European Play-Off

by alcoombe Wed 16 Oct 2013, 2:53 am

English and French clubs have responded to demands by the Celtic and Italian unions for eight clubs from the RaboDirect Pro12 to remain in the top competition of European club rugby by proposing a new play-off system, Telegraph Sport has learned.

The move is likely to be viewed as a significant olive branch in the bitter row over the future of European club rugby.

It comes as negotiations intensify to hammer out a deal that will ensure that clubs from all six nations continue to compete in the same tournament next season.

It is understood that the proposal is for clubs from the Aviva Premiership, Top 14 and Pro12 to take part in end-of-season play-offs that might produce two qualifiers for the following season’s Rugby Champions’ Cup, the new European tournament being set-up by the English and French to replace the Heineken Cup.

The weekend of May 17-18 next year has been earmarked for the inaugural European play-offs.

The plan might, for instance, see two matches being staged, with the prize for the winners of each being qualification for the Rugby Champions’ Cup.

The new play-off system is understood to be supported by both the English and French clubs and its details are being considered by the Rugby Football Union, which is playing a central role in attempting to thrash out a deal that its Celtic and Italian counterparts can support.

Supporters of the play-off system are understood to see two major benefits.

First, it is seen as a potentially acceptable compromise between the two sides.

One of the key demands behind the decision by the England and French clubs in June last year to serve the necessary two years’ notice to leave the current European Rugby Cup accord was for the Heineken Cup to be reduced from 24 to 20 clubs, in order to strengthen the second-tier Amlin Challenge Cup.

Coupled with this was the demand that only the top six from the Pro 12 would qualify, in order to remove guaranteed places in the European Cup and make it a truly meritocratic tournament.

The Celtic and Italian unions have stuck by their desire for the status quo to be retained, given their view of the European tournament as key for developing and nourishing professional rugby on as broad a basis as possible.

Premiership Rugby and their French counterparts have already given ground from their original demand by agreeing that each nation should have one guaranteed representative in the new Champions’ Cup, and the play-offs system would be in addition to that pledge.

It would allow the English and French to retain their 20-club model – with six sides from each league qualifying automatically.

But, depending how the play-off participants are decided, it could potentially see two more Pro12 clubs given a chance to qualify, which would broaden the entry to the tournament, but in a merit-based fashion.

The second benefit of the play-off idea is that it is hoped it will bring an extra element of excitement to the end of season for those clubs who are outside the domestic semi-finals in the three leagues but not under threat of relegation.

Much of the detail has yet to be thrashed out, but both the English and French clubs also see it as a priority to boost the second-tier competition of European club rugby, currently the Amlin Challenge Cup.

They see the second competition as crucial to the health of club rugby in Europe.

Average attendances in the first round of the Amlin Challenge Cup were 5,600, even with a 15,000 crowd to see Bath’s victory in Bordeaux.

It is not yet clear whether the play-off proposal will prove acceptable to the Celtic and Italian unions, and there remains considerable ground to be made up in terms of the distribution of revenues, governance of the new competitions and the separate commitments made by each side to rival broadcasters.

Nonetheless, if nothing else it suggests that, while time is now on no one’s side, a deal can yet be struck.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/club/10381474/English-and-French-tempt-Celts-and-Italians-to-European-deal-with-play-offs-offer.html

by TJ Wed 16 Oct 2013, 7:22 am

Well its an imaginative idea and shows a tiny bit of movement from the PRL but I cannot see it being acceptable to the Rabo unions. Any solution requires a compromise that meets in the middle and this is nowhere near that.

by Toohey Wed 16 Oct 2013, 9:11 am

Intereseting that the average attendence in round 1 of a tier two competition at 5,600 seems to be a problem. The average attendance in round 1 of the rabo was 5,400? Considering some of the fixtures involved 5,600 doesn't seem too bad but obviously room for improvement.

by XR Wed 16 Oct 2013, 9:26 am

Toohey, i guess the idea is you cut the numbers in the tier1 cup and then you get 'bigger' teams in the tier 2 which would, you'd assume, see bigger attendances.

by Brendan Wed 16 Oct 2013, 9:44 am

So if i have it right the problem before is that teams in the Pro12 only try in the league once they are out of the HC and don't care about position in the league. But the tought Aviva and T14 have to fight for places either play-offs, HC or Relegation.

Now they are saying we'll have play-offs so now no team in any league needs to try as you only need to win two games and you're in. Seems like Edinbrugh could do worse in the league (though that could be hard to achive) and only worry about the last two games of the season.

by TJ Wed 16 Oct 2013, 9:46 am

So if i have it right the problem before is that teams in the Pro12 only try in the league once they are out of the HC and don't care about position in the league.

this is simply not true and even if it were what business is it of anyone outside the pro 12?

I have never seen a game in the pro 12 that no one is trying to win and trying their very best.

by thebluesmancometh Wed 16 Oct 2013, 9:53 am

I like the idea of a playoff system, it would benefit all and the HC!

Sadly though forcing bigger teams into the Amin would weaken the Amlin, bath v Dragons at full tilt would be a decent game, bath v Racing academy wouldn't be!

A lot of talk is that the Rabo teams don't try in the league and but has anyone considered the focus on league by the T14 teams is what's hurting euro rugby more? The Amlin will never work with French clubs sending out their academy teams, so adding more French teams isn't going to help!

If the HC was a priority for French teams then they would be more competitive across the board, they regularly throw HC games when qualification looks difficult, is this what we want for the worlds best club comp?

by Guest Wed 16 Oct 2013, 9:58 am

Presumably it will the three 7th placed teams and last years winner or their leagues substitute ie. 8th placed team will be the four teams for these proposed playoffs?

by Brendan Wed 16 Oct 2013, 9:59 am

TJ wrote:
So if i have it right the problem before is that teams in the Pro12 only try in the league once they are out of the HC and don't care about position in the league.
this is simply not true and even if it were what business is it of anyone outside the pro 12?

I have never seen a game in the pro 12 that no one is trying to win and trying their very best.

I agree with you TJ but it was one of the reasons put forward as to why Rabo teams needed to be reduced for "their own good"

Sorry to be sceptical but i see it like this
If the Rabo clubs join we can rob their players and then as their teams we will weaker we can get our club numbers up and put them in the lower cup where they belong.

by Sin é Wed 16 Oct 2013, 10:10 am

The French have their own way of doing things which surprisingly enough criticises. For instance, they send out weakened teams for their away games - only 25% of wins in the Top 14 are away ones.

You'd have to admire the level of negative spin the PRL have generated against the ERC/Rabo league In the comments section on the telegraph article, one poster blames the ERC for the poor attendance at the semi final between Saracens & Toulon last year, claiming that Saracens did a better job with the ticket sales in the QF between Saracens & Ulster.

Someone will need to explain that the French don't travel to Away games, unlike the Rabo team supporters and especially the Irish.

Anyway, this is a pointless offer. The SRU for instance have said they don't have an issue with having only one team in the Heineken Cup - the issue is that they can't take any financial cuts.

by TJ Wed 16 Oct 2013, 10:14 am

There must be a decent chance tho of getting 2 teams in for each of the countries. 8 teams is the minimum that is acceptable. 6 simply is too few and unacceptable.

by TJ Wed 16 Oct 2013, 10:16 am

Brendan wrote:
Sorry to be sceptical but i see it like this
If the Rabo clubs join we can rob their players and then as their teams we will weaker we can get our club numbers up and put them in the lower cup where they belong.

I agree - and also if the Rabo teams are weakened / have less representation it will be easier for the AP teams to do well.

by Sin é Wed 16 Oct 2013, 10:18 am

thebluesmancometh wrote:I like the idea of a playoff system, it would benefit all and the HC!

Sadly though forcing bigger teams into the Amin would weaken the Amlin, bath v Dragons at full tilt would be a decent game, bath v Racing academy wouldn't be!

A lot of talk is that the Rabo teams don't try in the league and but has anyone considered the focus on league by the T14 teams is what's hurting euro rugby more? The Amlin will never work with French clubs sending out their academy teams, so adding more French teams isn't going to help!

If the HC was a priority for French teams then they would be more competitive across the board, they regularly throw HC games when qualification looks difficult, is this what we want for the worlds best club comp?

According to Peter Stringer, what is good about the Amlin is that if you get to the knock-out stages you meet Heineken Cup quality teams.

"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."

by thebluesmancometh Wed 16 Oct 2013, 10:27 am

And he's right to a point, but the group stages are still where the problem lies, French clubs will use it as a testing ground until last game. Look at the proposals from the PRL too, making HC spots very competitive and the likes of Dragons will then do similar.

I'm surprised no one sees the proposals as bad for both competitions

by TJ Wed 16 Oct 2013, 10:28 am

Many of us do Bluesman. The PRL seem to confuse good for their clubs with good for everyone. welcome back BTW.

by thebluesmancometh Wed 16 Oct 2013, 10:42 am

But you have to look at it from their POV too...

They want what they think they can get, they have upped the media bid and highlighted the sky deals for what they were!

If I could take the heads and put them in charge of the ERC I would, what they are doing is right for them, and if they damage Celtic/Italian rugby what do they care? It's up to us to push back and get what we want, but the truth of the matter is money talks, and is power, it's inevitable the Rabo will eventually end up a feeder league to the AP and T14, where they take the best players. It's how we react and how we respond to this, and how we can benefit...

by TJ Wed 16 Oct 2013, 10:46 am

In my view bluesman - play hardball 'cos without us they do not have a european cup to sell. theyneeds us as much as we need them. Playing hardball has forced them to start to negotiate. continue to play hardball and they will have to compromise more

by beshocked Wed 16 Oct 2013, 10:51 am

Sin é wrote:The French have their own way of doing things which surprisingly enough criticises. For instance, they send out weakened teams for their away games - only 25% of wins in the Top 14 are away ones.

You'd have to admire the level of negative spin the PRL have generated against the ERC/Rabo league In the comments section on the telegraph article, one poster blames the ERC for the poor attendance at the semi final between Saracens & Toulon last year, claiming that Saracens did a better job with the ticket sales in the QF between Saracens & Ulster.

Someone will need to explain that the French don't travel to Away games, unlike the Rabo team supporters and especially the Irish.

Anyway, this is a pointless offer. The SRU for instance have said they don't have an issue with having only one team in the Heineken Cup - the issue is that they can't take any financial cuts.

Well Sin e that poster on the telegraph website is completely correct. ERC taking control of the Saracens vs Toulon fixture lead to a poor attendance and a lacklustre event.

Saracens currently have over 50k attendance for Toulouse game expected. Could even go up to 60k.

I know it's down to lower ticket prices mainly but surely higher attendance is far more beneficial than just trying to rake in the cash? Bigger attendance=bigger exposure = better brand image. Makes events have better atmosphere etc.

ERC approach led to a poor turnout and an opportunity lost.

by thebluesmancometh Wed 16 Oct 2013, 10:56 am

You may well be right, if the Rabo unions do have the conviction and cahonaes to repel this and hold out (I think they will survive without a HC probably better than the PRL) then the Rabo will get stronger.

The issue is it will always struggle as a cross border comp between small nations, and will never compete on an even footing with the other 2 leagues.

The PRL believe they are holding 4 kings, they have to be shown what they are really holding is 2 pair, similar to the Rabo unions, and not as strong as the LNR/FFR if they stay united for a second or 2.

by quinsforever Wed 16 Oct 2013, 11:00 am

thebluesmancometh wrote:You may well be right, if the Rabo unions do have the conviction and cahonaes to repel this and hold out (I think they will survive without a HC probably better than the PRL) then the Rabo will get stronger.

The issue is it will always struggle as a cross border comp between small nations, and will never compete on an even footing with the other 2 leagues.

The PRL believe they are holding 4 kings, they have to be shown what they are really holding is 2 pair, similar to the Rabo unions, and not as strong as the LNR/FFR if they stay united for a second or 2.

to continue your analogy, in poker, generally the winner is the one who believes he has the best hand. at the top level of the game, you play the player not the cards.

by thebluesmancometh Wed 16 Oct 2013, 11:01 am

Beshocked

Do you really think the sport needs exposure in the uk still? I haven't met many people who don't know a lot about the sport or it's celebrity personnel.

Surely whoring yourself out for numbers is going to detract from the 2nd tier comp, make the comp more exclusiv e and generate a true following and turnover. I think a,lot of the Sarries ideas are about creating a man utd style brand worldwide, whereas the ERC was trying to promote euro rugby.

by quinsforever Wed 16 Oct 2013, 11:06 am

thebluesmancometh wrote:Beshocked

Do you really think the sport needs exposure in the uk still? I haven't met many people who don't know a lot about the sport or it's celebrity personnel.

Surely whoring yourself out for numbers is going to detract from the 2nd tier comp, make the comp more exclusiv e and generate a true following and turnover. I think a,lot of the Sarries ideas are about creating a man utd style brand worldwide, whereas the ERC was trying to promote euro rugby.

most PRL club players could enjoy a night out without being recognised in England. so yes i think there's lots of scope in england and scotland to raise the profile, popularity and profitability of the game. i understand thats much less likely to be true in ireland or wales.

by Sin é Wed 16 Oct 2013, 11:08 am

beshocked wrote:
Sin é wrote:The French have their own way of doing things which surprisingly enough criticises. For instance, they send out weakened teams for their away games - only 25% of wins in the Top 14 are away ones.

You'd have to admire the level of negative spin the PRL have generated against the ERC/Rabo league In the comments section on the telegraph article, one poster blames the ERC for the poor attendance at the semi final between Saracens & Toulon last year, claiming that Saracens did a better job with the ticket sales in the QF between Saracens & Ulster.

Someone will need to explain that the French don't travel to Away games, unlike the Rabo team supporters and especially the Irish.

Anyway, this is a pointless offer. The SRU for instance have said they don't have an issue with having only one team in the Heineken Cup - the issue is that they can't take any financial cuts.
Well Sin e that poster on the telegraph website is completely correct. ERC taking control of the Saracens vs Toulon fixture lead to a poor attendance and a lacklustre event.

Saracens currently have over 50k attendance for Toulouse game expected. Could even go up to 60k.

I know it's down to lower ticket prices mainly but surely higher attendance is far more beneficial than just trying to rake in the cash? Bigger attendance=bigger exposure = better brand image. Makes events have better atmosphere etc.

ERC approach led to a poor turnout and an opportunity lost.

A Heineken Cup semi-final is meant to be a premium product. By giving away tickets for half nothing does nothing for the image of the competition or the sponsors - it just cheapens the image.

Interesting that all the Irish teams can fill any stadium they are put into (including an 80K stadium) without resorting to giving away the tickets - and that is with a population half the size of Greater London.

*Leinster v Toulouse in Dublin semi-final attendance 50,073. Tickets full price.

by thebluesmancometh Wed 16 Oct 2013, 11:11 am

Is that because of the games profile though? Or more to do with country size, club player numbers and lack of exposure to int rugby?

Wouldnyounrecognise every premiership footballer you came across? Every English celeb?

Rugby is a hugely popular sport in the uk, along with olympic addition it will be the highest profile it has ever been, it's time to evolve and turn that exposure into hardcores!

by TJ Wed 16 Oct 2013, 11:13 am

Guys - lets not have the same debate again. Its interesting to see some movement from the PRL brokered by the RFU. If the playoffs suggested where wider it might work. 4 teams from each league thu as of right, next 4 in each league playoff for Euro cup places - that sort of thing

by Sin é Wed 16 Oct 2013, 11:16 am

quinsforever wrote:
thebluesmancometh wrote:Beshocked

Do you really think the sport needs exposure in the uk still? I haven't met many people who don't know a lot about the sport or it's celebrity personnel.

Surely whoring yourself out for numbers is going to detract from the 2nd tier comp, make the comp more exclusiv e and generate a true following and turnover. I think a,lot of the Sarries ideas are about creating a man utd style brand worldwide, whereas the ERC was trying to promote euro rugby.
most PRL club players could enjoy a night out without being recognised in England. so yes i think there's lots of scope in england and scotland to raise the profile, popularity and profitability of the game. i understand thats much less likely to be true in ireland or wales.

So, the Irish provinces have been far more successful at marketing themselves?

Maybe the Saracens could learn something from them on how to market themselves (and resorting to gimmicks & cheap tickets is the way the Irish Provinces have done it).

by thebluesmancometh Wed 16 Oct 2013, 11:17 am

TJ

But by that you could end up with just Irish teams in the HC with english and French, that would be onenboring asss HC

by thebluesmancometh Wed 16 Oct 2013, 11:19 am

Well sin, there is the bonus of a few hundred years of heritage and history within actual borders, doesn't hurt.

by Sin é Wed 16 Oct 2013, 11:19 am

TJ wrote:Guys - lets not have the same debate again. Its interesting to see some movement from the PRL brokered by the RFU. If the playoffs suggested where wider it might work. 4 teams from each league thu as of right, next 4 in each league playoff for Euro cup places - that sort of thing

TJ - everyone knows that the qualification etc. is a non-issue with the Rabo teams. The issue is money and control of it.

by Sin é Wed 16 Oct 2013, 11:26 am

thebluesmancometh wrote:Well sin, there is the bonus of a few hundred years of heritage and history within actual borders, doesn't hurt.

It helps, but in the 2006 Leinster v Munster semi-final, there was about 45K Munster supporters and 5K Leinster supporters there. Since that game Leinster have completely changed their image, moved from a 3/4 K ground to an 18K one. They tried one gimmick to get a crowd in that no one talks about anymore (Naked Cowboy in the RDS in Dec). Smile

They actually had to reclaim those from Leinster who supported Munster, so it wasn't easy.

by beshocked Wed 16 Oct 2013, 11:32 am

thebluesmancometh wrote:Beshocked

Do you really think the sport needs exposure in the uk still? I haven't met many people who don't know a lot about the sport or it's celebrity personnel.

Surely whoring yourself out for numbers is going to detract from the 2nd tier comp, make the comp more exclusiv e and generate a true following and turnover. I think a,lot of the Sarries ideas are about creating a man utd style brand worldwide, whereas the ERC was trying to promote euro rugby.

thebluesmancometh where there are sell outs in every HC game then yes we can do what you suggest. The reality is that rugby is still far behind the likes of football and other sports. We need to try and get more people hooked and involved. By getting more people going to rugby matches there is more opportunity to get fans.

It shows your narrow minded approach and you call trying to increase the exposure of HC rugby as whoring yourself out.

Having high attendances portrays a positive image. You forget that these are tough economic times - getting a cheap ticket to a top class sporting event is something really positive. The idea is for people to have a great day out and watch some top class rugby in a famous sporting venue.

Sin e ha ha learn from the Irish in marketing? That's a joke right? You are too conservative and narrow minded. Irish regions have built up their fanbase over the years. It's something that is far harder for clubs without control of their own stadium, a merchandising shop, without an established fanbase built up in one area.

Saracens push the boundaries - they try new things. Most other club's flags for example are so boring. Some of the designs of ours are miles better.

They have to try new things because they don't have the years and years of an established core fanbase like most clubs who are based in a specific city like Leicester.

by TJ Wed 16 Oct 2013, 11:35 am

Edinburgh play in a 70 000 seat staduim to crowds of around 5000 paying £20 -30 per seat. I would much rather they got bigger crowds at lower price. 2 kids free with every adult, seats at £5-10, free tickerts to schools etc etc etc etc. That would build audience and get kids in who might just then become fans

by beshocked Wed 16 Oct 2013, 11:38 am

Sin é wrote:
beshocked wrote:
Sin é wrote:The French have their own way of doing things which surprisingly enough criticises. For instance, they send out weakened teams for their away games - only 25% of wins in the Top 14 are away ones.

You'd have to admire the level of negative spin the PRL have generated against the ERC/Rabo league In the comments section on the telegraph article, one poster blames the ERC for the poor attendance at the semi final between Saracens & Toulon last year, claiming that Saracens did a better job with the ticket sales in the QF between Saracens & Ulster.

Someone will need to explain that the French don't travel to Away games, unlike the Rabo team supporters and especially the Irish.

Anyway, this is a pointless offer. The SRU for instance have said they don't have an issue with having only one team in the Heineken Cup - the issue is that they can't take any financial cuts.
Well Sin e that poster on the telegraph website is completely correct. ERC taking control of the Saracens vs Toulon fixture lead to a poor attendance and a lacklustre event.

Saracens currently have over 50k attendance for Toulouse game expected. Could even go up to 60k.

I know it's down to lower ticket prices mainly but surely higher attendance is far more beneficial than just trying to rake in the cash? Bigger attendance=bigger exposure = better brand image. Makes events have better atmosphere etc.

ERC approach led to a poor turnout and an opportunity lost.
A Heineken Cup semi-final is meant to be a premium product. By giving away tickets for half nothing does nothing for the image of the competition or the sponsors - it just cheapens the image.

Interesting that all the Irish teams can fill any stadium they are put into (including an 80K stadium) without resorting to giving away the tickets - and that is with a population half the size of Greater London.

*Leinster v Toulouse in Dublin semi-final attendance 50,073. Tickets full price.

Sin e oh right it's back to you saying how big your wang is. A Heineken cup semi final is obviously not seen as a premium product by enough people.

You talk about cheaping the image - you think it cheapens it more by the ERC only getting 25k people for a 90k stadium or discounting tickets and getting 50k + for a 90k stadium.

Keep banging the Irish are awesome drum. Population becomes irrelevant when you think that football in England is a far bigger competitor to anything in Ireland.

by quinsforever Wed 16 Oct 2013, 11:40 am

thebluesmancometh wrote:Is that because of the games profile though? Or more to do with country size, club player numbers and lack of exposure to int rugby?

Wouldnyounrecognise every premiership footballer you came across? Every English celeb?

Rugby is a hugely popular sport in the uk, along with olympic addition it will be the highest profile it has ever been, it's time to evolve and turn that exposure into hardcores!

its because of all those things and more - rugby in eng, like aus is nowhere close to 1st sport. my point is there is plenty or room to grow, particularly in england and scotland, and it strikes me the clubs are the right engine to drive sustainable growth, not top-down administrators who decide to chuck more money around on pet projects. sustainability (profitable growth) is the key. built on solid foundations of support for clubs and country, reaching all the way down into schools and youth development.

by broadlandboy Wed 16 Oct 2013, 11:41 am

Blues, other than the HEC(a closed shop & more luck than judgement IMHO) what has the ERC done to promote European Rugby?

by TJ Wed 16 Oct 2013, 11:42 am

Again Quins - you simply do not know what is happening in Scotland. Part of the HC money goes to schools development coaches and so on to try to grow the grassroots. This is a big part of why the Scots cannot accept the PRL proposals due to the damage it would do to the whole structures

by quinsforever Wed 16 Oct 2013, 11:43 am

TJ wrote:Edinburgh play in a 70 000 seat staduim to crowds of around 5000 paying £20 -30 per seat. I would much rather they got bigger crowds at lower price. 2 kids free with every adult, seats at £5-10, free tickerts to schools etc etc etc etc. That would build audience and get kids in who might just then become fans

thats a great idea TJ. that's the kind of creative long-term thinking that is needed by administrators. why dont they do it?

by andyi Wed 16 Oct 2013, 11:47 am

Somebody's maths at the Telegraph aren't very good. The actual average for the first round of Amlin games was 5364 and without the Bordeux-Bath game, they were 4233.

The Amlin has always suffered in the group stage from poor crowds and very one sided games. I'm not sure the PRL/LNR proposals can actually change that but I guess we shall see if they get thier way.

by quinsforever Wed 16 Oct 2013, 11:48 am

TJ wrote:Again Quins - you simply do not know what is happening in Scotland. Part of the HC money goes to schools development coaches and so on to try to grow the grassroots. This is a big part of why the Scots cannot accept the PRL proposals due to the damage it would do to the whole structures

i havent seen any proposals that reduce money for anyone in Rabo12 yet. the HC money goes straight into player pockets. the fact it passes through SRU hands doesnt alter this. Scottish sides get approx £4m from HC is that right? The wage bill of the SRU was i believe £18,433,000 in 2012-2013.

by beshocked Wed 16 Oct 2013, 11:52 am

quinsforever perhaps Edinburgh feel it will cheapen their brand. Whistle

by TJ Wed 16 Oct 2013, 11:53 am

Nope - not correct at all. the HC money goes with all other income to the SRU and the two pro clubs get a budget from the SRU. the SRU use thir income to support the game at all levels.

by TJ Wed 16 Oct 2013, 11:54 am

quinsforever wrote:
TJ wrote:Edinburgh play in a 70 000 seat staduim to crowds of around 5000 paying £20 -30 per seat. I would much rather they got bigger crowds at lower price. 2 kids free with every adult, seats at £5-10, free tickerts to schools etc etc etc etc. That would build audience and get kids in who might just then become fans
thats a great idea TJ. that's the kind of creative long-term thinking that is needed by administrators. why dont they do it?

a few years ago when phill anderson was marketing director of the SRU it did happen to some extent. I have no idea why it was stopped

by quinsforever Wed 16 Oct 2013, 11:56 am

TJ wrote:Nope - not correct at all. the HC money goes with all other income to the SRU and the two pro clubs get a budget from the SRU. the SRU use thir income to support the game at all levels.

i have been unable to find the breakout for pro player salaries at the 2 scottish teams. do you happen to know it or know where i can get it? and the other variable costs involved in running the 2 sides?

by thebluesmancometh Wed 16 Oct 2013, 11:56 am

Be shocked

Why so aggressive? I merely disagreed that giving tickets away, playing games in Asia, and spending all your efforts on brand promotion to an unsustainable market wasn't the way to go long term. Do you think that Chinese/Asian footballers are the best in the world? How do you explain every prem club signing a token player over the last 3/4 seasons?

Cheapening a product to initially get numbers through the door will work, I'm just trying to say that rugby has gone beyond that now, and we need to start capitolizing on sustainable long term growth, the time for giveaways and gimmicks has gone, now it's time to work on the top product to attract... Oh the PRL want rid of the top product... Ummm...

by thebluesmancometh Wed 16 Oct 2013, 11:58 am

Also be shocked Ireland's loyalties are far more divided than England's, GAA and football lead Rugby in most areas.

by VietGwentRevisited Wed 16 Oct 2013, 12:00 pm

TJ wrote:Again Quins - you simply do not know what is happening in Scotland. Part of the HC money goes to schools development coaches and so on to try to grow the grassroots. This is a big part of why the Scots cannot accept the PRL proposals due to the damage it would do to the whole structures

Silly me. I thought that the proposals from the Franglos saw everyone getting more money even if a team is in Amlin instead - but yes some getting a larger increase.

So if the issue is there would be less money for grass-roots, well surely that is not the case as there would be more. If the issue is "ah but they get more than me" well I agree there is a potential problem.

The biggest problem, as alluded to by the CEO of SRU, is if there is no tournament next season featuring the big English and French clubs, then the money going to Scottish rugby would indeed fall quite dramatically. This is why he has conceded that 2 guaranteed Top tier spots may have to be given up - and even seemed to suggest that both may have to be given up - so as to ensure there is a tournament and cashflows are protected.

by Sin é Wed 16 Oct 2013, 12:01 pm

beshocked wrote:
thebluesmancometh wrote:Beshocked

Do you really think the sport needs exposure in the uk still? I haven't met many people who don't know a lot about the sport or it's celebrity personnel.

Surely whoring yourself out for numbers is going to detract from the 2nd tier comp, make the comp more exclusiv e and generate a true following and turnover. I think a,lot of the Sarries ideas are about creating a man utd style brand worldwide, whereas the ERC was trying to promote euro rugby.
thebluesmancometh where there are sell outs in every HC game then yes we can do what you suggest. The reality is that rugby is still far behind the likes of football and other sports. We need to try and get more people hooked and involved. By getting more people going to rugby matches there is more opportunity to get fans.

It shows your narrow minded approach and you call trying to increase the exposure of HC rugby as whoring yourself out.

Having high attendances portrays a positive image. You forget that these are tough economic times - getting a cheap ticket to a top class sporting event is something really positive. The idea is for people to have a great day out and watch some top class rugby in a famous sporting venue.

Sin e ha ha learn from the Irish in marketing? That's a joke right? You are too conservative and narrow minded. Irish regions have built up their fanbase over the years. It's something that is far harder for clubs without control of their own stadium, a merchandising shop, without an established fanbase built up in one area.

Saracens push the boundaries - they try new things. Most other club's flags for example are so boring. Some of the designs of ours are miles better.

They have to try new things because they don't have the years and years of an established core fanbase like most clubs who are based in a specific city like Leicester.

Who are the best supported teams in the Heineken Cup. What is the first thought of every club owner when he gets a home game with an Irish team? Who sells the most rugby jerseys/merchandise?

When you answer all those questions, you know who are the best at marketing their teams.

Saracens were founded in 1876 - Tigers were founded in 1880. Very Happy

Looks like Leicester are also better at marketing than Saracens.

by quinsforever Wed 16 Oct 2013, 12:01 pm

TJ wrote:
quinsforever wrote:
TJ wrote:Edinburgh play in a 70 000 seat staduim to crowds of around 5000 paying £20 -30 per seat. I would much rather they got bigger crowds at lower price. 2 kids free with every adult, seats at £5-10, free tickerts to schools etc etc etc etc. That would build audience and get kids in who might just then become fans
thats a great idea TJ. that's the kind of creative long-term thinking that is needed by administrators. why dont they do it?
a few years ago when phill anderson was marketing director of the SRU it did happen to some extent. I have no idea why it was stopped

i used to watch some london irish games when i went back to Reading a few years ago to see my parents. the atmoshpere was good, but i didnt really enjoy the feeling of knocking around inside a stadium that was 15% filled as it was back then. can imagine what murrayfield must be like for some games.

by TJ Wed 16 Oct 2013, 12:01 pm

Blueman - I don't think that is true. I think we still need to be building a fanbase and getting the punters in - it depends on the team of course - different teams need different solutions but Edinburgh have plenty of scope to grow the audience as the stadium is less than 10% full

by TJ Wed 16 Oct 2013, 12:04 pm

VietGwentRevisited

If the scots teams are in the second tier the gate will be even less - and no possibility of the big paydays of the QFs. Sponsership will be worthless. Income will go down. Also costs will rise as salaries will have to go up as the rich AP clubs fuel salary rises. or the scots clubs will lose all their top players and lose any chance of being competative

by Sponsored content