Mediator appointed- Will the Clubs Engage?

First topic message reminder :

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2013/sep/20/heineken-cup-dispute-lawyer?CMP=twt_gu

The ERC has appointed Graeme Mew, a Canadian lawyer specialising in dispute resolution, to try and get the English and French back in the room and negotiate a future for European rugby. I'm not sure we can hope for much resolution within the framework of the ERC but hopefully we can have all the decision makers meet and not rule anything out- be it continuing within the ERC or forming a new successor body.

We could probably have used this about 3 months ago tbh.

Portnoy's Complaint wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:

whocares wrote:Looks like the mediator task is only getting tougher :

http://www.premiershiprugby.com/m/news/28965.php

So no more details until after the ERC meeting?

Surely no precise proposals can be put forward until such time as it has been established who is party to the agreement. Otherwise maybe there would have to be contingency plans for all combinations of possible outcomes.

The PRL has no experience of drawing up effective contingency plans. As an organising body, it has to be admitted that they are rubbish. Ask those bods in Oxford.

But they are not alone in being rubbish at sports administration.

As mentioned by many many posters who are very much against the PRL gaining any form of control over the game outside their league in their country, it would be good negotiating to offer everything up front for examination rather than withholding and threatening.

From the start the should have negotiated the BT vision deal with the rest of Europe, not use it as a gun to point at others. They will never be trusted for their actions. And they continue to be deceitful and reluctant to negotiate.

As I said before, it is time for the RFU and FFR to tell us their stance.

Maes, the PRL have been asking for a change in tv deal for years. The fact that the ERC have consistently ignored them and given below market price contracts to their corporate pals. The PRL had no option but to announce the deal with BT and try to force the negotiation which the the ERC have been refusing to have for some time.

The idea that the ERC are the white knights of European rugby is a load of Horlix. They are an incompetent corporate body that has over seen no growth or development in the two competitions they oversee despite brilliant teams playing enthralling games for many years.

I believe that the BT deal was a commercially sensitive matter covering a territorial broadcasting area. I'd be surprised had any other multi-million pound activity would have been been conducted in the public domain.

What I dislike is the PRL strewing roadside bombs primed to explode just before ERC meetings however intransigent the Pro12 lobby appears to be.

But that's typical PRL incompetence for you, I'm afraid. But terrorist measures and strategies have a fair track record, I'm afraid.
I'm no fan of any tabled proposal from any side - least of all the current ERC cups formats.

Portnoy's Complaint wrote:I believe that the BT deal was a commercially sensitive matter covering a territorial broadcasting area. I'd be surprised had any other multi-million pound activity would have been been conducted in the public domain.

What I dislike is the PRL strewing roadside bombs primed to explode just before ERC meetings however intransigent the Pro12 lobby appears to be.

But that's typical PRL incompetence for you, I'm afraid. But terrorist measures and strategies have a fair track record, I'm afraid.
I'm no fan of any tabled proposal from any side - least of all the current ERC cups formats.

I hope the RFU make an announcement on their stance soon.

Maes, the RFU have already called for further discussions and mediation whilst stating they will not stand in the way of the clubs should they start a new competition.

The RFU won't side against the PRL purely because they can't afford bad blood between the organisations ahead of the renewal of the EPS agreement in two years time.

Sam, the IRB said that. The RFU are keeping tight lipped. But I assume they'll take a similar stance.

I hope that all the Unions make announcements soon.
And that clear independent announcements are made by each of them with respect to their ERC standpoints. I hope that the ERC is restructured and reformed as clearly it is currently apparently unsatisfactory for all parties.

Mostly I hope that a modified HEC can kick off at the start of next season.

I'd personally be happier that it would be on a fully meritocratic basis rather than High Street charity shop model. i.e. that there are no union rations at all: just a performance-led one via an independent ranking system. But that's just me farting in the wind.

formerly known as Sam wrote:Maes, the RFU have already called for further discussions and mediation whilst stating they will not stand in the way of the clubs should they start a new competition.

The RFU won't side against the PRL purely because they can't afford bad blood between the organisations ahead of the renewal of the EPS agreement in two years time.

The RFU might as well cease to exist if they let the PRL have any more power.

From all I read the RFU may have been reluctant to release a direct press release on their stance, but I hadn't read that they condone what they PRL are doing. They agree to mediation, they agree to further discussion, they also can easily prevent the PRLs ability to do anything that the RFU/IRB and other unions involved with ERC might oppose.

I hope their stance is projected clearly and in-ambiguously very soon.

maestegmafia wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:Maes, the RFU have already called for further discussions and mediation whilst stating they will not stand in the way of the clubs should they start a new competition.

The RFU won't side against the PRL purely because they can't afford bad blood between the organisations ahead of the renewal of the EPS agreement in two years time.

The RFU might as well cease to exist if they let the PRL have any more power.

From all I read the RFU may have been reluctant to release a direct press release on their stance, but I hadn't read that they condone what they PRL are doing. They agree to mediation, they agree to further discussion, they also can easily prevent the PRLs ability to do anything that the RFU/IRB and other unions involved with ERC might oppose.

I hope their stance is projected clearly and in-ambiguously very soon.

It will be Maes, and it will be clearly pro PRL. The RFU don't want the PRL gunning for them next, ironically thats exactly what they are going to do win or lose this coup.

If the PRL determine a new comp it will be PRL run and biased, they will then look for more PRL member advantage by using international call ups as the enemy!!!

The RFU are all but out of commission already unless they do something drastic.

According to a WalesOnline article Gosper 'tweeted' that the RFU and FFR are NOT on board with Anglo-French comp. so whether the IRB would approve it was hypothetical. Whether that's 'aren't on board at all' or 'aren't on board until after the mediator stuff' or just a miscommunication remains to be seen.

None of the arguments on either side of this debate make any sense.

Casartelli wrote:None of the arguments on either side of this debate make any sense.

You have to focus on one or the other. If you try to hold both sets of arguments in your head at the same time they lose meaning. If you focus on just one, he secret if revealed and it all makes sense.

HammerofThunor wrote:

Casartelli wrote:None of the arguments on either side of this debate make any sense.

You have to focus on one or the other. If you try to hold both sets of arguments in your head at the same time they lose meaning. If you focus on just one, he secret if revealed and it all makes sense.

"Stuff the union and the good of the game, there's a chance for us select few, as directors and shareholders, to make some serious bloody cash quick here..."

"Look, I know we've made a botch of the professional game and our regions are completely irrelevant in Europe, but we have some really good management guys here and we'd love to be involved with you guys going forward.  Please?......Please?.....Disband one of them?....yeah, sure, they won't mind....."

"Da only reason you don't want us involved in dis ting is you know we'll win it all every year, to be sure." (This one has some justification).

" RFU chief executive Ian Ritchie has since released a statement stating that his organisation is "supportive of the Premiership clubs seeking greater meritocracy," while stressing that rugby should "continue to thrive and grow" and urging "compromise on both sides"."

There's the RFU statement. Taken from http://m.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/24074931

The RFU won't disappear because the PRL gain a degree of European power. The RFU control the prem in conjunction with the PRL and then every other league in England. The PRL have agreed greater international release with the RFU and have been supportive of the RFUs attempts to incentivise EQ player development. If they were anti international rugby they could have easily made life more difficult for the RFU or done more to isolate the RFU from the top level of the game, especially, with the RFU making bungles like the London Welsh promotion fiasco.

There's no point trying to put some clear blue water between the bungling of the RFU and the buffoonery and incompetence of the PRL, Sam.

Whose fault would it be if a Bedford promotion claim was turned down on the basis of their ground's suitability for promotion? A sloping ground and spectator accommodation would both fall short of the PRL's requirements whilst having to move to another site would most likely bust them.

Both parties are guilty of sitting on their hands and doing nothing to prepare competing clubs in readiness for potential promotion. Whilst established clubs like Irish, Wasps and to a lesser extent Sale also need help to even out their comparative economic disadvantages. Possibly local government and government quangos e.g. Sport England could be encouraged to participate if local, wider projects were involved.

The PRL don't had criteria for promoted clubs though that's a RFU thing. Agree that the PRL don't help clubs prepare for the prem but that really isn't their job. Their job is to look after the interests for the AP clubs. Now they may well consider England doing well on the international scene beneficial to them as a collective (easiest way for English rugby to get lots of positive interest) and development of emerging third tier markets (potential export opportunities and potential new player pools) which would also benefit other groups as well.

formerly known as Sam wrote:The PRL don't had criteria for promoted clubs though that's a RFU thing. Agree that the PRL don't help clubs prepare for the prem but that really isn't their job. Their job is to look after the interests for the AP clubs. Now they may well consider England doing well on the international scene beneficial to them as a collective (easiest way for English rugby to get lots of positive interest) and development of emerging third tier markets (potential export opportunities and potential new player pools) which would also benefit other groups as well.

The Minimum Standards Criteria are a PRL thing, albeit rubberstamped by RFU through the Professional Game Board. RFU's bungle with regard to London Welsh was to allow PRL to dump the mess into their lap - after that, I thought they handled it well.

I think the answer to whether the clubs will engage is no. The PRL and LNR have said they will not be at the next meeting AND will only talk to the mediator to set up their new competition.

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2013/sep/22/premiership-rugby-champions-cup

What new competition? the french federation statement makes it clear there will be no franglo cup. So for the PRL teams it might well be An ERC run competition or nothing. Or force a breakaway and end the international careers of every PRL player.

For the new competition that they're trying to set up. That the FFR won't sanction it is fine. But that statement came after the PRL statement. And in which case there is no point them meeting the mediator at all.

Unless they want to play in a european cup next year. There will be one - but it won't be a PRL run one

formerly known as Sam wrote:This is a desperation move by the ERC who are probably desperate to stay in a job mismanaging one of the biggest competitions in rugby. They've used the Rabo vote bulk voting to nullify any attempt to negotiate since 2007 when issues were first raised.

I still hold that the ERC could have brought round the PRL months back by allowing them to sell their own tv rights, but no they renewed with Sky for a pittance instead further angering the PRL. That move was petty and stupid.

What was the result of the claims/counter-claims about who is entitled to sell the TV rights?

The way I see it the PRL have a number of objectives at the moment;
- Show that they control the purse strings (tv revenue deals)
- Change the focus from a european competition with 6 Nations represented to a european competition comprising 3 leagues (the rabo is 1 league... not 4 separate Nations)
- Control professional rugby in the UK

thebandwagonsociety wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:This is a desperation move by the ERC who are probably desperate to stay in a job mismanaging one of the biggest competitions in rugby. They've used the Rabo vote bulk voting to nullify any attempt to negotiate since 2007 when issues were first raised.

I still hold that the ERC could have brought round the PRL months back by allowing them to sell their own tv rights, but no they renewed with Sky for a pittance instead further angering the PRL. That move was petty and stupid.

What was the result of the claims/counter-claims about who is entitled to sell the TV rights?

The way I see it the PRL have a number of objectives at the moment;
- Show that they control the purse strings (tv revenue deals)
- Change the focus from a european competition with 6 Nations represented to a european competition comprising 3 leagues (the rabo is 1 league... not 4 separate Nations)
- Control professional rugby in the UK

The Rabo has no connection to the HC though, it is the unions who vote, own the shares, so at what point does the Rabo as a league get involved? The unions give their HC slots to whoever they want.

thebandwagonsociety wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:This is a desperation move by the ERC who are probably desperate to stay in a job mismanaging one of the biggest competitions in rugby. They've used the Rabo vote bulk voting to nullify any attempt to negotiate since 2007 when issues were first raised.

I still hold that the ERC could have brought round the PRL months back by allowing them to sell their own tv rights, but no they renewed with Sky for a pittance instead further angering the PRL. That move was petty and stupid.

What was the result of the claims/counter-claims about who is entitled to sell the TV rights?

The way I see it the PRL have a number of objectives at the moment;
- Show that they control the purse strings (tv revenue deals)
- Change the focus from a european competition with 6 Nations represented to a european competition comprising 3 leagues (the rabo is 1 league... not 4 separate Nations)
- Control professional rugby in the UK

This is an interesting point - I wonder if someone from the PRL view of the world could explain for me how the Romanian, Spanish, minor Italian teams fit into this categorisation?

They would invited guests like they are now I imagine. We haven't had much on the 3rd tier stuff as the top two can't be agreed.

HammerofThunor wrote:They would invited guests like they are now I imagine. We haven't had much on the 3rd tier stuff as the top two can't be agreed.

All well and good, right and proper, but on what basis? For the good of the development of the game perhaps?

Well we don't know do we? that side of it has completely closed down. Considering the ERC don't give a hoot about the CC never mind another competition I don't it's going anywhere. Especially bearing in mind the ERC's only know counterproposal was a 32 comeptition with no mention of anyone else anywhere.

JP Lux blames the english clubs saying they never really wanted to negociate anything: when the french gave the ERC a list of what they wanted, the English clubs refused to discuss while the other unions were ready to have a look at most points (number of participants, calendar etc).
He adds that the main driver for the english clubs is that the only way for them to save their BT deal was to create their own competition. Scrapping the HC was therefore seen as an opportunity.
He then finishes by saying that the RFU is taking a similar stance than the FFR (ie not backing the clubs) and still hopes for a happy ending.
Wonder if there is any truth in that or is it just more propaganda in trying to force the French clubs to change their position by implying they have been "conned" by the English from day 1

whocares wrote:JP Lux blames the english clubs saying they never really wanted to negociate anything: when the french gave the ERC a list of what they wanted, the English clubs refused to discuss while the other unions were ready to have a look at most points (number of participants, calendar etc).
He adds that the main driver for the english clubs is that the only way for them to save their BT deal was to create their own competition. Scrapping the HC was therefore seen as an opportunity.
He then finishes by saying that the RFU is taking a similar stance than the FFR (ie not backing the clubs) and still hopes for a happy ending.
Wonder if there is any truth in that or is it just more propaganda in trying to force the French clubs to change their position by implying they have been "conned" by the English from day 1

Not a massive leap of the imagination to see that!

whocares wrote:JP Lux blames the english clubs saying they never really wanted to negociate anything: when the french gave the ERC a list of what they wanted, the English clubs refused to discuss while the other unions were ready to have a look at most points (number of participants, calendar etc).
He adds that the main driver for the english clubs is that the only way for them to save their BT deal was to create their own competition. Scrapping the HC was therefore seen as an opportunity.
He then finishes by saying that the RFU is taking a similar stance than the FFR (ie not backing the clubs) and still hopes for a happy ending.
Wonder if there is any truth in that or is it just more propaganda in trying to force the French clubs to change their position by implying they have been "conned" by the English from day 1

if the mediator is going to be successful they need to muzzle Lux. The french clubs hate him and i cant imagine PRL is any keener. so the less he says, the more chance (albeit slim) of people being able to climb down behind closed doors and come to a deal without looking like they have egg on their faces.

I sort of agree, Lux is a goner anyway even if the ERC stays alive. He wont apply again for the job.

what surprises me is that the same article said that the ERC had a deal with sky till 2018 ?! was it subject to the ERC "mandate" being maintained till then?

whocares wrote:I sort of agree, Lux is a goner anyway even if the ERC stays alive. He wont apply again for the job.

what surprises me is that the same article said that the ERC had a deal with sky till 2018 ?! was it subject to the ERC "mandate" being maintained till then?

no-one knows for sure the contract details, but i would be highly confident that the very sharply commercial sky did not enter into a commercial contract with the rather inept ERC that leaves SKY high and dry in the even of i) no ENG, FRA or ii) no Heineken Cup when the "Accord" expires next summer (a new accord with new participants needs to be negotiatied and i am sure it is with this entity representing the 6 nations that sky's conditional contract would be with)

butterfingers wrote:

thebandwagonsociety wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:This is a desperation move by the ERC who are probably desperate to stay in a job mismanaging one of the biggest competitions in rugby. They've used the Rabo vote bulk voting to nullify any attempt to negotiate since 2007 when issues were first raised.

I still hold that the ERC could have brought round the PRL months back by allowing them to sell their own tv rights, but no they renewed with Sky for a pittance instead further angering the PRL. That move was petty and stupid.

What was the result of the claims/counter-claims about who is entitled to sell the TV rights?

The way I see it the PRL have a number of objectives at the moment;
- Show that they control the purse strings (tv revenue deals)
- Change the focus from a european competition with 6 Nations represented to a european competition comprising 3 leagues (the rabo is 1 league... not 4 separate Nations)
- Control professional rugby in the UK

The Rabo has no connection to the HC though, it is the unions who vote, own the shares, so at what point does the Rabo as a league get involved? The unions give their HC slots to whoever they want.

Very true butters.  And that should be in the media a lot more, but the objective of the PRL is to show that they, as a league, should be in control here and to do that they need to always reference the Rabo as producing the teams to the competition as opposed to the truth, being 4 Nations are nominating their representatives in the european club competition and each nation should be able to choose how they select their representatives.  The IRFU could choose AIL club sides, the RFU could choose championship sides, the FFR could choose ProD2, etc. (unlikely, but totally their decision).

There is also an interesting argument within the PRL on who has the shares in that company, who gets their hands on the greasy spoon so to speak.  I think Exeter have been in the Jeff for a couple of seasons now but have only recently been allowed to by the share to allow them to claim the rightful share of tv rights. And even at that, there are longevity top ups (open for correction) that gives the bigger, longer established Jeff sides a top up percentage of tv money.  Does the BT deal go the same way? Could, say a Newcastle (or a side without preference shares in PRL) get into the European "Insert Name Here" Cup, progress all the way to the final stages but still have all that box office money stay with the big names in the PRL without the non-pref share team getting their rightful cut?  Everything might not be quite so rosy even within the PRL.

They all the current sides have pretty much equal shares. Not sure if Newcastle lost a little due to the relegation but they'll be back up to full next season. Bristol also have some. So I don't think there is much dissatisfaction in the PRL. The issues would be for new guys like Bedford or Pirates. And if they come up a stay up they can buy the shares off the relegated side like Exeter did off Leeds. Not a super system but it's unlikely to cause much/all dissatisfaction in the league.

thebandwagonsociety wrote:

butterfingers wrote:

thebandwagonsociety wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:This is a desperation move by the ERC who are probably desperate to stay in a job mismanaging one of the biggest competitions in rugby. They've used the Rabo vote bulk voting to nullify any attempt to negotiate since 2007 when issues were first raised.

I still hold that the ERC could have brought round the PRL months back by allowing them to sell their own tv rights, but no they renewed with Sky for a pittance instead further angering the PRL. That move was petty and stupid.

What was the result of the claims/counter-claims about who is entitled to sell the TV rights?

The way I see it the PRL have a number of objectives at the moment;
- Show that they control the purse strings (tv revenue deals)
- Change the focus from a european competition with 6 Nations represented to a european competition comprising 3 leagues (the rabo is 1 league... not 4 separate Nations)
- Control professional rugby in the UK

The Rabo has no connection to the HC though, it is the unions who vote, own the shares, so at what point does the Rabo as a league get involved? The unions give their HC slots to whoever they want.

Very true butters.  And that should be in the media a lot more, but the objective of the PRL is to show that they, as a league, should be in control here and to do that they need to always reference the Rabo as producing the teams to the competition as opposed to the truth, being 4 Nations are nominating their representatives in the european club competition and each nation should be able to choose how they select their representatives.  The IRFU could choose AIL club sides, the RFU could choose championship sides, the FFR could choose ProD2, etc. (unlikely, but totally their decision).

There is also an interesting argument within the PRL on who has the shares in that company, who gets their hands on the greasy spoon so to speak.  I think Exeter have been in the Jeff for a couple of seasons now but have only recently been allowed to by the share to allow them to claim the rightful share of tv rights. And even at that, there are longevity top ups (open for correction) that gives the bigger, longer established Jeff sides a top up percentage of tv money................

Is this correct? I'm slightly buoyed by the suggestion that other rugby organisations are just as cloak & dagger as the WRU, but this would be a stinking, corrupt farce, if true?

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:

thebandwagonsociety wrote:

formerly known as Sam wrote:This is a desperation move by the ERC who are probably desperate to stay in a job mismanaging one of the biggest competitions in rugby. They've used the Rabo vote bulk voting to nullify any attempt to negotiate since 2007 when issues were first raised.

I still hold that the ERC could have brought round the PRL months back by allowing them to sell their own tv rights, but no they renewed with Sky for a pittance instead further angering the PRL. That move was petty and stupid.

What was the result of the claims/counter-claims about who is entitled to sell the TV rights?

The way I see it the PRL have a number of objectives at the moment;
- Show that they control the purse strings (tv revenue deals)
- Change the focus from a european competition with 6 Nations represented to a european competition comprising 3 leagues (the rabo is 1 league... not 4 separate Nations)
- Control professional rugby in the UK

This is an interesting point - I wonder if someone from the PRL view of the world could explain for me how the Romanian, Spanish, minor Italian teams fit into this categorisation?

I would be more interested in what happens to the stake of a Pro12 nation that hypothetically decides to serve notice on the Pro12 in the same way as the English/French have served notice on the Heineken Cup...

HammerofThunor wrote:I think the answer to whether the clubs will engage is no. The PRL and LNR have said they will not be at the next meeting AND will only talk to the mediator to set up their new competition.

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2013/sep/22/premiership-rugby-champions-cup

Great- so everyone loses. PRL/LNR spite the FFR and RFU by refusing to take part in talks who in turn will spite the clubs by denying them their breakaway tournament.

At this rate, the LV Cup is going to be massive next year  

Notch wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:I think the answer to whether the clubs will engage is no. The PRL and LNR have said they will not be at the next meeting AND will only talk to the mediator to set up their new competition.

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2013/sep/22/premiership-rugby-champions-cup

Great- so everyone loses. PRL/LNR spite the FFR and RFU by refusing to take part in talks who in turn will spite the clubs by denying them their breakaway tournament.

At this rate, the LV Cup is going to be massive next year  

This is a complete mess now. Its so obvious now that the English just want their European BT deal. They never really wanted to negotiate.

You know with a functional ERC where the clubs and unions were interested in working together this could be a great year for European Rugby. With BT Sport entering the market place a bidding war for the broadcasting rights of the best tournament in rugby could have pushed the game up to the next level right across Europe.

Instead we now hang over a precipice and look set to fall because we'd rather point fingers than climb back out  

Notch wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:I think the answer to whether the clubs will engage is no. The PRL and LNR have said they will not be at the next meeting AND will only talk to the mediator to set up their new competition.

Great- so everyone loses. PRL/LNR spite the FFR and RFU by refusing to take part in talks who in turn will spite the clubs by denying them their breakaway tournament.

At this rate, the LV Cup is going to be massive next year  

no, once its clear the clubs are out of the HC for real, the unions will fall into line in France and England, and the IRB too, and then the Welsh, etc, etc, in a competition which to spectators will look strangely similar to the HC.

no-one can force LNR or PRL to participate in HC. no-one. not the unions. not the IRB. once the HC is dead, then someone will have to come up with a new competition without the ERC jokers in the middle and guess what, i bet it will be a lot easier. and guess what, i bet it will be done in time for 2014 season. au revoir JP Lux et al.

Yeah, cheers to the PRL/LNR for bringing European rugby to the brink for some minor changes they could have had within the ERC.

It's been just fantastic for rugby in general. Comments about Lux etc. show this is at least partly driven by egos and personalities. On both sides probably. As usual, it's the ordinary fans that will miss out.

Except no minor changes did happen. It took them handing n their notice for this to happen. Then a year of nothing and when they finally say we're done the ERC organise a mediator. Why not do that right at the beginning? Why not after 6 months getting nowhere. The only time the ERC seem to do anŷthing is when they're given ultimatums. Maybe they took the same view many on here seemed to. "Sod 'um. Let them go. They'll be back or they're bluffing. The French aren't that fussed and only want the final pushing earlier (this one I really didn't get as they started the whole and had the biggest gripe)"

Its all about.......... - wishful thinking? there is no way on earth the Rabo unions will sign up to any competition run in the way the PRL wants it. Its just not going to happen nor is any alternative competition they run going to be sanctioned by the unions. their stance has backfired and they are scrabbling for some sort of lever and they can't find one. Smacks of desperation the statements they keep making

HammerofThunor wrote:Except no minor changes did happen. It took them handing n their notice for this to happen. Then a year of nothing and when they finally say we're done the ERC organise a mediator. Why not do that right at the beginning? Why not after 6 months getting nowhere. The only time the ERC seem to do anŷthing is when they're given ultimatums. Maybe they took the same view many on here seemed to. "Sod 'um. Let them go. They'll be back or they're bluffing. The French aren't that fussed and only want the final pushing earlier (this one I really didn't get as they started the whole and had the biggest gripe)"

ERC action (or lack of it) and brinkmanship by Celtic unions does indeed appear to be fairly well supported by the views on this fora.

i hate to say it again, but ITS ALL ABOUT THE INCENTIVES. never ever call someone's bluff if they have the gun and you have a peashooter.

TJ wrote:Its all about.......... - wishful thinking?  there is no way on earth the Rabo unions will sign up to any competition run in the way the PRL wants it.  Its just not going to happen nor is any alternative competition they run going to be sanctioned by the unions.  their stance has backfired and they are scrabbling for some sort of lever and they can't find one.  Smacks of desperation the statements they keep making

i suggest you read the article hammer posted

i know you dont want to take in any new information that might influence your a priori opinion, but it might save some embarrassment later...

Who has the gun - the PRLs bluff is well and truely called and they will have no cross border competition to play in. They will have no European cup to sell the rights to. they are isolated and have nowhere to go.

itsallabouttheincentives wrote:

TJ wrote:Its all about.......... - wishful thinking?  there is no way on earth the Rabo unions will sign up to any competition run in the way the PRL wants it.  Its just not going to happen nor is any alternative competition they run going to be sanctioned by the unions.  their stance has backfired and they are scrabbling for some sort of lever and they can't find one.  Smacks of desperation the statements they keep making

i suggest you read the article hammer posted

i know you dont want to take in any new information that might influence your a priori opinion, but it might save some embarrassment later...

Which article?

lets follow this logically to its conclusion:

PRL/LNR set up their thing and invite everyone
Rabo set up their thing (as the HC no longer exists) and invite everyone
IRB approves both (as they will both have their unions backing at the end of the day)

PRL/LNR get lots of money
Rab's new competition fails to find a sponsor

Rabo unions accept PRL/LNR offer and find that actually they get more money than before and its really not so bad after all.

although the Unions absolutely hate it.

TJ wrote:

itsallabouttheincentives wrote:

TJ wrote:Its all about.......... - wishful thinking?  there is no way on earth the Rabo unions will sign up to any competition run in the way the PRL wants it.  Its just not going to happen nor is any alternative competition they run going to be sanctioned by the unions.  their stance has backfired and they are scrabbling for some sort of lever and they can't find one.  Smacks of desperation the statements they keep making

i suggest you read the article hammer posted

i know you dont want to take in any new information that might influence your a priori opinion, but it might save some embarrassment later...

Which article?  

you cant be bothered to scroll up the page and find it?

if you're not going to read what other people bring to the table maybe you should think twice about posting twaddle?

TJ wrote:Who has the gun - the PRLs bluff is well and truely called and they will have no cross border competition to play in.  They will have no European cup to sell the rights to.  they are isolated and have nowhere to go.

here, let me help you...
"I cannot see any reason for the IRB to intervene," he said. "This is not their issue and, if any unions try to obstruct the new competition, they will need to be specific and be mindful of conflicts of interest. We want a six-nation European tournament based on merit, with money divided between the three leagues, but it will not be run by ERC and there is no getting round that. Whatever, our competition will start and the money BT is putting in does not vary depending on how many countries are involved."