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.

TJ wrote:

mystiroakey wrote: the rabbo with 12 teams will have more auto spots..[/color]

How on earth do you make none per country to be more than the 3.3.2.2 they have now.  How on earth do you make 6 teams from the rabo to be more than 10 there is now?  You need to understand this - no one is interested in the 2nd teir.  if its so good put more AP teams in it - the same nonsensical arguments you apply to putting more rabo teams in applies equally to the AP Its better for quins to be in the 2nd teir so they won't get thumped every week and might win a game?

this is one of the things that really annoy me about this debate.  the dual standards applied by trhe PRL apologists to the Rabo teams and the AP ones.  

the PRL subsides with anactual transfer of money the lower half of their league directly with HC money - and thats OK - but hey then try to make out that equal shares as we have no is somhow a subsidy to the Rabo teams as the english audience pays more and that is a subsidy that is wrong despite there actually being no transfer of funds so its not a subsidy

According to the PRL going into the second teir will be good for the middle ranked Rabo teams  and thats right - but the middle ranked AP teams have to stay in the top teir

Its humbug hypocisy and cant

 
 
When Exeter was in the Amlin, I was interested in it - the HC was an irrelevance. Last weekend, I would much have preferred to watch Oyannax v Worcester, than whatever HC game was on the telly (only because of the number of ex-Chiefs on each side).
 
I'm just one person, but I'm not not no one. I wonder how many of the thousands upon thousands of the followers of 13 english and french teams competing in this year's Amlin are like me.
 
Your thinking is clouded by your refusal to ascribe any value to the Amlin, or its successor. It is not as good as the HC, nor ever will be and, while not all the pool stages currently are worthwhile, there is still an attraction for fans and there is plenty of room for improvement.
 
As for middle ranked Pro12 vs middle ranked AP, aren't the proposals that teams of equal ranks in each league would be competing against each other in one or other of the two competitions?

I would rather watch watsonians V west of scotland than Edinburgh in the Amlin playing in meaningless games, Its not the same as your situation. we are building a new audience from zero and that audience has to come from in the club followers. this is why no one will come to amilin ames - they have an alternative. part of this is why saturday games get smaller crowds.

- we do not have a load of load of loyal fans like you who follow thru thick and thin. We simply do not have that history yet. Edinburgh supporters will simply revert to the clubs if the don't ave the big game to watch

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

markb wrote:

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

quinsforever wrote:

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

quinsforever wrote:"Is it worth increasing the appeal of the Amlin at the expense of the HC"

HC as we all know it is gone. no point getting too nostalgic. sh1t happens. the majority of teams and majority of money in european rugby weren't as happy with the format as you obviously were. its about what the format of any replacement is.

Well that's beside the point,is it worth increasing the appeal of the Amlin at the expense of the super duper shiny new Euro Cup.

Amlin (in format if not in name) is gone too. HC and Amlin were adminnistered by ERC. cant change one without changing the other.

Wow you are obtuse.I'll try one more time.

Is it worth increasing the appeal of the super duper shiny new 2nd tier Euro Cup at the expense of the super duper shiny new 1st tier Euro Cup?

Someone mentioned that as a Leinster fan I wouldn't care about the Amlin since I'm used to the HC but using Connacht as an example for years they toiled away in the Amlin but it was entry into the HC that increased their season ticket holders year on year and generated interest not only in HC matches but general league matches too.Connacht have come on in leaps and bounds since they gained entry  to the HC and no matter how much anyone would like to believe they would be better off competing in a lower competition real events have shown that to be completely false.

I don't agree that it would be at the expense of the 1st tier.  What predominantly makes a competition and matches worth watching is how competitive the encounters between the sides are, not what that competition is labelled.

Two competitions where the sides in each are more closely matched will make for more closer fought encounters.  The supporters and TV viewing public will respond to that.

I've already shown that is a false belief,the opposite happened in Connacht where the supporters stayed away when they were in the Amlin yet when they stepped up to the HC even though supporter didn't expect them to have a chance of getting out of their group season ticket sales sky rocketed.

hell, if my team were stuck playing rabo12 only, can only imagine attendance and interest would go up several times over if they got to play HC against top Fr and English sides  

Casartelli wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:

Casartelli wrote:This thread is probably an exact equivalent of the discussions that the 'guys' around the negotiating table for the Franglo/Euro/Unions/TV stuff are having.

What's needed is some sort of overseeing body that governs the European (and, perhaps, the World?) game of rugby that could sort all this sort of 'business' admin out in advance.

Rather than leaving it to aggressive club owners, sitting on a made up board of representative nonsense, yelling at amateur buffoons from useless unions.

what like UEFA and FIFA you mean?

Blydi good point mysti/quinsy

Internet research reveals something called the IRB.  Where are they while the fate of Euro rugby hangs in the balance?

Arranging referee seminars in Barbados and sitting on the sidelines having a wazz?

in this matter...IRB - Impotent Retrograde Bystanders

TJ wrote:Does this thread have its own gravity field yet - I am sure i read something about rotating masses getting heavier. Its sure orbiting quickly

feels more likely to be a hot air balloon candidate than small planet... 

Quins - you do not watch the Rabo. It produces a lot of exciting high quality games that are good entertainment.

Dubbelyew L Overate wrote:

TJ wrote:

mystiroakey wrote: the rabbo with 12 teams will have more auto spots..[/color]

How on earth do you make none per country to be more than the 3.3.2.2 they have now.  How on earth do you make 6 teams from the rabo to be more than 10 there is now?  You need to understand this - no one is interested in the 2nd teir.  if its so good put more AP teams in it - the same nonsensical arguments you apply to putting more rabo teams in applies equally to the AP Its better for quins to be in the 2nd teir so they won't get thumped every week and might win a game?

this is one of the things that really annoy me about this debate.  the dual standards applied by trhe PRL apologists to the Rabo teams and the AP ones.  

the PRL subsides with anactual transfer of money the lower half of their league directly with HC money - and thats OK - but hey then try to make out that equal shares as we have no is somhow a subsidy to the Rabo teams as the english audience pays more and that is a subsidy that is wrong despite there actually being no transfer of funds so its not a subsidy

According to the PRL going into the second teir will be good for the middle ranked Rabo teams  and thats right - but the middle ranked AP teams have to stay in the top teir

Its humbug hypocisy and cant

 
 
When Exeter was in the Amlin, I was interested in it - the HC was an irrelevance. Last weekend, I would much have preferred to watch Oyannax v Worcester, than whatever HC game was on the telly (only because of the number of ex-Chiefs on each side).
 
I'm just one person, but I'm not not no one. I wonder how many of the thousands upon thousands of the followers of 13 english and french teams competing in this year's Amlin are like me.
 
Your thinking is clouded by your refusal to ascribe any value to the Amlin, or its successor. It is not as good as the HC, nor ever will be and, while not all the pool stages currently are worthwhile, there is still an attraction for fans and there is plenty of room for improvement.
 
As for middle ranked Pro12 vs middle ranked AP, aren't the proposals that teams of equal ranks in each league would be competing against each other in one or other of the two competitions?

Couldn't agree more. Well said.

TJ wrote:Quins - you do not watch the Rabo.  It produces a lot of exciting high quality games that are good entertainment.

are you saying it wouldnt be more competitive if half the places in HC were up for grabs? lets still assume the money is more or less equal whether a team is in HC or Amlin going forward. wouldnt the rabo be an awful lot more competitive then?

TJ wrote:Quins - you do not watch the Rabo.  It produces a lot of exciting high quality games that are good entertainment.

however, not as exciting as getting the chance to play HC too, as soreshoulder kindly points out with connacht.

For those saying that ticket sales drop crippingly when going down to the Amlin, take a look at London Irish and Bath who all dropped from the Heineken in 2012 to the Amlin in 2013.

In 2012 London Irish got 6,700 attending against Edinburgh and 7,000 against Racing.  In 2013 they got 5,700 against Mont-de-Marsan, 7,300 against Gloucester.

In 2012 Bath got 11,000 against Glasgow and 11,700 against Montpellier. In 2013 they got 11,400 against Calvisano and 9,900 against Bucharest.

Some small reductions in a couple of games over the whole season do not destroy a club, and in any case, what we're talking about is the Amlin as it will be, not the Amlin as is.  A closer matched better promoted competition, with no bigger sides parachuting in will draw more supporters than it has in the past.

If you're playing good rugby in close fought matches the supporters will come whatever the competition is called.

More Celtic whinging. What a pathetic bunch you are.

quinsforever wrote:

TJ wrote:Quins - you do not watch the Rabo.  It produces a lot of exciting high quality games that are good entertainment.

are you saying it wouldnt be more competitive if half the places in HC were up for grabs? lets still assume the money is more or less equal whether a team is in HC or Amlin going forward. wouldnt the rabo be an awful lot more competitive then?

Nope. You cannot makea highly competitive close faught contest any more so. what yo would end up with is less exciting games as fear of loseing took over from wanting to win.

markb wrote:For those saying that ticket sales drop crippingly when going down to the Amlin, take a look at London Irish and Bath who all dropped from the Heineken in 2012 to the Amlin in 2013.

In 2012 London Irish got 6,700 attending against Edinburgh and 7,000 against Racing.  In 2013 they got 5,700 against Mont-de-Marsan, 7,300 against Gloucester.

In 2012 Bath got 11,000 against Glasgow and 11,700 against Montpellier. In 2013 they got 11,400 against Calvisano and 9,900 against Bucharest.

Some small reductions in a couple of games over the whole season do not destroy a club, and in any case, what we're talking about is the Amlin as it will be, not the Amlin as is.  A closer matched better promoted competition, with no bigger sides parachuting in will draw more supporters than it has in the past.

If you're playing good rugby in close fought matches the supporters will come whatever the competition is called.

In 09 in the Heineken Cup, London Irish got 37,323 in Twickers against Leinster.
When they played Munster, they got 20,000 in the Majeski.

Thats a big payday when you are used to getting a lot less through the turnstiles.

Interesting quote from Peter Stringer on erc website (talking how highly he rates George Ford), he says

"Europe is something that I've been involved in a lot over the years with Munster. We've been in the Heineken Cup and the knockout stages almost every year since I started," added Stringer.

"Whether it be Heineken or Amlin, I know the importance from a player's point of view and a club's point of view to be seen on the European stage.
"That's what it's all about. It's where you rate yourself and it's how you improve. That's where we want to get to - we want to be playing these Heineken Cup teams on a regular basis.
"When you look at an Amlin knockout stage, it could be the Heineken knockout stage with the quality of teams that are in it. It's an unbelievable competition and it's in our minds going forward."

markb wrote:For those saying that ticket sales drop crippingly when going down to the Amlin, take a look at London Irish and Bath who all dropped from the Heineken in 2012 to the Amlin in 2013.

In 2012 London Irish got 6,700 attending against Edinburgh and 7,000 against Racing.  In 2013 they got 5,700 against Mont-de-Marsan, 7,300 against Gloucester.

In 2012 Bath got 11,000 against Glasgow and 11,700 against Montpellier. In 2013 they got 11,400 against Calvisano and 9,900 against Bucharest.

Some small reductions in a couple of games over the whole season do not destroy a club, and in any case, what we're talking about is the Amlin as it will be, not the Amlin as is.  A closer matched better promoted competition, with no bigger sides parachuting in will draw more supporters than it has in the past.

If you're playing good rugby in close fought matches the supporters will come whatever the competition is called.

Its not the same thing tho. Certainly the scots teams do not have a loyal following with deep connections to the clubs - and they have alternatives to go to anyway and often divided loyalties. I would expect many fans to go to club games rather than watch second rate pro games. I would.

Trevor40 wrote:More Celtic whinging. What a pathetic bunch you are.

I think you mean Rabo whinging. Get with the program Trev.

I haven't noticed one italian whinge dude!

mystiroakey wrote:I haven't noticed one italian whinge dude!

i think casartelli was ironically highlighting the "leagues not unions" angle that we have been shovelling... 

Whinge, whinge, whinge. Pathetic.

TJ wrote:I would rather watch watsonians V west of scotland than Edinburgh in the Amlin playing in meaningless games,   Its not the same as your situation.  we are building a new audience from zero and that audience has to come from in the club followers.  this is why no one will come to amilin ames - they have an alternative.  part of this is why saturday games get smaller crowds.

- we do not have a load of load of loyal fans like you who follow thru thick and thin.  We simply do not have that history yet.  Edinburgh supporters will simply revert to the clubs if the don't  ave the big game to watch

Good point, but I'll persist.

Wouldn't Wasps or Stade Francais be a marketable big game, or Tom Heathcote's Bath. Newcastle would be pretty much a local derby and all the Scots in their team might add interest.

If the minnows are excluded, there'd probably be one "big" home game, perhaps two, against decent-ish english and french teams, with the other against a poor-ish team, compared to 3 big HC games. Would they be attractive compared to a 3rd and 4th game against Pro12 opposition in the same season? English teams tend to put out their front rank against their main opposition in the pool, weakened teams against the minnows, whilst French vary a bit, hence my desciption of "decent-ish".

You say that Amlin games would be meaningless but, without wishing to open wounds, how meaningful were Edinburgh's HC games last season after the first 2 or 3? Happy to note that that's changed this year.

I'm not denying that Amlin/Amlinv2 would be a step down from HC/HCv2, but I don't believe that it would be a step over a cliff.

I'm sure that attendances will vary, some considerably, from team to team, but in Exeter's case, Amlin gates were about 25% down on league average, and HC last season was about 25% up.

Trevor40 wrote:Whinge, whinge, whinge. Pathetic.

We were here first, and we'll whinge if we want to.

You say that Amlin games would be meaningless but, without wishing to open wounds, how meaningful were Edinburgh's HC games last season after the first 2 or 3? Happy to note that that's changed this year.

Not very meaningfull at all- and I can't remeber the teams either. However I would still prefer to be playing the big boys even if all we are playing for is pride.

Well this thread has circulated and masturbated its way to 20 pages. I am impressed.

Just like the Cian Healey thread which hit 20 pages. Except we kept that going because we were deliberately juvenile..........

Sin é wrote:

markb wrote:For those saying that ticket sales drop crippingly when going down to the Amlin, take a look at London Irish and Bath who all dropped from the Heineken in 2012 to the Amlin in 2013.

In 2012 London Irish got 6,700 attending against Edinburgh and 7,000 against Racing.  In 2013 they got 5,700 against Mont-de-Marsan, 7,300 against Gloucester.

In 2012 Bath got 11,000 against Glasgow and 11,700 against Montpellier. In 2013 they got 11,400 against Calvisano and 9,900 against Bucharest.

Some small reductions in a couple of games over the whole season do not destroy a club, and in any case, what we're talking about is the Amlin as it will be, not the Amlin as is.  A closer matched better promoted competition, with no bigger sides parachuting in will draw more supporters than it has in the past.

If you're playing good rugby in close fought matches the supporters will come whatever the competition is called.

In 09 in the Heineken Cup, London Irish got 37,323 in Twickers against Leinster.
When they played Munster, they got 20,000 in the Majeski.

Thats a big payday when you are used to getting a lot less through the turnstiles.

Interesting quote from Peter Stringer on erc website (talking how highly he rates George Ford), he says

"Europe is something that I've been involved in a lot over the years with Munster. We've been in the Heineken Cup and the knockout stages almost every year since I started," added Stringer.

"Whether it be Heineken or Amlin, I know the importance from a player's point of view and a club's point of view to be seen on the European stage.
"That's what it's all about. It's where you rate yourself and it's how you improve. That's where we want to get to - we want to be playing these Heineken Cup teams on a regular basis.
"When you look at an Amlin knockout stage, it could be the Heineken knockout stage with the quality of teams that are in it. It's an unbelievable competition and it's in our minds going forward."

The thing is few sides are trying to host at that level in the pool stages.  Edinburgh had Munster in their pool last season and only 6,000 turned up at Murrayfield.  Scarlets had Clermont in their pool and the stadium was half full, less people than came to any of their PRO12 Welsh derbies.

A team that's not likely to make it out of their pool in the Heineken would make more money from the extra games and bonus payments they would get from progressing to the knockout stages in the Amlin.

if this thread gets closed, its a racing certainly the argument will jump onto the recently open thread about AP TV viewing numbers just out from BT...LOL

One of my biggest concerns is about BT Sport actually. Sky Sports are showing 11 out of 12 games this weekend in the UK and Ireland.

BT have a massive amount to live up to if they inherit the tournament wholesale. I sincerely doubt that they will be capable of delivering the same quality/quantity of coverage and reach the same number of households.

I think it's an exceptionally short-sighted move to leave Sky. They have been pretty integral to the growth of the tournament.

I don't think BT necessarily want all of it. Personally I'd prefer it to be split between the two, that way we'll get more Amlin games aired.

Sky & BT just signed a deal for BT to have access to Sky's movie channels, so they're clearly getting into the negotiating & sharing mood as well.

I would much prefer BT to sky allthough the BBC would be my real wish. I will never put a penny in the hands of news corp / sky / murdoch. i have BT broadband

quinsforever wrote:

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

markb wrote:

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

quinsforever wrote:

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

quinsforever wrote:"Is it worth increasing the appeal of the Amlin at the expense of the HC"

HC as we all know it is gone. no point getting too nostalgic. sh1t happens. the majority of teams and majority of money in european rugby weren't as happy with the format as you obviously were. its about what the format of any replacement is.

Well that's beside the point,is it worth increasing the appeal of the Amlin at the expense of the super duper shiny new Euro Cup.

Amlin (in format if not in name) is gone too. HC and Amlin were adminnistered by ERC. cant change one without changing the other.

Wow you are obtuse.I'll try one more time.

Is it worth increasing the appeal of the super duper shiny new 2nd tier Euro Cup at the expense of the super duper shiny new 1st tier Euro Cup?

Someone mentioned that as a Leinster fan I wouldn't care about the Amlin since I'm used to the HC but using Connacht as an example for years they toiled away in the Amlin but it was entry into the HC that increased their season ticket holders year on year and generated interest not only in HC matches but general league matches too.Connacht have come on in leaps and bounds since they gained entry  to the HC and no matter how much anyone would like to believe they would be better off competing in a lower competition real events have shown that to be completely false.

I don't agree that it would be at the expense of the 1st tier.  What predominantly makes a competition and matches worth watching is how competitive the encounters between the sides are, not what that competition is labelled.

Two competitions where the sides in each are more closely matched will make for more closer fought encounters.  The supporters and TV viewing public will respond to that.

I've already shown that is a false belief,the opposite happened in Connacht where the supporters stayed away when they were in the Amlin yet when they stepped up to the HC even though supporter didn't expect them to have a chance of getting out of their group season ticket sales sky rocketed.

hell, if my team were stuck playing rabo12 only, can only imagine attendance and interest would go up several times over if they got to play HC against top Fr and English sides  

You don't watch the Rabo so are ignorant of the quality of rugby played in it.I do watch some of the English Premiership and can tell you that the Rabo easily matches it and at the top end surpasses it.

Notch wrote:One of my biggest concerns is about BT Sport actually. Sky Sports are showing 11 out of 12 games this weekend in the UK and Ireland.

BT have a massive amount to live up to if they inherit the tournament wholesale. I sincerely doubt that they will be capable of delivering the same quality/quantity of coverage and reach the same number of households.

I think it's an exceptionally short-sighted move to leave Sky. They have been pretty integral to the growth of the tournament.

i'm generally not so concerned. as the telecoms industry evolves, it has become abundantly clear that its all about content, and less about distribution. i know its a bit of a jump off topic,. but Netflix's decision to produce (and pay $60m to do so) a re-make of House of Cards shows that content is absolutely king. So if rugby shows more competitive games that people want to watch, then the TV rights will become more and more valuable, especially as you get broadband vs telco vs satellite vs cable companies bidding for content.

its a rugby game filmed by experienced camera crews...in fact i reckon i could provide decent rugby coverage...we could do a fanbox with a couple of 606v2 commentators in each game to provide a totally biased alternative to the objective, biased cac we get from the pro pundits etc.

seriously though, its pretty hard to f-up the content.

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

quinsforever wrote:

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

markb wrote:

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

quinsforever wrote:

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

quinsforever wrote:"Is it worth increasing the appeal of the Amlin at the expense of the HC"

HC as we all know it is gone. no point getting too nostalgic. sh1t happens. the majority of teams and majority of money in european rugby weren't as happy with the format as you obviously were. its about what the format of any replacement is.

Well that's beside the point,is it worth increasing the appeal of the Amlin at the expense of the super duper shiny new Euro Cup.

Amlin (in format if not in name) is gone too. HC and Amlin were adminnistered by ERC. cant change one without changing the other.

Wow you are obtuse.I'll try one more time.

Is it worth increasing the appeal of the super duper shiny new 2nd tier Euro Cup at the expense of the super duper shiny new 1st tier Euro Cup?

Someone mentioned that as a Leinster fan I wouldn't care about the Amlin since I'm used to the HC but using Connacht as an example for years they toiled away in the Amlin but it was entry into the HC that increased their season ticket holders year on year and generated interest not only in HC matches but general league matches too.Connacht have come on in leaps and bounds since they gained entry  to the HC and no matter how much anyone would like to believe they would be better off competing in a lower competition real events have shown that to be completely false.

I don't agree that it would be at the expense of the 1st tier.  What predominantly makes a competition and matches worth watching is how competitive the encounters between the sides are, not what that competition is labelled.

Two competitions where the sides in each are more closely matched will make for more closer fought encounters.  The supporters and TV viewing public will respond to that.

I've already shown that is a false belief,the opposite happened in Connacht where the supporters stayed away when they were in the Amlin yet when they stepped up to the HC even though supporter didn't expect them to have a chance of getting out of their group season ticket sales sky rocketed.

hell, if my team were stuck playing rabo12 only, can only imagine attendance and interest would go up several times over if they got to play HC against top Fr and English sides  

You don't watch the Rabo so are ignorant of the quality of rugby played in it.I do watch some of the English Premiership and can tell you that the Rabo easily matches it and at the top end surpasses it.

ah good, thanks for setting me straight on that then assoreleftshoulder. will just ignore silly things like attendance figures, value of tv rights, and comments of others who do watch rabo matches, as they are all obviously wrong.

timhen wrote:I don't think BT necessarily want all of it.  Personally I'd prefer it to be split between the two, that way we'll get more Amlin games aired.

Sky & BT just signed a deal for BT to have access to Sky's movie channels, so they're clearly getting into the negotiating & sharing mood as well.

they compete in lots of areas. sky and bt are nowhere near as mortal enemies as most fans on this forum are in relation to this topic. because it's just business.

timhen wrote:The thing is few sides are trying to host at that level in the pool stages.  Edinburgh had Munster in their pool last season and only 6,000 turned up at Murrayfield.  Scarlets had Clermont in their pool and the stadium was half full, less people than came to any of their PRO12 Welsh derbies.

A team that's not likely to make it out of their pool in the Heineken would make more money from the extra games and bonus payments they would get from progressing to the knockout stages in the Amlin.

Munster played Edinburgh 4 times last year. That is about average for a Edinburgh v Munster game.

Bath v Saracens will probably attract less in this new Cup as they do in the League and the LV Cup. They could end up meeting 6 times  

The derbies will always do better, particularly if they are around christmas/new year when everyone is home.

Gates are very important. In the LI v Munster game they would have sold approx. 12K tickets more than they normally sell in a League Game - that would be 300K plus more than usual. There won't be those kind of payments in the Amlin.

quinsforever wrote:

timhen wrote:I don't think BT necessarily want all of it.  Personally I'd prefer it to be split between the two, that way we'll get more Amlin games aired.

Sky & BT just signed a deal for BT to have access to Sky's movie channels, so they're clearly getting into the negotiating & sharing mood as well.

they compete in lots of areas. sky and bt are nowhere near as mortal enemies as most fans on this forum are in relation to this topic. because it's just business.

Sky Sports raison d'etre is from sport - they won't be sharing any of those if they can help it.

quinsforever wrote:ah good, thanks for setting me straight on that then assoreleftshoulder. will just ignore silly things like attendance figures, value of tv rights, and comments of others who do watch rabo matches, as they are all obviously wrong.

Classy it must have taken you a while to come up with that,at least now I know I'm debating with a child.

Sin é wrote:

quinsforever wrote:

timhen wrote:I don't think BT necessarily want all of it.  Personally I'd prefer it to be split between the two, that way we'll get more Amlin games aired.

Sky & BT just signed a deal for BT to have access to Sky's movie channels, so they're clearly getting into the negotiating & sharing mood as well.

they compete in lots of areas. sky and bt are nowhere near as mortal enemies as most fans on this forum are in relation to this topic. because it's just business.

Sky Sports raison d'etre is from sport - they won't be sharing any of those if they can help it.

my bad. i thought sky's raison d'etre was making money.

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

quinsforever wrote:ah good, thanks for setting me straight on that then assoreleftshoulder. will just ignore silly things like attendance figures, value of tv rights, and comments of others who do watch rabo matches, as they are all obviously wrong.

Classy it must have taken you a while to come up with that,at least now I know I'm debating with a child.

i wanted to give you the opportunity to join the moral high ground. the celtic unions who are safeguarding the very soul of rugby shouldn't be stuck on their own up there. 

quinsforever wrote:

Notch wrote:One of my biggest concerns is about BT Sport actually. Sky Sports are showing 11 out of 12 games this weekend in the UK and Ireland.

BT have a massive amount to live up to if they inherit the tournament wholesale. I sincerely doubt that they will be capable of delivering the same quality/quantity of coverage and reach the same number of households.

I think it's an exceptionally short-sighted move to leave Sky. They have been pretty integral to the growth of the tournament.

i'm generally not so concerned. as the telecoms industry evolves, it has become abundantly clear that its all about content, and less about distribution. i know its a bit of a jump off topic,. but Netflix's decision to produce (and pay $60m to do so) a re-make of House of Cards shows that content is absolutely king. So if rugby shows more competitive games that people want to watch, then the TV rights will become more and more valuable, especially as you get broadband vs telco vs satellite vs cable companies bidding for content.

its a rugby game filmed by experienced camera crews...in fact i reckon i could provide decent rugby coverage...we could do a fanbox with a couple of 606v2 commentators in each game to provide a totally biased alternative to the objective, biased cac we get from the pro pundits etc.

seriously though, its pretty hard to f-up the content.

Yeah but it's pretty easy to f up the delivery of said content; i.e you need a platform. BT Sport are a complete unknown quantity, with a large potential base of subscribers but no concrete customer base as of yet. To take your netflix analogy, the current viewing figures they're getting are the equivalent of netflixes 1 month free trial. Lots of people continue on to full subscriptions with netflix, lots of people drop it after having watched most of what they wanted in the first month. We're in the 'first month' of BT Sport. BT are giving their product out for free right now with the intention of getting people to pay down the line. The question is when push comes to shove how many people are going to pay for both Sky Sports and BT Sport and if they will only pay for one which one will they drop? Right now, we simply don't know.

Sky Sports are the safe pair of hands. They have the kind of market share that BT Sport dream of and it'll take more than snatching their premier domestic and European rugby to see off Sky. They still have the majority of Premiership football, lots of international football and English international rugby. They're dipping their toe in the Pro12 as a potential rival domestic rugby product from next year.

I do wonder also about the future of TV rights for European rugby in France, Ireland and Italy. BT seem to be basing their strategy entirely around the UK, Sky have understood the value of Munster and Leinsters Heineken Cup games in selling Sky Sports in Ireland they also have a strong presence in Italy. Will BT Sport buy up the tournament as a whole? Or will they just buy up English games leaving another block featuring mainly Celtic teams on Sky Sports. Will BT buy up the broadcast rights for any new tournament in Ireland? Sky have a presence in Ireland and Italy that BT largely do not.

Obviously the PRL are keeping the details of the BT Sport deal close to their chest as a negotiating tactic. As a result there are still many unanswered questions about the TV coverage of any new tournament.

quinsforever wrote:

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

quinsforever wrote:ah good, thanks for setting me straight on that then assoreleftshoulder. will just ignore silly things like attendance figures, value of tv rights, and comments of others who do watch rabo matches, as they are all obviously wrong.

Classy it must have taken you a while to come up with that,at least now I know I'm debating with a child.

i wanted to give you the opportunity to join the moral high ground. the celtic unions who are safeguarding the very soul of rugby shouldn't be stuck on their own up there. 

You come across as very immature here. Why don't you actually base your opinion on facts by actually watching the Pro12?

I didn't know the value of TV rights determined the quality of rugby being played?

Some of the most valuable TV rights in Europe are for the Top14 and a lot of the rugby being played is absolutely terrible.

Sin é wrote:

timhen wrote:The thing is few sides are trying to host at that level in the pool stages.  Edinburgh had Munster in their pool last season and only 6,000 turned up at Murrayfield.  Scarlets had Clermont in their pool and the stadium was half full, less people than came to any of their PRO12 Welsh derbies.

A team that's not likely to make it out of their pool in the Heineken would make more money from the extra games and bonus payments they would get from progressing to the knockout stages in the Amlin.

Munster played Edinburgh 4 times last year. That is about average for a Edinburgh v Munster game.

Bath v Saracens will probably attract less in this new Cup as they do in the League and the LV Cup. They could end up meeting 6 times  

The derbies will always do better, particularly if they are around christmas/new year when everyone is home.

Gates are very important. In the LI v Munster game they would have sold approx. 12K tickets more than they normally sell in a League Game - that would be 300K plus more than usual. There won't be those kind of payments in the Amlin.

I'm not doubting that, but like I said, that size of a match in the pool stage is rarely staged, it's certainly not something the sides likely to drop to the Amlin from the PRO12 have been doing.

The few thousand in gate numbers those sides might lose out on from Amlin pool stages compared to Heineken would be made up by one extra game and the bonus payment from reaching the knockout stages of the Amlin. If they progress further they'll certainly be making more.

Notch wrote:

quinsforever wrote:

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

quinsforever wrote:ah good, thanks for setting me straight on that then assoreleftshoulder. will just ignore silly things like attendance figures, value of tv rights, and comments of others who do watch rabo matches, as they are all obviously wrong.

Classy it must have taken you a while to come up with that,at least now I know I'm debating with a child.

i wanted to give you the opportunity to join the moral high ground. the celtic unions who are safeguarding the very soul of rugby shouldn't be stuck on their own up there. 

You come across as very immature here. Why don't you actually base your opinion on facts by actually watching the Pro12?

I didn't know the value of TV rights determined the quality of rugby being played?  

maturity has nothing to do with the validity of what i say, just that you dont like how i say it. i am flattered to be called immature by someone who is 25. makes me feel young again.

why would i bother watching rabo12?

value of tv rights give an indication of the number of people interested in watching the rugby, irrespective of subjective nonsense like how "good" it is. give it a few years sonny and you will realize this is the relevant fact - no-one cares how "good" you or i think something is, how good it is is determined by how many people are prepared to vote with their pocket to watch it. it's the only objective measure around.

Why should you bother watching Rabo - same reason as I watch super 15 - its got some graeat games happening in it. it certainlymakes you look a bit daft to comment on the quality of something you have not seen

recent AP matches seem to have got better but you almost never get the dire "scared to loose" attitional borefests in the Rabo that used to be commonplace in the AP

TJ wrote:Why should you bother watching Rabo - same reason as I watch super 15 - its got some graeat games happening in it.  it certainlymakes you look a bit daft to comment on the quality of something you have not seen

recent AP matches seem to have got better but you almost never get the dire "scared to loose" attitional borefests in the Rabo that used to be commonplace in the AP

i hear u TJ. i have seen plenty of rabo matches but i definitely dont follow the league.

if no-one has anything to lose then i am sure it makes for nice viewing but isnt that more along the lines of exhibition type stuff? i like my competitions to be meaningful, my anguish real, my victory all the sweeter.

the only golf i always try to watch is the ryder cup - why? obviously because the pressure is immense when they have something above and beyond themselves to worry about.

i prefer gripping contests. do-or-die. gladiatorial stuff. it's not a proper contest if it doesnt mean anything in my opinion.

Wait- you're a grown man? Jeezus... I thought you were 17/18 at the oldest based on the way you get on! Whats wrong with you that you're all grown up and you're spending your evening coming up with childish putdowns on a rugby forum?!

Ah man, that cracks me up. Anyway I think in terms of rugby, we see that there are things other than how good it is that impact on how many people want to watch it- like most sports. Loyalty to a team is the major one, of course. You have a certain number of diehard fans, you have others that will only pay to watch a winning team etc. A team could be in poor form but attract a massive audience because they are a big club- whatever. Very few of us are rugby puritans who only want to watch the best rugby no matter what.

So why is the quality of the rugby relevant here? Because this debate is at least partially about how many places each league should have in the top European competition. If you're not familiar with the teams from the Pro12 you're not really fully qualified to comment on what teams will add to the competition.

But thats not why I suggested you spend your precious time watching the Pro12. It was more "some of the rugby is pretty good, if you are a rugby fan you might enjoy it". I might have made the mistake that you, like me, actually have an interest in the game of rugby union. You're making a lot of assumptions that teams don't care if they lose week to week in the Pro12, that its 'exhibition' style. That isn't really borne out by what actually happens in the league on a week to week basis.

On the second tier, the biggest problem with its credibility is that it's going to contain the bottom clubs in the Top14 and Premiership. These teams are always going to prioritise their league campaigns either staying out of the relegation zone or pushing for playoffs and/or a place in the top tier for next season.

Whatever you do with it, it's going to be a bit drab. You can't help that. I'd say it'll be improved aye- but its a big like lipstick on a pig.

haha. you wait til you have 2 kids and see whether that curtails your evenings out.

i like to see proper competition not nice rugby. as i suspect do most fans. and you are lucky that you have 3 teams that over the last 10 years have been extremely competitive in the HC. but that doesnt mean you can compare the compelling gripping nature of AP and top14 to rabo12.

RWC - does anyone care if anyone's team plays more attractive rugby and loses? no, they will be branded naive and the coach will be fired.

i also think in terms of rugby. All rugby, and i think what the prl are doing with salary caps and working alongside a modern RFU CEO stand the english clubs and national team in great stead for the next 20 years. and if other nations adopt more professional models, in whatever way they can, then maybe they wont get left too far behind. but status quo is just not an option at club level any more. that horse has bolted.

'Not nice rugby?'

No wonder you're a Quins fan!

Ha ha ha

actually i would rather the quins won ugly than lose prettily trev old bean. i think thats pretty clear from my posts.

wouldnt u rather quins did that too?

Quins are only capable of losing ugly.

    

If you find the TRUTH funny perhaps you should stay on CAW with the rest of the excuse makers.