EFS finds a new campaign

[goodNumber10]

Should be more pressure on the individual NH unions to give other European unions meaningful tests - the Lions playing Samoa? Less important IMO.

completely this, one off games mean very little what they need is regular incoming tours.

I thought IRB said the Home Unions had to tour a tier2 every one in four tours?

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

I blame Gloucester for him!!!!

 

[valley commando]

This from TV3s John Campbell

Eliota finds his constituency brilliantly," says Campbell. "He inspires outrage and shock from people who were probably never going to support him anyway. But he grabs a whole lot of other people. He is speaking on behalf of a dispossessed, marginalised, alienated political class who don't have much clout and don't get their views in the media very often. He has worked out that the way to do that is just scream and sometimes say stuff that is just preposterous. He is an articulate, intelligent, passionate, informed, political man. He is great company, but sometimes you just want to grab him and say 'Eliota shut up'. But he is not interested in what a palagi member of the establishment thinks."

 

[big ginger 8]

*British and Irish Lions

 

[ncurd]

*British and Irish Lions

*British minus Scotland and Irish Lions

 

[big ginger 8]

*British minus Scotland and Irish Lions

Can't rep unfortunately.

 

[goodNumber10]

he's still going...

 

[RedruthRFC]

This from TV3s John Campbell

Eliota finds his constituency brilliantly," says Campbell. "He inspires outrage and shock from people who were probably never going to support him anyway. But he grabs a whole lot of other people. He is speaking on behalf of a dispossessed, marginalised, alienated political class who don't have much clout and don't get their views in the media very often. He has worked out that the way to do that is just scream and sometimes say stuff that is just preposterous. He is an articulate, intelligent, passionate, informed, political man. He is great company, but sometimes you just want to grab him and say 'Eliota shut up'. But he is not interested in what a palagi member of the establishment thinks."

I can't agree with this take (from someone who appears to be an acquaintance of his) at all. I find myself ignoring things points he raises because his rhetoric puts my back up so much. Just look at this thread - half of it is about what a (insert your favourite adjective here) EPS is rather than being about the issues at hand which are indeed important and need consideration from the whole of the rugby world (or should that be World Rugby).

- - - Updated - - -

He's a mouthy twit who talks some crap at times, but I agree with the sentiment that more home games for the Pacific should happen. I also think it should be a different side who goes there each year. It wouldn't be fair to just expect certain teams like New Zealand (despite their geographical convenience) to keep going there when they don't get a penny out of it. The Maori All Blacks, a domestic side? Sure. But they want the top sides so I think it should rotate.

Coming at this from a slightly different angle, are home games (in the true sense) really what the Pacific nations need? Obviously home tests, particularly against high profile opposition are great for the profile of the game in the country concerned, but (at least in Samoa's case) my impression is that the profile of the game isn't the big problem, it's a lack of money. According to the font of knowledge that is Wikipedia, the GDP PC of Samoa is just of $4k USD and Apia Park has a capacity of 15,000. This being the case, wouldn't they be better served by playing their "home" matches against tier on opposition away from home and taking a portion of the profits?

 

[ratsapprentice]

I think the issue with that is that it's completely contrary to how the monies from tests are currently divided - AFAIK there is a pre-agreed sum paid to the visiting side, regardless of ticket sales/revenue.
I think Samoa got 40-50k for their game in the Autumn (don't quote me on that - I can't remember where I read it).

 

[valley commando]

I can't agree with this take (from someone who appears to be an acquaintance of his) at all. I find myself ignoring things points he raises because his rhetoric puts my back up so much. Just look at this thread - half of it is about what a (insert your favourite adjective here) EPS is rather than being about the issues at hand which are indeed important and need consideration from the whole of the rugby world (or should that be World Rugby).

- - - Updated - - -



Coming at this from a slightly different angle, are home games (in the true sense) really what the Pacific nations need? Obviously home tests, particularly against high profile opposition are great for the profile of the game in the country concerned, but (at least in Samoa's case) my impression is that the profile of the game isn't the big problem, it's a lack of money. According to the font of knowledge that is Wikipedia, the GDP PC of Samoa is just of $4k USD and Apia Park has a capacity of 15,000. This being the case, wouldn't they be better served by playing their "home" matches against tier on opposition away from home and taking a portion of the profits?

How about the NH and SH having a 2nd division international comp run at the same time as main comp with one team promoted and one relegated each year, as follows with the the world ranking position in brackets . -:

SH div 1
(1) New Zealand
(2) South Africa
(5) Australia
(8) Argentina

SH div 2
(9) Samoa
(10) Fiji
(12) Japan
(15) Tonga you could add (19) Uruguay and (23) Chile and run it on the same lines as the 6 Nations playing one team at home this year and away next, or keep it to 4
teams home and away.

NH div 1
(3) Ireland
(4) England
(6) Wales
(7) France
(11) Scotland
(15) Italy

NH div 2
(14) Georgia
(17) Romania
(20) Spain
(22) Russia
(26) Belgium
(29) Portugal Run on the same format as the 6 Nations.

This will give teams something to aim at and improve playing standards.

 

[Peat]

Why can't he do it through proper channels. Not throwing a hissy on twitter.

Probably because it will be shuffled away to the bottom of the in-tray if done through proper channels.

This is one of those scenarios where I struggle to support anyone tbh. The Lions are perpetuating a non-inclusive and narrow set of rugby solely on grounds of money. Sensible perhaps, but I struggle to cheerlead for it, particularly with the Lions who are one of the last great romances. And normally I'm happy with a pragmatic stance on Tier 1 attitudes to Tier 2. It's nice to see someone calling them out. Just not when the guy is Nigel Farage's long lost angrier Samoan cousin. Or maybe Russel Brand's. Whatever.

Mindyou, there's plenty of growing rugby countries that might legit ask for a touch of the Lions magic. The USA, as was explored. Georgia. Argentina. Japan. They'll all be told no, more or less, because the schedule is too tight and there's an obligation to the hosts first and foremost. There would be a great romance about going to Samoa, one of the great rugby hotbeds of the world, but I don't think they're any more worthy than the others.

 

[goodNumber10]

I think the issue with that is that it's completely contrary to how the monies from tests are currently divided - AFAIK there is a pre-agreed sum paid to the visiting side, regardless of ticket sales/revenue.
I think Samoa got 40-50k for their game in the Autumn (don't quote me on that - I can't remember where I read it).

EPS reckons they got paid 0.

- - - Updated - - -

Coming at this from a slightly different angle, are home games (in the true sense) really what the Pacific nations need? Obviously home tests, particularly against high profile opposition are great for the profile of the game in the country concerned, but (at least in Samoa's case) my impression is that the profile of the game isn't the big problem, it's a lack of money. According to the font of knowledge that is Wikipedia, the GDP PC of Samoa is just of $4k USD and Apia Park has a capacity of 15,000. This being the case, wouldn't they be better served by playing their "home" matches against tier on opposition away from home and taking a portion of the profits?

it's local economy that benefits though. The host Union gets a lot fo money from tickets but the money brought in on the trousit routes is almost invaluable to the local businesses.

 

[ratsapprentice]

I know he does, but I find that extremely difficult to believe, particularly when I specifically remember the fee that they received for their last game vs England being discussed (possibly by him).

 

[BRSTLDRGN]

Probably because it will be shuffled away to the bottom of the in-tray if done through proper channels.

This is one of those scenarios where I struggle to support anyone tbh. The Lions are perpetuating a non-inclusive and narrow set of rugby solely on grounds of money. Sensible perhaps, but I struggle to cheerlead for it, particularly with the Lions who are one of the last great romances. And normally I'm happy with a pragmatic stance on Tier 1 attitudes to Tier 2. It's nice to see someone calling them out. Just not when the guy is Nigel Farage's long lost angrier Samoan cousin. Or maybe Russel Brand's. Whatever.

Mindyou, there's plenty of growing rugby countries that might legit ask for a touch of the Lions magic. The USA, as was explored. Georgia. Argentina. Japan. They'll all be told no, more or less, because the schedule is too tight and there's an obligation to the hosts first and foremost. There would be a great romance about going to Samoa, one of the great rugby hotbeds of the world, but I don't think they're any more worthy than the others.

Certainly not saying we shouldn't take the Lions to Samoa/Tonga/Fiji, it would be good for all involved.

My main point was that a online tirade isn't going to work very well with the powers that be.

 

[goodNumber10]

I know he does, but I find that extremely difficult to believe, particularly when I specifically remember the fee that they received for their last game vs England being discussed (possibly by him).

yeah, i was under the impression that the issue was the monetary flow from Samoan Union to the players, not that the English were not paying them.

50,000 is pretty small though when you think teams like England and New Zealand etc...command £1000,000 fees.

 

[Peat]

Certainly not saying we shouldn't take the Lions to Samoa/Tonga/Fiji, it would be good for all involved.

My main point was that a online tirade isn't going to work very well with the powers that be.

But neither will going through the correct channels.

EFS isn't talking to the powers that be. He's talking to the wider world and trying to get people to start shouting en masse at the powers that be. One would also question whether he has out of rugby interests that play into this.

At the very worst for him, he's venting steam about something where being polite isn't going to work anyway. Can't really knock that as a use of time, personally.

 

[RedruthRFC]

I think the issue with that is that it's completely contrary to how the monies from tests are currently divided - AFAIK there is a pre-agreed sum paid to the visiting side, regardless of ticket sales/revenue.
I think Samoa got 40-50k for their game in the Autumn (don't quote me on that - I can't remember where I read it).

Indeed. If England were to do the honourable thing and ensure that the next fixture between the two sides is played in Samoa and England make a *** for tat expenses claim, there would be a pretty paltry sum left over to do any good in Samoa. This was the point that I was making - in financial terms, hosting big internationals in Samoa achieves little. That being the case, I proposed Samoa hosting "home games" elsewhere (at the home of the nation they are playing would seem the logical choice). That way, Samoa get a much healthier chunk of cash than they could ever hope to generate on home soil and the side they are playing save making a (in some cases) long trip to play somewhere with poor facilities and also get the chance to make a few quid.

- - - Updated - - -

How about the NH and SH having a 2nd division international comp run at the same time as main comp with one team promoted and one relegated each year, as follows with the the world ranking position in brackets . -:

The idealist in me has been advocating doing that for the Six Nations since Georgia gave Ireland a fright in 2007 if not before, the case is stronger than ever now that they are above Italy in the world rankings. Now that the Tri-Nations is the Rugby Championship and Samoa and Fiji are right on Argentina's shoulder, the case for doing so down south becomes stronger.

The realist in me knows that it will never happen for commercial and blazer wearing tradition advocate reasons.

Either way, it wouldn't be a silver bullet, but would be a step in the right direction.

 

[BRSTLDRGN]

But neither will going through the correct channels.

EFS isn't talking to the powers that be. He's talking to the wider world and trying to get people to start shouting en masse at the powers that be. One would also question whether he has out of rugby interests that play into this.

At the very worst for him, he's venting steam about something where being polite isn't going to work anyway. Can't really knock that as a use of time, personally.

More chance of that or if he had he been civil with this rather than hat he's said. He comes across as a bitter man throwing a temper tantrum. As such he loses a large part of the audience, including me.

 

[ratsapprentice]

Indeed. If England were to do the honourable thing and ensure that the next fixture between the two sides is played in Samoa and England make a *** for tat expenses claim, there would be a pretty paltry sum left over to do any good in Samoa. This was the point that I was making - in financial terms, hosting big internationals in Samoa achieves little. That being the case, I proposed Samoa hosting "home games" elsewhere (at the home of the nation they are playing would seem the logical choice). That way, Samoa get a much healthier chunk of cash than they could ever hope to generate on home soil and the side they are playing save making a (in some cases) long trip to play somewhere with poor facilities and also get the chance to make a few quid.

What's the end game there? That just creates a false economy - the harsh reality is that Samoa, Fiji and Tonga don't have the GDP to keep pace with the rest of the world in a professional context.
I'd be all for ensuring that visiting test sides receive a minimum % of gate revenues, and that T2 sides get more regular tests against T1 sides - but your suggestion does little that I could support.

 

[Peat]

More chance of that or if he had he been civil with this rather than hat he's said. He comes across as a bitter man throwing a temper tantrum. As such he loses a large part of the audience, including me.

I very much doubt that you and me are an audience he cares about.