If the Heinekin Cup ends should the English/French club players be ineligable for International rugby?

by blackcanelion Fri 20 Sep 2013, 2:17 am

First topic message reminder :

Here's the deal. French and English clubs have a new television deal, with lots of cash. It allows them to separate from the existing tournament when it ends early next year. However, multinational rugby tournaments are governed by the IRB and the nations involved are less than supportive of the clubs moves. If the English/French clubs thumb their collective noses at the IRB one option is to remove the rights of players, playing for those clubs, to be involved in 6 nations and world cup.

by geoff998rugby Wed 09 Oct 2013, 9:37 am

A measured change is fine.

Teams 6/6/8 is fine
Money 30/30/40 is fine

and from what I am told would be accepted by the Pro12 nations
that is not what is on the table from the PRL

+the issue of dictating who the TV provider will be.

I suspect the compromise that will be required here is that different TV companies
have different agreements for games in different countries e.g.

BT - England
Sky - Pro 12 countries
French TV - France

Lastly it will not be on the basis of an 'invitation' from the English which is quite frankly condesending and insulting. It will be a joint body of all interested parties. We can call it something other than the ERC if you want but basically it will be something on similar lines lines because the bodies who will be represented will be the same.

by mystiroakey Wed 09 Oct 2013, 9:42 am

what do you mean 30/30/40 or teams 6/6/8.. thats not moving forward!!

all teams should qualify
we need to expand the contest to other countries like georgia/russia/spain/etc
money should only go to the clubs competing-revenue from each game should be split in half(as all other sports contests are dealt with financially)

"'invitation' from the English which is quite frankly condesending and insulting"

ok i have worked out your problem. YOu are happy with a change for the better/fairer but you just hate it when england make a stand!!

by geoff998rugby Wed 09 Oct 2013, 10:39 am

30/30/40 is a change from 24/24/52 - thats moving forward

6/6/8 is a change from 6/6/10+2 - thats moving forward
With 8 teams from the Pro12 and only 1 guaranteed place from each nation every team from the Pro12 will need to qualify

Making a stand? - dictating to you mean !

by TrailApe Wed 09 Oct 2013, 10:41 am

I can understand the problems the Rabo Unions have with ANY change to the status quo in the HC, as their Unions have been using it as a cash cow for years and obviously want it to continue.

However the French and English have decided that the HC is not meeting their requirements and have quite legally pulled out. The fact that there are now several ‘offers’ being made to the Franglos must be put into the context of the lack of compromise from the ERC in previous negotiations.

Yes it’s about money and power – but isn’t that the same in any walk of life? The deal that the PRL have managed to get out of BT makes me wonder how much £££££ the 6N Unions have missed in the past because of their support of the ERC. That’s money that YOUR Unions have missed out on because they supported the cosy set up with the ERC and Sky.

You can howl and gnash your teeth and use terms like ‘Greed’, ‘Bully Boys’, ‘Good of Rugby’, but make no mistake about it, ‘The old order changeth yielding place to new’ and things will move on.

There are many cries about having the RFU set their house in order, however none of the other Unions has went through the schism that the RFU had to suffer with the breakaway of the ‘Northern Unions’ and there is no doubt that the RFU will do anything to avoid that, and this might include snubbing any edicts the IRB send out.

It might be worth remembering that in English law there are a whole host of measures set up to fight any anti-competitive practices and the IRB might find themselves pulled up to face an English court (and remember the same Laws apply in Wales) if they try to restrict the English clubs trade – which is playing Rugby. And considering that a full Twickenham brings in mucho moolah for the SH Unions visiting, I think any IRB response to the Franglo’s breakaway from the ERC run competition will be tempered by the need to keep the French and English national sides in the international circuit. Money again eh?

Then there is the ‘Rugby will go the same way as Football’ mantra. What they really mean is that Rugby will go the same way as the English FA (in other words the international side is crap whilst the club scene is dominant) and they conveniently forget the other examples where Football have a thriving domestic club scene and at the same time have a good international side, Germany, Spain and the Netherlands being good examples of this.

I certainly don’t want to see the demise of ANY international side, and whilst I think it’s still well ahead in the future, I would love to see this dispute be the start of a movement that will eventually see an European (not just the 6N’s) league in which features promotion/relegation and which will then allow a real top flight European competition, not the invitation only Old Boy’s Club setup which we have at the minute.

by mystiroakey Wed 09 Oct 2013, 10:42 am

how are we dictating.

We along with france are suggesting a 100% fair environment and qualification is based on MERIT!! and proposing that other nations can also join up.

If thats dictating then I am Hitler!

The Pro 12 is the only ones STILL dictating!!

by lostinwales Wed 09 Oct 2013, 10:47 am

What Geoff said plus a reformed, revamped and better funded tier 2 is probably, and hopefully, what we are going to get.

There is going to have to be more flexibility over the TV deals as in general each nation will have to make its own. Cross border stuff, knock out stages and how the TV money gets split up is another matter but at least there are some proper suggestions on sharing everything out. A lot of that side shouldnt be a rugby problem.

by mystiroakey Wed 09 Oct 2013, 10:48 am

geoffs suggestion is still nonsense- Its still a lock in for the 'old boys' with no expansion options.. Its a 'false' better option.

by geoff998rugby Wed 09 Oct 2013, 10:51 am

You come up with a solution that suits you and tell us take it or leave it

Is it any wonder why many consider the English arrogant picard

Change comes through negotiation not through telling others what they can have.

What I mapped out will be something close to an agreement or there will be no agreement

6/6/6+2 teams
33/33/33 money
BT do the TV

will never happen - unless the English meet up half way between the current status and the above - as I propose there will be no European Cup next year

by geoff998rugby Wed 09 Oct 2013, 10:53 am

mystiroakey wrote:geoffs suggestion is still nonsense- Its still a lock in for the 'old boys' with no expansion options.. Its a 'false' better option.

What do you mean no expansion options ???
Old boys ??? - I have no idea what yo uare talking about

Of course there will be Amlin and the like below that
I was merely laying out the premier tournament options

by mystiroakey Wed 09 Oct 2013, 10:55 am

geoff998rugby wrote: You come up with a solution that suits you and tell us take it or leave it

Is it any wonder why many consider the English arrogant

Change comes through negotiation not through telling others what they can have.

What I mapped out will be something close to an agreement or there will be no agreement

6/6/6+2 teams
33/33/33 money
BT do the TV

will never happen - unless the English meet up half way between the current status and the above - as I propose there will be no European Cup next year

I dont think you understand what qualification on merit , and allowing the possibility of other leagues to get involved means dude.

by mystiroakey Wed 09 Oct 2013, 10:57 am

geoff998rugby wrote:
mystiroakey wrote:geoffs suggestion is still nonsense- Its still a lock in for the 'old boys' with no expansion options.. Its a 'false' better option.
What do you mean no expansion options ???
Old boys ??? - I have no idea what yo uare talking about

Of course there will be Amlin and the like below that
I was merely laying out the premier tournament options

it's clearly your problem isnt it- You dont understand what is being proposed.

The english and french have proposed a breakaway league where anyone can get involved(not just the pro 12!!- but potentially other leagues as well) and ALL QUALIFICATION IS BASED ON MERIT.

IT ISN'T JUST ABOUT US(the teams that allways qualify year in year out!!)!!!

by lostinwales Wed 09 Oct 2013, 11:00 am

Who runs the new competition is another big issue. The PRL clubs want to have meaningful competitions for all of their members and they dont want to be in the situation where they could be shafted like the FFR did with the LNR over Lux.

but moving on..

Lets ask another question.
Would it be better to run with a compromise competition for a couple of years (not fair but fairer than there has been) with a commitment to a proper shake up in the future

Or would it be better to just take a break for a couple of years.

I dont know the answer. The first option will keep people happier short term. The second would help to focus minds a great deal more, and given the disruption to the domestic scene due to the 2015 RWC might not be such a great hardship as has been imagined.

by geoff998rugby Wed 09 Oct 2013, 11:07 am

THe proposal for the senior tournament is 6/6/6+2

Please enlighten me the mechanics on how teams from nations outside the 6N qualify for the senior competition.

If as I supect you are going to side winning the Amlin that is a totally empty proposal.
Teams from the other nations are a million miles from being anywhere near the standard required.

If and when they improve then we should reconsider the structure of European rugby so that they can have an opportunity to progress. Probably via some sort of trigger - say getting a team in the Amlin SF 2 years in a row.

Right now the biggest help would be to widen the Amlin to include the professional teams from Georgia and Russia and Internationally giving more games to those countries and others like Romania during the November break.

Those are real changes to help other nations not some pie in the sky carrot that will never be achieved under the current structure.

by mystiroakey Wed 09 Oct 2013, 11:10 am

it doesnt matter if they are at the standard yet or not- if they are allowed to try and 'qualify' then that is a REAL step forward!

by geoff998rugby Wed 09 Oct 2013, 11:13 am

No its not its a pointless piece of window dressing.

Make changes that make it real

by geoff998rugby Wed 09 Oct 2013, 11:14 am

lostinwales wrote: Lets ask another question.
Would it be better to run with a compromise competition for a couple of years (not fair but fairer than there has been) with a commitment to a proper shake up in the future

Or would it be better to just take a break for a couple of years.

Definitely prefer the former as I suggest but we need triggers that force a reconsideration/restructure in the light of changing events.

by mystiroakey Wed 09 Oct 2013, 11:16 am

geoff998rugby wrote:No its not its a pointless piece of window dressing.

Make changes that make it real

you are not proposing any changes- you are just jigging about allocations based on nothing more than appeasing other nations not MERIT!!!

by mystiroakey Wed 09 Oct 2013, 11:20 am

why are you double posting!

We got it the first time Smile

Look dude i haven't heard you state anything about the french here(the only league that will benefit straight away from the english/french vision-- england will be in worse shape from the off!!)

Your issue is clearly only due to the english being a part of this breakaway comp!!

by geoff998rugby Wed 09 Oct 2013, 11:25 am

I give up

The English are the font of all knowledge

The PRL are the enlighten ones who have the true well being and development of the game at heart

The Celts are money grabbing deluded fools

You sir are so blinkered you cannot see that what is being offered to non 6N countries is pointless and is just there so the PRL can make a totally false claim about opening up the game

by mystiroakey Wed 09 Oct 2013, 11:28 am

Again your problem is with the english and anyone that disagrees with you!

You dont understand what open qualification based on merit means do you! You seem to think that its all smoke and mirrors about opening up the game to other nations.

NO ITS NOT.

You have to start with fair(based on merit qualification)

Once that is dealt with- the rest will follow! NATURALLY!

by mystiroakey Wed 09 Oct 2013, 11:29 am

AS stated the english are happy to be affected from the off. Why do you not have an issue with France?

by geoff998rugby Wed 09 Oct 2013, 11:32 am

Please don't tell me what I do and do not understand - I understand perfectly thanks!

To be honest your last two post are barely coherent.

I'll exit stage left and let you ramble on

Bye bye

by mystiroakey Wed 09 Oct 2013, 11:33 am

Please leave, you are just showing up your xenophobia and are unwilling to debate.

by ScarletSpiderman Wed 09 Oct 2013, 11:39 am

mystiroakey - if things are get the same the likes of Spain and Romania do technically have a shot at getting into the HEC, as they have Amlin sides, and the winner of the Amlin gets into the HEC. If the RCC does go ahead as the PRL desire, then the Spanish and Romanians (and others?) will have a pee-weak comp pre-season/start of the season, to earn their right to try and compete in the second teir comp. So if anything the RCC proposed three teir system is more of a block on the developing nations than the HEC/Amlin is.

The whole, qualification on merit issue was to do with teams like Edinburgh and Zebre constantly being in the HEC without fear of missing out. The Rabo nations seem to be willing to accept that this needs to chance, and that league places should determine who qualifies.

by mystiroakey Wed 09 Oct 2013, 11:53 am

How will more than 1 team get in under HEC law then?

When the HEC is based on guaranteed spots for nations??

Base everything on merit and the rest will follow! The whole point of the breakaway comp!

we may not get any 'other' teams in the tier 1 comp yet(but that would be right and fair)- but in ten years we could have 7 teams.

If we keep sticking to the(give spots to the old boys) but let one team in methodology we will never move forward!

All we have to give is a fair platform..And that is what the breakaway league is suggesting

by ScarletSpiderman Wed 09 Oct 2013, 11:58 am

mystiroakey wrote:How will more than 1 team get in under HEC law then?

When the HEC is based on guaranteed spots for nations??

Base everything on merit and the rest will follow! The whole point of the breakaway comp!

How will more that one get into the Teir Two, or Teir One, level of the new proposed RCC system?
At the moment in the ERC system there are a handful of sides in the Amlin (second teir) already.

Please don't take this the wrong way, but I would suggest that you have a look through how the HEC is organised, and how the RCC (and ther three teir system) have been reported to work, and then come back with answers to the questions. As at the moment all you are doing is heckling people with genuine understanding of the systems in place, and that have been proposed, and making comments that are very incorrect like "Base everything on merit and the rest will follow! The whole point of the breakaway comp!".

by mystiroakey Wed 09 Oct 2013, 12:01 pm

how do these teams get out of the second tier?

by mystiroakey Wed 09 Oct 2013, 12:07 pm

how do teams like edinburgh or zebre drop out of tier 1!

If teams have to qualify on merit - we will have relegation and promotion(or at least effective relegation and promotion)

If you cant see that- then well ok you might as well spout the same type of xenophobic nonsense that geoff does! For all the sense you make!

by ScarletSpiderman Wed 09 Oct 2013, 12:30 pm

'Oakey - Zebre, Treviso, Glasgow and Edinburgh are unable to drop out of the top teir as it stands, but the Rabo nations are willing to accept this should change and that we should qaulify via league placings the same as the English and French do. I have said this to you a few times already, as have others.

The pressent here are the HEC qualification rulings are below. However, as many have told you the Rabo Nations appear willing to adjust their representation to a fix number (6 or 8) from the league, as long as their is a minimum of one per nation.

http://www.ercrugby.com/eng/heinekencup/rules/qualification_process.php wrote:
Qualification Process

24 top flight clubs from six countries compete in the Heineken Cup. These will include a minimum of:

France 6 clubs (selected by performance in Top 14 Championship)

England 6 clubs (selected by performance in Aviva Premiership and LV=Cup)

Wales 3 clubs (selected by performance in RaboDirect Pro12)

Ireland 3 clubs (selected by performance in RaboDirectPro12)

Scotland 2 clubs (selected by performance in RaboDirect Pro12)

Italy 2 clubs (selected by performance in RaboDirect Pro12)

Both the 2012/13 Heineken Cup and Amlin Challenge Cup winners will qualify automatically for the 2013/14 Heineken Cup season and will each earn an extra Heineken Cup spot for their countries - over and above their guaranteed allocations.

However, England and France, who have six automatic places, will only be allowed a maximum of seven clubs. So if either country wins both the Heineken Cup and the Amlin Challenge Cup, then the second additional spot will pass on to the club with the highest ERC European Ranking who has not already qualified, from any of the other five nations.

For the 2013/14 season, the 23rd Heineken Cup team comes from Ireland because Leinster won the 2012/13 Amlin Challenge Cup, while the the 24th Heineken Cup club comes from France since Toulon won the Heineken Cup.

The RCC has not officially released it's intentions on format, so the three teir system that will be in place and how it will operate is not fully known (will be announced in October mind). It is generally understod the Top Teir format will either be the 6-6-8, or 6-6-6-2 (Teir 1 and Teir 2 winners), with Teir 3 being played either pre-season or early in the season, with the winner of Teir Three making it into Teir Two.

http://www.espn.co.uk/heineken-cup-2013-14/rugby/story/199323.html wrote:The battle to shape the European club rugby landscape has intensified with the English and French clubs announcing that their proposed alternative to the Heineken Cup will be called the Rugby Champions Cup.

Premiership Rugby, the umbrella body representing the leading English clubs, and their French counterparts, the Ligue Nationale de Rugby, confirmed earlier this month that they plan to form a new cross-border competition for the 2014-15 season having failed to negotiate a re-vamp of the Heineken Cup.

Frustrated at a lack of progress in their efforts to force changes to the structure, qualification criteria and distribution of revenue and angered by a perceived reluctance on the part of the Irish, Italian, Scottish and Welsh sides to embrace change, the English and French clubs have also declared they are no longer interested in dealing with European Rugby Cup Ltd (ERC), the organisers of both the Heineken Cup and the second tier Amlin Challenge Cup.

The ERC management board is dominated by representatives from those unions that compete in the existing tournaments and the English and French leagues are determined to see that power switch to the clubs although any new cross-border competition requires the approval of the respective unions and the International Rugby Board.

ERC has scheduled a fresh round of negotiations for October 23 and more recently announced the appointment of an independent mediator but this latest move suggests the English and French clubs are determined to push on with their own plans. However, they insist the Rugby Champions Cup will be open to teams from all three leagues in Europe - the Premiership, the Top 14 and the PRO12 - and Premiership Rugby chief executive Mark McCafferty insists they have already been approached by other sides.

A statement from Premiership Rugby revealed that the competition will "be based on the principles of qualification on merit, a strong competition format, equality between the leagues, higher commercial values for the teams and expansion into new European markets."

The Top 14 and Premiership Rugby clubs have already confirmed their participation in the new competition and a joint working group has been created to prepare all necessary elements in good time for next season. Further details concerning the competition format, marketing and financial aspects of the Rugby Champions Cup will be released in October.

"Before we can release more details we need to know over the next few weeks which other teams will be joining the competition," McCafferty told PA Sport. "We expect those discussions to continue over the next few weeks. Once we know the final, or close to final, numbers then we settle on the competition formats.

"Various people have approached us about the possibility of joining and we've indicated to them that we'll keep their names confidential. We've heard that other people want to be involved in European competitions, that's why we've left the door open and expect it to be more than an Anglo-French competition.

"Once people saw on September 10 that we would seek an alternative, interest has been expressed in at least knowing exactly what will be involved - the format, commercial and financial details as well."

McCafferty is also confident of securing Rugby Football Union backing and hinted that Premiership Rugby would pursue the matter legally if its approval was not forthcoming. "We're asking for the RFU's support against the background that there will be no ERC competition in which we're taking part at the end of the season. We need to put in place new competitions," McCafferty said.

"We ultimately expect to have RFU support and it's in the interests of English rugby to have the teams playing in a good competition at the end of the season. If that scenario occurs where the RFU oppose what we're doing, we'd have to look at the reasons for opposing it.

"You can't just from a legal point of view say 'we don't want it so we're not going to approve it', especially when there's a conflict of interests. We'll try to overcome the issues and then take it from there. We're asking for support. We'd expect that support."

McCafferty revealed the proposed Rugby Champions Cup would be overseen by an "organising body of some sort - it doesn't need to be as big, unwieldy or institutionalised as ERC" and has reiterated the club's reluctance to deal with the current organisers.

"We have said all along we will not be in an ERC-run competition after this season," he told The Rugby Paper. "We can only say that so many times."

In terms of a timelines for a further announcement, McCafferty added: "We have a period of four-to-six weeks in terms of who's in and who's not. This is not intended as a deadline but we would need to know by November otherwise the goalposts are shifting around."

So in reality there is no difference between the proposed RCC (if the Rabo take part in it) or the revamped HEC (if the PRL/LNR take part in it). The only difference is who holds the power over the TV rights.

Also I honestly can't see how you can accuse any of the Rabo nations of being xenophobic, especially seeing as we run a league were there are multiple nations involved. A pan-european league, if you will. Not exactly what people who are frightened of non-locals would do.

by mystiroakey Wed 09 Oct 2013, 12:33 pm

when have i accused the rabo nations of xenophobia?

by ScarletSpiderman Wed 09 Oct 2013, 12:36 pm

mystiroakey wrote:when have i accused the rabo nations of xenophobia?

I think this would count

mystiroakey wrote:
If you cant see that- then well ok you might as well spout the same type of xenophobic nonsense that geoff does! For all the sense you make!

Unless it was an accusation fo xenophobia aimed directly at myself and geoff? Which would be a bit silly too seeing as you know very little, if any, of either of our backgrounds, and attitudes.

by mystiroakey Wed 09 Oct 2013, 12:37 pm

"The RCC has not officially released it's intentions on format, so the three teir system that will be in place and how it will operate is not fully known (will be announced in October mind). It is generally understod the Top Teir format will either be the 6-6-8, or 6-6-6-2 (Teir 1 and Teir 2 winners), with Teir 3 being played either pre-season or early in the season, with the winner of Teir Three making it into Teir Two"

can you not understand what the above represents that is different to the closed shop of the HEC. There is clear relegation and promotion!!

and how the heck anyone can think its fair that one league with 12 teams should still be getting 10 teams qualifying is beyond ridicuals!

Sorry the HEC is nonsense and i have no idea why anyone has an issue with england or france making a stand . There are also a masiive percentage that want our national teams banned for it as well.

Pfft- nonsense mate

by mystiroakey Wed 09 Oct 2013, 12:38 pm

ScarletSpiderman wrote:
mystiroakey wrote:when have i accused the rabo nations of xenophobia?
I think this would count

mystiroakey wrote:
If you cant see that- then well ok you might as well spout the same type of xenophobic nonsense that geoff does! For all the sense you make!
Unless it was an accusation fo xenophobia aimed directly at myself and geoff? Which would be a bit silly too seeing as you know very little, if any, of either of our backgrounds, and attitudes.

I think its very clear to anyone that reads the above(bar you obviously) That i have accused geoff of being xenophobic- not you or the rabbo nations!

by ScarletSpiderman Wed 09 Oct 2013, 12:43 pm

mystiroakey - I assume you have selective reading. Nobody, except for you, is saying that the HEC should (if it continues, and has been revamped) should have more than either 6 or 8 Rabo sides in it. Only you are getting hung up on the it being 10.

It is not just the English and French that are at risk because of this issue. IF the welsh regions do not sign up to their participation agreement with the WRU by the end of this year, and join then they will be expelled from the Rabo, and will be no longer part of the WRU, and as such their players will no longer be part of the union either. It is a very serious issue, and having people who have no clue or real interest about the club/regional scene chirpping on with nonesensical and illogical rubbish is not really of use to anyone.

by ScarletSpiderman Wed 09 Oct 2013, 12:46 pm

mystiroakey wrote:
ScarletSpiderman wrote:
mystiroakey wrote:when have i accused the rabo nations of xenophobia?
I think this would count

mystiroakey wrote:
If you cant see that- then well ok you might as well spout the same type of xenophobic nonsense that geoff does! For all the sense you make!
Unless it was an accusation fo xenophobia aimed directly at myself and geoff? Which would be a bit silly too seeing as you know very little, if any, of either of our backgrounds, and attitudes.
I think its very clear to anyone that reads the above(bar you obviously) That i have accused geoff of being xenophobic- not you or the rabbo nations!

Please can you explain your grounds for that accusation? Not agreeing to a rehashed competition that is only fractionally different from the HEC, is far from being xenophobic. You are entitled to you beliefs, however without knowing either me or geoff, I think it would be pretty hard to come to the conclussion we are xenophobic, and it could be construed as a libelous comment on your part.

by mystiroakey Wed 09 Oct 2013, 12:47 pm

"It is a very serious issue, and having people who have no clue or real interest about the club/regional scene chirpping on with nonesensical and illogical rubbish is not really of use to anyone."

I take it thats a dig,

Ok stick to your closed shop then(HEC and thread).
Keep bashing the english or anyone that disagrees with you or people that actually understand what is going on!!

I will leave you to it.

by mystiroakey Wed 09 Oct 2013, 12:48 pm

ScarletSpiderman wrote:
mystiroakey wrote:
ScarletSpiderman wrote:
mystiroakey wrote:when have i accused the rabo nations of xenophobia?
I think this would count

mystiroakey wrote:
If you cant see that- then well ok you might as well spout the same type of xenophobic nonsense that geoff does! For all the sense you make!
Unless it was an accusation fo xenophobia aimed directly at myself and geoff? Which would be a bit silly too seeing as you know very little, if any, of either of our backgrounds, and attitudes.
I think its very clear to anyone that reads the above(bar you obviously) That i have accused geoff of being xenophobic- not you or the rabbo nations!
Please can you explain your grounds for that accusation? Not agreeing to a rehashed competition that is only fractionally different from the HEC, is far from being xenophobic. You are entitled to you beliefs, however without knowing either me or geoff, I think it would be pretty hard to come to the conclussion we are xenophobic, and it could be construed as a libelous comment on your part.

You are going to have to first explain when I have accused you of anything!

The only libelous comment is yours ! sadly you haven't got the comprehension skills to work that out

by ScarletSpiderman Wed 09 Oct 2013, 12:51 pm

Look you just posted "I think its very clear to anyone that reads the above(bar you obviously) That i have accused geoff of being xenophobic- not you or the rabbo nations!"

Now maybe it is just me, but your coming off as a bit of a tool here. I'm gonna leave you to have a dig back at me for it, and won't be back on this thread until someone posts somethig that is even relevent to this thread and not just outright wummery.

by mystiroakey Wed 09 Oct 2013, 12:52 pm

Yes i accused him not you.

Are you allways this thick?

by mystiroakey Wed 09 Oct 2013, 12:53 pm

"You are entitled to you beliefs, however without knowing either me or geoff, I think it would be pretty hard to come to the conclussion we are xenophobic, and it could be construed as a libelous comment on your part."

by ScarletSpiderman Wed 09 Oct 2013, 1:41 pm

mystiroakey wrote:Yes i accused him not you.

Are you allways this thick?

I guess I must ALWAYS be this thick Laugh

(sorry that just tickled me) because this comment read as an accusation of xenophobia to me

mystiroakey wrote:If you cant see that- then well ok you might as well spout the same type of xenophobic nonsense that geoff does! For all the sense you make!

So going by that I believe my question was fair.

Anyway, lets just draw a line under it. You have a very different view point from myself and others about what classes as qualification on merit, which is more or less the arguing point on the whole PRL/LNR Vrs ERC. As for the question the thread raised, Should The English/French Club Players Be Ineligable For International Rugby, the truth is that if the clubs enter a competition that is not sanctioned by the IRB, then the club and its employees are no longer under the IRBs control and as such are no longer eligable to be involved in IRB controlled competions, down to insurance purposes etc. Like I said in on of my other posts, this is not just a worry for the English and French, but also a worry for the Welsh, Irish, Scotish and Italians, as if any of their teams decide to enter the RCC without their unions, or IRB, backing then they too will be outside the IRBs reigns and ilegable too.

I have said on a few different HEC/RCC threads, mainly on the club section, that this could well end up as another one of those moments in the game of rugby where a split occurs (like back when league was formed). We could well end up with a club game, run by the clubs and their backers, and a union ran game, involving international teams, and regions/provinces/franchises. Personally I think that would be a rather sad day for fans of international and/or club/regional.

by mystiroakey Wed 09 Oct 2013, 1:54 pm

that comment clearly states you are not spouting xenophobic nonsense- but YOU MIGHT AS WELL!

Until you stop the BS we are never going to move forward mate. My comment in regards to geoff may have been harsh but he certainly had a tone that was anti english..

ANd I am surprised as to why this is an english power trip(as he suggests). When the clubs that will be benefiting mostly are the french!

by lostinwales Wed 09 Oct 2013, 2:08 pm

The impact on 606v2 has been a sad side effect of the HC carp. I cant help feeling its going downhill fast at the moment. You have to wonder at what point its just going to be GE posting in the international section and only MM on the club section posting important articles about English clubs like the last time an AP club failed to pay a groundsman overtime.

There has, amongst other stuff, an increasing tendency to take things too far and for people to suffer a sense of humor failure.

Personally I dont have any problems with Geoff's arguments and dont think he was being particularly anti English at all, certainly compared to some of the vast amounts of rant and drivel that has been written in the club section by the usual suspects, but then I guess we have all been getting over sensitive.

by mystiroakey Wed 09 Oct 2013, 2:17 pm

So HEC have offered that only 8 pro 12 teams should qualify but each country has to have 1 team in the comp..

why should the pro 12 have more than the english or french leagues?

What has nationality of the nations got to do with anything as well. Why do they need one from each nation immaterial of quality?

How is that even close to being fair still..

But imagine we have 6/6/6/6(the last 6 is from all other european nations) and a 25/25/25/25 split in revenue - isn't this what we should push for! ok we are not necessarily qualifying on merit- but we would have made massive strides into making things fair and to bring other leagues in!

by nathan Wed 09 Oct 2013, 2:28 pm

GunsGerms wrote:Cant understand it either to be honest. I guess a lot of people in England are blissfully unaware that international football has steadily deteriorated over the last 50 years.

????

and spanish football has been brilliant over the years.....

by mystiroakey Wed 09 Oct 2013, 2:34 pm

I think what Guns can't and possibly will never understand is that its very easy for england to remain in contention in the international world of cricket and rugby as both are very much minor sports with less competition over football..

For anyone to assume we should compete at the highest level in so many sports is pushing the boundaries of reality and football is the main sport for 150 nations world wide! so what does anyone expect!

by TJ Wed 09 Oct 2013, 5:03 pm

mystiroakey wrote:So HEC have offered that only 8 pro 12 teams should qualify but each country has to have 1 team in the comp..

why should the pro 12 have more than the english or french leagues?

What has nationality of the nations got to do with anything as well. Why do they need one from each nation immaterial of quality?

How is that even close to being fair still..

But imagine we have 6/6/6/6(the last 6 is from all other european nations) and a 25/25/25/25 split in revenue - isn't this what we should push for! ok we are not necessarily qualifying on merit- but we would have made massive strides into making things fair and to bring other leagues in!

Because the PRO12 is four unions and four countries. At the moment the qualification is 6 english. 6 french. 3 irish. 3 welsh. 2 scots, 2 Italian.

If the numbers need to be cut why do 4 unions have to bear all the cut and two unions get no cut. Its everything to do with nations and nothing to do with the fact that some nations play in a combined league. 6 teams from 4 nations will never be acceptable to those nations who are used to 10 representatives

by mystiroakey Wed 09 Oct 2013, 5:09 pm

I have no idea why you are talking about unions- This is a club game and nothing to do with the respective unions!

"6 teams from 4 nations will never be acceptable to those nations who are used to 10 representatives"

well then there are going to have to face facts and be shunted out then Because France and England have had enough of the favoritism!

by mystiroakey Wed 09 Oct 2013, 5:11 pm

What should we do -demand to UEFA that wales should get extra CL spots for the welsh teams competing in the EPL.

They would laugh at us big time dude!! These things are/should all be club based.

by TJ Wed 09 Oct 2013, 5:17 pm

mystiroakey wrote:I have no idea why you are talking about unions- This is a club game and nothing to do with the respective unions!

"6 teams from 4 nations will never be acceptable to those nations who are used to 10 representatives"

well then there are going to have to face facts and be shunted out then Because France and England have had enough of the favoritism!

Errmm - its the PRL that have no tourney to play in. Its not favoritism to have 1/2 or 1/3 of the representation

Until you understand that shouting "its unfair on us we want more and we want everything or we go home" is not a negotiation and until you understand that 6/6/6 is NEVER going to be acceptable then you will continue to fail to see what is happening.

by Sponsored content

Should the world cup be moved from England if the Englisg/French clubs split?