simonokeeffe wrote:Summary of what the Northampton chairman said
when we last won the HC the Welsh, Scottish and Italian talent was spread across 8, 3 and 10 sides not 4,2 and 2 as it is now
The English league is better because its English
Irish players arent injured all the time because their clubs dont flog them til they drop
The pro12 is all regional teams which is like so unfair and stuff
We cant get our own way whenever we want it
Axel Foley
No regions were formed from clubs on the basis of HC spots
Celtic league players (Cardiff excluded) dont want to win places in HC team, national teams, earn contracts, have no pride, theres no domestic rivalries and no grudge matches
the hypocrite coup de grace "A successful England team is dependent on having a competitive and strong club base, which develops and cares for top class players throughout the season."
Ha ah, hilarious
He also said I like money
"That was shiterarse coaches need to look at themselves this is as bad at is.beem with school. Items impeovrnkyb neefedc"
TerenureJim wrote:
The more I think about it the more I think we as fans need to start getting vocal with banners/protests etc. to get coverage and demand that our sport is kept out of the hands of a few privilaged individuals who have bought into the game and now want to exploit it. We need to stand up to this like we stood up for Connacht when the IRFU were thinking of disbanding it.
I'm quite happy to lead a chrous of " You can still your Anglo-French cup up your arse" at Franklins Gardens in December!
That'll go down well. Judging by many comments on their forum they are rabidly in agreement that the ERC should be killed and a new league ala the(ir) Champions league started.
In fairness Donny is the man for the job, if there is abuse to be hurled.
IanD wrote: I cant help but feel that the RFU are giving McCafferty and co enough rope to hang themselves - no evidence to support this just a theory.
Unfortunately you are crediting the RFU with far more foresight than they have ever demonstrated. We can but hope though.
They wouldn't be too disappointed with no European competition next season though as it would provide a great opportunity to get the international players in for more World Cup preparation training camps in the windows when European rugby would have been played. It would certainly be in their interest in a number of ways to let this run a while longer and let the clubs dig themselves in deeper.
"You can’t defend like the boss one week and the cookie man the next".
Maybe I missed mutterings from the RFU coming through but someone quotes the Guardian rugby e-mail stating:
It is hard to see, at this stage, with attempts at mediation looking doomed to failure, how there can be a solution without the winding up of ERC. The RFU is exploring if there is a possibility of a 50-50 split on control of the organising body and sharing the television deal – BT having the rights in England and Sky elsewhere – but the clubs feel that compromising their demands in the last two accords has brought them to this position. http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2013/s ... d-injuries
I can't see Sky buying that for their largest market.
A few contributors on the Guardian website linking the actions of the English/French clubs to close down the ERC so that all contracts would be then gone. Highlighting the Celtic Unions lack of reference to the ERC as an opening.
So ERC goes and something set up in its place. More or less ERC with a different name. Workable compromise somehow on the structure/power/money of the European game between all parties.
The time it takes for all the above to happen kills the sport everywhere outside of the Top14. Everyone becomes a feeder to the French Clubs.
Scrum 5 wrote:Maybe I missed mutterings from the RFU coming through but someone quotes the Guardian rugby e-mail stating:
It is hard to see, at this stage, with attempts at mediation looking doomed to failure, how there can be a solution without the winding up of ERC. The RFU is exploring if there is a possibility of a 50-50 split on control of the organising body and sharing the television deal – BT having the rights in England and Sky elsewhere – but the clubs feel that compromising their demands in the last two accords has brought them to this position. http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2013/s ... d-injuries
I can't see Sky buying that for their largest market.
I don't see anyone buying it. A 50-50 split? 50% to England and 50% to be split amongst the rest of us? Mebollix. They'll get 16.667% same as everybody else.
Scrum 5 wrote:A few contributors on the Guardian website linking the actions of the English/French clubs to close down the ERC so that all contracts would be then gone. Highlighting the Celtic Unions lack of reference to the ERC as an opening.
So ERC goes and something set up in its place. More or less ERC with a different name. Workable compromise somehow on the structure/power/money of the European game between all parties.
The time it takes for all the above to happen kills the sport everywhere outside of the Top14. Everyone becomes a feeder to the French Clubs.
Hopefully good sense prevails and soon.
The ERC is going nowhere, the PRL aren't even shareholders and can take no action to shut it down, and will be running the european rugby competitions for the foreseeable future. I said it earlier and I'll say it again, its sad that they have become so used to the ignorance dripping from their masters lips that they don't actually recognise magnaminity, in the form of not pointing out this out to them, when they see it
The ERC has 13 Directors.
The LNR have one rep (René Bouscatel) and the PRL another (Peter Wheeler).
The other 11 Directors (including Lux as Chairman) are either Union members, or cannot vote against their Union (RRW rep Stuart Gallacher)
The Heineken Cup and Amlin Challenge Cup tournaments are owned and run by ERC, a company set up by the six main European unions which is recognised by the IRB as the organiser of the pre-eminent cross-border club competitions in Northern hemisphere rugby.
ERC is run by an executive based in Dublin with a mandate from the company's Board which is made up of club and union representatives from England, France, Ireland, Italy, Wales and Scotland.
I don't understand therefore how the ERC will be forced to "wind itself down" because 1 of those Directors was party to setting up an illegal contract with BT while also being party to the renewal of a contract with SKY.
Seems far more likely to me that Peter Wheeler is in a dodgy legal position and could well be sued, after being fired 1st of course.
The ERC are the unions, they are one and the same. The ERC is essentially the name they give themselves when arranging cross border European competitions.
The PRL want control from the unions. The Unions give up control, European Rugby dies, it's that simple. The RFU need to stand up to the PRL, let their bankrupt, failing teams drop one by one, then bail them out as they fall. Essentially buying back control of their own game.
Last edited by Jackie Brown on September 26th, 2013, 11:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.
mikerob wrote:Posted elsewhere. As the writer says, this will all be totally hypothetical, but hypothetically speaking, if there is a grain of truth in this, it would explain a lot.
"A few random musings:
Obviously in this litigious society no one should make statements in relation to other peoples private dealings without having proof. Therefore all we can do is make Hypothetical assumptions about what may be going on. Let's pretend an imagined employee of a national rugby union had seen a copy of the BT deal. He could then give hypothetical explanations to the following recent occurrences.
1) Why the PRL have been so vocal about trying to push their new European league on the rest of us and increasingly so as the deadline draws near.
2) Why the RFU have been so quiet about the whole matter.
3) The French clubs interest over an extended T14.
4) LNR representatives making references to “Contracts being signed” and “having to help the English from the mess they have created”.
5) And most importantly why no one has been shown a copy of the BT agreement except the RFU.
This imagined employee might say that the BT deal "Allegedly" states that:
1) The European pot is highly dependent on the number of tier 1 nation clubs taking part. Less than four nations and only travel costs for each team are paid. Only four and 50% is paid, 5 nation’s means 75% and all 6 are needed for the full 100%.
2) The European pot is for a “NEW” European cup of which the PRL, LNR and BT are the majority shareholders and control 60% of the vote,
3) The amount paid for the premier league is also highly dependent on the formation of a new PRL/LNR European Cup. The figure paid this year consists of a significant % of a “Signing on bonus” this applies to the first year only. For each successive year, a similar bonus exists dependent on the PRL having provided BT with a new European Cup. This is also graded according to the number of Tier 1 nations clubs involved, identical to the conditions above. Zero for less than 4, 75% for 5 etc. If PRL are not able to provide a new European Cup their league payments drop to a lower figure than the previous SKY deal.
4) The BT deal applies to all home games in England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland. The percentages offered to Scotland, Wales and Ireland as stated by PRL are correct. They however receive around 50% of the total pot and France receives the remainder. How can this be true? Why is the LNR share smaller than now and Italy have none.
5) The LNR have been offered a share of the pot equal to that of Wales, Scotland and Ireland but have also been given the right to negotiate their own TV deal of which PRL will receive, an equal percentage as the LNR receive from the BT deal. To legitimise this based on TV markets, the Italians are allowed (have to) negotiate their own TV deal.
What would this all mean? Yes the other nations would all make more money than they are now. The PRL clubs will however make substantially more money than the Celts. 50% of BT deal plus 11% of LNR deal compared to just 11% of the BT deal for the Celts. The French stand to make even more from a new deal due to the competition between Canal and a new competitor.
However if a new European Cup does not come about the PRL will receive no European money, even for a French/English league. They will also lose their bonus league payments leaving them worse off financially than they are now. By signing the deal they excluded themselves from taking part in any ERC competition, hence it’s all or nothing for them. The LNR have signed a contract for a new European CUP but it is also conditional on having four Tier one nation members before coming into affect. This provides them with the guarantees but it also means they are not prohibited from re-entering the ERC.
This would explain why the RFU are the only ones who have been shown the Deal, and why they have refused to come out against the clubs. Despite not being in favour of the PRL’s actions they now have no choice but to allow a new European Cup or else most of the premier clubs will be bankrupt in time for the World Cup.
Just as well this is all Hypothetical "
If that is more than just hypothetical, A huge amount of PRL clubs could be in serious trouble. Maybe we should start buttering up Leicester, Exeter, Quinns and whichever other club is currently operating in profit.
The sport that unites Catholic, Protestant and dissenter has had its day of days. Pity anybody who can't enjoy it. Some day.
Maybe, just maybe. This is what the RFU are up to.
Knowing that the BT contract is a lot less lucrative(and I mean the premiership part of it, even less than the previous one with SKY), if the PRL don't deliver a euro cup. The RFU know that a lot of these clubs just wont be viable very quickly. The RFU will have to come to the rescue of the clubs, but at a price. The RFU regain the upper hand over the clubs.
You know I'm going to lose,
And gambling's for fools,
But that's the way I like it baby, I don't want to live FOREVER!
blockhead wrote:Maybe, just maybe. This is what the RFU are up to.
Knowing that the BT contract is a lot less lucrative(and I mean the premiership part of it, even less than the previous one with SKY), if the PRL don't deliver a euro cup. The RFU know that a lot of these clubs just wont be viable very quickly. The RFU will have to come to the rescue of the clubs, but at a price. The RFU regain the upper hand over the clubs.
BT are barely delivering premiership rugby. The direction is poor although you might put that down to teething but it's obvious they are pandering to the soccer constituency in the main ans select rugby teams. if you are a tigers, quins or Sarries supporter - then you get to see your team every week (badly).
"That was shiterarse coaches need to look at themselves this is as bad at is.beem with school. Items impeovrnkyb neefedc"
The RFU's number one concern is delivering a successful RWC for 2015. I'm sure all the nuts and bolts of the tournament will be very well organised, but they also want to ensure the England team performs on the pitch and is in contention come the sharp end of the competition. Blazers being blazers the world over, a lot of the RFU won't agree with the PRL position, but they will be terrified that cracking down on the clubs will negatively impact England's chances in 2015.
The Saints chairman said "A successful England team is dependent on having a competitive and strong club base, which develops and cares for top class players throughout the season." but the short version is "support us RFU, or we'll feck you over"
LeinsterDude wrote:I don't understand therefore how the ERC will be forced to "wind itself down" because 1 of those Directors was party to setting up an illegal contract with BT while also being party to the renewal of a contract with SKY.
Seems far more likely to me that Peter Wheeler is in a dodgy legal position and could well be sued, after being fired 1st of course.
It's an Irish registered company and if Wheeler as a director of ERC was part of the board meeting that approved the Sky extension, and at the same time knew and had an interest in the competing contract with BT then yes he could be in a very actionable position as regards not declaring the interest with BT and also that he presumably knew PRL were actively working to the detriment of the ERC and as such you could argue that he has acted against the best interests of the shareholders of the ERC which is a serious no no in an Irish legal context.
TerenureJim wrote:a serious no no in an Irish legal context.
Given how often it's acted upon (have a quick, depressing browse of the cases on the ODCE's website), it probably can't be considered that serious. I assume it's far more likely that it would be a civil case, and that would be quite tricky to prove, etc.
Also (not aimed @ you TJ), there's lots of mention of the BT contract being illegal. Is that not a bit harsh (and libellous) given that nobody knows the terms of the deal. Selling rights to a yet-to-be-established competition is fine. I assume BT didn't just throw cash at PRL without lots, and lots of very specific clauses. After all, the ERC sold rights to the a yet-to-be-agreed competition.
"You'd better watch who you're calling a child, Lois. Because if I'm a child, you know what that makes you? A paedophile. And I'll be damned if I'm gonna be lectured by a pervert"
While we have now long established that the supposed lack of competitiveness in the Rabo is not the reason for this dispute - PRL certainly started out with this being a gripe - there are enough people in England who still use this to beat the Pro12 with. This being, the IRFU resting players at the beginning of the season, making them fresh for the Heineken Cup and the 6 Nations. And, for years before, British journalists like Paul Rees and Robert Kitson did too. SKY tiptoed around it, but ultimately the Heineken Cup was worth too much for any sort of a major dispute with them.
At the same time, journalists were worried about the increased work-load and lack of rest time. But then they would criticise the IRFU. Then complain about too many injuries. Then back to the IRFU and so forth.
Manu Tuilagi and Brad Barritt are ruled out of the autumn internationals and burn-out is an issue after a Lions summer
Well, well, well.
Their injuries raise the issue of whether the balance between rest and training/playing is set correctly in professional rugby in England and France. What has been overlooked in what has become a strident dispute over the future of the Heineken Cup is the demands on the players: a side-effect of the changes wanted by Premiership Rugby and the Top 14 would be a lengthening of the season for international players in Ireland and Wales in particular.
Some of the Lions based in France were playing league rugby in August, less than six weeks after arriving back from the tour to Australia. Just as concussion protocols have come to be loosely interpreted, so the various conferences over player welfare have delivered far more in words and statements of intent than they have in meaningful action.
McCafferty wrote:"All we are looking to do is maximise the value of European club rugby, not take over the game. We would work with the unions, ensuring everything fitted in around the international calendar, but we will no longer work for them. It will happen sooner or later and no one wants this to end up in court."
To me that's a shot accross the bow of the RFU, IRB and international rugby in general. If you let this guy get what he wants the long term goal he'll achieve is the replacement of international rugby by a number of elite franchises privately owned and backed by sugar daddies with huge squads hoovering up players from accross the globe.
McCafferty wrote:"All we are looking to do is maximise the value of European club rugby, not take over the game. We would work with the unions, ensuring everything fitted in around the international calendar, but we will no longer work for them. It will happen sooner or later and no one wants this to end up in court."
To me that's a shot accross the bow of the RFU, IRB and international rugby in general. If you let this guy get what he wants the long term goal he'll achieve is the replacement of international rugby by a number of elite franchises privately owned and backed by sugar daddies with huge squads hoovering up players from accross the globe.
The arrogance of this name knows no bounds.
When are the RFU going to man up and actually comment on this farce ?. As you point out this champions cup is the tip of the iceberg these jokers have far bigger plans and it will to detriment of everyone bar their little elite group of super rich clubs.
What must the people who run the grass roots of English rugby or the fans of smaller clubs and the English national team think about this?
If they don't act and act now they will soon find they have lost all control of the professional game in England and their national team will be going down the pan.
