End In Sight To Euro Mess (Pt. 2)

First topic message reminder :

Munchkin wrote:

Notch wrote:Wouldn't be too interested in Toulon helping keep the dying ERC competitions alive.

Whats better from an Irish/Celtic point of view-

a) Toulon help the Heineken Cup survive but continue their wild spending unchecked
b) ERC competitions are dropped, new 20 team competitions start including Celtic sides, the LNR imposes strict financial penalties on teams who rely exclusively on expensive imports.

For me b) may see the status quo change in a way which is not necessarily in our favour, but it will still allow the Irish provinces to be major powers in Europe on and off the field with the right management in both areas.

But without the culture of charismatic super-rich chairmen buying up talent from elsewhere changing in France we may not be able to keep our best players in Ireland. The likes of Boudjellal and their millions are a bigger threat to us than reform of European competitions.

He can sling his hook in conclusion. Most other sides in the competition have some kind of identity with many homegrown players. His side of imported superstars shouldn't be allowed to become the new normal.

Why is choice restricted to either (a) or (b)? What about (a), but with the Unions imposing those same penalties on clubs breaking whatever foreign player cap?

because, if you read boudjellal's statement, the reason he is saying he will join HC is because there are no caps or quotas in the HC.

I think we should demand a name change from PRL, just to show their willingness to give and take.

The ERL would do me. And it would instantly stop this nonsense when they claim the 'E' bit has nothing to do with their attempts to castrate the rest of us...

[quote="Pot Hale"]

Irish Londoner wrote:

TJ wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:
I'd go a bit further and give the PRL representation on the board as of right - not as a gift from the RFU and dilute the unions power but ensure that the club reps do not hold a majority[/quote]

I've got it
England 33% (RFU 20% - PRL 13%)
France 33% (FFR 20% - FRL - 13%)
RABO 33%

Remaining 1% to be given to 606V2 Rugby Forum Members

I presume you mean:

England 33.3% (RFU 20 - PRL 13%)
France 33.3% (FFR 20 - LNR 13%)
Wales 8.33% (WRU 4? - RRW 4%)
Ireland 8.33%
Scotland 8.33%
Italy 8.33%

Can't see that as the shareholding split when currently it's equal shares across the board of 16.69%.

The voting rights may change from the current allocations of 5, 5, 2, 2, 2, 2.

I didn't write the highlighted quote.

The more union control the better, as mentioned above, it appears England's Union are doing far more to make things work than their PRL ever did.

I don't think the clubs need to be part of this organisation. It is better that they communicate through their union.

Maesteg - giving the clubs a say would allow the PRL to claim victory and would do the rest of us no harm so long as they remained a minority vote.  The RFU and FFR have given some votes to the clubs in the current setup - lets just enshrine that as a right not as a gift.

We have to allow the PRL to claim victory as they are backed into a corner. We can afford to be magnanimous on this so long as our red lines are not crossed

I'm amazed that some of you still can't see how unbalanced it is at the moment.

TJ wrote:Maesteg - giving the clubs a say would allow the PRL to claim victory and would do the rest of us no harm so long as they remained a minority vote.  The RFU and FFR have given some votes to the clubs in the current setup - lets just enshrine that as a right not as a gift.  

I think this whole balls up has proved that organisations such as the PRL are not trustworthy enough to be able to vote on something that effects rugby in other countries in such a massive way.

I think it is far more sensible that organisations representing clubs/regions/provinces lobby their thoughts through their national union.

OK its a club and union thing or we might us well be stuck in a dictatorship. The clubs are what makes it- they need some say!!


every club in every union should get 1 vote, the unions should get as many votes as clubs they have!

so PRL 12 individual team votes plus 12 votes for the RFU

france 14 and 14

sru 2 votes, plus the rabbo representation 2 votes 

and so on.

The fairest and most Democratic way IMO

Nonsense. that would allow the english clubs far too much say. NO two parties should be able to outvote the rest, no one party should have too great a say.

its not about the english having more say- its about each individual team haveing as much right as the next.

the rabbo gets exactly the same say as the prl- and the french overall get more, why??

because they have more clubs that can potentially get into the comp.

That is the democratic way- ANything else Isn't.

Competing teams need the same say as the next

mystiroakey wrote:OK its a club and union thing or we might us well be stuck in a dictatorship. The clubs are what makes it- they need some say!!


every club in every union should get 1 vote, the unions should get as many votes as clubs they have!

so PRL 12 individual team votes plus 12 votes for the RFU

france 14 and 14

sru 2 votes, plus the rabbo representation 2 votes 

and so on.

The fairest and most Democratic way IMO

Most people don't want the fairest and most Democratic way, they would rather continue the Status Quo as it suits them.

And why do you go after england like a bull to a red flag?

france would have the most collective say under my system and they do for a reason(they have more teams)

Fair is relative Scrumpy.
Mysti - because I do not trust the english clubs

 

mystiroakey wrote:And why do you go after england like a red flag to a bull?

france would have the most collective say under my system and they do for a reason(they have more teams)

I wonder?

for the english clubs to make any headway under than system they would need backing from way more than their collective 12 votes! there would be a total of 76 votes out there- the PRl are only getting 15.7% collectively

mmmmmmmmmmmmm - maybe my maths is at fault.

mystiroakey wrote:its not about the english having more say- its about each individual team haveing as much right as the next.

the rabbo gets exactly the same say as the prl- and the french overall get more, why??

because they have more clubs that can potentially get into the comp.

That is the democratic way- ANything else Isn't.

Competing teams need the same say as the next

Surely then the RP12 could change to the RP21 and by your concept completely out vote the French and English...?

Not sure that's a good system at all..!


If clubs have an issue they can take it to their union and the Union can raise that point for them at the next "REC" meeting.

It is a system that works very well in four of the six countries involved.

Maesteg - we have to compromise and give the PRL the ability to claim victory. this is one area we can compromise on without it causing too much harm

maestegmafia wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:its not about the english having more say- its about each individual team haveing as much right as the next.

the rabbo gets exactly the same say as the prl- and the french overall get more, why??

because they have more clubs that can potentially get into the comp.

That is the democratic way- ANything else Isn't.

Competing teams need the same say as the next

Surely then the RP12 could change to the RP21 and by your concept completely out vote the French and English...?

Not sure that's a good system at all..!


If clubs have an issue they can take it to their union and the Union can raise that point for them at the next "REC" meeting.

It is a system that works very well in four of the six countries involved.

only when and if one league had over half the representation would that become an issue- but no they would need to get to 27 teams to out vote the english and french(who have 26 teams already)

TJ wrote:Maesteg - we have to compromise and give the PRL the ability to claim victory.  this is one area we can compromise on without it causing too much harm

So let them force a name change and give them a reasonably insignificant vote..?

Aye - and in return we get a better deal on things important to us. Let them have some or all of the RFUs votes

mystiroakey wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:its not about the english having more say- its about each individual team haveing as much right as the next.

the rabbo gets exactly the same say as the prl- and the french overall get more, why??

because they have more clubs that can potentially get into the comp.

That is the democratic way- ANything else Isn't.

Competing teams need the same say as the next

Surely then the RP12 could change to the RP21 and by your concept completely out vote the French and English...?

Not sure that's a good system at all..!


If clubs have an issue they can take it to their union and the Union can raise that point for them at the next "REC" meeting.

It is a system that works very well in four of the six countries involved.

only when and if one league had over half the representation would that become an issue- but no they would need to get to 27 teams to out vote the english and french(who have 26 teams already)

Just check your theory and your maths on that... Surely a 21 team comp would give that league 52 votes.

Either way it is a silly concept.

TJ wrote:Aye - and in return we get a better deal on things important to us.  Let them have some or all of the RFUs votes

All the RFUs votes...?

The RFU are the guys who are looking the most saintly in all this.. I think it would be unfair to see them sort out all the problems that the PRL have caused and then step away. Surely having the PRL answer to the RFU makes so much more sense.

maestegmafia wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:its not about the english having more say- its about each individual team haveing as much right as the next.

the rabbo gets exactly the same say as the prl- and the french overall get more, why??

because they have more clubs that can potentially get into the comp.

That is the democratic way- ANything else Isn't.

Competing teams need the same say as the next

Surely then the RP12 could change to the RP21 and by your concept completely out vote the French and English...?

Not sure that's a good system at all..!


If clubs have an issue they can take it to their union and the Union can raise that point for them at the next "REC" meeting.

It is a system that works very well in four of the six countries involved.

only when and if one league had over half the representation would that become an issue- but no they would need to get to 27 teams to out vote the english and french(who have 26 teams already)

Just check your theory and your maths on that... Surely a 21 team comp would give that league 52 votes.

Either way it is a silly concept.

 

silly maest.. if we add teams to the rabbo there are more voters.

and even with 21 teams its 42 votes!! compared to the english and french combined 52

TJ wrote:Aye - and in return we get a better deal on things important to us.  Let them have some or all of the RFUs votes

What are these?

They will also have the RRW votes.

I am looking at a pragmatic solution. the PRL have to get some of what they demand and this could be conceded without too much harm. In tun this would strengthen our claims in other areas as a "we gave you this now you give us that" sort of fashion.

I would prefer the clubs to have no say - but compromise involves accepting things you do not want in one area to get something you want in another would it be a prie worth paying to get the 8 teams that is the minimum we can accept?

Toohey wrote:

TJ wrote:Aye - and in return we get a better deal on things important to us.  Let them have some or all of the RFUs votes

What are these?

8 rabo teams minimum, financial protection for the smaller unions

the rabbo needs to financially protect its smaller unions.. thats the rabbos concern only. The french and english should never be pushed into supporting the rabbos lesser clubs..

TJ wrote:

Toohey wrote:

TJ wrote:Aye - and in return we get a better deal on things important to us.  Let them have some or all of the RFUs votes

What are these?

8 rabo teams minimum, financial protection for the smaller unions

What do you mean by financial protection? Guaranteed income at previous levels?

Nope - just to ensure that the relative financial positions are not changed too much in favour of the english and french. If the english and french clubs more than double their income and the rest get less or the same as they have now ( as the PRL proposals state) the rest will be priced out of the market for players with disastrous consequences for the game in Italy and Scotland. We can barely compete financially as it is now.

mystiroakey - they do not, never have and won't in the future. You have to accept the european cup is what produces the money - not the English and french clubs Continuing with that nonsense is daft. without strong teams from other countries there is no european cup.

so i take it you also support the lesser teams in the other two leagues as getting the same type of financial protection as you want to give to the lesser rabbo teams?

Yes - I do not want them to be disadvantaged either - and no one has suggested that they will be. Some real nonsense from you on this.

How is that possible TJ?

I mean you say a lot of things- but how does it work??

the only way i can see it working is if every club that competes for places to get into the HC is giving an equal monetary share and an equal voting right?

You see i have given you a solution to supporting all teams, you just state stuff without actually understanding what it takes to protect all teams!

Its funny for me the key thing that I keep on coming back to looking at all this is the challenge/amlin/tier 2 cup.

The thing is, its important to England and France because they have a significant presence in it, and its not important to the Rabo because they dont. It also happens to be important for teams outside of the three big leagues as its the only shot they have at euro rugby.

What that means in practice is that a big part of the motivation of the PRL (and LNR) is about addressing european competition as a whole as they have a stake in both competitions. All of their teams are in Europe and they want them all to get an even starting share. A lot of the negativity from the rabo side seems to come from a blindness to european rugby outside of the HEC.

I dont think there is anything that I have seen that will stop, for instance, the Irish continuing to win regular championships if they keep their form up. I do think there should be better games for lower ranked teams. I also think that in theory there would be nothing wrong in time with pro12 nations putting more teams into european rugby , but the size of the tiers should remain fixed

If the english and french get more than double the money per team they have now ( and the irish get the same or less) then they will be able to push up the price of players thus making it impossible for the Irish to hang onto their best players thus making it harder to do well

and the french do not take the amlin seriously at all.

TJ wrote:If the english and french get more than double the money per team they have now ( and the irish get the same or less) then they will be able to push up the price of players thus making it impossible for the Irish to hang onto their best players thus making it harder to do well

the money would get split evenly amongst all 36 teams . how would any one club be at an advantage from the euro pot?

 

TJ wrote:Maesteg - giving the clubs a say would allow the PRL to claim victory and would do the rest of us no harm so long as they remained a minority vote.  The RFU and FFR have given some votes to the clubs in the current setup - lets just enshrine that as a right not as a gift.

We have to allow the PRL to claim victory as they are backed into a corner.  We can afford to be magnanimous on this so long as our red lines are not crossed

Thats what happened the last time. The RFU and the FFR gave the clubs too much say. And when they couldn't get their way, they decided to kill the competition.

The Unions should just get rid of them, otherwise we will have this saga every time renewal.

TJ wrote: 

fairness isn't your concern then TJ?

If you want fairness then every team gets a voting right(which incorporates 50% of the vote, unions get the other 50%) and all clubs get an even share.

You really do talk some nonsense. How is it fair for one set of teaqms to double or triple thier income while others get less?
Fairness is my concern and the PRL proposals are nothing like fair.

TJ wrote:You really do talk some nonsense.  How is it fair for one set of teaqms to double or triple thier income while others get less?
Fairness is my concern and the PRL proposals are nothing like fair.

You keep saying I talk nonsense.. I am not taking it to heart because it only shows you up and couldn't be further from the truth. Your debating skills have taken a massive nose dive..



I am trying to work out your point and I think it boils down to the fact that many english and french clubs do better domestically therefore the rabbo should get more of a euro pot! 

Why do you want the english and french leagues to prop your lesser teams up?

How is that fair?

or is it because you are used to more of the pot , therefore you think it isn't fair because it was unfair before?

I dont really want to use your word , but it does fit here!

TJ you want financial support for the smaller unions yet Italy has to pay to be in the Rabo. How is that fair?

mystiroakey wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:its not about the english having more say- its about each individual team haveing as much right as the next.

the rabbo gets exactly the same say as the prl- and the french overall get more, why??

because they have more clubs that can potentially get into the comp.

That is the democratic way- ANything else Isn't.

Competing teams need the same say as the next

Surely then the RP12 could change to the RP21 and by your concept completely out vote the French and English...?

Not sure that's a good system at all..!


If clubs have an issue they can take it to their union and the Union can raise that point for them at the next "REC" meeting.

It is a system that works very well in four of the six countries involved.

only when and if one league had over half the representation would that become an issue- but no they would need to get to 27 teams to out vote the english and french(who have 26 teams already)

Just check your theory and your maths on that... Surely a 21 team comp would give that league 52 votes.

Either way it is a silly concept.

 

silly maest.. if we add teams to the rabbo there are more voters.

and even with 21 teams its 42 votes!! compared to the english and french combined 52

Sorry I thought your number votes was hypothetical not directly linked.

mystiroakey wrote:

TJ wrote: 

fairness isn't your concern then TJ?

If you want fairness then every team gets a voting right(which incorporates 50% of the vote, unions get the other 50%) and all clubs get an even share.

All clubs get an equal share?

...Of the money left after the prize money for actually doing well in the competition is handed out?

All clubs as in regions/provinces/clubs?

Grand idea.  I concur.

Now another point, all clubs agree to an equalised salary cap, affordable to the poorest ranking League sides.  Huh?  Too 'fair'?

Another one.  All clubs agree to a quota for 'home' produced players - academy based.  Fair?

No major bucks sides buying major bucks players and thus articfically loading the 'fairness' dice very much in their favour.

Wage caps are a fantastic idea and really should be implied to reduce the crazy escalation in the French league. I am sure the club owners would be happy.

Serge Blanco was stating how important it is to rein in the spending in France just the other week.

SecretFly wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:

TJ wrote: 

fairness isn't your concern then TJ?

If you want fairness then every team gets a voting right(which incorporates 50% of the vote, unions get the other 50%) and all clubs get an even share.

All clubs get an equal share?

...Of the money left after the prize money for actually doing well in the competition is handed out?

All clubs as in regions/provinces/clubs?

Grand idea.  I concur.

Now another point, all clubs agree to an equalised salary cap, affordable to the poorest ranking League sides.  Huh?  Too 'fair'?

Another one.  All clubs agree to a quota for 'home' produced players - academy based.  Fair?

No major bucks sides buying major bucks players and thus articfically loading the 'fairness' dice very much in their favour.

thats the fair solution- its not my perfect outcome, but its fair!

I would much rather allocations be dealt with on a league coefficient scale and the top teams naturally win more!!

BUt TJ wants financial compensation for lesser clubs- thats how you do it!

Kind of like a NFL system(lesser clubs get first pick from the college drafts etc)

broadlandboy wrote:TJ you want financial support for the smaller unions yet Italy has to pay to be in the Rabo. How is that fair?

Its not. But what is that to do with the european cup?

Do you want only the English and french to be competitive and an end to pro rugby in Scotland and italy?

Rather than going round in circles continually how about some positive thoughts on solutions?

TJ wrote:

broadlandboy wrote:TJ you want financial support for the smaller unions yet Italy has to pay to be in the Rabo. How is that fair?

Its not.  But what is that to do with the european cup?

Do you want only the English and french to be competitive and an end to pro rugby in Scotland and italy?

Rather than going round in circles continually how about some positive thoughts on solutions?

some of us have tried but you just call it nonsense.

I think the point is to forget about how it was done,, But to imagine its a completely new thing and we start from scratch today. What's the fair way of going about this cup?

TJ wrote:Nope - just to ensure that the relative financial positions are not changed too much in favour of the english and french.  If the english and french clubs more than double their income and the rest get less or the same as they have now ( as the PRL proposals state)  the rest will be priced out of the market for players with disastrous consequences for the game in Italy and Scotland.  We can barely compete financially as it is now.  

mystiroakey - they do not, never have and won't in the future.  You have to accept the european cup is what produces the money - not the English and french clubs  Continuing with that nonsense is daft.  without strong teams from other countries there is no european cup.

So what about if they manage to do this outside European competition? For example if they doubled their crowds, or got apple as a new sponsor for their domestic league? Should they turn people away at the gate and tell apple to shove their money as this wouldn't be fair on the rabo teams?