New European Rugby cup (or whatever it is called) - Qualification agreed

I have heard it is:

6 French
6 English
7 Pro12 (1 guaranteed from each country, 3 on league position)
1 play-off (7th English and 7th French team)

Trying to find out is correct as we speak

Full statement
There is consensus that there should continue to be two professional European club rugby tournaments, with each tournament consisting of 20 clubs. A third tier European tournament should also be considered.

The Primary Competition would be made up of 20 clubs, with six each from PRL and the LNR, and seven from the Pro12 tournament. The clubs would come through meritocratic qualification from their respective leagues. In the case of the Pro12, there will be at least one club guaranteed from each country.

In year one, the 20th place would be allocated through a play-off match between the 7th placed PRL and LNR clubs. For the following years, the 20th club would qualify through play-offs between the 7th placed PRL and LNR clubs and the two next non-qualified Pro12 clubs. The winner of the secondary competition would qualify to participate in the play-offs, if not already qualified by right.

The English and French clubs would have home advantage in the play-offs against the Pro12 clubs.

The Secondary Competition would consist of up to 20 clubs made up of the remaining 18 PRL, LNR and Pro12 clubs. Two places could be allocated to clubs qualifying from a third competition.

Distribution of Revenues

There is also consensus that distributable revenues generated through the competitions would be divided one third, one third, one third per league with the stipulation that monies to be received by the Pro12 countries would not be less than the current levels.

Next Steps

At our suggestion, all parties agreed to meet with us again within the next 10 days to discuss the implementation of these principles together with important operational and management issues.

Governance - the biggy - still to be decided

I see that as a loss for the Rabo teams and sets the precedent for the PRL to request even more concessions the next time a review comes up.

Its farcical that the French and English are guarenteed 6 teams with a possible 7 when Italy, Scotland, Wales and Ireland are now only guarenteed 1. What a joke!

Exactly what is gained from taking away the guarenteed places? Not a lot.

Not really one side wanted 6/6/6 the other wanted 6/6/8

Surprise surprise we have ended up with 6/6/7

The bigger issue Governance is still to be determined

Where is that from tho?

Based on last years Rabo league results that would equate to…

Ulster, Glasgow, Scarlets, Treviso

and then Leinster, Ospreys, Munster


Connacht, Blues, Edinburgh, Dragons, Zebre miss out.

Its now being widely reported and at least one those reporting it I know for a fact was in the building in an official capacity

For the following years, the 20th club would qualify through play-offs between the 7th placed PRL and LNR clubs and the two next non-qualified Pro12 clubs. The winner of the secondary competition would qualify to participate in the play-offs, if not already qualified by right.


This bits a bit strange. I am assuming if the winner of the secondary competition did not qualify via another method someone would have to drop out otherwise there would be 5 teams in the play off.

Also, reading between the lines, it implies to The LVcup is no longer a qualification route for the English

Now for the Biggy Who gets the media rights?

Still a nonsense unless the PRL have suddenly decided to let the erc run the competition. Governance as has been mentioned is the biggie and we are no closer to a solution.

The only way this works is if the rfu take this to PRL and say join up or else we won't back you

Media rights would appear to be split between Sky and BT

We have a format
We have money sorted
We (probably ) have TV sorted
What we don't have is Governance sorted and that is the biggy

I don't believe anyone is wedded to the ERC - the issue is keeping union control. I also would like to see more than rumours. Been too many false reports reported as fact

Not happy with that as a deal but its not bad enough to walk away from Its not a meet in the middle sort of deal

Everything recently suggested that PRL would accept Union governance if they could control their own commercial rights.

The English and French clubs would have home advantage in the play-offs against the Pro12 clubs.

In year one, the 20th place would be allocated through a play-off match between the 7th placed PRL and LNR clubs

Both these are unnacceptable

So does that mean no place for the cup winners ? Or would that come out of their league allocation - e.g. if Exeter won the HEC this season but then finished 7th in the Jeff then the 6th placed English club would miss out?

geoff999rugby wrote:Full statement


The English and French clubs would have home advantage in the play-offs against the Pro12 clubs.

  Afraid of a visit to fortresses like the Galway Sportsground are we? So much for meritocracy

Irish Londoner wrote:So does that mean no place for the cup winners ? Or would that come out of their league allocation - e.g. if Exeter won the HEC this season but then finished 7th in the Jeff then the 6th placed English club would miss out?

Clarity on this would be useful alright. I say leave them out. If a club can't fight on both league and cup fronts then they shouldn't be in both. This should work the other way too with harsh penalties for any clubs fielding weakened teams and devaluing the cup competition.

geoff999rugby wrote:Full statement

In year one, the 20th place would be allocated through a play-off match between the 7th placed PRL and LNR clubs. For the following years, the 20th club would qualify through play-offs between the 7th placed PRL and LNR clubs and the two next non-qualified Pro12 clubs. The winner of the secondary competition would qualify to participate in the play-offs, if not already qualified by right.

The English and French clubs would have home advantage in the play-offs against the Pro12 clubs.

Could this not be done by current ERC (or their replacement) rankings?

Remember there was nobody from the PRL or LNR at this meeting. The RFU and the FFR are the folk who have agreed this.
Interesting to see the reaction from the clubs but it would seem the P12 have given a lot away if we are not going to get anything on the level of union involvement

TJ wrote:

The English and French clubs would have home advantage in the play-offs against the Pro12 clubs.

In year one, the 20th place would be allocated through a play-off match between the 7th placed PRL and LNR clubs

Both these are unnacceptable

Why? Pro 12 gets one more guaranteed place on the condition that the playoffs for the last remaining spot take place in England and France.

It doesn't mean that the Quarter and Semi Finals will always give England or France home advantage...

thomh wrote:

TJ wrote:

The English and French clubs would have home advantage in the play-offs against the Pro12 clubs.

In year one, the 20th place would be allocated through a play-off match between the 7th placed PRL and LNR clubs

Both these are unnacceptable

Why? Pro 12 gets one more guaranteed place on the condition that the playoffs for the last remaining spot take place in England and France.

It doesn't mean that the Quarter and Semi Finals will always give England or France home advantage...

Err, no, tomh - we've just conceded 3 places Or were you assuming that the PRL proposal was the benchmark?

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:

thomh wrote:

TJ wrote:

The English and French clubs would have home advantage in the play-offs against the Pro12 clubs.

In year one, the 20th place would be allocated through a play-off match between the 7th placed PRL and LNR clubs

Both these are unnacceptable

Why? Pro 12 gets one more guaranteed place on the condition that the playoffs for the last remaining spot take place in England and France.

It doesn't mean that the Quarter and Semi Finals will always give England or France home advantage...

Err, no, tomh - we've just conceded 3 places  Or were you assuming that the PRL proposal was the benchmark?

I clearly meant 'one more than the other two leagues'

thomh wrote:

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:

thomh wrote:

TJ wrote:

The English and French clubs would have home advantage in the play-offs against the Pro12 clubs.

In year one, the 20th place would be allocated through a play-off match between the 7th placed PRL and LNR clubs

Both these are unnacceptable

Why? Pro 12 gets one more guaranteed place on the condition that the playoffs for the last remaining spot take place in England and France.

It doesn't mean that the Quarter and Semi Finals will always give England or France home advantage...

Err, no, tomh - we've just conceded 3 places  Or were you assuming that the PRL proposal was the benchmark?

I clearly meant 'one more than the other two leagues'

Or in an alternative parlance, two unions have 6 guaranteed places each, and 4 unions (that just happen to have less teams so have been forced together to form a meaningful league) have 1 guaranteed place each - hmm, that sound fair?

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:
Err, no, tomh - we've just conceded 3 places  Or were you assuming that the PRL proposal was the benchmark?

Or 4 places based on current competition?

Of course depends if you view the current format as fair or not. But that is a whole different argument that would only stand a chance of getting resolved in a drink tyhe pub dry lock-in. Of course everyone woudl forget in the morning what had been agreed.

VietGwentRevisited wrote:

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:
Err, no, tomh - we've just conceded 3 places  Or were you assuming that the PRL proposal was the benchmark?

Or 4 places based on current competition?

Of course depends if you view the current format as fair or not. But that is a whole different argument that would only stand a chance of getting resolved in a drink tyhe pub dry lock-in. Of course everyone woudl forget in the morning what had been agreed.

First round on you, VGR?!

So is this how it would work? Take last seasons table;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012%E2%80%9313_Pro_12#Table

Ulster qualify as top Irish side (1st)
Glasgow as Top Scottish side (3rd)
Scarlets as Top Welsh side (4th)
Treviso as top Italian side (7th)

The other three automatic places are allocated to teams not qualified in this manner; to Leinster (2nd), Ospreys (5th), Munster (6th).

The minimum automatic qualifiers as top-placed nations there can be in the Top 6 is two. If two nations (Ireland/Wales) occupy all Top 6 slots, then the two other automatic qualifiers come from the bottom half of the table meaning that the side who finishes sixth will not automatically qualify- however they go into a playoff.

If there are three different nations represented in the Top 6, then all of the Top 6 qualify. If there are four nations then all of the Top 7 qualify.

Bottom line is; Top 5 is guaranteed European rugby whoever finishes ahead of you. Top 6 finish will be good enough most years and Top 7 will at the very least give you a chance of qualifying- although in an unfair away tie rather than a meritocratic home/away double-header.

If you're Italian or Scottish it's just a case of finishing ahead of the other one.

Home advantage in the playoffs for the French/English- what a lot of horsesheet. I'm glad we can see the lie in reforms being about merit now.

If it was the best teams, they would have a home/away playoff to decide who was the better team instead of handing a perennial advantage to themselves. MFers.

This is a pretty unwholesome day for European rugby.

Not a great deal at all. One place per Union?

The following is a complete nonsense though:


"The English and French clubs would have home advantage in the play-offs against the Pro12 clubs."

Why on earth should the Rabo team play-off have to take place in France or England, and not allowed to play on the own home soil, or at least a neutral ground?

A sop? Are the PRL, and LNR that terrified of losing to us?

Don't worry. Prl/lnr haven't agreed yet. So far this is just from the unions.

BUt all this has just come from the ERC ie the unions surely. There were no representatives from PRL, LNR or RRW there as the snake oil salesman Stuart Gallacher didn't attend.

So really how much use is this?

Home advantage is clearly a sop in exchange for 7 rabo teams. Isn't that obvious?

quinsforever wrote:Home advantage is clearly a sop in exchange for 7 rabo teams. Isn't that obvious?

It's obvious it's a sop. An immature gesture. Does any really want this sort of added-on within the structure of a premier competition. Strikes me as tacky, and ill-considered.

quinsforever wrote:Don't worry. Prl/lnr haven't agreed yet. So far this is just from the unions.

This is just from the Unions... in terms of revenue sharing and qualification this is about the worst deal I would possibly accept and sees all the compromises on one side with none from the French/English. They'd have to be crazy not to take this deal, lets be honest. Whether it takes place as the RCC or the ERC, pfff, big deal to the average punter. Thats the politics of TV deals and governance. Hopefully it will be sorted out but if there is a new body the important names will change and the faces will stay the same.

In terms of splitting revenue and qualification, they'd be mad not to bite our arms off. Whether this is run by the ERC or a new body it's a compromise that will anger many fans; this is the only template for the future of European rugby that we'll get and it represents the Celtic Unions giving up a massive amount and the English/French nothing at all.

Make the 1872 Cup even tastier though !

doctornickolas wrote:BUt all this has just come from the ERC ie the unions surely. There were no representatives from PRL, LNR or RRW there as the snake oil salesman Stuart Gallacher didn't attend.

So really how much use is this?

What this is is the Unions bottom line - if the clubs reject it there will no competition next year

Agree it feels tacky. I would prefer 7th to play each 8th team not in their league (so everyone gets 2 games but there is a small advantage to coming 7th vs 8th) and top 2 out if the 6 get HC spots.

Means rabo only get 6 auto spots though

It's an interesting point about the PRL/LNR not being there.  I think you can potentially assume two things out of today’s news though:

- The FFR and RFU have gone in and fought for exactly what the PRL and LNR want which I think should squash the myth that they have been against the PRL/LNR
- The fact they have gone in and fought for exactly what they want implies that it was a joint strategic effort despite the PRL/LNR not being at the meeting.

Nothing on the structure of a 20-team tournament - will it be 5 groups of 4 or 4 groups of 5. Lot of detail still to be revealed - how do go about seeding assuming the ERC 4-year playing record for seeding is dumped.

Overall TV money is a big qn. If it's old sky deal now split 3 ways, that means a lot less money for rabo. If it's with the new BT deal, same-ish for rabo and a lot more (vs existing) for eng/fr

brennomac wrote:Nothing on the structure of a 20-team tournament - will it be 5 groups of 4 or 4 groups of 5.  Lot of detail still to be revealed - how do go about seeding assuming the ERC 4-year playing record for seeding is dumped.

It will be 5 groups of 4 with 3 Runners up qualifying

doctornickolas wrote:BUt all this has just come from the ERC ie the unions surely. There were no representatives from PRL, LNR or RRW there as the snake oil salesman Stuart Gallacher didn't attend.

So really how much use is this?

The use comes from how tough  the RFU are prepared to be. As notch says this is a victory for the PRL as the only concessions are coming from the Rabo. The stipulations on the play off places are a joke. Maybe the Rabo teams should only be allowed to field 14 players in them.

Either way If the rfu have agreed this and are in discussions with PRL then the onus is on the clubs to be flexible. Remembers the RFU haven't publicly backed the RCC yet.

It is no myth that the FFR were against the RCC. They issued a statement saying as much. The rfu though hopefully are acting as a go between.

Tv deal is key. There is a proviso that no Rabo union will receive less money than currently. That suggests BT to me

Can't see statement. Is it true there is no mention of ERC? Could mean that's toast too.

Notch wrote:

quinsforever wrote:Don't worry. Prl/lnr haven't agreed yet. So far this is just from the unions.

This is just from the Unions... in terms of revenue sharing and qualification this is about the worst deal I would possibly accept and sees all the compromises on one side with none from the French/English. They'd have to be crazy not to take this deal, lets be honest. Whether it takes place as the RCC or the ERC, pfff, big deal to the average punter. Thats the politics of TV deals and governance. Hopefully it will be sorted out but if there is a new body the important names will change and the faces will stay the same.

In terms of splitting revenue and qualification, they'd be mad not to bite our arms off. Whether this is run by the ERC or a new body it's a compromise that will anger many fans; this is the only template for the future of European rugby that we'll get and it represents the Celtic Unions giving up a massive amount and the English/French nothing at all.

Surely they've offered diddly squat in terms of splitting revenue. The offer is 1/3 each way but "with the stipulation that monies to be received by the Pro12 countries would not be less than the current levels." As the ERC have already tied themselves into another contract with Sky presumably that means the revenue is now fixed for a few years, and therefore there will be no extra revenue to share and there will be no 1/3 each way split? Or am I missing something, have ERC got out of the Sky deal?

Toohey wrote:It's an interesting point about the PRL/LNR not being there.  I think you can potentially assume two things out of today’s news though:

- The FFR and RFU have gone in and fought for exactly what the PRL and LNR want which I think should squash the myth that they have been against the PRL/LNR
- The fact they have gone in and fought for exactly what they want implies that it was a joint strategic effort despite the PRL/LNR not being at the meeting.

I disagree, the PRL would have done their own fighting with the Celtic Unions at their meetings on Monday.

I think the RFU are still pretty neutral, not that it really matters - dunno about the FFR, though.

Toohey wrote:It's an interesting point about the PRL/LNR not being there.  I think you can potentially assume two things out of today’s news though:

- The FFR and RFU have gone in and fought for exactly what the PRL and LNR want which I think should squash the myth that they have been against the PRL/LNR
- The fact they have gone in and fought for exactly what they want implies that it was a joint strategic effort despite the PRL/LNR not being at the meeting.

You mean Mr Ian Ritchie wasn't the honourable, quiet, calm, noble, fence-sitting, honest-broker after all; but just another cloaked henchman for the Private Members Club?

Dear, dear. That'll come as a very big diappointment to some of his champions on these boards.

He is even more my hero now SF

quinsforever wrote:Agree it feels tacky. I would prefer 7th to play each 8th team not in their league  (so everyone gets 2 games but there is a small advantage to coming 7th vs 8th) and top 2 out if the 6 get HC spots.

Means rabo only get 6 auto spots though

It should have been 6,6,8. You would probably disagree, but what we can agree on, I think, is that this is a weakness to the structure of the competition for obvious reasons. Meritocracy? How is that a fair contest, and how will that effect the players from either side playing in it? Not forgetting the Rabo fans who may feel cheated out of a Euro spot should their team lose.

Dubbelyew L Overate wrote:

Toohey wrote:It's an interesting point about the PRL/LNR not being there.  I think you can potentially assume two things out of today’s news though:

- The FFR and RFU have gone in and fought for exactly what the PRL and LNR want which I think should squash the myth that they have been against the PRL/LNR
- The fact they have gone in and fought for exactly what they want implies that it was a joint strategic effort despite the PRL/LNR not being at the meeting.

I disagree, the PRL would have done their own fighting with the Celtic Unions at their meetings on Monday.

I think the RFU are still pretty neutral, not that it really matters - dunno about the FFR, though.

So who in the meeting suggested the format that's been presented in the press release?  The IRFU?

Big wrote:

Notch wrote:

quinsforever wrote:Don't worry. Prl/lnr haven't agreed yet. So far this is just from the unions.

This is just from the Unions... in terms of revenue sharing and qualification this is about the worst deal I would possibly accept and sees all the compromises on one side with none from the French/English. They'd have to be crazy not to take this deal, lets be honest. Whether it takes place as the RCC or the ERC, pfff, big deal to the average punter. Thats the politics of TV deals and governance. Hopefully it will be sorted out but if there is a new body the important names will change and the faces will stay the same.

In terms of splitting revenue and qualification, they'd be mad not to bite our arms off. Whether this is run by the ERC or a new body it's a compromise that will anger many fans; this is the only template for the future of European rugby that we'll get and it represents the Celtic Unions giving up a massive amount and the English/French nothing at all.

Surely they've offered diddly squat in terms of splitting revenue.  The offer is 1/3 each way but "with the stipulation that monies to be received by the Pro12 countries would not be less than the current levels." As the ERC have already tied themselves into another contract with Sky presumably that means the revenue is now fixed for a few years, and therefore there will be no extra revenue to share and there will be no 1/3 each way split?  Or am I missing something, have ERC got out of the Sky deal?  

Not necessarily. Sky aren't the only ones who bring in revenue and the erc I think projected 62m+ to be made next season. In truth I can't remember e exact figures but the revenue generated was going up by between 8-10m a year. It may still bethe sky deal, it could be BT, it could be both (god forbid). If it was the same money generated as this season then you would be right but it not be. If the pot goes up 10m that excess essentially gets split 2 ways unless that would mean the PRL/LNR share exceeds 66% of all revenue.