm fairly sure it's not the only reason, there has been a lot of discontent before this

The deal with BT was done after the PRL and LNR had already handed in their notice from the ERC, so your right there was already unrest prior to the BT deal being struck.

It was not ERC's property. The media rights belong to PLR/RFU with PRL believing they own them due to their deal with RFU.Just because ERC had the rights up to now doesnt mean they keep them as the accord was coming to an end & the PRL/LNR had given notice so where no longer covered by ERC. Where as it seems that ERC did sell the Rights to PRL games that they didnt have.

ChequeredJersey wrote:

Sin é wrote:

VietGwentRevisited wrote:Or they form a new organising body?

.... with the same board of directors?

The only reason the Premiership Clubs want rid of the ERC is because they are in deep Poopie with the ERC & Sky for selling ERC's property to BT.

While that may be a reason I'm fairly sure it's not the only reason, there has been a lot of discontent before this

Yea, going back to 1995 when the English clubs didn't get involved in the competition. Then they stayed out again in 1999, and 2007 it was the French clubs who did the running, using the hosting of a world cup back then as well to try and blackmail their Unions. It didn't work in 2007 and its not going to work in 2013.


Worth reading again the IRB's view of the LNR's tactics. (statement by Syd Miller, IRB President then).

"It is unbelievable that one man should be allowed to bring European rugby to this state. We understand that not all clubs agree. Is there no-one among the clubs of France who has the courage to say no, we will not be part of this"? asks Dr Syd Millar in a statement issued Monday on behalf of the International Rugby Board.
The decision by the French and English clubs to withdraw from the European Rugby Cup has been described as regrettable, unfortunate and shameful. It is more than that. It is absolutely disgraceful and selfish to destroy a tournament which has developed into a hugely successful and special annual rugby event that is vital to the well being of European Rugby. It will have serious consequence for world rugby.
This decision is not about fixing match schedule congestion in France as was first suggested. Indeed it is difficult for the average Rugby supporter to understand why Serge Blanco has withdrawn the French clubs. The IRB made the concession of allowing the French rugby premiership (LNR) to play matches during Rugby World Cup to alleviate match congestion in the 2007/08 season.

He talks now for support for the English premiership clubs, he talks of respect.

What respect has he shown for those who have worked hard to develop this tournament into the excellent event that it has become? What respect is he showing for other European rugby nations who will suffer financial hardship with a direct consequence to player employment? What respect is there for the players who enjoy and want to play in the tournament? What respect is there for the supporters who have enjoyed the event and travelled in their tens of thousand throughout Europe in support of their teams therefore producing a great festival of rugby? What respect is he showing for the sponsors and media who have made their contribution to the tournament? None.

What respect has he shown for the French Rugby Federation and French rugby in a year that is hugely important for the game in France as it hosts the Rugby World Cup in September and October? He says he has no dispute with his own National Union but why is he interfering with the affairs of another Union?

It is unbelievable that one man should be allowed to bring European rugby to this state. We understand that not all clubs agree. Is there no-one among the clubs of France who has the courage to say no, we will not be part of this?

I have always had a great respect for Serge Blanco as a player and a person but in this instance I can only assume that he is being very badly advised or he is being na�ve and has allowed himself to be used by certain people in England not just to destabilise ERC but to support a challenge to the way club rugby is governed through national unions and the International Rugby Board.

Remember this is not the first time the English clubs have sought to destroy the ERC as they removed themselves from the tournament in 1998/99. Some now suggest a new ERC Championship should be put in place. We dont need a new one. We have one. What next, a new 6 Nations run by the premiership clubs?

The premiership clubs in the main are owned by entrepreneurs who are not used to and do not like deferring to governing bodies such as the RFU. They do not want to have a governing body which controls the game for the good of all and not just for a handful of elite professional clubs. The most significant and illuminating statement as to the clubs true intent came in a Sunday newspaper where Mr Barwell of the Northampton club was quoted as saying: Well run our own business and the RFU can mind their own business. What does he mean? Indeed it is difficult to get from the clubs what they want as their objectives seem to change regularly.

Strong clubs are an essential part of a healthy game. However, it is essential that a good relationship exists between Union and clubs. It is not too late for the Premiership clubs to reverse their decision and have the courage to do so and to show the rugby world at large that they are prepared to work within a system where their voice is heard and has been listened to.

The IRB is attempting to facilitate a solution and in this instance we still have time to get around the table to find a workable solution. To that effect the IRB will convene a meeting later this week with senior representatives from the European Unions involved in the ERC to determine precisely what needs to be done to ensure the future of the tournament. This meeting will follow the ERCs Shareholders and ERCs Board of Directors meetings in Dublin this week.

The Rugby Unions of the world will not allow 26 clubs to dictate the course of world Rugby and the present situation has brought those Unions even closer and more determined to preserve the game for the good of all. Rugby has progressed enormously over the past few years and will continue to grow under the guidance of the Unions and IRB who cater for the needs of all the Games stakeholders.

The IRB has obligations to all of its stakeholders and envisages meetings with other senior Unions around the world to allay their fears on the direction professional rugby is taking in Europe due to the actions of the English and French clubs.

broadlandboy wrote: The media rights belong to PLR/RFU with PRL believing they own them due to their deal with RFU.

Only in England - their remit does not extend to any of the other countries.

Of course the Unions will be involved because they will be representatives of a number of the member countries in any reconstituted body.
If the rumour is to be believed the England and French unions will retain a % of the new body as well.

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

ChequeredJersey wrote:

Sin é wrote:

VietGwentRevisited wrote:Or they form a new organising body?

.... with the same board of directors?

The only reason the Premiership Clubs want rid of the ERC is because they are in deep Poopie with the ERC & Sky for selling ERC's property to BT.

While that may be a reason I'm fairly sure it's not the only reason, there has been a lot of discontent before this

The deal with BT was done after the PRL and LNR had already handed in their notice from the ERC, so your right there was already unrest prior to the BT deal being struck.

I think members of board of directors have a legal duty not to undermine companies they are directors of. At that time, the PRL & LNR were still members of that board and would have seen the details of the Sky deal that the ERC signed.

Glad to see none of us are seeing things in black and white and refusing to accept that both (well, all, there are more than 2) sides have a large chunk of responsibility for the way things have panned out!

Sin é wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

ChequeredJersey wrote:

Sin é wrote:

VietGwentRevisited wrote:Or they form a new organising body?

.... with the same board of directors?

The only reason the Premiership Clubs want rid of the ERC is because they are in deep Poopie with the ERC & Sky for selling ERC's property to BT.

While that may be a reason I'm fairly sure it's not the only reason, there has been a lot of discontent before this

The deal with BT was done after the PRL and LNR had already handed in their notice from the ERC, so your right there was already unrest prior to the BT deal being struck.

I think members of board of directors have a legal duty not to undermine companies they are directors of. At that time, the PRL & LNR were still members of that board and would have seen the details of the Sky deal that the ERC signed.

Didn't ERC sign the renual on the Sky deal after the PRL/LNR had handed in their notice, that too is pretty iffy.


Anyway lets not get too hung up on arguing the same old arguement that we have for a good while now. It looks like a compromise has been reached, lets just be cheerful for that.

You know what - there may be an actual way out of this mess, but people would much rather though dung.

As to seeing details of the Sky Deal - people have been quoted in the press to say they were not shown the details nor did they sign a new deal with Sky. Now they could be lying - or they could be telling the truth. If they are telling the truth well that is a whole new can of poopie.

I truly hope a deal can be reached.
I hope that deal does not abandon the minnows - and actually opens up routes for the competition to genuinely expand beyond 6 nations.

I equally hope it is a deal that everyone is a little unhappy with - as that would probably mean a fair deal had been agreed.

So the battle for the future of european rugby may be coming to an end, but the battle for who gets to claim victory is only just beginning. As for the conflict over the causes of the battle - I doubt that will ever end...

lostinwales wrote:So the battle for the future of european rugby may be coming to an end, but the battle for who gets to claim victory is only just beginning. As for the conflict over the causes of the battle - I doubt that will ever end...

spot on

let me see if i can find a long irrelevant speech from 6 years ago to prove the accuracy of your statement... 

lostinwales wrote:So the battle for the future of european rugby may be coming to an end, but the battle for who gets to claim victory is only just beginning. As for the conflict over the causes of the battle - I doubt that will ever end...

and its going to be ugly, mean, petty, offensive and overall pretty funny. but seriously why doesnt v2 set up a separate forum area with slightly different rules (access required so no outsiders can be accidentally offended) where all the bile can be flung rather than it overflowing here?

Quins - you mean like a HEC/RCC version of fight club?    Love the idea, but can't see it happening any time soon.

 

ScarletSpiderman wrote:Quins - you mean like a HEC/RCC version of fight club?     Love the idea, but can't see it happening any time soon.

First rule of HEC/RCC fight club - you don't post (facts) about HEC/RCC fight club  

Irish Londoner wrote: 

ScarletSpiderman wrote:Quins - you mean like a HEC/RCC version of fight club?     Love the idea, but can't see it happening any time soon.

First rule of HEC/RCC fight club - you don't post (facts) about HEC/RCC fight club  

facts would also be banned from the thread. they just get in the way of a good opinion.

and of course...

franglos get to be brad pitt  

quinsforever wrote:

lostinwales wrote:So the battle for the future of european rugby may be coming to an end, but the battle for who gets to claim victory is only just beginning. As for the conflict over the causes of the battle - I doubt that will ever end...

spot on

let me see if i can find a long irrelevant speech from 6 years ago to prove the accuracy of your statement... 

Its very relevant ... its the same battle everytime - who controls rugby - the PRL/LNR or the Unions.

So there looks like there will be a Euro Competition, now theres a surprise.

Sin é wrote:

quinsforever wrote:

lostinwales wrote:So the battle for the future of european rugby may be coming to an end, but the battle for who gets to claim victory is only just beginning. As for the conflict over the causes of the battle - I doubt that will ever end...

spot on

let me see if i can find a long irrelevant speech from 6 years ago to prove the accuracy of your statement... 

Its very relevant ... its the same battle everytime - who controls rugby - the PRL/LNR or the Unions.

I agree, Sin e. It is relevant, and if steps are not taken now then maybe this issue of control will rear its ugly head yet again in another 8 seasons, if the above is true.

Sin é wrote:

quinsforever wrote:

lostinwales wrote:So the battle for the future of european rugby may be coming to an end, but the battle for who gets to claim victory is only just beginning. As for the conflict over the causes of the battle - I doubt that will ever end...

spot on

let me see if i can find a long irrelevant speech from 6 years ago to prove the accuracy of your statement... 

Its very relevant ... its the same battle everytime - who controls rugby - the PRL/LNR or the Unions.

Nigel Wray cnbc interview yday - "When people say it is not about the money, what they always mean is that it's about the money"

this time around prl/lnr have a bigger money deal. last time they were just threatening not to participate/renew ERC agreement.

see quote above.

Taking control of the competition means controlling the money as well.

IRB statement wrote:The most significant and illuminating statement as to the clubs true intent came in a Sunday newspaper where Mr Barwell of the Northampton club was quoted as saying: Well run our own business and the RFU can mind their own business. What does he mean? Indeed it is difficult to get from the clubs what they want as their objectives seem to change regularly.

if you are unwilling to recognise that this time the relative negotiating strength is very different, then you are likely to be very very disappointed with the compromise.

quinsforever wrote:if you are unwilling to recognise that this time the relative negotiating strength is very different, then you are likely to be very very disappointed with the compromise.

A significant gain for the clubs last time was getting representation on the board of the ERC.

Give an inch and take a mile  

Sin é wrote:Taking control of the competition means controlling the money as well.

IRB statement wrote:The most significant and illuminating statement as to the clubs true intent came in a Sunday newspaper where Mr Barwell of the Northampton club was quoted as saying: Well run our own business and the RFU can mind their own business. What does he mean? Indeed it is difficult to get from the clubs what they want as their objectives seem to change regularly.

I don't know the context of the question he answered, but I do know Mr. Barwell has been very clear over many years that he wants clear, unambiguous rules governing the areas of responsibility and areas of influence between the RFU and the clubs.  For him this includes player welfare, the playing calendar, and training procedures. Also includes specific allocation of finite resources.  This is not remotely new from him, and after almost 20 years of professional Rugby, the frustrations are high.  Nor is this new between most clubs and the RFU.  You have to understand, he finds far too much ambiguity and wants rules agreed.  And a lot of the friction comes from the ambiguity.  Which is one reason why Ian Ritchie is a welcome change at the RFU - a modern sports administrator, not one of the old boys.

Sin é wrote:

quinsforever wrote:if you are unwilling to recognise that this time the relative negotiating strength is very different, then you are likely to be very very disappointed with the compromise.

A significant gain for the clubs last time was getting representation on the board of the ERC.

Give an inch and take a mile  

last time prl/lnr had a weak negotiating position and were clearly cast in role of villain, so got little public sympathy.

this time celtic unions have the weak negotiating position (its all about the money remember), and erc and celtic unions share the villain spotlight with prl (this is why prl went public with the whole spat, they didnt want private non-negotiations to make them look like truculent children come 2014 expiration of ERC agreement).

so maybe the significant gain for the unions vs what prl initially proposed, will be that they get representation on the board of newco?

but i betcha its going to be 6/6/6+2 and 1/3 money per league.

quinsforever wrote:Nigel Wray cnbc interview yday - "When people say it is not about the money, what they always mean is that it's about the money"

this time around prl/lnr have a bigger money deal. last time they were just threatening not to participate/renew ERC agreement.

see quote above.

They have a big money proposal - the only existing 'deal' part to date is for the Aviva English Premiership domestic competition.  

The problem was always that the PRL arrived aggressively and beligerently talking about having lost patience and having a 'deal' already signed and delivered for a new European competition.  They seemed to somehow presume they had everyone else's rights firmly taken care of on a piece of paper signed only by them and BT.  They were in charge... everyone else tow the line or lose out on the mucho bucks.  

But the truth was that the "bigger money" doesn't arrive unless there is a deal  And PRL seemed genuinely taken-aback that other organisations would assume direct control of their own rights and negotiate accordingly.  

The extra money offered by BT to PRL was for a European event - PRL knew they were blustering when they talked about a breakaway with France as, even if it went/goes ahead, the European offer by BT would have been substantially downgraded had only two Nations turned up to replace an already successful six Nation tournament.  
BT were after HEC - the brand that already works in the public conscience and made the entire venture appear both viable and enticing to them.  They were never after a Franglo waterdown.

quinsforever wrote:

Irish Londoner wrote: 

ScarletSpiderman wrote:Quins - you mean like a HEC/RCC version of fight club?     Love the idea, but can't see it happening any time soon.

First rule of HEC/RCC fight club - you don't post (facts) about HEC/RCC fight club  

facts would also be banned from the thread. they just get in the way of a good opinion.

and of course...

franglos get to be brad pitt  

Split personality, and fighting against themselves?  

quinsforever wrote:

Sin é wrote:

quinsforever wrote:if you are unwilling to recognise that this time the relative negotiating strength is very different, then you are likely to be very very disappointed with the compromise.

A significant gain for the clubs last time was getting representation on the board of the ERC.

Give an inch and take a mile  

last time prl/lnr had a weak negotiating position and were clearly cast in role of villain, so got little public sympathy.

this time celtic unions have the weak negotiating position (its all about the money remember), and erc and celtic unions share the villain spotlight with prl (this is why prl went public with the whole spat, they didnt want private non-negotiations to make them look like truculent children come 2014 expiration of ERC agreement).

so maybe the significant gain for the unions vs what prl initially proposed, will be that they get representation on the board of newco?

but i betcha its going to be 6/6/6+2 and 1/3 money per league.

I don't think the Celtic unions are in a weak negotiating position because you are looking at it the wrong way.

Let's assume that a France - England tournament is worth, say, £20m (I am assuming the 'travel expenses' rumour for the TV part is incorrect).
The ERC have given us a figure of £62m for the HEC/Amlin.
Simple arithmetic tells you that the value added by the involvement of the 4 Pro12 nations would be £42m.

To be clear I am not saying the Pro12 unions should get, or are worth, £42m - the value added comes from having a 6 nation competition rather than just 2.

I think almost all Celts and Italians understand that there have to be changes to the financial structure (as well as qualification etc) but it is extremely wearing to keep hearing that we are not worth very much and get subsidised.

Out of interest, if PRL are so into rewarding merit why don't they propose putting a much bigger chunk of the pot into prize money?

quinsforever wrote:

Sin é wrote:

quinsforever wrote:if you are unwilling to recognise that this time the relative negotiating strength is very different, then you are likely to be very very disappointed with the compromise.

A significant gain for the clubs last time was getting representation on the board of the ERC.

Give an inch and take a mile  

last time prl/lnr had a weak negotiating position and were clearly cast in role of villain, so got little public sympathy.

this time celtic unions have the weak negotiating position (its all about the money remember), and erc and celtic unions share the villain spotlight with prl (this is why prl went public with the whole spat, they didnt want private non-negotiations to make them look like truculent children come 2014 expiration of ERC agreement).

so maybe the significant gain for the unions vs what prl initially proposed, will be that they get representation on the board of newco?

but i betcha its going to be 6/6/6+2 and 1/3 money per league.

Not being able to show the celtic unions the deal on offer from BT isn't exactly a strong position to be in.

By the way, I don't think the PRL is getting too much sympathy from the non-English posters on this board. 

From what I heard, the 6/6/6+2 and 1/3 money per league was on offer a long time ago, but the PRL didn't want to hear about it.

If the Newco had any sense, PRL/LNR representation should be banned as they are not to be trusted as Company Directors.

SecretFly wrote:

quinsforever wrote:Nigel Wray cnbc interview yday - "When people say it is not about the money, what they always mean is that it's about the money"

this time around prl/lnr have a bigger money deal. last time they were just threatening not to participate/renew ERC agreement.

see quote above.

They have a big money proposal - the only existing 'deal' part to date is for the Aviva English Premiership domestic competition.  

The problem was always that the PRL arrived aggressively and beligerently talking about having lost patience and having a 'deal' already signed and delivered for a new European competition.  They seemed to somehow presume they had everyone else's rights firmly taken care of on a piece of paper signed only by them and BT.  They were in charge... everyone else tow the line or lose out on the mucho bucks.  

But the truth was that the "bigger money" doesn't arrive unless there is a deal  And PRL seemed genuinely taken-aback that other organisations would assume direct control of their own rights and negotiate accordingly.  

The extra money offered by BT to PRL was for a European event - PRL knew they were blustering when they talked about a breakaway with France as, even if it went/goes ahead, the European offer by BT would have been substantially downgraded had only two Nations turned up to replace an already successful six Nation tournament.  
BT were after HEC - the brand that already works in the public conscience and made the entire venture appear both viable and enticing to them.  They were never after a Franglo waterdown.

marc watson - BT retail CEO few days ago:

"We are not involved in the conversations. We have deliberately wanted to step back. We have said what we would like, we have set out the investment we are prepared to make and we hope we will be able to be involved. I really hope they grab this opportunity.

"The English-French tournament we will support, if it goes ahead, and we very much hope that if it does, then others [from Wales, Ireland, Scotland and Italy] will then join.

"We have a long-term interest in rugby and that interest is not going to go away. If we get the opportunity to broadcast European rugby we will grasp it with both hands."

no-one has shared whats in the contract, but its a credible offer from a very credible company (ie they're not going bust anytime soon), credible enough to give prl confidence to say f-off to ERC. how prl have gone about it all is kind of a red herring. everyone should put their egos aside and get the best deal they can for themselves, anything else is just fluff and nonsense, fodder for v2!  

malky1963 wrote:

quinsforever wrote:last time prl/lnr had a weak negotiating position and were clearly cast in role of villain, so got little public sympathy.

this time celtic unions have the weak negotiating position (its all about the money remember), and erc and celtic unions share the villain spotlight with prl (this is why prl went public with the whole spat, they didnt want private non-negotiations to make them look like truculent children come 2014 expiration of ERC agreement).

so maybe the significant gain for the unions vs what prl initially proposed, will be that they get representation on the board of newco?

but i betcha its going to be 6/6/6+2 and 1/3 money per league.

I don't think the Celtic unions are in a weak negotiating position because you are looking at it the wrong way.

Let's assume that a France - England tournament is worth, say, £20m (I am assuming the 'travel expenses' rumour for the TV part is incorrect).
The ERC have given us a figure of £62m for the HEC/Amlin.
Simple arithmetic tells you that the value added by the involvement of the 4 Pro12 nations would be £42m.

To be clear I am not saying the Pro12 unions should get, or are worth, £42m - the value added comes from having a 6 nation competition rather than just 2.

I think almost all Celts and Italians understand that there have to be changes to the financial structure (as well as qualification etc) but it is extremely wearing to keep hearing that we are not worth very much and get subsidised.

Out of interest, if PRL are so into rewarding merit why don't they propose putting a much bigger chunk of the pot into prize money?

Spot on there malky. I've tried to explain that numerous times but its a concept most people have trouble understanding.


Another example is from a French point of view the Pro 12 might add more value to the tournament as some of the biggest clashes of recent years involved the likes of Leinster for example, up against the top French teams like Clermont. Also look at the teams on sky tomorrow and compare them to the teams on the red button. There seems to be plenty of interest in the Pro 12 teams. Sky usually show the biggest matches.

quinsforever wrote:

Sin é wrote:

quinsforever wrote:if you are unwilling to recognise that this time the relative negotiating strength is very different, then you are likely to be very very disappointed with the compromise.

A significant gain for the clubs last time was getting representation on the board of the ERC.

Give an inch and take a mile  

last time prl/lnr had a weak negotiating position and were clearly cast in role of villain, so got little public sympathy.

this time celtic unions have the weak negotiating position (its all about the money remember), and erc and celtic unions share the villain spotlight with prl (this is why prl went public with the whole spat, they didnt want private non-negotiations to make them look like truculent children come 2014 expiration of ERC agreement).

so maybe the significant gain for the unions vs what prl initially proposed, will be that they get representation on the board of newco?

but i betcha its going to be 6/6/6+2 and 1/3 money per league.

In your dreams not a chance in hell

I think Leinster, Munster and Ospreys are the big draws from the Pro12 and will always get decent airtime and be big attractions to TV companies.

malky1963 wrote:

quinsforever wrote:

Sin é wrote:

quinsforever wrote:if you are unwilling to recognise that this time the relative negotiating strength is very different, then you are likely to be very very disappointed with the compromise.

A significant gain for the clubs last time was getting representation on the board of the ERC.

Give an inch and take a mile  

last time prl/lnr had a weak negotiating position and were clearly cast in role of villain, so got little public sympathy.

this time celtic unions have the weak negotiating position (its all about the money remember), and erc and celtic unions share the villain spotlight with prl (this is why prl went public with the whole spat, they didnt want private non-negotiations to make them look like truculent children come 2014 expiration of ERC agreement).

so maybe the significant gain for the unions vs what prl initially proposed, will be that they get representation on the board of newco?

but i betcha its going to be 6/6/6+2 and 1/3 money per league.

I don't think the Celtic unions are in a weak negotiating position because you are looking at it the wrong way.

Let's assume that a France - England tournament is worth, say, £20m (I am assuming the 'travel expenses' rumour for the TV part is incorrect).
The ERC have given us a figure of £62m for the HEC/Amlin.
Simple arithmetic tells you that the value added by the involvement of the 4 Pro12 nations would be £42m.

To be clear I am not saying the Pro12 unions should get, or are worth, £42m - the value added comes from having a 6 nation competition rather than just 2.

I think almost all Celts and Italians understand that there have to be changes to the financial structure (as well as qualification etc) but it is extremely wearing to keep hearing that we are not worth very much and get subsidised.

Out of interest, if PRL are so into rewarding merit why don't they propose putting a much bigger chunk of the pot into prize money?

i certainly would be in favour of that, as long as there was no automatic qualification for ANY clubs. however i suspect you will find that only the franglo clubs have the budgets to cope with the volatility of revenue associated with a large performance-based component.

and i'm not sure the PRL are into rewarding merit per se, i think they represent owners who want to make money and achieve sporting success.

Look, the PRL split the money they earn in the HCup between all teams (i.e., looking out for their weaker clubs and at the expense of the Celts&Italian weaker teams).

Yet the celts&Italians are the baddies for wanting to hold onto as much money as possible for our weaker teams who are not going to help develop the game (unless its paying more money for south sea islanders to play in their competition and who will never represent their own country).

strength of negotiating position is based on 1) what people bring to the table 2) consequences of no deal at all. Upside and downside.

people can and are arguing about 1) all day long.

consequences of 2) no deal are pretty devastating for celtic unions finances and ability to run competitive pro teams.

thats why i think the prl/lnr negotiating position is stronger.

Sin é wrote:Look, the PRL split the money they earn in the HCup between all teams (i.e., looking out for their weaker clubs and at the expense of the Celts&Italian weaker teams).

Yet the celts&Italians are the baddies for wanting to hold onto as much money as possible for our weaker teams who are not going to help develop the game (unless its paying more money for south sea islanders to play in their competition and who will never represent their own country).

prl split the money because all 12 teams compete in europe. i know its easy to forget about the amlin when you dont have any teams in it.

there are no goodies or baddies. just clubs, unions and broadcasters trying to get the most money they can from euro club competition.

All our teams are in Europe this year again