English clubs look for HC decision in May.

First topic message reminder :

A little bit of an update amongst the usual blurb on the various options. It really does look like a case of who is going to blink first and the English and French having to cook up a viable alternative in order to generate compromise.
The Anglo welsh league is one I haven't previously heard muted. May looks like being decision time.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/club/9875127/English-clubs-linked-with-southern-hemisphere-Super-Rugby-teams-as-Heineken-Cup-stalemate-deepens.html

Thats a point of contention, as they granted the authority to sell broadcast rights to its tournaments solely to ERC, and then PLC went and sold it's own, it will maybe be a legal battle (a a bigger part of the ERC talks that haven't even been reached yet).

Therefore I'd be surprised if the French went and sold its own as well, I suspect they haven't and Rec has picked it up wrong.

Kingshu wrote:Thats a point of contention, as they granted the authority to sell broadcast rights to its tournaments solely to ERC, and then PLC went and sold it's own, it will maybe be a legal battle (a a bigger part of the ERC talks that haven't even been reached yet).

Therefore I'd be surprised if the French went and sold its own as well, I suspect they haven't and Rec has picked it up wrong.

or you have it wrong?

IIRC the ERC /Sky deal was announced after the FRE/ENG clubs had given their withdrawal notice,so no agreement to any games post 2014, and after the PRL/BT deal anouncment.The PRL/BT deal is for games post 2014 so would have to be covered by the new agreement.
With the rights to broadcast in France,and the apparent lack of interest in games with no French involvment, covering a single territory you get a good idea how much they are valued.

Kingshu, I don't read french, so can't find a link. However the fact that the french have a separate broadcaster, which is not a recent development, means a separate deal for both the domestic and euro comps. I don't know the split between the two but the ERC would have the facts.

The English clubs want the same setup and post 2014 will do so - Sky have been very quiet. The ERC mandate beyond that date is non existent no matter what was said around a table in June last year. There clearly was no contractual agreement otherwise we would see civil court actions being issued for breach of contract. In the parlance, the ERC were sold a blinder.....probably just due to the timing of announcements.

The PRL made a big play of the extra HC cash but the R12 have realised their mistake and want to bring the English clubs down a peg or two. If they were dealing with the RFU they would probably achieve that but unfortunately for them they are not. The RFU are generally keeping quiet as they want the clubs to be active participants in the run up to the RWC.

So, essentially the PRL (please, Kingshu, stop calling them the PLC) agree that the ERC had the rights to negotiate a Sky deal for all 6 nations up to 2014, but that any deal beyond that point excluded the PRL and Top 14 clubs because they had served notice.

The ERC claims it was given rights to negotiate up to 2016 and that this included two unions that had already served notice on the tournament.

Neither side is spotless, and it will probably take a court of law to sort it out.

Based on the available facts, trom this side of the Irish Sea / Severn Bridge / Hadrian's Wall / Med, it looks as if the PRL and FFR are behaving more reasonably. As far as I can see, all of these are simply basic facts:
- They tried to renegotiate the deal and when they were rebuffed they followed the correct process and served notice
- They have proposed some alternative tournament structures and have offered at least one compromise position. This may not be an acceptable compromise to the Rabo unions, but it would appear to be one more compromise position than the Rabo unions have offered. Until they've put an offer of their own on the table (that is more than "everything stays the same and you have to live with all the things you hate about the competition") they aren't exactly in a position to throw stones.
- The television deal point is murky, but I would be very surprised if the tournament agreement has been drafted so that TV rights are vested in the ERC after the tournament has been dissolved. That would be commercially very stupid
- The BT deal is rich enough that everyone can get more money in absolute terms. The PRL are prepared to do this, but on the condition that in relative terms the money is more evenly shared. Right now, the Rabo unions get 52% of the money to share among 12 teams. The PRL get 24% to share among 12 and the Top 14 24% among 14.

The big sticking point appears to be whether qualification and money should be based on unions or leagues. The Rabo union position is essentially that the money (and places) should be shared at a union level with much less regard for the number of professional teams in each union. The PRL/Top 14 position is that all the teams are commercial operations in their own right and the revenue and places should be more of a level playing field at a team level.

Who's right? Can you really say? Does it matter? This is in the end a commercial negotiation. At the moment it looks like the Rabo unions aren't prepared to give ground to the PRL/Top 14, and would rather live without their contribution.

Sorry for PLC, PRL mix up.

Rec think you have picked it up wrong, Top 14 never have and therefore haven't yet sold the rights for League and Europe together. Top 14 sold the league rights and granted ERC rights to sell European rights, just so happened to be the same braodcaster, same way Sky had Aviva rights and UK European game rights, they purchased League from PRL and European games from ERC, just the same as the French, ERC pooled all the braodcast money (UK, France, Italy and overseas deals, and divided as agreed by the Unions).

ERC didn't sell European rights to just Sky in UK, ERC also sold rights to Canal in France and whoever else showed European games in the world, the French didn't sell there European games).

You say "no contractual agreement otherwise we would see civil court actions being issued" this is being held off at the present to see if agreement can be reached before going down this route.

RFU have sat on fence so far as they own the rights to sell the European game, PRL sold them and upset them,
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/club/9544678/RFU-refuses-to-endorse-Premiership-Rugbys-bumper-152-million-TV-rights-deal-with-BT-vision.html
RFU haven't endorsed it yet, ERC say RFU and PLC gave them the rights beyond 2014, and we don't know that if this is binding or not after notice was served, or what way the RFU will even go yet?

Its all a big mess, but France haven't further added to it by selling thier own European rights, as you suggest.

If agreement isn't reached I suspect there will be a number of court cases, lets hope its avoided.

Poorfour
On point one, agreed, they weren't happy and followed due process.

On point 2 - Pro 12 Unions did put forward a compromise, of a 32 team, Almin/H-cup combined tournament this was rejected. They hav't stuck with everything stays the same they have looked to reach an agreement that all parties would be happy with (I though it reasonable as it avoided cutting Unions represention).

Point 3 - think either agreement will be reached or its to the courts (which I think all parties want to avoid) PRL and ERC are at loggerheads and RFU are fench sitting, untill we get to this part of the talks.

Point 4 - Why would the IRFU accept a drop in share from 13% to 8.25%. as you say should it be Union or league based, its been agreed each Union should be there though. In any talks you will have a very hard sell to they majority accept a smaller share.

Just on your last point, maybe as you say the Pro 12 Unions are not prepared to give ground, but the English and French are not prepared to give ground either, I don't here anything about them accepting less teams or lower shares.

I think a fairer way to look at it thus far is the Pro 12 Unions have not appeared to concede anything to the PRL demands, and have looked at alternative methods around the issue, which the French and English have rejected, bringing us back to loggerheads.

France may not have sold their rights, but they're still tied up in the same argument over whether ERC retains the right to sell their rights beyond the end of the notice period. Whaterver is true for the RFU/PRL is also likely to be true for FFR/Top 14.

Fair point about the 32 team hybrid comp, but that fails to address the PRL/LNR (remembered the right acronym!) concerns about mismatches in the same way that the 20 team proposal fails to address the Rabo concerns about access. Both sides have a way to move...

Thinking about the money in percentage terms is, I think, the root of that bit of the deadlock. Accepting a drop in share from 13% to 8,25% as a Union is unacceptable. But it's just as unacceptable to the PRL/LNR that 4 teams get 3.25% each (on average) (and the Scots get what, 5.5% each) when 12 teams get 2% each and 14 teams get less than that.

Part of the trouble is that the IRFU, WRU, SRU and FIR control their provinces/regions/clubs so (I guess) think about them as a bunch of 4 or 2 rather than as individual commercial entities. The PRL and LNR clubs are all independently owned and while they will pool their interests where it makes sense they don't have a huge flow of money from their unions and need to make money at a club level.

The PRL may have gone off-piste with the BT deal, but I do think it was a genuine attempt to bring something new to the table and break the deadlock. The essence of the BT deal is that there's enough money that everyone can get more in absolute terms.

You may be right Kingshu but by the same token, no broadcaster would tender for purely a domestic game without the whole rights and the two are closely linked in order for the french to accept the domestic terms. The ERC have been proven to have fallen short in that regard and Sky played a clever game, which has now been challenged.

On the TV deal as with all inter union competions each union holds the rigths to show the whole competition in there union area.

BT has the rights to all english teams in an inter-union competition in the UK (3.3unions)

The SRU hold the rights to show all games in any competition held involving Scottish teams. So any rights sold by another union/group that the SRU have rights too that they don't agree with in null and void. The PRL can only sell the rights to game involving PRL teams in England. Any cross-boarder competition requires the rights to be agreed with all unions.

This is why the RFU gave out to the PRL because the PRL didn't have the rights for the Uk only england or a competition invovling only PRL teams.

The thing were the issue arises is the the PRL sold the rights to a competition (that is to be created) that would involve each country keeping the rights to their teams and not to the competition.

Brendan wrote:The thing were the issue arises is the the PRL sold the rights to a competition (that is to be created) that would involve each country keeping the rights to their teams and not to the competition.

The PRL have to unveil what their BT deal is before it can even be a bargaining point. It may be the best thing since sliced bread or it maybe the best thing for a few English Clubs.

Poorfour

1) If the PRL walk away, will the Top 14 do the same? It's not clear, but I would guess that they will because their schedule is already overloaded and they want change

The french will not walk away

Toulouse president Rene Bouscatel has confirmed that his side will stay in the Heineken Cup in whatever format the tournament takes come the 2014-15 season.

.

DaveM


I think you might be talking about the French Union, rather than the French clubs? I'd like to see the quote where they say they aren't interested in other compeitions if you can find it?

See above quote

If it is just the PRL who are the problem how come no agreement could be reached when they were not invited to the Paris meeting? IIRC the LNR were not very happy at the ERC for that.

maestegmafia wrote:

Brendan wrote:The thing were the issue arises is the the PRL sold the rights to a competition (that is to be created) that would involve each country keeping the rights to their teams and not to the competition.

The PRL have to unveil what their BT deal is before it can even be a bargaining point. It may be the best thing since sliced bread or it maybe the best thing for a few English Clubs.

They have to reveal it during negotiations...not to the media (or us). I don't expect to hear any specifics until it's all sorted (maybe not then).

There seems to be some confusion as to TV rights. A union doesn't have any control to rugby shown in their area. They have control over the home games played in their area. The RFU have no say, nor gain anything, from the sale of (for example) S15 rugby in England. The only way the union doesn't control these rights is if they given them up.

The TV rights for the ERC were given to the ERC as part of the participation agreement. That ends after 2014, as does the ERC itself in its current form. The ERC is acting as though the participation agreement is renewed, as it has to. If it isn't, or the terms change, they it will have modify their actions. As things stand the RFU believe the rights revert to them and the PRL believe they would be given them as are all other domestic games (I think the RFU are right from the things I read). However the RFU haven't said they're annoyed or that the deal is illegal (that I've seen). Just that they have to approve any deal.

Regarding the French, the LNR have said they wish they could sell they're rights but the FFR won't give them the rights. No idea specifically how the French rights are dealt with but there have been no stories that I'm aware to suggest any changes have happened in the last few years.

And finally, one of the most ironic (possibly not really ironic but still...) things in this is that the PRO12 is the only cross border competition that I know of that has each participating union sells their own rights and keep the money. Maybe we should a leaf out of their book.

It would look like the English and French have joined together. That might be the case but looking a little deeper it seems the French and English are looking for different things. The French want less matches and different HEC calender while the English mainly want more money.

Its like a game of cards. All sides are threading carefully and waiting for each other to make the next move. There is also the possibility of one side bluffing, breaking ranks within a side and sides having cards up their sleeves that they have yet to show. Its actually interesting to see how it goes! lol


What has not been talked about yet is the possibility of sky buying the rights for rabo games. Sky need more rugby which they have demonstrated by buying up rights for Ireland autumn international matches. They'll need more than that though.

profitius wrote:It would look like the English and French have joined together. That might be the case but looking a little deeper it seems the French and English are looking for different things. The French want less matches and different HEC calender while the English mainly want more money.

Its like a game of cards. All sides are threading carefully and waiting for each other to make the next move. There is also the possibility of one side bluffing, breaking ranks within a side and sides having cards up their sleeves that they have yet to show. Its actually interesting to see how it goes! lol


What has not been talked about yet is the possibility of sky buying the rights for rabo games. Sky need more rugby which they have demonstrated by buying up rights for Ireland autumn international matches. They'll need more than that though.

It certainly is. I imagine we'll end up with something very similar to what we have now, with relatively minor changes. However I'm quite exciting about something new (could be Poopie mind). People can make stuff up to get angry about if they want. But we know very very little (even on details often current agreement)

HammerofThunor wrote:

profitius wrote:It would look like the English and French have joined together. That might be the case but looking a little deeper it seems the French and English are looking for different things. The French want less matches and different HEC calender while the English mainly want more money.

Its like a game of cards. All sides are threading carefully and waiting for each other to make the next move. There is also the possibility of one side bluffing, breaking ranks within a side and sides having cards up their sleeves that they have yet to show. Its actually interesting to see how it goes! lol


What has not been talked about yet is the possibility of sky buying the rights for rabo games. Sky need more rugby which they have demonstrated by buying up rights for Ireland autumn international matches. They'll need more than that though.

It certainly is. I imagine we'll end up with something very similar to what we have now, with relatively minor changes. However I'm quite excited about something new (could be Poopie mind). People can make stuff up to get angry about if they want. But we know very very little (even on details often current agreement)

People are not making anything up.

You see things very very differently to a good number of posters on this thread, and to me.

I can't agree on many of the things you have written on this subject because I think you are blind to what is happening and interpret everything incorrectly. I am not alone, there are plenty of posters on this thread that I concur with.


The reason we are all angry is very very plain and simple, England are threatening to take away a competition that we all cherish for their own financial reward.

Whether we win regularly or not we think the HEC is an institution worth preserving, the PRL do not, they are using the competition we enjoy watching as a bargaining tool.

'England' aren't doing anything. The English and French clubs that take part one the ERC competitions aren't satisfied with the current set up and will pull out. Some people seem to think they should be forced to adhere to a structure that was formed in time when the structure of professional in Europe was very different. There nothing wrong with renegotiations (IMO).

TJ has made stuff up. Unless of course TJ has insider knowledge of what the LNR and PRL are planning and want. If someone presents facts that aren't backup up by anything I take it as made up (and that's backed up by quotes not journalist spin and dogy headlines).

Difference of opinions I don't really care about. As long as these people don't try and peddle these opinions as facts. That I will challenge. Nobody has to pay. Attention if they don't want.

Out of curiosity what am I interpreting incorrectly and being blind to?

Here are a few quotes from the French:

Patrick Wolff, vice-president of the Ligue Nationale de Rugby, "We must give negotiation a chance because the competition is more interesting with the Celts involved. We expect to find a common understanding with all the stakeholders. If the negotiations fail, we will see what our alternative options are. We must have something agreed by October or November. If we don't we'll have to look at how the nine dates set aside for European competition can be used in other ways."

Regarding broadcasting rights he said, "It is not our understanding that ERC only have the right to negotiate TV rights."

Jean-Marc Lhermet, AS Clermont general manager has said, "Is it really appropriate always to have two Italians clubs in the group stage? Is it normal that some teams automatically qualify while others have to fight for their place? I am not sure."

Wolff outlined some of the demands that would be made by the French clubs, "The Amlin Challenge Cup must have teams from all stakeholders because at the moment it is a useless competition just concerning English and French clubs. We want a decent schedule to the season whereby European competition will be finished by the end of April. We also believe it would be interesting - even for the Celts - if the RaboDirect teams have to qualify like the English and French clubs do. We believe that would give more momentum to their competition. Our thoughts have already been transmitted to ERC and the stakeholders and will form the basis for negotiations."

maestegmafia wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:

profitius wrote:It would look like the English and French have joined together. That might be the case but looking a little deeper it seems the French and English are looking for different things. The French want less matches and different HEC calender while the English mainly want more money.

Its like a game of cards. All sides are threading carefully and waiting for each other to make the next move. There is also the possibility of one side bluffing, breaking ranks within a side and sides having cards up their sleeves that they have yet to show. Its actually interesting to see how it goes! lol


What has not been talked about yet is the possibility of sky buying the rights for rabo games. Sky need more rugby which they have demonstrated by buying up rights for Ireland autumn international matches. They'll need more than that though.

It certainly is. I imagine we'll end up with something very similar to what we have now, with relatively minor changes. However I'm quite excited about something new (could be Poopie mind). People can make stuff up to get angry about if they want. But we know very very little (even on details often current agreement)

People are not making anything up.

You see things very very differently to a good number of posters on this thread, and to me.

I can't agree on many of the things you have written on this subject because I think you are blind to what is happening and interpret everything incorrectly. I am not alone, there are plenty of posters on this thread that I concur with.


The reason we are all angry is very very plain and simple, England are threatening to take away a competition that we all cherish for their own financial reward.

Whether we win regularly or not we think the HEC is an institution worth preserving, the PRL do not, they are using the competition we enjoy watching as a bargaining tool.

Well, that's one way of looking at it. But from the PRL's perspective the Rabo unions manipulated the structure of their league, after the ERC agreement was signed, to give their clubs a structural advantage in qualifying and a disproportionate share of the cash. They are looking to redress that imbalance.

Your position is not that far from arguing that India should not have been allowed its independence because the Empire was working quite nicely for Britain, thank you very much. It's not as if the English clubs get the most money today and want it all. They get less money and fewer entries at a per club level, earn less from the HEC and Amlin than from the LV, and want a better balance.

Poorfour wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:

profitius wrote:It would look like the English and French have joined together. That might be the case but looking a little deeper it seems the French and English are looking for different things. The French want less matches and different HEC calender while the English mainly want more money.

Its like a game of cards. All sides are threading carefully and waiting for each other to make the next move. There is also the possibility of one side bluffing, breaking ranks within a side and sides having cards up their sleeves that they have yet to show. Its actually interesting to see how it goes! lol


What has not been talked about yet is the possibility of sky buying the rights for rabo games. Sky need more rugby which they have demonstrated by buying up rights for Ireland autumn international matches. They'll need more than that though.

It certainly is. I imagine we'll end up with something very similar to what we have now, with relatively minor changes. However I'm quite excited about something new (could be Poopie mind). People can make stuff up to get angry about if they want. But we know very very little (even on details often current agreement)

People are not making anything up.

You see things very very differently to a good number of posters on this thread, and to me.

I can't agree on many of the things you have written on this subject because I think you are blind to what is happening and interpret everything incorrectly. I am not alone, there are plenty of posters on this thread that I concur with.


The reason we are all angry is very very plain and simple, England are threatening to take away a competition that we all cherish for their own financial reward.

Whether we win regularly or not we think the HEC is an institution worth preserving, the PRL do not, they are using the competition we enjoy watching as a bargaining tool.

Your position is not that far from arguing that India should not have been allowed its independence because the Empire was working quite nicely for Britain, thank you very much.

You must be taking the pi$$.

I think a lot of posters on here are far too emotionally attached to the HC and so struggle withany concept of change.

Artful_Dodger wrote:

Poorfour wrote:
Your position is not that far from arguing that India should not have been allowed its independence because the Empire was working quite nicely for Britain, thank you very much.

You must be taking the pi$$.

Exaggerating for effect, certainly. But the PRL and LNR clubs bring most of the money to the table, but earn less per club from the competition than the Rabo provinces/regions/clubs. They have the least number of slots relative to the number of teams in their league. And yet they are somehow in the wrong for wanting to reform that.

My point is tha the status quo is not always a defensible position just because it's the status quo. Can anyone offer a good explanation of why the current set up is reasonable for the PRL and LNR clubs?

maestegmafia wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:

profitius wrote:It would look like the English and French have joined together. That might be the case but looking a little deeper it seems the French and English are looking for different things. The French want less matches and different HEC calender while the English mainly want more money.

Its like a game of cards. All sides are threading carefully and waiting for each other to make the next move. There is also the possibility of one side bluffing, breaking ranks within a side and sides having cards up their sleeves that they have yet to show. Its actually interesting to see how it goes! lol


What has not been talked about yet is the possibility of sky buying the rights for rabo games. Sky need more rugby which they have demonstrated by buying up rights for Ireland autumn international matches. They'll need more than that though.

really? Will the English be the only ones to benefit from the increased money, i was always under the impression it would increase the pot for everyone.
It certainly is. I imagine we'll end up with something very similar to what we have now, with relatively minor changes. However I'm quite excited about something new (could be Poopie mind). People can make stuff up to get angry about if they want. But we know very very little (even on details often current agreement)

People are not making anything up.

You see things very very differently to a good number of posters on this thread, and to me.

I can't agree on many of the things you have written on this subject because I think you are blind to what is happening and interpret everything incorrectly. I am not alone, there are plenty of posters on this thread that I concur with.


The reason we are all angry is very very plain and simple, England are threatening to take away a competition that we all cherish for their own financial reward.

Whether we win regularly or not we think the HEC is an institution worth preserving, the PRL do not, they are using the competition we enjoy watching as a bargaining tool.

But isn't that a financial reward for everyone? not just the English. They've already said the money would go into the "pot".

Poorfour wrote: They have the least number of slots relative to the number of teams in their league. And yet they are somehow in the wrong for wanting to reform that.

My point is tha the status quo is not always a defensible position just because it's the status quo. Can anyone offer a good explanation of why the current set up is reasonable for the PRL and LNR clubs?

Because France and England get more teams in the HC than other countries already.

For the nth time the competition was set up as a contest between the best teams from 6 independant countries not 3 competing leagues.

There does seam to be some reasonable posters here, Compromise will have to be reached, and I think the below model seams reasonable, would like thoughts.

Entries French 6, English 6, Pro 12 8 (one from each union, and rest league based)

Winner of Almin or H-cup take one of the Union spaces. (ie if Tigers won H-cup and finished 7th in League, they would get one of Englands 6 spots and then top 5 in League). Final brought forward as French wish.

Money
Currently around 90% is divided among the 6 unions for taking park (25% english, 25% french about 13% the Pro 12 unions each), and 10% is given out as prize money, to each club per round in the knock out stage.

If it was changed to 60% was given out for participation (divided same as before) and 30% was then given out as Prize money (10% to boost Almin), going so far as to reward finish 3rd in group.

Pro's
With this Pro 12 Unions have at least one team, in and 4 spaces are on merit.
Fewer Pro 12 teams, (as English and French want) more in Almin.
Each Union keeps its share of basic payment, and French and English by having more teams, should take up more of the prize money available.

Con's
IRFU wish 2 + 1 can qualify on merit, this only gives 1+3,
Pro 12 Unions make all the concessions
PRL does not recieve the 33% it wants.
SRU and FIR would prob be the losers in this,

[quote="geoff998rugby"]

Poorfour wrote: They have the least number of slots relative to the number of teams in their league. And yet they are somehow in the wrong for wanting to reform that.

My point is tha the status quo is not always a defensible position just because it's the status quo. Can anyone offer a good explanation of why the current set up is reasonable for the PRL and LNR clubs?

Because France and England get more teams in the HC than other countries already to reflect this. (from when th eH-cup started France and English numbers have increased each time.

As said numerous times if England and France are not happy with the payment per club, they can reduce the number of Clubs like the Welsh did. If they reduced the Prem to 8 teams, 75% of them would get into the H-cup and the payment per club would increase by 1/3 each.

Can anyone really argue that the IRFU deserve less than 3 spots?

But I'm going to avoid this part from now on its the same arguments, should it be Union or League splits in money and qualification, and its going in circle, will only comment on anything new from now on.

Kingshu wrote: Con's
IRFU wish 2 + 1 can qualify on merit, this only gives 1+3,

I think they could live with that - it gives the 3 senior Provinces ever opportunity to qualify.

What is totally unacceptable is a 6+6+6 spilt which freezes out the 3rd Irish provinces.

I remember posting months ago that 6+6+8 and no place for Cup winners was the way to go.

I still feel this will be the decision but with either 2 or 4 of the Pro12 places being based on league positions

I'd agree geoff, I don't think reducing the Pro 12 unions to 8 teams between them is unreasonable, reduction to 6 teams is unacceptable.

SRU and FIR are the ones that would prob object, but ever since the SRU got rid of the 3rd team and entered two automatically they would know that something like this was coming.

FIR currently enter 6 teams in Europe, and it being reduced to 2 would make sense.

Its the way the money is sorted that I think is fairest as well. No Union is going to accept a reduction in share, but if share stayed the same and but more was granted to performance it may keep all parties happy.

[quote="Kingshu"]

geoff998rugby wrote:

Poorfour wrote: They have the least number of slots relative to the number of teams in their league. And yet they are somehow in the wrong for wanting to reform that.

My point is tha the status quo is not always a defensible position just because it's the status quo. Can anyone offer a good explanation of why the current set up is reasonable for the PRL and LNR clubs?

Because France and England get more teams in the HC than other countries already to reflect this. (from when th eH-cup started France and English numbers have increased each time.

As said numerous times if England and France are not happy with the payment per club, they can reduce the number of Clubs like the Welsh did. If they reduced the Prem to 8 teams, 75% of them would get into the H-cup and the payment per club would increase by 1/3 each.

Can anyone really argue that the IRFU deserve less than 3 spots?

But I'm going to avoid this part from now on its the same arguments, should it be Union or League splits in money and qualification, and its going in circle, will only comment on anything new from now on.

This highlighted bit is what I don't understand. So the attitude is 'we are happy the way things are, you should change to fit'? Effectively some of the unions have played the system, knowing full well that the system wouldn't exist into perpetuity.

The tournament has changed a lot since it was first started, in particular the Rabo league set up. There was a pre-agreed time (now) for a discussion about how the tournament works. What is the issue with that?

I think a compromise will be reached, despite all the posturing, nobody wants the gap in income that no HC would provide.

[quote="Kingshu"]

geoff998rugby wrote:

Poorfour wrote: They have the least number of slots relative to the number of teams in their league. And yet they are somehow in the wrong for wanting to reform that.

My point is tha the status quo is not always a defensible position just because it's the status quo. Can anyone offer a good explanation of why the current set up is reasonable for the PRL and LNR clubs?

Because France and England get more teams in the HC than other countries already to reflect this. (from when th eH-cup started France and English numbers have increased each time.

As said numerous times if England and France are not happy with the payment per club, they can reduce the number of Clubs like the Welsh did. If they reduced the Prem to 8 teams, 75% of them would get into the H-cup and the payment per club would increase by 1/3 each.

Can anyone really argue that the IRFU deserve less than 3 spots?

But I'm going to avoid this part from now on its the same arguments, should it be Union or League splits in money and qualification, and its going in circle, will only comment on anything new from now on.

The Welsh reduced the number of teams because their market couldn't sustain that many professional rugby teams. The Rabo nations amalgamated their league because a professional league isn't viable without around 12 teams. Both of these moves happened after the current HEC structure was put in place; both moves essentially compensate for weaknesses in the local markets of the unions involved. They have a happy side effect of making it easier for the teams that comprise the Rabo (artificially established in the case of 3 of the 4 constituent unions, and with guaranteed places in the league) to qualify and giving them an increased share of the revenue.

The allocation of entries was meant to bring together the best teams of 5 unions (and help Italy to develop); when 10 of the 12 Rabo teams qualify by default, that makes a bit of a mockery of the concept of "best".

Cutting the number of AP teams to 8 to compensate for the Celtic national markets being smaller is essentially saying that they should artificially restrict the size of their league to below what their market will support. Even if it could somehow be agreed (the RFU couldn't force it and the PRL wouldn't, since it is, erm, the representative body of the 12 clubs that make up the PRL plus a couple in ND1), it would be financial suicide for English club rugby. The least damaging way to do it would be to force 4 clubs down into ND1. Revenue falls off a cliff for them, and for the 4 clubs they displace to lower leagues. It's not much better for the clubs remaining in the AP, because they go from 16 home games per season (11 AP + 2 LV + 3 HEC) to 11 (7 AP + 2 LV + 2 HEC). So that's over a quarter of your gate, food, beverage and merch revenues gone overnight.

I can see why the Rabo clubs don't want to budge, but let's not get on a high horse about their moral right to maintain the status quo. I like the idea of a 20 team HEC with at least one team per nation but proper qualification thereafter, combined with a much stronger and higher profile Amlin (which has been improved a lot by having HEC teams drop into the QFs)

But the Pro12 teams are budging by agreeing to lose 2 places and making some of the qualification places dependant on league position.

The change that needs to be seen from the English, I dont think the French would object, is to make the other 2 places the Cup Winners positions not further cuts to the Pro12.

Under this concept the competition would have 4 less teams but the English and French would not lose a single qualification position.

To dogmatically insist on 6+6+6 is to totally ignore the fact that 4 nations are represented in the Pro12 and only 1 in the Aviva and the French league.

I honestly believe that if the English do not budge on this then the HC will not take place in 2014-15

Geoff, I think the cup winning Union getting an extra place for the league will be forgotten about, Why woould the IRFU be happy if they win it and WRU get the extra place?

It will be either 6+6+8 and cup winners come out of that Unions allocation, or 5+5+8 and the two league with the hightest co-efficient get an extra place each (a fiar compromise again, spots are on league strenght, not if a union has one really good team).

Again I think your right Geoff, then the HC will not take place in 2014-15.
I think everyone will dig their heels in (sure we haven't even reached the most contentious issue yet), English and French will believe a year without H-cup will have the pro 12 unions more willing to concede, and Pro 12 Unions will not be cave in.

My main hope is that if there is no H-cup for a year the Pro 12 Unions can run a cup, advertise it that this cup is for thier survival against English bullying (may not be your viewpoint, but I mean it as Pro 12 spin doctoring)and hopefully we can get massive crowds out in support of the Pro 12 teams. Support your Region/Province and stick it up the English at the same time, to be fair thats what the Celtic nations love doing.

Can someone explain the purpose of reducing the tournament to 20 teams in stead of 24? A 20 team competition has exactly the same number of games as a 24 team competition in the way that the HC and Amlin have the same 6 games, quarters, semis and final. Its just 5 groups of 4 rather than 6 groups of 4.????

Kingshu, do you really think that a Rabo cup on top of the Rabo league would attract that much interest, even if the spin came off? It's still the same teams playing each other.

Sure there arn't many options open to the Pro 12, for generating the lost income if there isn't a h-cup for a year.

So relaunching the Celtic cup for one year seams to be the best option to make up some of the lost income, the more support they can generate the lower the loss. So it would be marketed well (sure its mostly the same teams playing each other in the LV cup as Aviva, and it goes on each year). Push the Pro 12 as well, no H-cup games means internationals will need less rest, maybe have an extra Autumn international (for IRFU). Advertise it as the English are trying to break us, so come out and support your team.

It would be a year out and plans for survival will have to be made, if the H-cup looks to be dead forever longer term plans would need made, I'd suggest adding two USA teams, one in New york could do well, USA have some good players and could be competative, its a hugh market, and there are plenty of Irish/Italians/Scots and Welsh that could attract decent crowds, and they would be playing against the best from Europe.

Kingshu wrote:Sure there arn't many options open to the Pro 12, for generating the lost income if there isn't a h-cup for a year.

So relaunching the Celtic cup for one year seams to be the best option to make up some of the lost income, the more support they can generate the lower the loss. So it would be marketed well (sure its mostly the same teams playing each other in the LV cup as Aviva, and it goes on each year). Push the Pro 12 as well, no H-cup games means internationals will need less rest, maybe have an extra Autumn international (for IRFU). Advertise it as the English are trying to break us, so come out and support your team.

It would be a year out and plans for survival will have to be made, if the H-cup looks to be dead forever longer term plans would need made, I'd suggest adding two USA teams, one in New york could do well, USA have some good players and could be competative, its a hugh market, and there are plenty of Irish/Italians/Scots and Welsh that could attract decent crowds, and they would be playing against the best from Europe.

yappysnap wrote:I think a lot of posters on here are far too emotionally attached to the HC and so struggle withany concept of change.

I think change is good and I like the idea of making qualification for the HEC tougher for teams in the RP12. Though I would also like to see it equally tougher for teams in the T14 and English Premiership.

I also see this as a European competition, therefor it is very important that all top European nations are involved.

I agree with the concept that the Amlin should be strengthened, I like the idea that a third tier competition for smaller European nations is added too.

I want to see a tough and exciting competition in Europe I would like it to evolve but I do not see the ERC are doing many things wrong with what they currently have. They can make changes, improvements without the threats that the English and French have made. These threats have jeopardised something that is already very exciting and very good.

maestegmafia wrote:I think change is good and I like the idea of making qualification for the HEC tougher for teams in the RP12. Though I would also like to see it equally tougher for teams in the T14 and English Premiership.

Genuinely confused by that. What do you mean by "equally tougher"? "Equally tough" as in "everyone qualifies in the same proportion" or "an equal amount tougher" as in "qualification for everyone gets tougher by the same degree"?

Qualification is already very tough for the AP and Top 14 sides. Post the 6N, the AP almost always divides into 2-3 teams fighting relegation, 5-6 teams fighting for playoff spots and 3-5 teams fighting for the last two HEC places. It's very rare for these to be decided before the final round of matches, and very rare that there is even one match on the final day in which neither team has something at stake. Qualification makes enough of a difference to the clubs' income that it is something they really scrap for. When the teams are as evenly matched as they are (London Irish, in the relegation zone, beat Sarries, in the top 3 a couple of weeks ago) there's generally not much to choose between the teams from 4th to 9th at the end of the season.

How much tougher would you like it to be?

Here's an idea.

14 teams qualify by right (Top 4 EN, Top 4 FR, Top 2 IR, WA, Top SC, Top IT)

Next 12 teams (5-8 EN, 5-8 FR, Next 4 Rabo) are paired and play home and away over the league playoff weekends. (needs some co-ordination around the Top 14, but still...). Winners play HEC, losers play Amlin.

Everyone else into the Amlin, plus 2 more Italian sides to make up the numbers.

Both competitions are 5 pools of 4. Pool winners and top 3 runners up in the HEC go into the QFs.

Amlin Pool winners plus next 2 HEC runners up plus best Amlin runner up go into Amlin QFs.

The clever bit is to use the playoff weekends to run the extra qualifying rounds. The teams in qualifying by definition aren't in the playoffs, they each get an extra home gate and no-one can really claim that the positions aren't decided on merit. Could it work, or have I just been overthinking it?

Hammer - I have made nothing up at all. Lots of guff from the English posters tho

Its not out fault that the English league is structured in a way that they believes handicaps them - its their fault. Sort your own league out do not attempt to handicap ours

England and France do not bring more money into it and receive less - the money is brought in my the whole competition and they already get the lions share.

The French will not leave - the PRL are isolated from everyone including their own union. this is a fact not made up or an opinion. all you need to be able to do is read and understand.

Anyway - I will leave you to it but remember this - if the PRL ruin the HC they will never be forgiven for it and they could really suffer for it

TJ, you may not be making stuff up, but you don't seem to be paying much attention to what other people are saying. You repeatedly write as if the English and French teams could easily lose a third of their number with no negative effects on the remaining teams, on English and French rugby or on European rugby in general. That simply isn't the case. Cut the size of the league down, and the league will eventually die. The need for the Rabo is testament to the minimum supportable size.

It's not English rugby's fault that the Celts can't support a professional league without banding together, and yet English rugby is disadvantaged by that fact. That argument has as much or little merit as yours, the only difference being that the Rabo has an existing agreement on its side.

Is there any chance you might recognise that while their priorities are different both sides have legitimate interests, and say something constructive for once?

I have said nothing about the size of the English or French leagues. Its a simple point. You think your structure handicaps you you change your structure - you do not attempt to handicap others.

It is none of the PRLs business how the scots qualify.

I am trying to get you to see how outrageous the PRLs demands are - they want to control european rugby for the benefit of a small group of english team owners.

TJ wrote:The French will not leave - the PRL are isolated from everyone including their own union. this is a fact not made up or an opinion. all you need to be able to do is read and understand.

It's an opinion that fits oddly with the following quote posted above.

Patrick Wolff, vice-president of the Ligue Nationale de Rugby, "We must give negotiation a chance because the competition is more interesting with the Celts involved. We expect to find a common understanding with all the stakeholders. If the negotiations fail, we will see what our alternative options are. We must have something agreed by October or November. If we don't we'll have to look at how the nine dates set aside for European competition can be used in other ways."

Wolff's comments suggest he considers the "Celts" the party that need to be brought around and that if things can't be settled satisfactorily the French will look for alternatives.

It's not English rugby's fault that the Celts can't support a professional league without banding together, and yet English rugby is disadvantaged by that fact.

In what way does this disadvantage the English?

Toulouse president Rene Bouscatel has confirmed that his side will stay in the Heineken Cup in whatever format the tournament takes come the 2014-15 season.

.

And Patrick Wolff, vice president of the Ligue Nationale de Rugby (LNR) - the body in charge of the Top 14, revealed that Premiership Rugby (PRL) approached him to propose a breakaway Anglo-French tournament. He rejected this notion and Bouscatel has backed up the LNR's support for a pan-European competition when he told the Rugby Paper that his team will "stay in the Heineken Cup"

TJ wrote:

Toulouse president Rene Bouscatel has confirmed that his side will stay in the Heineken Cup in whatever format the tournament takes come the 2014-15 season.

.

And Patrick Wolff, vice president of the Ligue Nationale de Rugby (LNR) - the body in charge of the Top 14, revealed that Premiership Rugby (PRL) approached him to propose a breakaway Anglo-French tournament. He rejected this notion and Bouscatel has backed up the LNR's support for a pan-European competition when he told the Rugby Paper that his team will "stay in the Heineken Cup"

You do realise that the only quote in there is "stay in the Heineken Cup" don't you?

TJ wrote:Hammer - I have made nothing up at all. Lots of guff from the English posters tho

Its not out fault that the English league is structured in a way that they believes handicaps them - its their fault. Sort your own league out do not attempt to handicap ours

England and France do not bring more money into it and receive less - the money is brought in my the whole competition and they already get the lions share.

The French will not leave - the PRL are isolated from everyone including their own union. this is a fact not made up or an opinion. all you need to be able to do is read and understand.

Anyway - I will leave you to it but remember this - if the PRL ruin the HC they will never be forgiven for it and they could really suffer for it

Where is the evidence for this claim? You say "read and understand". What you mean is jump to conclusions and guess.

You will find out. there are only two ways this is going - the PRL will back down or will be out of the HC without any other competition to take its place

How do I know the PRL are isolated - direct quotes from the RFU, the french union and the french club representatives. all are furious at the way the PRL have behaved. Everyone can see this apart from dogmatic English fans.

Why do you think the RFU arranged a meeting of all stakeholders apart from the PRL?

Wolff not signing up for a breakaway Anglo-French tournament* is not the same thing as not saying they will seek alternatives to European rugby if the right agreement isn't reached, as Wolff's seperate accounts clearly indicate. The French would have more than a few possibilities open to them.

The French are the most powerful entity in these negotiations and it will come down to what they are happy to settle on, the rest will fall in line or there will be no European competition. The points the French seem more insistent on are reduced HC games completed earlier in the season (so fewer sides) and more PRO12 sides in the Amlin with increased competition for their places in the HC.

Wolff outlined some of the demands that would be made by the French clubs, "The Amlin Challenge Cup must have teams from all stakeholders because at the moment it is a useless competition just concerning English and French clubs. We want a decent schedule to the season whereby European competition will be finished by the end of April. We also believe it would be interesting - even for the Celts - if the RaboDirect teams have to qualify like the English and French clubs do. We believe that would give more momentum to their competition. Our thoughts have already been transmitted to ERC and the stakeholders and will form the basis for negotiations."

*On which he said

"That's not what we wanted to do. Save a catastrophic failure at the negotiations, which I don't think will happen, we want to play with the Celts and with the English."