End in sight to Euro Mess?

First topic message reminder :

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.

LordDowlais wrote:Beshocked, you really are insular when it comes to understanding other people points of view, I understand that you see you club as the pinnacle of your rugby, do I mock you or tell you that you are wrong ? No, I do not. International rugby does not in anyway damage the identity of the clubs in Wales, what evidence do you have of this ? The WRU at the moment do not make anywhere near enough money to keep all the starts in Wales, not with what a dozen or so very rich clubs can offer anyway, I have never talked about lack of money, and I can see the argument that each region will have more money than they do now if they went along with the PRL's idea, but we do not see it this way in Wales, the regions know that the WRU needs the money so they can use it on ALL area's of Welsh from the bottom up, thus the George Norths of this world can be replaced with other off the production line.

the one thing about this player-retention debate that irks me, is if international rugby is so much more important in celtic nations than club rugby, why would the players leave their home nation to live and ply their trade in another country for a few dollars more? surely their loyalty could be repaid by getting central contracts or getting more popular adulation (which they wouldnt get in france allegedly - oh wait, johnny wilkinson is far more loved in toulon than he ever was in england, and turned down a lions tour spot until his domestic league was over!!!!!!)

was amused to see on the lions video preview thread a quote from ronan o'gara saying that HC rugby was more important to many irish players than the 6N!

Notch wrote:Of course Edinburgh got to the semi-finals, and deservedly so, in 2012 but had a nightmare domestic season. It's not unheard of for an average team to have an excellent Cup run. It's part of the romance and magic of Cup rugby.

There's no place in the meritocratized world of coefficients for any more of that sentimental nonsense.

And completely unworkable as its about 6 unions not 3 leagues.  

TJ Going that route will result in a situation similar to the English football premier league with the rich clubs getting richer creating a bigger divide between the haves & have nots

Fair enough - just thinking aloud and looking for solutions to keep everyone happy.

quinsforever wrote:i have a new proposal:

each country negotiates their own TV rights to euro cup games
all those monies go into a communal pot
each country's teams get money according to the following formula: 50% of their own nations contribution from tv rights to the communal pot, 50% from performance within the competition
no nation gets any guaranteed qualification spots to top-tier competition, but in the first year we go with 6/6/8 (8 for rabo)
each year after that, the allocation of spaces per league varies according to how the teams from each league performed against each other in a rolling average of previous years, with the proviso that no league gets less than 4 teams into the top tier competition.
every team must have a minimum of 8 (or whatever can be agreed) domestic players in every european matchday squad.

value of tv rights per nation to be determined by the broadcasters who win the rights in various countries, or whomever they on-sell the rights to in the case where they have no means to broadcast in a country (eg SKY in France).

very meritocratic. very dynamic. real consequences for a league's teams underperforming. real consequences in terms of performance money for teams in the competition each year. allocation of places has to start somewhere but then it evolves. real incentive for proper maximisation of TV rights in each country.

There is some merit in that meritocratic proposal, quins.  

My reservations:

1.  The rolling average again coyly states that preference and 'meritocracy' is league rated and fixed on "what your league did over a number of years".  To me that spoils pure team meritocracy again - as 'what you did over the last number of years' can be used by the successful league to attract players and sponsors that help the top stay at the top.  A self perpetuating factory of money, buying influence, power and success.  
Now that might be a realistic business model - as investors always need to feel there is a better deal based on certainty and a worse deal based on risk - but it kills the idea of meritocracy..ie, fighting purely each year as individual teams to get to the European competition each year.  Still prefer my simple "best 24 teams of the season" across all three leagues based on points, tries etc. Best of one year then play in the next year's HC.

2.  The salaries would have to be more formally controlled on a European wide basis if true meritocracy rules.  You simply can't have a modern competition whereby some teams flourish because of super rich sugar-daddies; and others shrivel and die because their only means of competing against big money sides is the quality of the players they produce - players who get continually bought up by the sugar-daddy sides.
People can call that system what they like (and Premiership football excels at the model) but it is in no way 'fair' or 'meritocratic' - it's a cartel of a small number of superclubs using purchasing power to stay there.

3.  Lastly I'd up your number of home based player minimum to about 10 or 11.  If teams have faith in their ability and history then they should trust to that ability and agree to risk all on the basis that it 'breeds' a better class of player than its rivals.

Broadway do you watch the PL?

do you realise that its actually one of(if not the most) competitive leagues in europe.. Do you realise we have competitive games week on week. Sunderland could turn over Citeh and no one would be that surprised. however would that happen in any of the other big leagues in europe(spain or germany) - would that even happen in the average leagues in europe(scotland, holland, sweden)

the answer is a resounding NO.

My team palace just got up last year- the team got 60 m for going up(in extra revenue, if(and in all likelihood) we go down next year - we get 15 m a year in parachute payments for 4 years- so we can sustain any extra spending.


This nonsense PL talk- Is just that to be honest..

quinsforever wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:Beshocked, you really are insular when it comes to understanding other people points of view, I understand that you see you club as the pinnacle of your rugby, do I mock you or tell you that you are wrong ? No, I do not. International rugby does not in anyway damage the identity of the clubs in Wales, what evidence do you have of this ? The WRU at the moment do not make anywhere near enough money to keep all the starts in Wales, not with what a dozen or so very rich clubs can offer anyway, I have never talked about lack of money, and I can see the argument that each region will have more money than they do now if they went along with the PRL's idea, but we do not see it this way in Wales, the regions know that the WRU needs the money so they can use it on ALL area's of Welsh from the bottom up, thus the George Norths of this world can be replaced with other off the production line.

the one thing about this player-retention debate that irks me, is if international rugby is so much more important in celtic nations than club rugby, why would the players leave their home nation to live and ply their trade in another country for a few dollars more? surely their loyalty could be repaid by getting central contracts or getting more popular adulation (which they wouldnt get in france allegedly - oh wait, johnny wilkinson is far more loved in toulon than he ever was in england, and turned down a lions tour spot until his domestic league was over!!!!!!)

was amused to see on the lions video preview thread a quote from ronan o'gara saying that HC rugby was more important to many irish players than the 6N!

Sorry, I was talking about us fans, when I said that we see the national team as far more important, but it could be said the same about the players, when they have it written in their contract that they are allowed to leave for international duty, at the end of the day, you cannot blame a player for going to do the same job for about three times the money elsewhere.

Biltong wrote:when does this all come to an end now?

Only when the internet dies, my friend. Only then.............

When is the next meeting then???

Reports vaguely suggest this week. Though the official one is a week wednesday.

Reports vary a great deal between newspapers but It does look like Ritchie and Beaumont have done a great job of getting parties to agree. Well done RFU...!!!

Though reports, certainly the Guardian, lead us to believe the new comp will be the PRLs rugby championship, the PRL have been rather quiet.

Although not a massive amount of factual evidence is apparent either way. I would be inclined to believe TJ has got the story about right in his post a few pages back, it is pretty much what all but the most ardent apologist have been saying for a long while now.

TJ wrote:This is one of the things I don't understand.  To me its so obvious that the PRL had no intention of negotiating right from the word go.  the BT deal without even the knowledge of the RFU, the stance taken which has been totally inflexible and clearly unacceptable to everyone else.

Its only now they have found that they are isolated they are beginning to look for a compromise.  I bet the RFU have basically told tehm - find a compromie or we come out against you as well

fair points SF

re the general point of certain clubs getting all the money - in the AP it is absolutely clear to me, and the AP owners that european club competition money gets split equally between all the teams at the moment because the PRL wants the AP to be as competitive as it can be and to grow as a spectacle and to make money for as many if not all AP teams if possible. thats why they have a salary cap too. they clearly aspire to be as professional, commercially successful and profitable as the NFL for as many teams as possible.

if this general principle of having the closest competition we possibly can extends to european competitions, then i agree that some form of european salary cap makes total sense. going to be a pig to negotiate, but would definitely help.

The PRL folk don't give a stuff about meritocracy. They want nothing more than half a dozen English juggernaut teams slugging it out with half a dozen identical French outfits, with a couple of the Irish sides thrown in for 'European' flavour.

When they realise how dull this is (and get frustrated by the Irish winning it every year) they'll start jazzing it up with player-cam, ref-cam, cheerleader-upskirt-cam until, in three or four years time, the Franglo will be played by teams in spandex, on roller skates, trying to shove a metal rugby ball through a hoop whilst being chased by lunatic bikers carrying chainsaws.

Rugby cannot let this happen.

Casartelli wrote:The PRL folk don't give a stuff about meritocracy.  They want nothing more than half a dozen English juggernaut teams slugging it out with half a dozen identical French outfits, with a couple of the Irish sides thrown in for 'European' flavour.

When they realise how dull this is (and get frustrated by the Irish winning it every year) they'll start jazzing it up with player-cam, ref-cam, cheerleader-upskirt-cam until, in three or four years time, the Franglo will be played by teams in spandex, on roller skates, trying to shove a metal rugby ball through a hoop whilst being chased by lunatic bikers carrying chainsaws.

Rugby cannot let this happen.

 post of the day  

Casartelli wrote:The PRL folk don't give a stuff about meritocracy.  They want nothing more than half a dozen English juggernaut teams slugging it out with half a dozen identical French outfits, with a couple of the Irish sides thrown in for 'European' flavour.

When they realise how dull this is (and get frustrated by the Irish winning it every year) they'll start jazzing it up with player-cam, ref-cam, cheerleader-upskirt-cam until, in three or four years time, the Franglo will be played by teams in spandex, on roller skates, trying to shove a metal rugby ball through a hoop whilst being chased by lunatic bikers carrying chainsaws.

Rugby cannot let this happen.

The frothy stuff dribbling from the side of your mouth isn't normal dude! get it seen to

beshocked wrote:If the Irish care so much about their regions why not give so more money to Connacht? You have been happy to keep them as your poor unfortunate cousins.

I don't think you know what you are talking about here. IRFU investment has gone up. For instance they don't have a quota of NIQ players like the other provinces. They have a former Super Rugby coach like the other provinces. They just recruited the captain of the Chiefs (who have won back-to-back Super Rugby Titles.

They also had a deficit of 500K this last season which the IRFU is covering for them.

All-in-all, Connacht's lot has improved.

mystiroakey wrote:Broadway do you watch the PL?

do you realise that its actually one of(if not the most) competitive leagues in europe.. Do you realise we have competitive games week on week. Sunderland could turn over Citeh and no one would be that surprised. however would that happen in any of the other big leagues in europe(spain or germany) - would that even happen in the average leagues in europe(scotland, holland, sweden)

the answer is a resounding NO.

My team palace just got up last year- the team got 60 m for going up(in extra revenue, if(and in all likelihood) we go down next year - we get 15 m a year in parachute payments for 4 years- so we can sustain any extra spending.


This nonsense PL talk- Is just that to be honest..

How many teams have won the PL in the last 20 year - 4

That is not a competitive league and, at most, there are only 2 others (Spurs and Liverpool) who ever will.
It is that type of situation Rugby needs to avoid

quinsforever wrote:fair points SF

re the general point of certain clubs getting all the money - in the AP it is absolutely clear to me, and the AP owners that european club competition money gets split equally between all the teams at the moment because the PRL wants the AP to be as competitive as it can be and to grow as a spectacle and to make money for as many if not all AP teams if possible. thats why they have a salary cap too. they clearly aspire to be as professional, commercially successful and profitable as the NFL for as many teams as possible.

if this general principle of having the closest competition we possibly can extends to european competitions, then i agree that some form of european salary cap makes total sense. going to be a pig to negotiate, but would definitely help.

And why do you think the PRL have a salary cap? Leicester, Bath & Sarries would love to get rid of it. Its the rest of the PRL who keep them in line.

I would be quite happy to bring in greater competition to Pro12 entries i.e. 1 each plus 4from league position but I thing a quid pro quo would be reasonable.

Say only 5 players not qualified for the country, of the team in question, in each squad.
Woudl assist in development in the country as well

Seems reasonable

quinsforever wrote:fair points SF

re the general point of certain clubs getting all the money - in the AP it is absolutely clear to me, and the AP owners that european club competition money gets split equally between all the teams at the moment because the PRL wants the AP to be as competitive as it can be and to grow as a spectacle and to make money for as many if not all AP teams if possible. thats why they have a salary cap too. they clearly aspire to be as professional, commercially successful and profitable as the NFL for as many teams as possible.

if this general principle of having the closest competition we possibly can extends to european competitions, then i agree that some form of european salary cap makes total sense. going to be a pig to negotiate, but would definitely help.

so why does speading the money widely and "fairly" not apply to the other unions? the PRL want to double their share of the take and give the rest much smaller shares

geoff998rugby wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:Broadway do you watch the PL?

do you realise that its actually one of(if not the most) competitive leagues in europe.. Do you realise we have competitive games week on week. Sunderland could turn over Citeh and no one would be that surprised. however would that happen in any of the other big leagues in europe(spain or germany) - would that even happen in the average leagues in europe(scotland, holland, sweden)

the answer is a resounding NO.

My team palace just got up last year- the team got 60 m for going up(in extra revenue, if(and in all likelihood) we go down next year - we get 15 m a year in parachute payments for 4 years- so we can sustain any extra spending.


This nonsense PL talk- Is just that to be honest..

How many teams have won the PL in the last 20 year - 4

That is not a competitive league and, at most, there are only 2 others (Spurs and Liverpool) who ever will.
It is that type of situation Rugby needs to avoid

5 have won btw 


Yet its the best sporting league on the planet earth. and compared to scottish football or spanish football(two ends of the spectrum) is highly competitive. What we dont want is rugby turning into the SPL- that would be the biggest nightmare you could think off.

Why do people pick on the PL when its actually one of the most competitive football leagues around is beyond me- but ok. They are the big evil corporation that need to be targeted.. People forget that they actually make a lot of money for everyone in the UK, and is very very positive!

geoff998rugby wrote:I would be quite happy to bring in greater competition to Pro12 entries i.e. 1 each plus 4from league position but I thing a quid pro quo would be reasonable.

Say only 5 players not qualified for the country, of the team in question, in each squad.
Woudl assist in development in the country as well

Seems reasonable

to me the quid pro quo is 5/5/8+2. Everyone gives up something but the best leagues can get the two extra places.

I don't think Leicester want to get rid of the cap, they may want it increased,as they are self financing with no sugar daddy. If the cap went you could see more sugar daddies & racing wage inflation

Myst
How many of the PL clubs are self financing?

TJ wrote:

geoff998rugby wrote:I would be quite happy to bring in greater competition to Pro12 entries i.e. 1 each plus 4from league position but I thing a quid pro quo would be reasonable.

Say only 5 players not qualified for the country, of the team in question, in each squad.
Woudl assist in development in the country as well

Seems reasonable

to me the quid pro quo is 5/5/8+2.  Everyone gives up something but the best leagues can get the two extra places.

See I disagree with that - what is this fascination with +2.

You win a low grade competion (Amlin) so you qualify - why??

As to the HC winners each country can easily let the HC in at the expense of the bottom team in the respective selection procedures

broadlandboy wrote:Myst
How many of the PL clubs are self financing?

every one

Nonsense - many of them run huge deficits

mystiroakey wrote:

geoff998rugby wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:Broadway do you watch the PL?

do you realise that its actually one of(if not the most) competitive leagues in europe.. Do you realise we have competitive games week on week. Sunderland could turn over Citeh and no one would be that surprised. however would that happen in any of the other big leagues in europe(spain or germany) - would that even happen in the average leagues in europe(scotland, holland, sweden)

the answer is a resounding NO.

My team palace just got up last year- the team got 60 m for going up(in extra revenue, if(and in all likelihood) we go down next year - we get 15 m a year in parachute payments for 4 years- so we can sustain any extra spending.


This nonsense PL talk- Is just that to be honest..

How many teams have won the PL in the last 20 year - 4

That is not a competitive league and, at most, there are only 2 others (Spurs and Liverpool) who ever will.
It is that type of situation Rugby needs to avoid

5 have won btw 


Yet its the best sporting league on the planet earth. and compared to scottish football or spanish football(two ends of the spectrum) is highly competitive. What we dont want is rugby turning into the SPL- that would be the biggest nightmare you could think off.

Why do people pick on the PL when its actually one of the most competitive football leagues around is beyond me- but ok. They are the big evil corporation that need to be targeted.. People forget that they actually make a lot of money for everyone in the UK, and is very very positive!

Ok 4 in 18 years - the point stands

You definition of sporting, competitive, and best, is clearly very different one from mine.

I would not associate any of those adjective to the PL.
Biggest and a cash cow yes but sporting wise no thanks - teams like Everton, Villa, WBA, Fulham etc will NEVER EVER win the league - that = boring

geoff998rugby wrote:

TJ wrote:

geoff998rugby wrote:I would be quite happy to bring in greater competition to Pro12 entries i.e. 1 each plus 4from league position but I thing a quid pro quo would be reasonable.

Say only 5 players not qualified for the country, of the team in question, in each squad.
Woudl assist in development in the country as well

Seems reasonable

to me the quid pro quo is 5/5/8+2.  Everyone gives up something but the best leagues can get the two extra places.

See I disagree with that - what is this fascination with +2.

You win a low grade competion (Amlin) so you qualify - why??

As to the HC winners each country can easily let the HC in at the expense of the bottom team in the respective selection procedures

Its just a mechainism to allow the best leagues to get extra places. Its not something I am adamant is needed

it is crazy though when you think about the reality that the top 3 teams in the championship(to get into the PL) effectively get an extra 120m for doing so every single year and yet the ERC doesn't even make a third of that money.

freaking nuts isn't it!

geoff998rugby wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:

geoff998rugby wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:Broadway do you watch the PL?

do you realise that its actually one of(if not the most) competitive leagues in europe.. Do you realise we have competitive games week on week. Sunderland could turn over Citeh and no one would be that surprised. however would that happen in any of the other big leagues in europe(spain or germany) - would that even happen in the average leagues in europe(scotland, holland, sweden)

the answer is a resounding NO.

My team palace just got up last year- the team got 60 m for going up(in extra revenue, if(and in all likelihood) we go down next year - we get 15 m a year in parachute payments for 4 years- so we can sustain any extra spending.


This nonsense PL talk- Is just that to be honest..

How many teams have won the PL in the last 20 year - 4

That is not a competitive league and, at most, there are only 2 others (Spurs and Liverpool) who ever will.
It is that type of situation Rugby needs to avoid

5 have won btw 


Yet its the best sporting league on the planet earth. and compared to scottish football or spanish football(two ends of the spectrum) is highly competitive. What we dont want is rugby turning into the SPL- that would be the biggest nightmare you could think off.

Why do people pick on the PL when its actually one of the most competitive football leagues around is beyond me- but ok. They are the big evil corporation that need to be targeted.. People forget that they actually make a lot of money for everyone in the UK, and is very very positive!

Ok 4 in 18 years - the point stands

You definition of sporting, competitive, and best,  is clearly very different one from mine.

I would not associate any of those adjective to the PL.
Biggest and a cash cow yes but sporting wise no thanks - teams like Everton, Villa, WBA, Fulham etc will NEVER EVER win the league - that = boring

we watch it for week and week out competitive games full of the best players in the world.. The winner of the league is immaterial to 99% of the fans. The product is good enough . And that is what a sporting league is all about. And then you have all the battles in between- the title race, the CL race, the uefa race, the relegation battle!! then we have the derbys and the atmosphere. Its just unbelievable and although i love rugby and everything about it and i believe its a more honest game. The PL and the CL as competitions are the ultimate!

Its just on another level and full of excitement and competitiveness week in week out.

mystiroakey wrote:

Yet its the best sporting league on the planet earth. and compared to scottish football or spanish football(two ends of the spectrum) is highly competitive. What we dont want is rugby turning into the SPL- that would be the biggest nightmare you could think off.

Why do people pick on the PL when its actually one of the most competitive football leagues around is beyond me- but ok. They are the big evil corporation that need to be targeted.. People forget that they actually make a lot of money for everyone in the UK, and is very very positive!

Just because laliga and SPL are worse, doesnt make the Prem something good that we want to emulate. The pro football scene across europe is not something to aspire to IMO.
Yeah 5 teams have won, Man U, Arsenal. Then Chelsea get bought by a Billionaire, so they win. Then City get bought by Billionaire and they win. Blackburn spent chunks and won it once then sold off a load of the team and got relegated couple of seasons later.
Out of those teams I can only think Arsenal are something to look up to.

mystiroakey wrote:People forget that they actually make a lot of money for everyone in the UK, and is very very positive!

They make no money for us... so it's easy for the rest of us to 'forget' (and I'm afraid, honestly not even care about) the positive stuff they do for their own league.  I think that's reasonable to understand from a neutral's perspective.

Plus - blunt 'money' isn't the issue, as I always say.  Playing rugby at the highest level - ie, against the highest ranked English, French, Scottish, Welsh and Italian sides is.  Because that is also money but gained from particpation in an event rather than being given 'money' to sit in a corner away from the highest ranked contest and keep quiet.  

One is money with potential to earn more money - lucrative sponsorship deals and rated players staying with their team.  
The other is blackmail money.... "you don't need to play with us big boys to actually get some money, we'll give you some money anyway to compensate you for not playing with us. ...there's a good lad"

geoff998rugby wrote:

TJ wrote:

geoff998rugby wrote:I would be quite happy to bring in greater competition to Pro12 entries i.e. 1 each plus 4from league position but I thing a quid pro quo would be reasonable.

Say only 5 players not qualified for the country, of the team in question, in each squad.
Woudl assist in development in the country as well

Seems reasonable

to me the quid pro quo is 5/5/8+2.  Everyone gives up something but the best leagues can get the two extra places.

See I disagree with that - what is this fascination with +2.

You win a low grade competion (Amlin) so you qualify - why??

As to the HC winners each country can easily let the HC in at the expense of the bottom team in the respective selection procedures

I agree - the only reason for the Amlin qualification is to provide a carrot to make it interesting for the teams in the Amlin. You do have the problem of getting everyone to buy into it if you dont have that carrot, but it could and should be a cracking competition.

Just want to throw in that both Liverpool and Newcastle have both seriously challenged for the title though they didn't win it. Certainly the PL is as competitive as any major league in Europe probably more so. You would alos have to consider one of the greatest managers of all time staying at a single club for that entire period of time. Anyway, rugby...

Sin é wrote:

quinsforever wrote:fair points SF

re the general point of certain clubs getting all the money - in the AP it is absolutely clear to me, and the AP owners that european club competition money gets split equally between all the teams at the moment because the PRL wants the AP to be as competitive as it can be and to grow as a spectacle and to make money for as many if not all AP teams if possible. thats why they have a salary cap too. they clearly aspire to be as professional, commercially successful and profitable as the NFL for as many teams as possible.

if this general principle of having the closest competition we possibly can extends to european competitions, then i agree that some form of european salary cap makes total sense. going to be a pig to negotiate, but would definitely help.

And why do you think the PRL have a salary cap? Leicester, Bath & Sarries would love to get rid of it. Its the rest of the PRL who keep them in line.

because this is likely in my view to lead to the best commercialisation of the most competitive sporting spectacle they can organise, and hence it is, over the long term, going to make the maximum amount of money overall.

also, salary caps are anaethema to trophy club owners which prl clearly want to avoid just like everyone else in rugby.

SecretFly wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:People forget that they actually make a lot of money for everyone in the UK, and is very very positive!

They make no money for us... so it's easy for the rest of us to 'forget' (and I'm afraid, honestly not even care about) the positive stuff they do for their own league.  I think that's reasonable to understand from a neutral's perspective.

Plus - blunt 'money' isn't the issue, as I always say.  Playing rugby at the highest level - ie, against the highest ranked English, French, Scottish, Welsh and Italian sides is.  Because that is also money but gained from particpation in an event rather than being given 'money' to sit in a corner away from the highest ranked contest and keep quiet.  

One is money with potential to earn more money - lucrative sponsorship deals and rated players staying with their team.  
The other is blackmail money.... "you don't need to play with us big boys to actually get some money, we'll give you some money anyway to compensate you for not playing with us. ...there's a good lad"

Who is US?

You are Irish I take it?

You do realise that the NI is part of the UK dont you?

So yes it does actually benefit some of your population(As irish rugby is one!)

mystiroakey wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:People forget that they actually make a lot of money for everyone in the UK, and is very very positive!

They make no money for us... so it's easy for the rest of us to 'forget' (and I'm afraid, honestly not even care about) the positive stuff they do for their own league.  I think that's reasonable to understand from a neutral's perspective.

Plus - blunt 'money' isn't the issue, as I always say.  Playing rugby at the highest level - ie, against the highest ranked English, French, Scottish, Welsh and Italian sides is.  Because that is also money but gained from particpation in an event rather than being given 'money' to sit in a corner away from the highest ranked contest and keep quiet.  

One is money with potential to earn more money - lucrative sponsorship deals and rated players staying with their team.  
The other is blackmail money.... "you don't need to play with us big boys to actually get some money, we'll give you some money anyway to compensate you for not playing with us. ...there's a good lad"

Who is US?

You are Irish I take it?

You do realise that the NI is part of the UK dont you?

So yes it does actually benefit some of your population(As irish rugby is one!)

PRL funds Ulster rugby?

Funds academies?

Gives a slice to overall sporting intersts in NI?

How much?

How much?

I'd love to know how the PRL clubs fund scottish rugby as well.

Maybe I was right all along when I joked a week or two ago about the PRL taking over control of the Provinces and looking after the welfare of their TV rights etc.... telling IRFU to butt out.

TJ wrote:Nonsense - many of them run huge deficits

self financing doesn't mean they run a loss or a profit- it means they are self financed!(ie not like the irish clubs that are steamed from the IRFU and bailed out by them)

secondly the vast majority do ok and are within their means at the moment(the reason is SKY deal which is worth billions)

and even if they aren't the loss will just come out of rich owners pockets!!

TJ wrote:I'd love to know how the PRL clubs fund scottish rugby as well.

via their HC subsidy.... 

So actually running deficit financing on a huge scale. Not self finacing at all - requiring money to be given to them to stay afloat

SecretFly wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:People forget that they actually make a lot of money for everyone in the UK, and is very very positive!

They make no money for us... so it's easy for the rest of us to 'forget' (and I'm afraid, honestly not even care about) the positive stuff they do for their own league.  I think that's reasonable to understand from a neutral's perspective.

Plus - blunt 'money' isn't the issue, as I always say.  Playing rugby at the highest level - ie, against the highest ranked English, French, Scottish, Welsh and Italian sides is.  Because that is also money but gained from particpation in an event rather than being given 'money' to sit in a corner away from the highest ranked contest and keep quiet.  

One is money with potential to earn more money - lucrative sponsorship deals and rated players staying with their team.  
The other is blackmail money.... "you don't need to play with us big boys to actually get some money, we'll give you some money anyway to compensate you for not playing with us. ...there's a good lad"

Who is US?

You are Irish I take it?

You do realise that the NI is part of the UK dont you?

So yes it does actually benefit some of your population(As irish rugby is one!)

PRL funds Ulster rugby?

Funds academies?

Gives a slice to overall sporting intersts in NI?

How much?

How much?

you dont understand how much tax revenue the pl makes for the UK, the employment and the balance of payment export the pl does for the UK?

Do you not understand what affect big successful business has on the population and country!

Please tell me you are joking?

TJ wrote:So actually running deficit financing on a huge scale.  Not self finacing at all - requiring money to be given to them to stay afloat

name one club that is doing that?

quinsforever wrote:

TJ wrote:I'd love to know how the PRL clubs fund scottish rugby as well.

via their HC:doh:  subsidy....

ah - the non existant "subsidy" again. the irish get half the money the english do - as they have half the number of teams. Same amount of money per entrant. No subsidy. the only subsidy is the top 6 ap teams subsidise the bottom 6. None of which are in Scotland or ireland

TJ wrote:So actually running deficit financing on a huge scale.  Not self finacing at all - requiring money to be given to them to stay afloat

everyone is right here. lets move on from this one. i think we all agree no-one wants trophy owners in rugby, and its not likely to happen given the tiny money involved in rugby vs football, plus salary caps etc.

mystiroakey wrote:

TJ wrote:So actually running deficit financing on a huge scale.  Not self finacing at all - requiring money to be given to them to stay afloat

name one club that is doing that?

Man city.

mystiroakey wrote:

geoff998rugby wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:

geoff998rugby wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:Broadway do you watch the PL?

do you realise that its actually one of(if not the most) competitive leagues in europe.. Do you realise we have competitive games week on week. Sunderland could turn over Citeh and no one would be that surprised. however would that happen in any of the other big leagues in europe(spain or germany) - would that even happen in the average leagues in europe(scotland, holland, sweden)

the answer is a resounding NO.

My team palace just got up last year- the team got 60 m for going up(in extra revenue, if(and in all likelihood) we go down next year - we get 15 m a year in parachute payments for 4 years- so we can sustain any extra spending.


This nonsense PL talk- Is just that to be honest..

How many teams have won the PL in the last 20 year - 4

That is not a competitive league and, at most, there are only 2 others (Spurs and Liverpool) who ever will.
It is that type of situation Rugby needs to avoid

5 have won btw 


Yet its the best sporting league on the planet earth. and compared to scottish football or spanish football(two ends of the spectrum) is highly competitive. What we dont want is rugby turning into the SPL- that would be the biggest nightmare you could think off.

Why do people pick on the PL when its actually one of the most competitive football leagues around is beyond me- but ok. They are the big evil corporation that need to be targeted.. People forget that they actually make a lot of money for everyone in the UK, and is very very positive!

Ok 4 in 18 years - the point stands

You definition of sporting, competitive, and best,  is clearly very different one from mine.

I would not associate any of those adjective to the PL.
Biggest and a cash cow yes but sporting wise no thanks - teams like Everton, Villa, WBA, Fulham etc will NEVER EVER win the league - that = boring

we watch it for week and week out competitive games full of the best players in the world.. The winner of the league is immaterial to 99% of the fans. The product is good enough . And that is what a sporting league is all about. And then you have all the battles in between- the title race, the CL race, the uefa race, the relegation battle!! then we have the derbys and the atmosphere. Its just unbelievable and although i love rugby and everything about it and i believe its a more honest game. The PL and the CL as competitions are the ultimate!

Its just on another level and full of excitement and competitiveness week in week out.

And that's why England don't deseve a larger cut of the media financial pie. Most of the population prefer soccer and if anything despise rugby as they regard it as a posh game.

Unlike in France, Wales & Ireland.

Rugby is a posh game in Ireland compared to GAA. How many of the Irish Leinster players went to posh schools ?

mystiroakey wrote:

TJ wrote:So actually running deficit financing on a huge scale.  Not self finacing at all - requiring money to be given to them to stay afloat

name one club that is doing that?

Pretty much most of the England teams are running at a deficit. Only ones not are Leicester & Northampton. Sarries lost 4.5m last season.