Rugby breakaway league coming. (R360)

[Which Tyler]

Got a discussion over here as well

English rugby plots revolutionary changes to expand new ‘franchise-style’ Premiership

Don't know if I can stomach 90mins of Haskell, what's the wake-up call? Not being able to pick Willis and having to slum it out with Curry, Curry, Earl, Underhill, Pollock and Pepper? Or losing Farrell and allowing the two Smiths to come through? Haskell's not in it but the new bloke running...

www.therugbyforum.com

Its being put up on every thread s/he can thinks of.
They really, really want us to be talking about it

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

I suspect it won’t happen but stuff like this does need to be taken seriously and we’ve already seen that players can be tempted by short term contracts and big pay cheques. If this dies other ideas will be along.

The sporting landscape has changed massively. Just in the last few weeks Grand Slam Track has started, paying runners way more than they’ve ever received before for a short season. Hopefully that falls flat on its arse although I purely say that as a field event fan who doesn’t want to see the sport fragmented.

Very different dynamics for a team sport with traditional fan base obviously. But rugby needs change.

And I wouldn’t dismiss Tindall quite so easily. Wouldn’t have him as Ops Director, but like it or not his Royal connections have rich people around him like bees in a honey pot. As a front man he might be pretty much perfect.

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

Why does it need to be taken seriously?
Rugby doesn't need to change, it needs do what it's doing with more common sense
It's not F1, it's not golf, it's not Grand slam track. Sports teams need a community that will out last players to work.

Name me one other successful team sport that has this sort of style in place?
Others have been along and others have already failed.

The sport does not need this crap it needs people to work together not try and pull it apart.

If it happens all it would lead to is empty large soulless stadiums that will be terrible to watch with a dead atmosphere and lead to no one wanting to watch it.

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

I don’t like the idea but it needs to be taken seriously as something like that could disrupt the established landscape. And pro rugby in this country one way or another has been a bit of a sh*tshow for most of its existence - just getting our own house in order has been impossible, so some form of change is necessary. Whether that can be evolution or needs to be revolution remains to be seen.

Apart from raising the funding there are all kinds of contractual and player welfare reasons why it might not take off. But if it did I don’t think it would attract the Itojes of this world, but it might the next tier down.

But one thing that is clear across all sports is that players are keener than ever to monetise their talents. If they can be paid the equivalent of their club salary or more for a few weeks work, a lot will take it. Don’t think anyone would bat an eye at a short term contract or a franchise now. Cricket’s the obvious team sport where everything’s been turned on its head by money (driven mainly by a fanatical Indian fan base) - you seldom see the top stars in the traditional county championship now and bar the Ashes and a couple of others test cricket is dead….the landscape is full of forgotten tomorrow ODIs and T20.

I kind of agree with you that I’d like to see a version of what we have well run. But stuff like this is a threat and someday someone will try it properly, whether it’s this current idea or not. We don’t want to be Kodak in a digital world.

 

[Reiser99]

Financially it doesn't make sense. There are far more profitable markets (is rugby even a profitable market?) To try and buy into.

From a logistics view it doesn't make much sense either as you will have almost zero infrastructure for the new teams.

The only logic is for a country to pour money in to sport wash their image, but again is rugby really the sport to do it. I suppose it might give the Toffs in charge another excuse to jet around the world and make deals in private.

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

But IPL is completely different to what is being proposed.
From what I gather the top 14 spend more money than the IPL.

IPL would be more similar to if the Top 14 just decided to not give a **** about their French numbers and it became open season for everyone.

 

[McTallshort]

Good luck trying to get the French to sign up

 

[Crash Hamster]

Hmm, not convinced (and if I were convinced, it'd not be a crisis.)

300 players worldwide isn't actually very many. 300 players divided by 15 positions is 20 per position. Let's say the top 10 countries lose players. That would average out at two players per position per country.

Let's be generous and say England lose three hookers; maybe Langdon, Cowan-Dickie and George.

Still leaves Oghre, Dan, Frost, Singleton, Blake, Walker, Capon, Riley, Barbeary (sorry...), there's not a huge drop off in quality.

What about Tuipolutu? He's obviously going to be very good, but is he currently in the top 20 worldwide? Nope.

Now try the same exercise with back rowers? Made much difference to teh Prem or England team? Nope...

 

[Rugbyfan564]

Why are people putting any thought about this?

Every year someone with some money behind them says the same ****

No top player will join such a risk. I mean do they even have money to compete with the French league?

Just a load of crap by people who no nothing about creating a competition

Because current lions players have already agreed and signed a contract? The most famous women player has apaprnrrly signed up and is being used to promote it.

 

[Rugbyfan564]

Good luck trying to get the French to sign up

Most of them don’t earn 1 million or even there.

 

[Rugbyfan564]

I don't like the idea but it needs to be taken seriously as something like that could disrupt the established landscape. And pro rugby in this country one way or another has been a bit of a sh*tshow for most of its existence - just getting our own house in order has been impossible, so some form of change is necessary. Whether that can be evolution or needs to be revolution remains to be seen.

Apart from raising the funding there are all kinds of contractual and player welfare reasons why it might not take off. But if it did I don't think it would attract the Itojes of this world, but it might the next tier down.

But one thing that is clear across all sports is that players are keener than ever to monetise their talents. If they can be paid the equivalent of their club salary or more for a few weeks work, a lot will take it. Don't think anyone would bat an eye at a short term contract or a franchise now. Cricket's the obvious team sport where everything's been turned on its head by money (driven mainly by a fanatical Indian fan base) - you seldom see the top stars in the traditional county championship now and bar the Ashes and a couple of others test cricket is dead….the landscape is full of forgotten tomorrow ODIs and T20.

I kind of agree with you that I'd like to see a version of what we have well run. But stuff like this is a threat and someday someone will try it properly, whether it's this current idea or not. We don't want to be Kodak in a digital world.

Grand slam track has already had to make cutbacks because it’s losing money. Going from 3 nights to 2 because attendances were pretty bad despite being held in tiny stadiums (I haven’t caught up with last weekend’s through so maybe it got better)

I agree with how a lot of people seem too relaxed about it. Allegedly people in World Rugby think the Premeriship in particular are very in denial at what could be a fatal blow to it and domestic professional rugby in England.

 

[Rugbyfan564]

Why does it need to be taken seriously?
Rugby doesn't need to change, it needs do what it's doing with more common sense
It's not F1, it's not golf, it's not Grand slam track. Sports teams need a community that will out last players to work.

Name me one other successful team sport that has this sort of style in place?
Others have been along and others have already failed.

The sport does not need this crap it needs people to work together not try and pull it apart.

If it happens all it would lead to is empty large soulless stadiums that will be terrible to watch with a dead atmosphere and lead to no one wanting to watch it.

Because if 100 top players join the rest have to play weakened games which will also lose interest. The RFU won’t get the income it does if those going on the Argentina tour as fringe players ar4 suddenly starting the Six Narions because 20 top Engloah players have switched and been banned by the RFU

 

[TRF_Olyy]

The most famous women player has apaprnrrly signed up and is being used to promote it.

She also heavily promotes 7s, which is on it's arse

Because if 100 top players join

Monumentally sized "if", there

 

[Rugbyfan564]

Hmm, not convinced (and if I were convinced, it'd not be a crisis.)

300 players worldwide isn't actually very many. 300 players divided by 15 positions is 20 per position. Let's say the top 10 countries lose players. That would average out at two players per position per country.

Let's be generous and say England lose three hookers; maybe Langdon, Cowan-Dickie and George.

Still leaves Oghre, Dan, Frost, Singleton, Blake, Walker, Capon, Riley, Barbeary (sorry...), there's not a huge drop off in quality.

What about Tuipolutu? He's obviously going to be very good, but is he currently in the top 20 worldwide? Nope.

Now try the same exercise with back rowers? Made much difference to teh Prem or England team? Nope...

It is still a fatal blow to both the Premeirship and international rugby. A lot of people won’t watch England games if they know most of the players could be replaced by better players who are banned because of the RFU’s own rules. The breakaway are banking on this being so damaging to the RFU they have to lift their ban just to financially be able to survive as without those players the ticket sales, broadcast rights and sponsorship income is too low for the RFU to function.

 

[Ddanno]

 

[WCRugger]

Hmm, not convinced (and if I were convinced, it'd not be a crisis.)

300 players worldwide isn't actually very many. 300 players divided by 15 positions is 20 per position. Let's say the top 10 countries lose players. That would average out at two players per position per country.

Let's be generous and say England lose three hookers; maybe Langdon, Cowan-Dickie and George.

Still leaves Oghre, Dan, Frost, Singleton, Blake, Walker, Capon, Riley, Barbeary (sorry...), there's not a huge drop off in quality.

What about Tuipolutu? He's obviously going to be very good, but is he currently in the top 20 worldwide? Nope.

Now try the same exercise with back rowers? Made much difference to teh Prem or England team? Nope...

And if the 300 number includes the 4 womens teams then it's not 300 players. More like 200. And when you consider that if you just count the URC, SRP, Premiership and Top 14 alone there's between 1500-1700 full time pros. Include the JRL1 and Pro D2 that jumps by 600 or so.

 

[WCRugger]

It is still a fatal blow to both the Premeirship and international rugby. A lot of people won't watch England games if they know most of the players could be replaced by better players who are banned because of the RFU's own rules. The breakaway are banking on this being so damaging to the RFU they have to lift their ban just to financially be able to survive as without those players the ticket sales, broadcast rights and sponsorship income is too low for the RFU to function.

It depends on whether or not it gets sanctioning.

 

[Rugbyfan564]

It depends on whether or not it gets sanctioning.

It will be approved by World Rugby the articles do say that. They just think it will go bust. The biggest damage will be to international rugby. The breakaway are surely correct in thinking that if half of England’s six nations squad joins the interest in international rugby will collapse and the RFU will have to select breakaway players or face being unable to fund the international programme.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

It will be approved by World Rugby the articles do say that. They just think it will go bust. The biggest damage will be to international rugby. The breakaway are surely correct in thinking that if half of England's six nations squad joins the interest in international rugby will collapse and the RFU will have to select breakaway players or face being unable to fund the international programme.

Why do you blindly believe that everything they claim will 100% happen and 100% be successful?

 

[Rugbyfan564]

Why do you blindly believe that everything they claim will 100% happen and 100% be successful?

It just feels like it will happen. I just can’t believe Mike Tindall would put his family in a difficult position because of their royal roles within Rugby for something that might bomb hard.