PRO12 has new Managing Director and he isn't Irish :D :yahoo:

LordDowlais wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

Or maybe, just maybe everyone decided to pitch their hat into the ring and see what happened

Are all teams eligible?

Well considering they were all asked to tender for it that would mean they were

Marty, because the criteria has never been made public, none of us will never know.

LordDowlais wrote:

The Great Aukster wrote:Your interpretation is that they were leaving because of the referee. They could also have been shaking their heads because they were disappointed in their team or the coach or because they had just lost a bet or any number of reasons. In other words your interpretation isn’t conclusive proof that crap referees are turning people away from the League. Do you not think that the Pro12 would want proof that the system is broken before levying X thousand pounds from the teams to fix it?

So when I see a person infront of me getting up and saying, "I cannot take anymore of this, this ref is ruining the game, I'm off" what he means is, "Ah no there goes my bet, I am going home".

FFS, I know what I am seeing, and what I am hearing a few feet away from me mun.

P.S, I am not only on about last Sunday, I am talking over the past few seasons.

marty2086 wrote:Fly, another element I brought up previously is the French and the ERCC.

How will qualification work for the tournament?
Does the current participation agreement forbid the leagues existence?
How much value will it knock off the ERCC due to a diminishment in the value of the games?

ScarletSpiderman wrote:All the Pro12 supporters must be glad that the issues that Fly (and Marty) listed did not cause any issues in forming the Celtic League, or in allowing the Italians to join up too.

Stone Motif wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Not my quote.

It was Sins post. My bad.

LordDowlais wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:I didn't say' Mick Dawson (Leinster Rugby) said that he had been approached by a couple of English clubs who were only interested in taking in the Big 3 Irish Provinces (because of their travelling support).'

Sorry that was Sin e. You were just agreeing with him.

SecretFly wrote:

Stone Motif wrote:

Sin é wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:
Mick Dawson (Leinster Rugby) said that he had been approached by a couple of English clubs who were only interested in taking in the Big 3 Irish Provinces (because of their travelling support).

Sin brought up attendances. Fly then went off on one stating that despite Irish fans prioritising other competitions,attendance was a Welsh issue alone. Despite us attracting higher per capita support in a climate of teams woefully underfunded being free to watch on TV.

Higher per capita.  Grand.  Glad you're finally happy on the attendance issue.  That took a long time to come.  I've been here a long time and it's a first for Welsh Regional rugby to be happy about that.

Progress.

Welsh fans must be beginning to LOVE Pro12 .......  Break open the Champagne

ScarletSpiderman wrote:Fly, feel better to get it off your chest and actually post something other than a sarcastic swipe at someone else?

SecretFly wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:Fly, feel better to get it off your chest and actually post something other than a sarcastic swipe at someone else?

I get a sarcastic swipe, I'll give one.  And it's always a pleasure to return compliments.  What planet are you on, Scarlet?  I should ignore Stone's tone and meekly say "sorry for having offended you, Stone"?

Me?


 

No 7&1/2 wrote:In all other examples of tiered levels of sport the lower devisions get lower money so how would the lower level English clubs be enticed to lower their income and increase competition?

SecretFly wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:All the Pro12 supporters must be glad that the issues that Fly (and Marty) listed did not cause any issues in forming the Celtic League, or in allowing the Italians to join up too.

Do you want to comment on the actual post or just do another 'Meh'?

Either is fine, Scarlet.   Or does the hint of me saying we're not going to sit at a table where you guys have two votes and we have one upset you a little?

Chunky Norwich wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:In all other examples of tiered levels of sport the lower devisions get lower money so how would the lower level English clubs be enticed to lower their income and increase competition?

That's why it would be a conference style. This must be the 40th time I've typed this.

ScarletSpiderman wrote:All the Pro12 supporters must be glad that the issues that Fly (and Marty) listed did not cause any issues in forming the Celtic League, or in allowing the Italians to join up too.

marty2086 wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:All the Pro12 supporters must be glad that the issues that Fly (and Marty) listed did not cause any issues in forming the Celtic League, or in allowing the Italians to join up too.

Which games do you most look forward to in Europe every season? The games against the English and French teams?


The only way to maintain things is an NFL/Super rugby style conference and fixture system with 24 teams

That's a lot of teams to be dealing with

This needs fixtures arranged well in advance

The Championship teams will not want to see promotion stopped, this will hinder the arrangements required and the organisation of the conferences

Then how do you solve a problem like the Italians?

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:All the Pro12 supporters must be glad that the issues that Fly (and Marty) listed did not cause any issues in forming the Celtic League, or in allowing the Italians to join up too.

Which games do you most look forward to in Europe every season? The games against the English and French teams?


The only way to maintain things is an NFL/Super rugby style conference and fixture system with 24 teams

That's a lot of teams to be dealing with

This needs fixtures arranged well in advance

The Championship teams will not want to see promotion stopped, this will hinder the arrangements required and the organisation of the conferences

Then how do you solve a problem like the Italians?

Not sure the relevant of that to be honest.  But seeing as you have asked, it all depends on the team.  I would rather watch say Toulouse or Clermont instead of Newcastle or Sale, but I would rather Bath or Northampton than Montpellier etc.

As for the rest I would rather get the Pro12 fixed properly than start trying to start something new.

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:All the Pro12 supporters must be glad that the issues that Fly (and Marty) listed did not cause any issues in forming the Celtic League, or in allowing the Italians to join up too.

Do you want to comment on the actual post or just do another 'Meh'?

Either is fine, Scarlet.   Or does the hint of me saying we're not going to sit at a table where you guys have two votes and we have one upset you a little?

Meh.

It meant it genuinely.  You seem to generally avoid posting more than the odd one line, or sarcastic rant for a while, and then 'boom' a big long post, that is actually relevant and thought though.  I was wondering if it did feel good to get it off your chest.

Like I said in the post you quoted, there were issues with there being two separate political nations involved in the formation of the Pro12, now there are 3.  There were logistical issues that needed to be resolved, over a larger area if you include the Italians.  There were issues of Privately owned clubs and union ran clubs, if I am right the Irish are all union controlled, so are Edinburgh and Zebre, and the four regions are private ran, as are Glasgow and Treviso.   The issues of who qualifies for Europe and how were issues at the start of the Celtic Leagues formation, and have been issues again since.  But these have been resolved.  So a supporter of the Pro12 should be thankful that the issues you vented (and I am sure you are glad you did) about we not insurmountable.

ScarletSpiderman wrote:Marty, I tend to look forward to playing whoever it is that seeded above us.  So if the pool were, for argument sake

Glasgow
Glaws
Scarlets
Montpellier

I would be more interested in the Glasgow match and than any of the others.

SecretFly wrote:Hmm.... first paragraph.  You're personally over-interested in my habits, Scarlet....  
I do what I do...
Post guff.  Post jokes that aren't funny.  Post jokes that really are  Post nonsense and post seriously.  I do it all.... Long rambling stuff and short sarcastic pops.  
Thanks for pointing that out for people.  I think they already know, I certainly do.  It'll continue just so.  I like it so.

SecretFly wrote:Second Paragraph - so you agree with my points that a B&I cup needs negotiation with respect and equal say for all distinct spheres?  Grand.  
Europe wasn't.  

SecretFly wrote:;]And no, it hasn't been resolved.  It's a gap filler.  

SecretFly wrote:In fact, if a B&I Competition were to begin, Europe as it stands would have to be scrapped for a new agreement.

SecretFly wrote:So a vote for B&I is a vote to renegotiate yet again Europe.

SecretFly wrote:Hopefully this time some of you guys could mention Pan Europe Caps.... it was sadly lacking from the last talkshop.

marty2086 wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:Marty, I tend to look forward to playing whoever it is that seeded above us.  So if the pool were, for argument sake

Glasgow
Glaws
Scarlets
Montpellier

I would be more interested in the Glasgow match and than any of the others.

Is it not usually everyone seeded above Scarlets?
I don't envy that group though but look forward to seeing the games could be plenty of good match ups there

It is a fair point you make though, in my experience with Ulster the games against the French and English teams generate excitement around the province particularly in Belfast. Maybe the lack of professional sport here and Ulsters poor record play a part in that though

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:Marty, I tend to look forward to playing whoever it is that seeded above us.  So if the pool were, for argument sake

Glasgow
Glaws
Scarlets
Montpellier

I would be more interested in the Glasgow match and than any of the others.

Is it not usually everyone seeded above Scarlets?
I don't envy that group though but look forward to seeing the games could be plenty of good match ups there

It is a fair point you make though, in my experience with Ulster the games against the French and English teams generate excitement around the province particularly in Belfast. Maybe the lack of professional sport here and Ulsters poor record play a part in that though

Yeah that is why it is always so much sweeter when you finisher higher in the pool than other seeded above you.  Where did Ulster finish in the group last year  

No 7&1/2 wrote:Coming from an English perspective: Why would England want to give up power to share with the other nations?

Given that English clubs struggle to compete consistently with the French due to the wage cap and not their income how would the  new league help them win in Europe consistently?

Why would they want to increase the competition they have in the domestic league?

Why would they want to increase competition in Europe by helping to increase the income of the other nations clubs?

Chunky Norwich wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Coming from an English perspective: Why would England want to give up power to share with the other nations?

Given that English clubs struggle to compete consistently with the French due to the wage cap and not their income how would the  new league help them win in Europe consistently?

Why would they want to increase the competition they have in the domestic league?

Why would they want to increase competition in Europe by helping to increase the income of the other nations clubs?

You've labelled me a liar re: this subject, so I guess a reply from me here would be just wasted time..

SecretFly wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

My information dried up recently after discussions sidetracked on to support for Ireland's bid for the RWC with regards to progressing to a B&I league. All parties understand that it is the obvious route to go in order to challenged the French, but the make up of it and control of it are sticking points. We've a new broom at the WRU with Lewis out of the window and it's possible that the WRU would allow PRW to control its interest in the league. As we know, PRL run the Aviva Premiership 'under agreement' from the RFU. The Scots threw their lot in with PRL and PRW during the ERC fiasco. The only stumbling block that remains is the IRFU.

That's the problem I have with this rosey assumption that everything will be grand with a B&I competition.  Grand for who?

For our part - on our island - it seems we're needed for some viability reason, though hardly wanted for our own sake.  We're presumably a tool needed to open the seed that gives the potential riches.

My problem with all that is perhaps obvious.  Many commentators seem to want a British League - natural market, landlocked natural area, easy travelling, tradition etc.  We're a frustrating bit that has to be factored in grudgingly to get English approval for another look at a British Contest.
The fact remains though that three quarters (and more in territory terms) of Irish rugby ain't British.  And planes, trains and automobiles are still going to be needed for fans to engage in any B&I competition. Everyone is out for themselves.  Everyone is out for their own selfish interest.  And naturally so.  But it's time to admit it.  We're not one nation.  Our values, our methods and our aspirations are different.

But all I ever see when the talk gets down to detail on these proposed new contests is Initials of Interested parties.  WRU, PRW, PRL, RFU..... and the awkward Irish bit,  IRFU.


Administration of a Competition and control of a Competition would be MAJOR issues to sort out.  Not done casually overnight on a postage stamp - as the European debate has proven beyond doubt.  Sensitivities were run-over at that party.  Bad bad blood was the result all round.  We're still to an extent living with the raw emotions of that debate and conclusion. Nobody cared who they offended (admin or fans) - just give me the money!!!!  We don't care who doesn't like what's going on - majority rule - take what you get or f**k off.

If that's to be the negotiating strategy adopted for any proposed B&I league then the European crap will look like a doddle and all this current guff from people on all sides here will look tame indeed.  Four Union areas - Two distinct Political Nations.  MUST be Respected fully - no grey areas.  We're not one Nation.  France is.  There would be no casual ignorance of the fact that two distinct nations and four Union areas are agreeing a deal - not twelve or fourteen privately run rugby outfits.  This is - whether certain people want to admit it or not - an agreement of Nations, NOT an agreement of stateless Club CEOs.  

So, if Unions were to be involved (and I've heard WRU, RFU and IRFU mentioned) then Unions would to be involved - four way split in authority and administration - equal.  If Owners are only involved - then no need for RFU or WRU.  IRFU own four.  RFU and WRU (allegedly) have no ownership interests.

So which is it to be?  Because there is no way IRFU will be sitting down and saying they're happy that Wales have more votes at this B&I table than them because of this neat division of interest trick between the WRU and PRW.  Nor indeed will they accept slave donkey duty out on the hinterland from the neat division of interest trick that the RFU and PRL pull.

Four distinct spheres of rugby influence (Union areas) solidly recognised - nobody telling anybody else how to reform, or attempting to control development structures within one Union area from without a Union area due to more votes at a mere 'club' competition table.

So Equal division of rights amongst four.  
Equal places on administration for four.  
No run-away budgets by a chosen few (and strident rebuttal of sponsorship pressures from people such as BT or SKY to allow markets to decide) - a cap that means something and sticks - and sticks!

If all that was a given then something potentially could happen.  But a B&I competition merely used as a cover for Power struggles designed to weaken some Unions at the expense of others.  No way.

marty2086 wrote:Fly, another element I brought up previously is the French and the ERCC.

How will qualification work for the tournament?
Does the current participation agreement forbid the leagues existence?
How much value will it knock off the ERCC due to a diminishment in the value of the games?

marty2086 wrote:

ScarletSpiderman wrote:All the Pro12 supporters must be glad that the issues that Fly (and Marty) listed did not cause any issues in forming the Celtic League, or in allowing the Italians to join up too.

Which games do you most look forward to in Europe every season? The games against the English and French teams?


The only way to maintain things is an NFL/Super rugby style conference and fixture system with 24 teams

That's a lot of teams to be dealing with

This needs fixtures arranged well in advance

The Championship teams will not want to see promotion stopped, this will hinder the arrangements required and the organisation of the conferences

Then how do you solve a problem like the Italians?

No 7&1/2 wrote:Coming from an English perspective: Why would England want to give up power to share with the other nations?

Given that English clubs struggle to compete consistently with the French due to the wage cap and not their income how would the  new league help them win in Europe consistently?

Why would they want to increase the competition they have in the domestic league?

Why would they want to increase competition in Europe by helping to increase the income of the other nations clubs?

PhilBB wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

Never knew you could get one that specialised

Then maybe you can explain to the class how the many interpret Keynes today in regards to government spending and infrastructure

'How the many'? Interesting. What's that got to do with the Northern Ireland government investing in a business controlled by a Dublin based company?

Hmmm, you're desperate to avoid that point. Funny.

Sin é wrote:

That would be the same 'business' that bankrolls this 'business' to the tune of about 5m every year?

PhilBB wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Coming from an English perspective: Why would England want to give up power to share with the other nations?

Given that English clubs struggle to compete consistently with the French due to the wage cap and not their income how would the  new league help them win in Europe consistently?

Why would they want to increase the competition they have in the domestic league?

Why would they want to increase competition in Europe by helping to increase the income of the other nations clubs?

Money. It's quite a simple answer.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

So they'd share power for more money.

They'd be able to compete with the french due to more money, but money isn't an issue now it's the cap so you've not answered.

And the rest you think the English don't want to compete just make more money? OK, not sure I'd agree with that as we currently have allegations that clubs are cheating to become more competitive and tif it wasn't a major cause for them they surely wouldn't be?

PhilBB wrote:

Sin é wrote:

That would be the same 'business' that bankrolls this 'business' to the tune of about 5m every year?

You've lost me, sorry. Who is paying who 5m what per year?

SecretFly wrote:You are hacked into the IRFU offices now, Phil?

I'm Irish.  And I say the IRFU would dance at the chance of having a level playing field on the Cap.  

Why would they want to struggle on paying more and more money they can ill afford to keep their OWN players playing in Ireland when a European wide agreed cap would lighten the load and lessen the pressure?

You all get so nervous when Cap is mentioned.  Nobody wanted to mention Cap when Europe was debated here.  Not the English posters, not the Welsh posters.  Meritocracy was the Cry!!!!  Let there be Meritocracy!  But Let us also turn a blind eye to Top14 (who suck in best players from across the world and throw them out against poor Zebre)

The only people mentioning cap continuously was me and a few other Irish guys.  Not Welsh boys.  They were too busy trying to knife partners in the back by sleeping with anyone that offered them more money - even for less influence.

And you of course forget the English big boys never abided by their Cap.  You seriously think the IRFU didn't already have an idea about that truth?  Only good club is one that at least says it is constrained by a cap, even though it isn't?  

Sin é wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

Sin é wrote:

That would be the same 'business' that bankrolls this 'business' to the tune of about 5m every year?

You've lost me, sorry. Who is paying who 5m what per year?

The IRFU invests about 5m every year in each of the provinces to promote rugby.

No 7&1/2 wrote:You haven't really answered the points have you?

English clubs in Europe could currently compete with the French without the cap. Having a greater income wouldn't affect this. It's unlikely that a current broadcaster would increase the money available to increase what the English currently get.

Why would a team like Newcastle want to end up in the 2nd division from where they're currently at as it's liekly they wouldn't be good enough currently to be a top team.

PhilBB wrote:

Sin é wrote:

PhilBB wrote:

Sin é wrote:

That would be the same 'business' that bankrolls this 'business' to the tune of about 5m every year?

You've lost me, sorry. Who is paying who 5m what per year?

The IRFU invests about 5m every year in each of the provinces to promote rugby.

5? And the bloody rest!

PhilBB wrote:

SecretFly wrote:You are hacked into the IRFU offices now, Phil?

I'm Irish.  And I say the IRFU would dance at the chance of having a level playing field on the Cap.  

Why would they want to struggle on paying more and more money they can ill afford to keep their OWN players playing in Ireland when a European wide agreed cap would lighten the load and lessen the pressure?

You all get so nervous when Cap is mentioned.  Nobody wanted to mention Cap when Europe was debated here.  Not the English posters, not the Welsh posters.  Meritocracy was the Cry!!!!  Let there be Meritocracy!  But Let us also turn a blind eye to Top14 (who suck in best players from across the world and throw them out against poor Zebre)

The only people mentioning cap continuously was me and a few other Irish guys.  Not Welsh boys.  They were too busy trying to knife partners in the back by sleeping with anyone that offered them more money - even for less influence.

And you of course forget the English big boys never abided by their Cap.  You seriously think the IRFU didn't already have an idea about that truth?  Only good club is one that at least says it is constrained by a cap, even though it isn't?  

Fair enough, that's an interesting viewpoint. How do you reckon we could have a Europe wide salary cap when you have the McCreevy tax break, different levels of social security payments and different currencies?

The Irish wouldn't go for it as they wouldn't be willing to open up the books of the 'branches' to audit, neither would they want the transparency, especially as it wouldn't allow them to gerrymander.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Have a crack at each Phil. And then point to where the money will come from and how much.

The other 8 wouldn't really matter anymore as they wouldn't be in Europe anyway.

Sin é wrote:

What do you mean the rest? Facts are the NI Gov. know that the IRFU have invested way more in Ulster than anything they have. NI are benefitting from the ROI Gov. investment in the Aviva (which is responsible for generating most of the IRFU's funds).

Sin é wrote:

How do the French square it. It would be a damn site more expensive for players to live in Paris than in Toulon.