BKT United Rugby Championship 2022/23 - news and views

First topic message reminder :

Things building nicely for the start of the new season, first of the pre-season games underway getting ready for kick-off in Round 1 on Friday 16 Sept with Benetton at home facing Glasgow.  

Welsh region Cardiff Rugby take on Munster at their Arms Park HQ hoping to make a better start to their season with new recruits Toby Faletau and Thomas Young returning from the Premiership, two raw receipts from Dragons, multi-capped international, Liam Williams moves across from Scarlets, and the hefty Tongan backrower, Lopeti Tomani, comes in from Toulon.

Zebre have Leinster at home, and 3 derbies with Scarlets v Ospreys, Lions and Bulls,  and Ulster v Connacht.  Edinburgh and Dragons finish out the round.

All teams have recruited across the off-season so should be interesting to see how those pan out.

The Italian, South African, American and Irish unions have organised a mini-comp for development players during Oct, courtesy of the SA franchise Cheetahs.   With the squads likely to be filled with academy and upcoming youngsters, initial concerns about them impacting the URC senior squads have been ill-founded.

By the time we get to Round 6 before test players depart to prepare for Nov internationals, there should be a good picture of how teams are faring in the league this season and where they might finish.

Oh and a new 3-year deal for title sponsor for the URC has been announced - BKT - a global brand in tyre manufacturing - who knew? The title applies globally except in South Africa who have an on-going deal with Vodacom currently.

The blurb reads: "BKT’s sponsorships first started in the USA where its tires equip the iconic giant trucks of Monster Jam in all their incredible shows. Today its wide range of sponsorships include Rugby World Cup France 2023, cricket’s IPL (India) and the Big Bash League (Australia), European football leagues; La Liga (Spain), Serie BKT (Italy) and Ligue 2 (France) and also basketball’s Euroleague."

Roll on the Autumn.

Is Josh Adams injured?

Either injured or one of the three.

It looks like Adams is injured.

Where WillGriff John these days? Seems to be injured a lot.

mikey_dragon wrote:Where WillGriff John these days? Seems to be injured a lot.

Playing for the RFC this weekend, not injured.

He really hasn't done well since moving down to us, been disappointing in all honesty.

He hasn't played though apart from one half, has he?

Yeah hes had a few appearances for us but has struggled in the scrum.

They’ve struggled in the scrum and up front regardless. Your new props from the academy look decent enough, but Dwayne doesn’t seem to pick the best team. You’re a bit unlucky with injuries too.

mikey_dragon wrote:Things going from bad to worse for Cardiff... They don't look like winning another game at the moment. I wonder if the international is a regular, or someone who just had one or two caps years ago/when we had various injuries...

This post aged well

carpet baboon wrote:

Sorry Phil. It may look like they were interested from this article, but the truth was quite different.

There were so lacking in interest that they struck a deal.

Ok.

PhilBB wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:Things going from bad to worse for Cardiff... They don't look like winning another game at the moment. I wonder if the international is a regular, or someone who just had one or two caps years ago/when we had various injuries...

This post aged well

Battered by Glasgow and then Lions, but comes back to 'gloat' after a win over one of the worst teams in the league!

mikey_dragon wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:Things going from bad to worse for Cardiff... They don't look like winning another game at the moment. I wonder if the international is a regular, or someone who just had one or two caps years ago/when we had various injuries...

This post aged well

Battered by Glasgow and then Lions, but comes back to 'gloat' after a win over one of the worst teams in the league!

You're a week early

Nope, check the table and watch Scarlets re-runs this season.

mikey_dragon wrote:Nope, check the table and watch Scarlets re-runs this season.

Oh dear, I didn't think I'd need to explain it.

1. Mikey, check the fixture list.
2. Apply "comes back to 'gloat' after a win over one of the worst teams in the league!"
3. Now understand my response

You only just beat one of the worst in the league (Scarlets), after hammerings from Glasgow and Lions. I take no pleasure in presenting these facts to you as it's bad for Wales, but you need to check what's being said instead of making stuff up!

PhilBB wrote:

carpet baboon wrote:

Sorry Phil. It may look like they were interested from this article, but the truth was quite different.

There were so lacking in interest that they struck a deal.

Ok.

What deal? I didn't notice the Welsh teams in the prem. That's been kept quiet

carpet baboon wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

carpet baboon wrote:

Sorry Phil. It may look like they were interested from this article, but the truth was quite different.

There were so lacking in interest that they struck a deal.

Ok.

What deal? I didn't notice the Welsh teams in the prem. That's been kept quiet

The deal that was in the link.

Why have you sunk to the level of trying to save face by arguing black is white? That's very silly behaviour.

mikey_dragon wrote:You only just beat one of the worst in the league (Scarlets), after hammerings from Glasgow and Lions. I take no pleasure in presenting these facts to you as it's bad for Wales, but you need to check what's being said instead of making stuff up!

Erm, I make a "joke" at the expense of your team - September's Champions.

I appreciate Cardiff are crap.

PhilBB wrote:

carpet baboon wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

carpet baboon wrote:

Sorry Phil. It may look like they were interested from this article, but the truth was quite different.

There were so lacking in interest that they struck a deal.

Ok.

What deal? I didn't notice the Welsh teams in the prem. That's been kept quiet

The deal that was in the link.

Why have you sunk to the level of trying to save face by arguing black is white? That's very silly behaviour.

I'm confused Phil - if a deal has been made why hasn't it been announced ?

Irish Londoner wrote:

I'm confused Phil - if a deal has been made why hasn't it been announced ?

I'm confused that you can be confused. Anybody who has read the link the Rugby Paper (presented earlier in this thread) and who has English has a first or second language shouldn't be confused.

"they showed no interest"
"here's the interest"
"why didn't the deal get enacted"

Tremendous gaslighting.

I think the question now, is that there were apparently talks, more than that there was a deal in place....so who reneged on the deal? As teh Welsh should have been playing in our league for a number of years if a deal was struck. Latest public comments on a solution from the PRL and RFU also make no mention of the Welsh.

No 7&1/2 wrote:I think the question now, is that there were apparently talks, more than that there was a deal in place....so who reneged on the deal? As teh Welsh should have been playing in our league for a number of years if a deal was struck. Latest public comments on a solution from the PRL and RFU also make no mention of the Welsh.

FFS.

There was interest, the deal was agreed. The deal was "play in an AW league if ERC doesn't evolve"

ERC evolved.

Really weird why something so very, very, very, very basic needs this level of explanation

PhilBB wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:I think the question now, is that there were apparently talks, more than that there was a deal in place....so who reneged on the deal? As teh Welsh should have been playing in our league for a number of years if a deal was struck. Latest public comments on a solution from the PRL and RFU also make no mention of the Welsh.

FFS.

There was interest, the deal was agreed. The deal was "play in an AW league if ERC doesn't evolve"

ERC evolved.

Really weird why something so very, very, very, very basic needs this level of explanation

No need to get hett up Phil, this ain't twitter. There was a deal, then there wasn't because it wasn't really agreed. I think we all get that. And we can see from the latest comments from the PRL and RFU that there is no interest at present. Another week passes.

PhilBB wrote:

carpet baboon wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

carpet baboon wrote:

Sorry Phil. It may look like they were interested from this article, but the truth was quite different.

There were so lacking in interest that they struck a deal.

Ok.

What deal? I didn't notice the Welsh teams in the prem. That's been kept quiet

The deal that was in the link.

Why have you sunk to the level of trying to save face by arguing black is white? That's very silly behaviour.

If it helps you sleep better at night Phil you can believe that the report in the paper was a fair and accurate account of what was going on that's fine.

But the deal you so want to be true was nothing of the sort.
I understand why you would think it was due to how it was reported in the link you shared. But the reality was much different.

I'm really sorry they ruined your dreams champ, but it was never to be

carpet baboon wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

carpet baboon wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

carpet baboon wrote:

Sorry Phil. It may look like they were interested from this article, but the truth was quite different.

There were so lacking in interest that they struck a deal.

Ok.

What deal? I didn't notice the Welsh teams in the prem. That's been kept quiet

The deal that was in the link.

Why have you sunk to the level of trying to save face by arguing black is white? That's very silly behaviour.

If it helps you sleep better at night Phil you can believe that the report in the paper was a fair and accurate account of what was going on that's fine.

But the deal you so want to be true was nothing of the sort.
I understand why you would think it was due to how it was reported in the link you shared. But the reality was much different.

I'm really sorry they ruined your dreams champ, but it was never to be

So PRL went to all that effort, cost and signed a contract, but they never showed any interest.

Perfect.

All that time wasted to be messed around the Welsh backing out of a deal. Probably the reason there is no interest now.

It’s interesting watching the English RFU and Premiership gradually swinging round to solutions for issues that some of the URC unions have long practised.

Player management protocols, squad rotation, test players playing less club matches, central contracts, reduced league season, etc, etc

Pot Hale wrote:It’s interesting watching the English RFU and Premiership gradually swinging round to solutions for issues that some of the URC unions have long practised.  

Player management protocols, squad rotation, test players playing less club matches, central contracts, reduced league season, etc, etc

The RFU might publicly mull things through but never going to happen is it ? Unless you believe that the RFU is willing to take on the financial risk of owning/controlling up to a dozen professional sides, as well as the natural conflict in that and their role as governance of the sport. The RFU had their chance 25 years ago and baulked at it then, so not going to happen now.
Ireland have made it work with a couple of sides and should be forever grateful the Welsh and Scots ditched their own leagues and far more established club sides for a structure that has had several iterations and will probably continue to do so - I am not going to go into the pros and cons of that here.
The balance sheets of some club sides whilst attempting capital investment in stadia have been found out, as they haven't been able to cope with a one in a hundred year event - some of the press comment hysteria is ott.

Recwatcher16 wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:It’s interesting watching the English RFU and Premiership gradually swinging round to solutions for issues that some of the URC unions have long practised.  

Player management protocols, squad rotation, test players playing less club matches, central contracts, reduced league season, etc, etc

The RFU might publicly mull things through but never going to happen is it ? Unless you believe that the RFU is willing to take on the financial risk of owning/controlling up to a dozen professional sides, as well as the natural conflict in that and their role as governance of the sport.  The RFU had their chance 25 years ago and baulked at it then, so not going to happen now.
Ireland have made it work with a couple of sides and should be forever grateful the Welsh and Scots ditched their own leagues and far more established club sides for a structure that has had several iterations and will probably continue to do so - I am not going to go into the pros and cons of that here.
The balance sheets of some club sides whilst attempting capital investment in stadia have been found out, as they haven't been able to cope with a one in a hundred year event - some of the press comment hysteria is ott.

Thanks Rec.  I understood that they're mulling over giving central contracts to some of their elite England players similar to what IRFU do with 14-15 of their regular test starters.  But you're right - it may not happen.

Pot Hale wrote:It’s interesting watching the English RFU and Premiership gradually swinging round to solutions for issues that some of the URC unions have long practised.  

Player management protocols, squad rotation, test players playing less club matches, central contracts, reduced league season, etc, etc

PRL have had all of those, bar central contracts, written in to each of their RFU contracts, making the above post most weird

Pot Hale wrote:
Thanks Rec.  I understood that they're mulling over giving central contracts to some of their elite England players similar to what IRFU do with 14-15 of their regular test starters.  But you're right - it may not happen.

Of course, each Irish player is centrally contracted as each is contracted to the centre - the IRFU

But we all know this.

PhilBB wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:
Thanks Rec.  I understood that they're mulling over giving central contracts to some of their elite England players similar to what IRFU do with 14-15 of their regular test starters.  But you're right - it may not happen.

Of course, each Irish player is centrally contracted as each is contracted to the centre - the IRFU

But we all know this.

Central contracts are those deemed to be paid in full by the IRFU and are not in provincial playing budgets. There are 14-15 such central contracts for Irish players.

Everyone knows this.

As has also been explained to you - by an Irish rugby player on one occasion IIRC - the remaining players are on IRFU provincial playing contracts, where the IRFU only contributes part of the salary, and the remainder by the club.

PhilBB wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:It’s interesting watching the English RFU and Premiership gradually swinging round to solutions for issues that some of the URC unions have long practised.  

Player management protocols, squad rotation, test players playing less club matches, central contracts, reduced league season, etc, etc

PRL have had all of those, bar central contracts, written in to each of their RFU contracts, making the above post most weird

The point being that they have gradually adopted all of these measures over time, having railed against some of them such as playing time management/squad rotation. And somehow I doubt that reduced league season has been written into contracts, since the season hasn't been reduced as yet. The proposal is to move to 10 clubs and a shorter playing season.

Pot Hale wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:
Thanks Rec.  I understood that they're mulling over giving central contracts to some of their elite England players similar to what IRFU do with 14-15 of their regular test starters.  But you're right - it may not happen.

Of course, each Irish player is centrally contracted as each is contracted to the centre - the IRFU

But we all know this.

Central contracts are those deemed to be paid in full by the IRFU and are not in provincial playing budgets.  There are 14-15 such central contracts for Irish players.

Everyone knows this.

As has also been explained to you - by an Irish rugby player on one occasion IIRC - the remaining players are on IRFU provincial playing contracts, where the IRFU only contributes part of the salary, and the remainder by the club.



 

Central contracts are contracts paid by the centre. That the Irish system wishes to apply a unique and false meaning to the phrase is of no relevance.

The Irish rugby player confirmed his employment by the IRFU.

As Philip Browne confirmed. As the IRFU accounts confirm.

And you mean IRFU Branch contracts, not IRFU provincial contracts.

The IRFU have been contracting players since 1997, with Brian Ashton then encouraging more players to be contracted. You should read Brendon Fanning's book in order to educate yourself further.

Pot Hale wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:It’s interesting watching the English RFU and Premiership gradually swinging round to solutions for issues that some of the URC unions have long practised.  

Player management protocols, squad rotation, test players playing less club matches, central contracts, reduced league season, etc, etc

PRL have had all of those, bar central contracts, written in to each of their RFU contracts, making the above post most weird

The point being that they have gradually adopted all of these measures over time, having railed against some of them such as playing time management/squad rotation.   And somehow I doubt that reduced league season has been written into contracts, since the season hasn't been reduced as yet.  The proposal is to move to 10 clubs and a shorter playing season.

No. This is a perfect indication of your inability to comprehend basic facts.

They haven't 'gradually adopted' anything. They have contractually agreed to measures upon adequate compensation. The two are vastly different.

At one point in time, PRL wanted a larger league but the RFU contracted for a smaller league. So you've also misunderstood that.

Never change.

PhilBB wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:It’s interesting watching the English RFU and Premiership gradually swinging round to solutions for issues that some of the URC unions have long practised.  

Player management protocols, squad rotation, test players playing less club matches, central contracts, reduced league season, etc, etc

PRL have had all of those, bar central contracts, written in to each of their RFU contracts, making the above post most weird

The point being that they have gradually adopted all of these measures over time, having railed against some of them such as playing time management/squad rotation.   And somehow I doubt that reduced league season has been written into contracts, since the season hasn't been reduced as yet.  The proposal is to move to 10 clubs and a shorter playing season.

No. This is a perfect indication of your inability to comprehend basic facts.

They haven't 'gradually adopted' anything. They have contractually agreed to measures upon adequate compensation. The two are vastly different.

At one point in time, PRL wanted a larger league but the RFU contracted for a smaller league. So you've also misunderstood that.

Never change.

Phil - I'll say this once.

You are the most unpleasant, boorish and dismissive writer on these and other boards that I've encountered over a long number of years.

I've no doubt that me making this personalised comment will result in me being banned. But frankly, participating in this forum is not worthwhile any longer.

That's me done.

Pot Hale wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:
Thanks Rec.  I understood that they're mulling over giving central contracts to some of their elite England players similar to what IRFU do with 14-15 of their regular test starters.  But you're right - it may not happen.

Of course, each Irish player is centrally contracted as each is contracted to the centre - the IRFU

But we all know this.

Central contracts are those deemed to be paid in full by the IRFU and are not in provincial playing budgets.  There are 14-15 such central contracts for Irish players.

Everyone knows this.

As has also been explained to you - by an Irish rugby player on one occasion IIRC - the remaining players are on IRFU provincial playing contracts, where the IRFU only contributes part of the salary, and the remainder by the club.



 

p.s. you've spent hours pointing out how the centre charges the Branches. That means the centre holds the contract, not the Branches.

p.p.s. that makes the above even funnier.

Pot Hale wrote:

Phil - I'll say this once.

You are the most unpleasant, boorish and dismissive writer on these and other boards that I've encountered over a long number of years.

I've no doubt that me making this personalised comment will result in me being banned.  But frankly, participating in this forum is not worthwhile any longer.

That's me done.  

I'm 100% sure that you do see me that way, but the reason you do is because you spout so much ill informed drivel that only I call you out on.

"With so many units tugging at it, Lansdowne Road cops flak for many things. When it goes down with a cold,
the provinces hunker down. If only the Union would open the door to private investment, to a benefactor. It's
really that easy?
"There would be no problem. We have an open mind in relation to any proposition. There is no issue there.
In fact, there is.
"The issue is, what are they going to get in return," Browne shrugs. "The shareholders in each branch are the
clubs, that's the way it is. In France, someone comes in and buys the club
- as in the players, the brand, the
physical facilities, the whole shooting match. Gloucester, for instance, has just been sold by the Walkinshaws
for around £12m, and a new owner, Martin St Quinton, has bought the controlling shares.
"Now compare that to Munster: Thomond Park is owned by the clubs and by the branch. You can't sell that.
The players are owned and controlled by the IRFU, the revenue streams aren't sufficient to cover the costs of
running the professional game - so whoever is going to invest in professional rugby in Ireland is essentially
writing cheques for €1m and continue doing that until they get bored.
"What happens then? You have to find someone else to write the cheque. How many such folk are out there
with that level of discretionary income, who are prepared to simply be a sugar daddy. Therein lies the
difficulty. The Walkinshaw family could either have sold Gloucester as a going concern (which they did) or
just sell the place and build houses.
"Whatever investment is made in Ireland, it can't be secured against anything. Give them a seat on the
Board? If someone gave €5m, are they going to give it next year? So they go out and buy a clatter of good
players. What about the contracts in 2017?. Also there is the issue of selling off the playing assets of the
professional game here. What would finance the club and schools game in that case?"

Pot Hale wrote:That's me done.

Oh come on Pot, you post some good rugby stuff on here that many people are interested in.

Pot Hale wrote:I see that Munster Rugby have sold out their game against South Africa Select XV on Nov 10 during test window - looks like they made the right call in moving the game to the 45,000 capacity Páirc Uí Chaoimh in Cork with stand tickets selling out in the first hour, and terrace selling out in the following few days.

Good piece of business for the southern province.

Is it a good bit of business? What fee did the GAA get? It is definitely good for Munster fans, the majority of which live nearer or in Cork, not Limerick, who won’t have to travel for once to see Munster. But the money? For all we know Munster only get 10% of ticket sales.

By the way if PhilBB drives away someone like Pothale who shares so many well researched, intelligent and balanced posts and responses I’d like us all to campaign for PhilBB to be banned to keep Pothale. If we can choose. We need more posters like Pothale. This is the only time I’ve read a personal criticism from Pothale. This is an exception and shouldn’t result in someone being banned.

Intotouch wrote:By the way if PhilBB drives away someone like Pothale who shares so many well researched, intelligent and balanced posts and responses I’d like us all to campaign for PhilBB to be banned to keep Pothale. If we can choose. We need more posters like Pothale. This is the only time I’ve read a personal criticism from Pothale. This is an exception and shouldn’t result in someone being banned.

Hi Pothale, your accounts work wasn't well researched. It's why you deleted your twitter account. It had so many holes in that analysis that it looked like Bath playing Leinster.

Intotouch wrote:By the way if PhilBB drives away someone like Pothale who shares so many well researched, intelligent and balanced posts and responses I’d like us all to campaign for PhilBB to be banned to keep Pothale. If we can choose. We need more posters like Pothale. This is the only time I’ve read a personal criticism from Pothale. This is an exception and shouldn’t result in someone being banned.

There's no need to ban anyone.   My accounts commentary is well researched.  The phrases "central contract" and "provincial contract" are well understood in Ireland - that's the position I speak from and talk about.   I've explained this here on a number of occasions.  I'm well aware that the IRFU contracts all of the Irish players - either directly itself or through its branches.   That doesn't contradict how the payment system between the branches's professional teams and the IRFU centre work - it supports it.    The central contract or Category A contracts are paid in full by IRFU 'central', and the remaining provincial contracts costs' are split with fixed contribution from IRFU and the balance to be met by the club from its earnings - hence the re-charge each year by the IRFU to the provincial teams.

If someone does't like what I write, and they feel the need to be personal or abusive in response to satisfy some internal issue with themselves, that's their call. They'll just be blocked. 
I haven't deleted my Twitter account.  I block access to those who can only manage to be consistently pompous, bilious or vitriolic in response.

@pat_hale1 doesn't exist *no longer exists*, by the way.

Just to underline the level of accuracy.

PhilBB wrote:@pat_hale1 doesn't exist *no longer exists*, by the way.

Just to underline the level of accuracy.

Ummm it does, I've just looked on twitter & they are a private account with 43 followers & they follow 97 accounts.

Oakdene wrote:

PhilBB wrote:@pat_hale1 doesn't exist *no longer exists*, by the way.

Just to underline the level of accuracy.

Ummm it does, I've just looked on twitter & they are a private account with 43 followers & they follow 97 accounts.

Yes, he reactivated it last night after I posted the account detail.

https://www.iol.co.za/sport/rugby/urc/is-the-honeymoon-period-over-for-the-united-rugby-championship-e576263f-ff86-4ee8-8717-f015cebe6f44

I see the honeymoon is over. It took longer than I expected, in all fairness, not that I understand the South African psyche one iota.

More an issues of the Unions playing outside the international window than anything on the URC surely?

No 7&1/2 wrote:More an issues of the Unions playing outside the international window than anything on the URC surely?

That's the DNA of the URC. One 25% shareholder even took its employees out on tour during the URC.

What a way to value your product.