Discussion in 'International Test Matches' started by The Alpha Bro, Oct 10, 2018.
So this "revenue sharing" you speak of is the 6N bankrolling the game in the SH? Why should they?
Because nobody wins if benches in the NH pro game are filled with test level talent from the SH. It robs the game in the SH and blocks development opportunities for young NH talent.
That's a different issue.
The 6N don't need to be involved in a nations league and they don't need CVC investment either. I would like to see promotion/relegation scenario where the bottom side has a play off in the AI for promotion.
Also the world cup is a big money spinner for Rugby as are the Autumn tests and you need to have proper competitive teams. If the RC teams are stripped of all their players it will be bad for the 6N teams in the long run.
I think they are, but the players come under pressure to turn them down (think Montpellier).
The Boks have said that they will start enforcing the rule, the clubs can they decide if they still want the players. They then can;t moan as they were warned before they sign the player. The player could retire from International Rugby but for most players the honour of representing your country still means an awful lot and I can't see many (there will be some) refusing to play for their country.
"Erasmus also warned overseas clubs he would strictly apply World Rugby's Regulation 9 that guarantees players are available for national team duty 14 weeks of the year.
The Boks have in the past compromised with clubs to allow them to retain players during the Rugby Championship and Autumn Internationals in the northern hemisphere.
"If the clubs don't like that then they have the option of not signing the player," Erasmus said."
I dunno, so the game remains relevant outside the UK?
Regarding a closed shop, i can see Australia taking it because we are broke. Personally, i would love to see the Islands in particular involved. I've been there, i know plenty of Islander lads and they would love it.
Obviously, England being the richest union in the world, they don't need to do or share anything. But literally everyone else does. The Clubs are a black hole for the rest of the world.
The last time Australia fielded a full strength team was probably the RWC final, and even then there were players who would've been in or around the squad un-available.
It started with the Islands, moved to the RC. I see absolutely no reason why it won't happen to Ireland, Scotland and Wales as well.
Someone handily pointed out to me that by making Canada and the US play in Europe it is an inducement to the 6N unions by giving them more access to the largest potential markets rather than the Rugby Championship. Given the Irish and Scottish obsession with all things American that might help to bring them onboard.
I dont think it is a different issue of the 6N want to avoid unpleasantness further down the road. Do the 6N nations hold a majority of World Rugby Council votes? World Rugby are on record as saying change is required to ensure the sport doesn't become one of "the haves and have nots". I think they are absolutely bricking it in order to be so public about these discussions and to put out official videos about the competition before there has been agreement. I think they are willing to play hardball on this.
Of course if we dispense entirely with 'rugby values' and disregard the importance and benefits of cooperation then there is absolutely zero incentive for England and France to ever have a competitive fixture with any other nation because the sport will always be healthy there due to the TV money in their leagues. They can happily let the rest of the rugby world burn.
I wish the SARU well with that, but I'm not sure what leverage they can have with the leagues. Tier2 nations routinely struggle to get players released for all their matches. Obviously, the SARU have more clout and a seat at the Pro14 table (and if rumours are to be believed soon in the Challenge Cup). But I'm not sure that will help them long term with the English and French leagues.
I'm not sure why you guys want to single out England on the club issue or for not wanting relegation.
There are foreign players (even if they switch allegiance through residency) in all three leagues, with France being the main one because they have the biggest tv deal and no cap. As for relegation, if there is one team that would fear it less than the others it is England based on our tournament record. I'm not going to speculate on what is being said behind closed doors but just saying England are the bad guys because they have more money than we do is crazy.
Even if the RC unions got a slice of the 6N money it wouldn't really change anything in regards to players moving. All the 6N teams are currently susceptible to losing players to France (even England with the offer Manu received), but as I said before that is not a reason to create a nations league. The answer is in eligibility rules to stop project players and as Erasmus points out making international windows compulsory.
It is the rules. The Tier 2 nations don't pay enough to the players. The Tier 1 nations like the Boks will pay a generous match fee and the pride of wearing the shirt matters. Springboks players are very marketable and sought after so they will have much more bargaining strength that PI players. If the player wants to play and the nation wants him then under the rules, the clubs cannot refuse.
the council is composed of 33 delegates with a total of 50 votes, allocated as follows:[
(30) Ten unions each have three votes and two delegates: Argentina, Australia, England, France, Ireland, Italy, New Zealand, Scotland, South Africa, and Wales.
(2) One union has two votes and one delegate: Japan.
(6) Six unions each have one vote and one delegate: Canada, Georgia, Fiji, Samoa, Romania, and the United States.
(12) The six regional associations representing Europe, South America, Americas North, Africa, Asia and Oceania each have two votes and one delegate.
In total, Europe has 22 votes; Oceania 10 votes; South America 5 votes; Africa 5 votes; North America 4 votes and Asia 4 votes.
The 6 nations have 18 votes and the RC have 12 votes. Therefore the 6 nations and RC between them hold 30 out of 50 votes. 60% of the votes. Therefore if they agree on something the others can't stop them.
It would distribute funds to nations unable to match player salaries offered in France and England. Sure, it wouldn't completely even the playing field but it would allow them to a) retain a higher % of their better players and b) allow them to invest in production of more quality players. The flow on effect would be a more competitive international scene and a healthier game world wide. It will act as a counter balance to the player drain and also as stimulus to smaller nations, allowing for the growth of the game internationally.
The international game is terminal in it's current state. That's why WR are desperate. Pichot said as much. If Super rugby collapses so does player production, particularly in Australia. There might be a few years where they remain in the top 10 or so nations worldwide, but once the residual talent ages/leaves the game will revert to amateur status.
The English are being singled out because their reasons for refusing to enter the league are the most transparent and baseless. England relegated? it would never happen. They clearly relish being the big fish in a small pond and can see their way to international dominance over the next several decades following the near inevitable collapse of the southern hemisphere.
Reports are the Kitshoff and Peter Steph Du Toit will stay in South Africa. These are world class players that would walk into any team in Europe. I am sure that the South African's aren't paying these two peanuts.
If Super Rugby Collapses the Australia clubs are Fooked. New Zealand clubs are in trouble too. I guess that the South Africans would do a deal and either have the Lions, Sharks, Stormers and Bulls join the Pro 14 in bulk or have a domestic competition that provides qualification to the European Champions Cup.
I don't think that the Southern Hemisphere teams will collapse, the players will still be there. It will more like South America and Europe in Soccer. The players will still play for their nations but will play for European Clubs. In a way it could even help the South Nations National teams whilst hurting the 6 nations national teams as their players will be squeezed out by the Southern Nation Players.
I just don't think we would produce the same quality of player without a domestic competition. The difference with Soccer is that they still have domestic competitions and, for example, the Copa Libertadores. They still have proving grounds, so to speak. With no domestic competition at all, beyond amateur stuff? can't see it.
Bit negative there.
We're told all the time how superior SH rugby is to NH rugby and the world cup is used as an example to highlight it.
If South Africa jump north en masse, I'd expect a phone call to Andrew Forrest would be made immediately by Rugby Australia and the NZRU.
I’m not convinced about the world league and one could achieve most of what is wanted by a number of much smaller steps;
1) an insistence/rule that all T1 teams have to have at least one (or 2) tests per year against a T2 team.
2) use the euro challenge cup as a way to blend Strong clubs from established nations playing against T2 international sides. So you could end up with Germany Georgia Spain Romania USA etc all having players playing against strong pro teams across Europe. Gives them more regular top tier competition and then for the games against other international sides (point 1 above) you supplement the teams with a smattering or players playing overseas.
3) reinstate the sunwolves
4) have Fiji Tonga Samoa competing in Mitre10, based out of Auckland mainly but with 1-2 games played in their home countries. The immigrant population in NZ would have interest and again gets the players playing regularly together, with added overseas players for the tests.
If one just wants to make money it may not be the best option but it provides tier 2 nations a chance to compete against players from tier 1 nations in competitive games.
Yes they are.
Its one of the test windows in the WR Regs; the European Clubs and PRL agreed to this.
Agree with all apart from number 3.
Separate names with a comma.