Eurocup poll

[St George]

Erm... Rugby... in the leagues where you have Union controlled teams!?

Please elaborate, because if you mean that they rest players, then so do the PRL. And the Rabo12 rest players mainly in their own league so that they are at full strength for the most important competition for them....the HC.
IMO the only Union that has the best of club & country is the NZRU.

I am an England fan first and formost, but i also believe in a good sound domestic setup to deliver the players for the national side. England have that at the moment and are see the rewards of finally working with the PRL and having an agreement on player participation.

If you are using Union controlled leagues in Europe as a better alternative to the English setup, then i fail to see the comparison. The most successful is Ireland, but they cannot maintain a quality league on their own and need other nations to provide a viable league. The Italians are still newbies in terms of rugby development and i wont criticise them. Scotland are a shambles....their national team struggles and their domestic setup is a joke. But they have a nice stadium....good management from the SRU. And i have already mentioned the Welsh. Great national side, but an abomination in terms of domestic rugby which is tearing itself apart again.

And even France with the club system is heading for war with Big Brother bullying by the Union and the clubs about to sign a participation agreement. All these Unions and their setups make me rather happy with the English lot, and in Ritchie, we may have finally found a competant CEO who looks at rugby from all sides.

 

[ratsapprentice]

Ireland can't maintain a domestic league - that wouldn't change unless their participation numbers grew exponentially.
They simply don't have enough players to sustain their own 12 team league (the same is true for every Pro12 country).
Their top level teams (regions and national team) have been very successful relative to their resources.

Same goes for the Italians - where the game has grown consistently over the last ten years.
Every year their domestic teams and their National team become more competitive.

Scotland are the only ones who you could really argue consistently underwhelm on a domestic and international level.
Although it seems to me that they have got their act together over the last year or two and if I was Scottish I would feel fairly positive about the direction rugby as a whole is moving.
I think a lot of their national woes lay at Andy Robinson's door though.
How would private ownership help their situation?

Wales - a fantastic national side run by the union - terrible domestic sides run by themselves...

France - A floundering national side and powerful if fickle clubs.

Notice the theme here?

Top-down governed countries maximise their potential domestically and internationally (with the exception of Scotland) whereas systems with rival governing organisations universally squander theirs on at least one front.
If you accept that the NZRU has the most successful system then why are you so averse to moving towards such a system?

 

[St George]

Because i think its horses for courses.

It works in NZ due to everyone singing from the same hymn sheet, and the fact that they are in a partnership with two other like minded countries. It hasnt worked in Wales for just the opposite. The fans did not take regionalisation to heart, and for the WRU to be thinking of doing it again and watering the fanbase down even more would be suicide. The fans dont want the same as the WRU and they are the ones who pay the money.

And i for one am not suggesting that the Celts go for private owners as i think they have made their beds, but why on the other hand do you and others insist the only way for England is regions which would in all probability see a right royal hashup as per the Welsh model. Clubs are the norm in England and unless there is a sudden change of feeling from the fans that have traditionally followed their local clubs, then i dont see it changing. Why should it? It was the criteria for the HC that was broken not the English system.

 

[ratsapprentice]

My primary concern is that the RFU maintains it's control over the clubs.

Yes I would prefer a system where the RFU directly controls the clubs - but that is beside the point and it does not necessitate the implementation of regions/dissolution of the clubs anyway.

 

[St George]

You and i are probably not that far off, just getting our wires crossed abit.

 

[Mrs. Peter Quinn]

Ulster won by a landslide against Treviso, playing away - compare this to the trend of rabo pro 12 games between the two sides which are not nearly as one-sided - with Treviso having won or drawn away from home a couple of times.

Would anybody agree this highlights some of the issues being discussed - that rabo teams have that extra bit of capacity and ability to prioritize heineken games over the equivalent rabo fixture?

Or maybe Trevisos squad this year is just weaker in general - I don't know. Its just that to me, that result didn't seem entirely in keeping with what you might expect in the rabo.

 

[McTallshort]

How can you not see the clear dissonance in the interests of clubs run as capitalist ventures and international rugby (Unions)?

International rugby is clearly a competitor to their business.

Tell me honestly how you do not understand that.

Wrong! International rugby is the biggest selling pitch the clubs have. If they have players performing on the international stage then people will pay to see them playing for their clubs, it would do the clubs no good damaging International rugby. Also agree with St George regards WRU and FFR who seem bent on destroying their domestic competition.

 

[snoopy snoopy dog dog]

Would anybody agree this highlights some of the issues being discussed - that rabo teams have that extra bit of capacity and ability to prioritize heineken games over the equivalent rabo fixture?

Not especially but I see the point you're trying to make. I think there's more rotation in the Pro 12 because the margin for error is greater. You only have to finish in the top 4 to make the playoffs so can afford to risk dropping a few games by rotating freely whereas in the Heineken Cup, one home loss sees you almost out of it. Even then you'll see plenty of rotation from Irish teams. For example Munster started four different props in their last two games. Joe Schmidt regularly swapped Eoin Reddan/Isaac Boss, Damain Browne/Devin Toner, Heinke van der Merwe/Cian Healy and Kevin McLaughlin/Shane Jennings. Maybe the coaching and player management systems are just better in the Pro 12 so players don't get flogged and are fresh at the end of the season. Warren Gatland was a master of this while at Wasps.

In short, the Pro 12 and Heineken Cup are two different beasts. The Pro 12 is a marathon, the Heineken Cup is a more intense sprint.

 

[Tony Manx]

Wrong! International rugby is the biggest selling pitch the clubs have. If they have players performing on the international stage then people will pay to see them playing for their clubs, it would do the clubs no good damaging International rugby. Also agree with St George regards WRU and FFR who seem bent on destroying their domestic competition.

Watching the ABs, the Springboks, the French, Irish or Welsh or even Italians is not what makes me want to watch their domestic leagues.............I do not watch Sky's coverage of club competitions mainly because they have not got the Aviva or Top 14 which are what interest me! I do watch international rugby but, to be honest, am more enamoured with English and French club rugby......

I can see why it was said that international rugby is a competitor to the clubs in that it is their players who are released for training sessions, 6N, Summer Tours and EOYT which, with rest, means that they are not available to the clubs nearly as much as they would like.

Without the internationals, the clubs could organise more club matches (domestically or internationally), the profits they would make from gates, merchandise and entertainment would all go to the clubs.

I kknow that the Aviva clubs are conmpensated for the time that their players are with the International squads and also that they may receive some funding ex RFU.....but are the meglomaniacs considering that they can make more money with their players under their control at all times? Possibly.............

 

[Peat]

Ulster won by a landslide against Treviso, playing away - compare this to the trend of rabo pro 12 games between the two sides which are not nearly as one-sided - with Treviso having won or drawn away from home a couple of times.

Would anybody agree this highlights some of the issues being discussed - that rabo teams have that extra bit of capacity and ability to prioritize heineken games over the equivalent rabo fixture?

Or maybe Trevisos squad this year is just weaker in general - I don't know. Its just that to me, that result didn't seem entirely in keeping with what you might expect in the rabo.

Treviso have played some pretty weak Ulster sides recently, but I also think the HEC greatly improves Ulster's focus - not least because a lost Rabo game is slightly "oops" and a lost point in the Heineken is "**** **** ****"

Wrong! International rugby is the biggest selling pitch the clubs have. If they have players performing on the international stage then people will pay to see them playing for their clubs, it would do the clubs no good damaging International rugby. Also agree with St George regards WRU and FFR who seem bent on destroying their domestic competition.

I would have agreed with that, but it doesn't seem to work well with Wales...

 

[St George]

I would have agreed with that, but it doesn't seem to work well with Wales...

If you mean due to the fact that the regions are not supported with the same enthusiasm as the national side, then i think that alludes to what i have been saying regarding how the WRU have handled their domestic setup without taking into consideration what the fans wanted. Im no expert on Welsh rugby, but i get the impression that many fans stuck with the old clubs and did not take to the regions. This aspect of regionalisation is what i fear would occur with the English. They are rooted within their local clubs and would stick with that and occasionally go to regional games to see the stars as they would an international game. IMO it would be a disaster.

IMO i also believe Welsh rugby is having to compete for the hearts and minds of young welsh fans with the two football teams which are now in the Premiership. This latest fiasco of domestic management by the WRU could see them losing a whole generation of fans until it is all sorted out.

 

[ratsapprentice]

Regions wouldn't work in England if you turn it into a club vs region thing, life-long fans (particularly in Rugby towns) would resent it.
I do think a sytem similar to that used in NZ is workable though, whereby the regions play in the HC and are selected from the club constituents of each region.
That requires a re-working of the calendar and the PRL to concede a lot of power though.

 

[St George]

Not sure whether you have mentioned that format before and it went over me, but i could see where that system would work. Unfortunately i agree that there would need to be some give from the clubs which i doubt would be forthcoming. If the push come to shove with regards the RFU/PRL relationship, then it could be a way for the RFU to go.

 

[ratsapprentice]

Wrong! International rugby is the biggest selling pitch the clubs have. If they have players performing on the international stage then people will pay to see them playing for their clubs, it would do the clubs no good damaging International rugby. Also agree with St George regards WRU and FFR who seem bent on destroying their domestic competition.

http://www.therugbyforum.com/thread...-North-to-play-with-Wales?p=613518#post613518

 

[St George]

Nice try Rats, but i think when it all boils down, all the PRL are doing is implementing an agreed condition within the Premiership which is a binding contract and follows the Law as per the IRB's own Regulation 9 covering the agreed upon release of players from their domestic obligations for International matches.

So dont blame the PRL....blame the IRB.

 

[ratsapprentice]

I'm just trying to illustrate that whether or not it is in fact in PRL's interests to have their players playing international rugby - that's not how they see it.
Otherwise they would be encouraging this sort of thing.

 

[McTallshort]

Hold on, there is an agreed international window, if a union sets up a game outside that window they cannot expect the players club/region to support this, its an unfair demand.

 

[snoopy snoopy dog dog]

They can't expect clubs to release players but if the club obliges and releases the player, why should they be punished? This is a power play from PRL again. I know why they're doing it but don't agree with it.

 

[McTallshort]

No its a body enforcing the rules that everyone agreed to.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

They can't expect clubs to release players but if the club obliges and releases the player, why should they be punished? This is a power play from PRL again. I know why they're doing it but don't agree with it.

If it's a power play then they've been playing a vveerryy long game, as the clubs signed a 10yr contract 6yrs ago.

Also it's not the PRL and rFU in cahoots, per se, as the WRU/IRFU/Italians etc.etc. were offered the same deal as the RFU, but didn't pay up (which is understandable, really, but the opportunity was there).