Absolutely taking the urine

First topic message reminder :

So much for this new European utopia we are supposed to be having, so much for the excuse of making the second tier of the European cup more attractive and competitive, none of the French sides put out a first team in the second tier competition, I was watching the Blues game and it was a farce. But of course, who can we complain to, now that this brave new world are run by the clubs ? We cannot go to the ERC to complain as they are not running the competition, where do we go ? This second tier competition is not worth a w@nk, I would have much rather seen the top tier with the likes of Cardiff and Edinburgh in it rather than watching them wiping the floor with the French 3rd choice teams in a take it or leave it for the French second tier comp.

Handicap?

French and English have 6 and 7 teams in the competition. The rest deserve a larger representation IMO. The ones not in the 2nd tier can't really improve it that much without the help of the French.

TJ wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:So you've not got an answer? You're just bitching and moaning for the sake of it?

The Pro12 WERE/are resting players. You don't need criteria for that, it was open and lauded as being because they valued player welfare over the English and French.

Wrong - as you have been told many times.  pro 12 teams rotate players across all competitions.  They do not rest most of the first team for league matches

Which season was it when a host of Scottish internationals missed the last few pro12 games for Glasgow and Edinburgh? Was it as many as 8 or 9 games?

TJ wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:So you've not got an answer? You're just bitching and moaning for the sake of it?

The Pro12 WERE/are resting players. You don't need criteria for that, it was open and lauded as being because they valued player welfare over the English and French.

Wrong - as you have been told many times.  pro 12 teams rotate players across all competitions.  They do not rest most of the first team for league matches

Really? Well the IRFU and WRU both have enforced rest periods during the league. The previous Pro12 teams of the season are often labelled as farsical as most hardly played in the Pro12. Given your history of stating facts as opinion (would you look at that, the new competition DOES include the English, who would have thought it?) I think I'd need a bit more if you expect anyone to accept that.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Handicap?

The theory was that the pro 12 teams had an advantage as they didn't have to fight for qualification so could rest players in the league thus had all their best players fresh for the euro cup. although this is utter nonsense it was the excuse used by the PRL for the poor showing in recent years of the english teams ( although french seem to do OK) So the very tight and difficult qualification for the PRO 12 teams was an attempt to handicap them to give the english more chance by trying to make the pro 12 teams best players be tired out before the euro games. As the basic premise was nonsense then actually it will make no difference - so I merely wonder what the next PRL tactic to try to handicap others will be. We have already heard bleating about the size of the french salary cap, an increase in the english salery cap despite them saying this would not happen. so what next I wonder?

HammerofThunor wrote:

TJ wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:So you've not got an answer? You're just bitching and moaning for the sake of it?

The Pro12 WERE/are resting players. You don't need criteria for that, it was open and lauded as being because they valued player welfare over the English and French.

Wrong - as you have been told many times.  pro 12 teams rotate players across all competitions.  They do not rest most of the first team for league matches

Really? Well the IRFU and WRU both have enforced rest periods during the league. The previous Pro12 teams of the season are often labelled as farsical as most hardly played in the Pro12. Given your history of stating facts as opinion (would you look at that, the new competition DOES include the English, who would have thought it?) I think I'd need a bit more if you expect anyone to accept that.

But less rotation / resting than the ap teams do as was proven to you before.

Erm...no it wasn't. I remember someone showing that Leicester rotated just as much as Ulster in the game just before they played. That's all I've seen. Hardly proving it but it's at least plausible.

But the Pro12 work their players harder than the English clubs? I can honestly say that is the first time I've heard that.

TJ wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Handicap?

The theory was that the pro 12 teams had an advantage as they didn't have to fight for qualification so could rest players in the league thus had all their best players fresh for the euro cup.  although this is utter nonsense it was the excuse used by the PRL for the poor showing in recent years of the english teams ( although french seem to do OK)  So the very tight and difficult qualification for the PRO 12 teams was an attempt to handicap them to give the english more chance by trying to make the pro 12 teams best players be tired out before the euro games.  As the basic premise was nonsense then actually it will make no difference - so I merely wonder what the next PRL tactic to try to handicap others will be.  We have already heard bleating about the size of the french salary cap, an increase in the english salery cap despite them saying this would not happen.  so what next I wonder?

Was the AP teams showing poor? The bottom of the pools was dominated by Pro12 teams.

TJ wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Handicap?

The theory was that the pro 12 teams had an advantage as they didn't have to fight for qualification so could rest players in the league thus had all their best players fresh for the euro cup.  although this is utter nonsense it was the excuse used by the PRL for the poor showing in recent years of the english teams ( although french seem to do OK)  So the very tight and difficult qualification for the PRO 12 teams was an attempt to handicap them to give the english more chance by trying to make the pro 12 teams best players be tired out before the euro games.  As the basic premise was nonsense then actually it will make no difference - so I merely wonder what the next PRL tactic to try to handicap others will be.  We have already heard bleating about the size of the french salary cap, an increase in the english salery cap despite them saying this would not happen.  so what next I wonder?

When did "them" say there wouldn't be an increase in the salary cap, and is there an objection to a self-imposed limitation that doesn't extend to others?

Them are the PRL flaks. the extra money was going to be used to reduce losses and now? No the richest teams will be allowed to spend more. Its just a simple example of the continuing lies from the PRL.

All the increased salery cap wil do is continue to allow some teams to run massive deficits supported by rich men. This will be to the detriment of the competitivness of the ap.

Yes the ap teams showing is poor. Who have won in the last few years - the irish and the french. apparantly this was due to the irish teams being able to coast in their league as they didn't have to worry about qualification. Utter nonsense of course.

This thread is ridiculous. You can't judge either of the competitions by the first week of pool games.

Why don't we all do ourselves the favour of waiting til the tournament is over before condemning it to the slag heap.

I understand that bizarre logic TJ but when you were talking of hanidcapping the successful teams I thought you were talking about the French!

The Saint wrote:LDs point is quite clear. Why were English fans and the PRL for many years so critical of the celts teams choosing to rotate their squads when it was a common theme across the top European rugby nations. And why now are the French free of criticism for rotating theirs in the Euro comp when LNR and PRL had apparently took steps to ensure the European competition becomes a more elite one.

When, where and who gets rotated; well I guess that's up to the teams coaching staff.

Thank you Saint, that is exactly what I am trying to say, and do you know what, so do the PRL sympathisers on here, they know what point I am trying to make, but they are just trying to be clever, and are asking the same questions over and over but just rearranging the words, the thing is, we have already asked the same questions that they are asking now, the only difference is, we were forced into change, but now it all seems ok.

quinsforever wrote:This thread is ridiculous. You can't judge either of the competitions by the first week of pool games.

Why don't we all do ourselves the favour of waiting til the tournament is over before condemning it to the slag heap.

Well apparently this sort of thing has been going on for ages, and with more Pro12 teams in the comp, then it was supposed to put an end to it and make it a better product. ALL LIES.

You could just answer the question LD!

No 7&1/2 wrote:You could just answer the question LD!

AAaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrrrrghhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, WHAT QUESTION !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

But it is a better product. You're not talking about it being better than it was (the pool games truly were pointless before with 60 point margins common and then the parachuted teams) you seem to be demanding that it is seen as a primary focus.

The argument over rotation wasn't over rotation itself. It was about equalising the competitions between the leagues rather than the nations. The lack of consequence of poor performance in the Pro12 was ONE of the issues raised.

And the two questions you've avoided are:

1) How are teams allowed to rest players (numbers, which competition, etc)

2) Should teams be fined/payouts reduced from the leagues for the same thing?

[quote="HammerofThunor"]But it is a better product. You're not talking about it being better than it was (the pool games truly were pointless before with 60 point margins common and then the parachuted teams) you seem to be demanding that it is seen as a primary focus.

The argument over rotation wasn't over rotation itself. It was about equalising the competitions between the leagues rather than the nations. The lack of consequence of poor performance in the Pro12 was ONE of the issues raised.

And the two questions you've avoided are:

1) How are teams allowed to rest players (numbers, which competition, etc)

2) Should teams be fined/payouts reduced from the leagues for the same thing?[/quote]


I have already answered both these questions earlier on in this thread, for some reason you are chosing to ignore my answers and keep asking the same questions in an around about way, The Saint has pointed out what I am trying to say, so have others on this topic, but the sympathisers like you are just trying to be clever. There is a difference between resting three or four players, which you can do each game, than resting your whole or half of your first team squad for an entire competition.

You haven't answered them. If you want to bring in a rule to financially penalise someone you would need a robust rule. How many changes are allowed. Would returning internationals be included within the changes or be outside. What if someones form drops off a cliff and an academy player is then better?

There's too much whining about teams nationalities by some on here. It's based on leagues get over it.

Who is whining about nationalities ? I'll tell you what, there are a lot of English people on here who are getting very insular when it come's to their national identity, nobody on this thread has said anything about nationalities, they have complained about clubs from certain countries, but nothing about the natationlity of anybody. I have answered the question about resting players, read my post above, there is a difference between resting three or four players per game, than making wholesale changes, but I suspect you already know this and you are just trying to be clever.

Ok, I'll tell you what, I'll ask you a question, When the PRL were complaining about Pro12 teams "resting" players IN THE PRO12, and focusing more on Europe, did you think it was fair on the other teams competing in Europe ?

No 7&1/2 wrote:There's too much whining about teams nationalities by some on here. It's based on leagues get over it.

The only reason it can ever be based on leagues is if people whine and stamp their feet and bully their way to it being based on leagues, which is what has happened. What happens if the unions that constitute the Pro12 go their separate ways? Or just one? If the Italians leave does that change the allowance for the Pro12? What happens if the Irish or the Welsh go off and shack up with the South Africans?

You might say that its based on leagues but the Pro12, which is one of the leagues, is itself a cross-border competition based on nations so its a non-sequitur. Because the Pro12 might change but the European Cup shouldn't be affected by that.

Notch wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:There's too much whining about teams nationalities by some on here. It's based on leagues get over it.

The only reason it can ever be based on leagues is if people whine and stamp their feet and bully their way to it being based on leagues, which is what has happened. What happens if the unions that constitute the Pro12 go their separate ways? Or just one? If the Italians leave does that change the allowance for the Pro12? What happens if the Irish or the Welsh go off and shack up with the South Africans?

You might say that its based on leagues but the Pro12, which is one of the leagues, is itself a cross-border competition based on nations so its a non-sequitur. Because the Pro12 might change but the European Cup shouldn't be affected by that.

If the structure of the leagues change the format of the cup should be looked at as well for me.

LordDowlais wrote:Who is whining about nationalities ? I'll tell you what, there are a lot of English people on here who are getting very insular when it come's to their national identity, nobody on this thread has said anything about nationalities, they have complained about clubs from certain countries, but nothing about the natationlity of anybody. I have answered the question about resting players, read my post above, there is a difference between resting three or four players per game, than making wholesale changes, but I suspect you already know this and you are just trying to be clever.

Ok, I'll tell you what, I'll ask you a question, When the PRL were complaining about Pro12 teams "resting" players IN THE PRO12, and focusing more on Europe, did you think it was fair on the other teams competing in Europe ?

Clubs can do what they want. Realistically everyone will have a finite number of resources and should manage that. May not seem fair but that's life. Fair and what realistically has to happen isn't the same for me.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:Who is whining about nationalities ? I'll tell you what, there are a lot of English people on here who are getting very insular when it come's to their national identity, nobody on this thread has said anything about nationalities, they have complained about clubs from certain countries, but nothing about the natationlity of anybody. I have answered the question about resting players, read my post above, there is a difference between resting three or four players per game, than making wholesale changes, but I suspect you already know this and you are just trying to be clever.

Ok, I'll tell you what, I'll ask you a question, When the PRL were complaining about Pro12 teams "resting" players IN THE PRO12, and focusing more on Europe, did you think it was fair on the other teams competing in Europe ?

Clubs can do what they want. Realistically everyone will have a finite number of resources and should manage that. May not seem fair but that's life. Fair and what realistically has to happen isn't the same for me.

But, did you think it was fair on other teams playing in Europe ?

Think it was completely fair on teams in Europe yes. Probably less fair on teams competing in the league to be honest. Teams need to prioritise sometimes though. What I didn't agree with was qualifying from the league. The top comp should have the top ranked teams.

Did the PRL really complain about resting players in the Pro12 or are you just guessing because some fans here might have taken that view?

Is there any documentation on the PRL views about the Pro12?

It's a KitKat issue it seems.

It's a biscuit!

It's a bar!

Notch is right though...mostly because he's Irish and I support him on extreme National preference grounds  

No, seriously, he's right.  No7&12 is entitled to define his League how he pleases.  But we'll decide for ourselves how we define our own Pro12 League.  That's our decision.  We won't be held to definitions suited to both AP and Top14.  And we won't suit their perceptions by defining ourselves as they would wish us to define ourselves.

We are One League comprising of Four Mutually Exclusive Nations with Four Competing National Rugby Interests

To those who have a tough time understanding a Trans National League....just think ERCC.  There's your Trans National League - and look at how we all love and trust each other (and like to be bossed around by representatives of the ERC or the PRL) and look at how content we all are to automatically say that Zebre are as close to our heart emotionally as Leicester, Exeter and Harlequins

The Pro12 is a complex, mature League where much more detailed politics has to be played to make it work.  We won't be told how it should work by two very simple National Boundary Enclosed Leagues such as AP and Top14.  Indeed we have far more hands on experience at running a Trans National event than the PRL or LNR, who seem to think they've always had the expertise and experience to do so.  They don't.  They're novices - and it shows by the continuing fall-out of their ERC Take-over..

TightHEAD wrote:Did the PRL really complain about resting players in the Pro12 or are you just guessing because some fans here might have taken that view?

Is there any documentation on the PRL views about the Pro12?

How long have you been with us on this one (debate) TightHEAD? Because many of us have done a marathon on this one. We've been here a long time - as has public speaking representatives of PRL, LNR, ERC etc etc. It's all out there. Months of the stuff, not days or weeks. Months of it.

Dowlais, you didn't answer the question. Earlier you said some rotation was fine but changing 8 or 9 players was too much (or words to that effect). When asked how much was ok and when can they do it you dodged the question as said 'ask the PRL what THEY think too much rotation is'. That's pretty much exactly what you've done again.

As for:

Ok, I'll tell you what, I'll ask you a question, When the PRL were complaining about Pro12 teams "resting" players IN THE PRO12, and focusing more on Europe, did you think it was fair on the other teams competing in Europe ?

Well, ignoring the fact fairness isn't absolute and on every issue you will have things unfair from one POV and fair from another, I can understand why the Englishs clubs wanted to be in a competition that was based on leagues, not nations. Why wouldn't they? They are one nation and one league. Same with the Pro12 groups would have preferred it based on nations and not leagues. They're 4 nations and one league. What's happened is a move to treat the leagues largely as equals, which in turn means the nations aren't. Is that 'fair'? Depends on you're POV.

TightHEAD wrote:Did the PRL really complain about resting players in the Pro12 or are you just guessing because some fans here might have taken that view?

Is there any documentation on the PRL views about the Pro12?

TH, seriously, where have you been for the last few years ? I am not being sarky when I ask this either, surely as a rugby fan, you can remember the bitching that was emanating from the PRL's end ? The final nail in the coffin came when Edinburgh got to the semi's of Europe, but were languishing at the bottom of the league.

SecretFly wrote:

TightHEAD wrote:Did the PRL really complain about resting players in the Pro12 or are you just guessing because some fans here might have taken that view?

Is there any documentation on the PRL views about the Pro12?

How long have you been with us on this one (debate) TightHEAD?  Because many of us have done a marathon on this one.  We've been here a long time - as has public speaking representatives of PRL, LNR, ERC etc etc.  It's all out there. Months of the stuff, not days or weeks.  Months of it.

But is there any real reports/documentation of PRL moaning about Pro12 resting players, or was it just chat on here by fans from all sides of the argument?

HammerofThunor wrote:Dowlais, you didn't answer the question. Earlier you said some rotation was fine but changing 8 or 9 players was too much (or words to that effect). When asked how much was ok and when can they do it you dodged the question as said 'ask the PRL what THEY think too much rotation is'.  That's pretty much exactly what you've done again.

As for:

Ok, I'll tell you what, I'll ask you a question, When the PRL were complaining about Pro12 teams "resting" players IN THE PRO12, and focusing more on Europe, did you think it was fair on the other teams competing in Europe ?

Well, ignoring the fact fairness isn't absolute and on every issue you will have things unfair from one POV and fair from another, I can understand why the Englishs clubs wanted to be in a competition that was based on leagues, not nations.  Why wouldn't they? They are one nation and one league.  Same with the Pro12 groups would have preferred it based on nations and not leagues.  They're 4 nations and one league. What's happened is a move to treat the leagues largely as equals, which in turn means the nations aren't.  Is that 'fair'? Depends on you're POV.

But did you think it was fair that the Pro12 teams were focusing more on Europe than their league ?

Come on, as you have been telling me, answer the question.

There's this one from Cockerill

“There is pressure on us every week to win to ensure that we qualify for next season so that budgets can be set and season tickets sold,” he said. “Why is it alright for a Leicester or a Bath not to be involved in a Heineken Cup and it is not alright for a Munster or Leinster not to be involved?”

Not bemoaning the resting as such, rather the general lack of consequence to disregarding the league. Which is basically the same issue.

TightHEAD wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

TightHEAD wrote:Did the PRL really complain about resting players in the Pro12 or are you just guessing because some fans here might have taken that view?

Is there any documentation on the PRL views about the Pro12?

How long have you been with us on this one (debate) TightHEAD?  Because many of us have done a marathon on this one.  We've been here a long time - as has public speaking representatives of PRL, LNR, ERC etc etc.  It's all out there. Months of the stuff, not days or weeks.  Months of it.

But is there any real reports/documentation of PRL moaning about Pro12 resting players, or was it just chat on here by fans from all sides of the argument?

This is the first one I could find:-

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/club/9641643/Scottish-Rugby-Union-chief-executive-Mark-Dodson-attacks-English-clubs-in-Heineken-Cup-debate.html

LordDowlais wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:Dowlais, you didn't answer the question. Earlier you said some rotation was fine but changing 8 or 9 players was too much (or words to that effect). When asked how much was ok and when can they do it you dodged the question as said 'ask the PRL what THEY think too much rotation is'.  That's pretty much exactly what you've done again.

As for:

Ok, I'll tell you what, I'll ask you a question, When the PRL were complaining about Pro12 teams "resting" players IN THE PRO12, and focusing more on Europe, did you think it was fair on the other teams competing in Europe ?

Well, ignoring the fact fairness isn't absolute and on every issue you will have things unfair from one POV and fair from another, I can understand why the Englishs clubs wanted to be in a competition that was based on leagues, not nations.  Why wouldn't they? They are one nation and one league.  Same with the Pro12 groups would have preferred it based on nations and not leagues.  They're 4 nations and one league. What's happened is a move to treat the leagues largely as equals, which in turn means the nations aren't.  Is that 'fair'? Depends on you're POV.

But did you think it was fair that the Pro12 teams were focusing more on Europe than their league ?

Come on, as you have been telling me, answer the question.

There is no 'fair'. It is a meaningless term for "I liked it" or "I didn't like it". If you asking mean if I liked the Pro12 being able to disregard the league still have a very good chance of qualifying...I didn't care. But I think it is perfectly acceptable for the PRL to leave a competition they're not happy with. Just as it was perfectly reasonable for the other unions to not wish to get involved and form a 5 nation European Cup. I don't about what actually happens.

SecretFly wrote:It's a KitKat issue it seems.

It's a biscuit!

It's a bar!

Notch is right though...mostly because he's Irish and I support him on extreme National preference grounds  

No, seriously, he's right.  No7&12 is entitled to define his League how he pleases.  But we'll decide for ourselves how we define our own Pro12 League.  That's our decision.  We won't be held to definitions suited to both AP and Top14.  And we won't suit their perceptions by defining ourselves as they would wish us to define ourselves.

We are One League comprising of Four Mutually Exclusive Nations with Four Competing National Rugby Interests

To those who have a tough time understanding a Trans National League....just think ERCC.  There's your Trans National League - and look at how we all love and trust each other (and like to be bossed around by representatives of the ERC or the PRL) and look at how content we all are to automatically say that Zebre are as close to our heart emotionally as Leicester, Exeter and Harlequins

The Pro12 is a complex, mature League where much more detailed politics has to be played to make it work.  We won't be told how it should work by two very simple National Boundary Enclosed Leagues such as AP and Top14.  Indeed we have far more hands on experience at running a Trans National event than the PRL or LNR, who seem to think they've always had the expertise and experience to do so.  They don't.  They're novices - and it shows by the continuing fall-out of their ERC Take-over..

Which is fine but if we're talking about a European comp for the top teams we should have the top teams playing in it.

LordDowlais wrote:

TightHEAD wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

TightHEAD wrote:Did the PRL really complain about resting players in the Pro12 or are you just guessing because some fans here might have taken that view?

Is there any documentation on the PRL views about the Pro12?

How long have you been with us on this one (debate) TightHEAD?  Because many of us have done a marathon on this one.  We've been here a long time - as has public speaking representatives of PRL, LNR, ERC etc etc.  It's all out there. Months of the stuff, not days or weeks.  Months of it.

But is there any real reports/documentation of PRL moaning about Pro12 resting players, or was it just chat on here by fans from all sides of the argument?

This is the first one I could find:-

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/club/9641643/Scottish-Rugby-Union-chief-executive-Mark-Dodson-attacks-English-clubs-in-Heineken-Cup-debate.html

You are aware that there are absolutely no quots from anyone even involved with the PRL or any of the clubs there aren't you? He even says there's been a lot of moaning in the papers.

Not saying it didn't happen (see my above reference to Cockerill) but that doesn't even come close to doing what was asked.

HammerofThunor wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:Dowlais, you didn't answer the question. Earlier you said some rotation was fine but changing 8 or 9 players was too much (or words to that effect). When asked how much was ok and when can they do it you dodged the question as said 'ask the PRL what THEY think too much rotation is'.  That's pretty much exactly what you've done again.

As for:

Ok, I'll tell you what, I'll ask you a question, When the PRL were complaining about Pro12 teams "resting" players IN THE PRO12, and focusing more on Europe, did you think it was fair on the other teams competing in Europe ?

Well, ignoring the fact fairness isn't absolute and on every issue you will have things unfair from one POV and fair from another, I can understand why the Englishs clubs wanted to be in a competition that was based on leagues, not nations.  Why wouldn't they? They are one nation and one league.  Same with the Pro12 groups would have preferred it based on nations and not leagues.  They're 4 nations and one league. What's happened is a move to treat the leagues largely as equals, which in turn means the nations aren't.  Is that 'fair'? Depends on you're POV.

But did you think it was fair that the Pro12 teams were focusing more on Europe than their league ?

Come on, as you have been telling me, answer the question.

There is no 'fair'. It is a meaningless term for "I liked it" or "I didn't like it".  If you asking mean if I liked the Pro12 being able to disregard the league still have a very good chance of qualifying...I didn't care. But I think it is perfectly acceptable for the PRL to leave a competition they're not happy with. Just as it was perfectly reasonable for the other unions to not wish to get involved and form a 5 nation European Cup. I don't about what actually happens.

A simple YES or No will do, go on you can do it, stop skirting around the question.

HammerofThunor wrote:What's happened is a move to treat the leagues largely as equals, which in turn means the nations aren't.  Is that 'fair'? Depends on you're POV.

Thus the problem that won't die.  

Won't die and will intensify as the truth of how the ERCC thing will work out in real terms unfolds over the next few years.  
If it proves to endanger the rugby in some of those Nations in Pro12 (and Brian Moore himself admits that could be an issue down the line and that he himself would be against such an outcome) then the thing will explode again and we'll be back to square one.  With he Unions wanting one thing and the French and English clubs wanting total autonomy from all forms of 'contraints'.
Their goal, the biggest of them, is to go global - to soccerise the club game in promotion and global-reach terms, they want the product to attract TV watching fans globally and want limitless financial pockets to do so  They want 'club' rugby to compete against International for hearts and minds.  They want International grade players choosing money and club glory over Nation.

That ambition will inevitably - inevitably - again impact with Unions wishes for a strong International presence - so we'll be back; and once again, the 'clubs' will want to go their own way even more forcefully.

So no, it's not a point of view - it's simply that the present 'agreement' is designed to strengthen clubs in England and France and to weaken 'clubs' in Pro12 and Unions everywhere - even in SH.  Private Clubs don't want partnership, they want control.

LordDowlais wrote:A simple YES or No will do, go on you can do it, stop skirting around the question.

I have answered the question. If you want a different answer you'll need to explain what you mean by "fair".

TightHEAD wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

TightHEAD wrote:Did the PRL really complain about resting players in the Pro12 or are you just guessing because some fans here might have taken that view?

Is there any documentation on the PRL views about the Pro12?

How long have you been with us on this one (debate) TightHEAD?  Because many of us have done a marathon on this one.  We've been here a long time - as has public speaking representatives of PRL, LNR, ERC etc etc.  It's all out there. Months of the stuff, not days or weeks.  Months of it.

But is there any real reports/documentation of PRL moaning about Pro12 resting players, or was it just chat on here by fans from all sides of the argument?

Real reports. Cotton wool - Irish - there you go too, even the Nationality of specifically 'Irish' provinces was outlined as a real issue for 'fairness'. And yet, the argument is that it wasn't a Nationalised issue. It very much was and it was Nationalised bluntly by those same people who pretended they were only interested in 'club'.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

SecretFly wrote:It's a KitKat issue it seems.

It's a biscuit!

It's a bar!

Notch is right though...mostly because he's Irish and I support him on extreme National preference grounds  

No, seriously, he's right.  No7&12 is entitled to define his League how he pleases.  But we'll decide for ourselves how we define our own Pro12 League.  That's our decision.  We won't be held to definitions suited to both AP and Top14.  And we won't suit their perceptions by defining ourselves as they would wish us to define ourselves.

We are One League comprising of Four Mutually Exclusive Nations with Four Competing National Rugby Interests

To those who have a tough time understanding a Trans National League....just think ERCC.  There's your Trans National League - and look at how we all love and trust each other (and like to be bossed around by representatives of the ERC or the PRL) and look at how content we all are to automatically say that Zebre are as close to our heart emotionally as Leicester, Exeter and Harlequins

The Pro12 is a complex, mature League where much more detailed politics has to be played to make it work.  We won't be told how it should work by two very simple National Boundary Enclosed Leagues such as AP and Top14.  Indeed we have far more hands on experience at running a Trans National event than the PRL or LNR, who seem to think they've always had the expertise and experience to do so.  They don't.  They're novices - and it shows by the continuing fall-out of their ERC Take-over..

Which is fine but if we're talking about a European comp for the top teams we should have the top teams playing in it.

But in future we will not will we ? The thing is, becuase we have been bullied into reforming our league as how we qualify for Europe, things are getting a bit more competitive, now in seasons to come, becuase we only have six places, the top tier European competition could potentialy lose out on having Munster,Leinster, Ulster, Ospreys, Glasgow, in place of The Scarlets, Blues, Edinburgh ect, now most of the first five I have mentioned are better teams than the sixth or seventh placed English or French sides, so how does that make the top tier better, because you are not having ALL the best teams in Europe in it.

LordDowlais wrote:

TightHEAD wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

TightHEAD wrote:Did the PRL really complain about resting players in the Pro12 or are you just guessing because some fans here might have taken that view?

Is there any documentation on the PRL views about the Pro12?

How long have you been with us on this one (debate) TightHEAD?  Because many of us have done a marathon on this one.  We've been here a long time - as has public speaking representatives of PRL, LNR, ERC etc etc.  It's all out there. Months of the stuff, not days or weeks.  Months of it.

But is there any real reports/documentation of PRL moaning about Pro12 resting players, or was it just chat on here by fans from all sides of the argument?

This is the first one I could find:-

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/club/9641643/Scottish-Rugby-Union-chief-executive-Mark-Dodson-attacks-English-clubs-in-Heineken-Cup-debate.html

Just one mans view to be honest, and I guess he had a lot to lose if neither Scottish teams qualified. Thank god for Glasgow.

SecretFly wrote:So no, it's not a point of view - it's simply that the present 'agreement' is designed to strengthen clubs in England and France and to weaken 'clubs' in Pro12 and Unions everywhere - even in SH.  Private Clubs don't want partnership, they want control.

Yes it is. The clubs wanted a competition that is split equally between the three leagues. From their point of view it IS fair. If you don't agree because you're POV is different it doesn't make their POV invalid. They wanted a system that was 'fair' from their POV. It could be unfair in everyone else's POV but it's still only their POV.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

SecretFly wrote:It's a KitKat issue it seems.

It's a biscuit!

It's a bar!

Notch is right though...mostly because he's Irish and I support him on extreme National preference grounds  

No, seriously, he's right.  No7&12 is entitled to define his League how he pleases.  But we'll decide for ourselves how we define our own Pro12 League.  That's our decision.  We won't be held to definitions suited to both AP and Top14.  And we won't suit their perceptions by defining ourselves as they would wish us to define ourselves.

We are One League comprising of Four Mutually Exclusive Nations with Four Competing National Rugby Interests

To those who have a tough time understanding a Trans National League....just think ERCC.  There's your Trans National League - and look at how we all love and trust each other (and like to be bossed around by representatives of the ERC or the PRL) and look at how content we all are to automatically say that Zebre are as close to our heart emotionally as Leicester, Exeter and Harlequins

The Pro12 is a complex, mature League where much more detailed politics has to be played to make it work.  We won't be told how it should work by two very simple National Boundary Enclosed Leagues such as AP and Top14.  Indeed we have far more hands on experience at running a Trans National event than the PRL or LNR, who seem to think they've always had the expertise and experience to do so.  They don't.  They're novices - and it shows by the continuing fall-out of their ERC Take-over..

Which is fine but if we're talking about a European comp for the top teams we should have the top teams playing in it.

The top teams aren't playing in it. A specified number of English, French, Irish, Welsh, Scottish and Italians are playing in it. A legally defined number from each of those 'Nations' is playing in it. It's not the 'Best sides in Europe'.
It's a mechansim to have cross-border club rugby in Europe amongst 6N Union nations. That's all it is. It's not about 'Best' - it's about a money circus designed to attract followers from the 6N, designed to attract media coverage, designed to attract sponsorship - and designed simply to produce a product that makes money.

HammerofThunor wrote:

SecretFly wrote:So no, it's not a point of view - it's simply that the present 'agreement' is designed to strengthen clubs in England and France and to weaken 'clubs' in Pro12 and Unions everywhere - even in SH.  Private Clubs don't want partnership, they want control.

Yes it is.  The clubs wanted a competition that is split equally between the three leagues. From their point of view it IS fair. If you don't agree because you're POV is different it doesn't make their POV invalid.  They wanted a system that was 'fair' from their POV.  It could be unfair in everyone else's POV but it's still only their POV.

Slavery is bad for the slave and good for the Master...but the Master could still claim that both those truths validate his notion that it's all just a POV.

It is - but one's fundamentally Bad and the other is fundamentally Bad

Hammer, you play with words better than I do when you want your coin to show Heads

Maybe the new Competition should have been called the POV Cup! It certainly beats the repetitive ERCC and the ERCC bit.

The thing is, the sympathisers on here are hiding behind the fact that what was said at the start was a load of lies, the second tier is still the same, a farce, and the top tier will not have all the best sides in Europe playing in it, because you will still get sides that finish sixth or seventh in England and France, and those sides are not better than the sides that could potentially miss out from the Pro12.

Don't start sexualising the debate, Lord. We don't need smut...not now when we've all kept it clean for so long.

Edit, what a great choice.