Guinness Pro12 2015/2016 Season thread

galwaylad14

The biggest problem I think is that the top teams haven't their best players available often enough. Would make it a more attractive proposition if the big international players that we all know were playing in most of the games now. As it is now I'd say there's some guys like Murray and Sexton that aren't playing 5 games a season in the pro 12.

irishbucsfan

Deleted User wrote: »

But you've actually not outlined a single decision that objectively would be made differently by anyone else. Which is the most important part of the entire argument!


You are asserting that a different decision maker would make a different decision about something.
And that something would be important enough to improve the pitiful valuation of the league.
What is the something?
What is the decision that they would make instead of what has been made?
Why is that decision not being made by the current administration?

These are straightforward questions that would instantly help your case if there were answers available.

These aren't straightforward questions because without working for the organisation there's absolutely no way of knowing. I don't know what decisions are made on smaller issues. I've been told we're very restrictive on scheduling for example. I've listed 5 areas above where I've been told we are much more restrictive and I have heard on numerous occasions from people involved that this it's down to leadership (most recently from Welsh club employees in the Millennium Stadium).

Andrew Hore voiced similar concerns just last week:
"The key thing is, what is it our supporters and TV companies want that would make a different and valuable proposition, uniquely different from the Premiership and Top 14? We have to create a product around them instead of stagnating and staying with tradition. Don’t fall into the usual Celtic rugby political rubbish. People realise the Six Nations on its own is not going to solve these problems."

And it's guys like him (although now departed) and the likes of Mick Dawson who are both adequately motivated and adequately equipped to even up the odds. As long as our league is run as an afterthought to the 6 Nations and the Lions we will suffer.

shuffol

Look what a change of leadership did to darts, they didn't fundamentally change things just marketed it better.

I say better music and scantily dressed dames when the teams walk on, lads might be a bit tentative in the first couple of rucks though.

thomond2006

thomond2006 wrote: »

What if John Hayes runs the league?

• Tries scored by props would be awarded 6 points instead of 5.
  
• Only props are allowed take drop goals.
  
• If your team has a player who is named after a breed of cow you start with 5 points.

irishbucsfan

irishbucsfan wrote: »

These aren't straightforward questions because without working for the organisation there's absolutely no way of knowing. I don't know what decisions are made on smaller issues. I've been told we're very restrictive on scheduling for example. I've listed 5 areas above where I've been told we are much more restrictive and I have heard on numerous occasions from people involved that this it's down to leadership (most recently from Welsh club employees in the Millennium Stadium).

You appear significantly less confident than when you asserted that the leadership issue is the most important issue. And that a change of leadership was indeed needed.

Any chance of any information on the Chinese Whispers?

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Andrew Hore voiced similar concerns just last week:
"The key thing is, what is it our supporters and TV companies want that would make a different and valuable proposition, uniquely different from the Premiership and Top 14? We have to create a product around them instead of stagnating and staying with tradition. Don’t fall into the usual Celtic rugby political rubbish. People realise the Six Nations on its own is not going to solve these problems."

And it's guys like him (although now departed) and the likes of Mick Dawson who are both adequately motivated and adequately equipped to even up the odds. As long as our league is run as an afterthought to the 6 Nations and the Lions we will suffer.

If there are decisions that someone else would make that would have lead to a better outcome than those that were made, let's talk about those decisions.

It would be useful (to say the least) show that at least one of these decisions exist.
The next step would be to explain why there is a conflict of interest that prevented the current administration from making that decision.

If you can do both of these things about even just one single decision, then you might have a case. Otherwise, it's just hurling from the ditch without anything to base it on. This is simple enough logic.

irishbucsfan

Deleted User wrote: »

You appear significantly less confident than when you asserted that the leadership issue is the most important issue. And that a change of leadership was indeed needed.

Any chance of any information on the Chinese Whispers?


If there are decisions that someone else would make that would have lead to a better outcome than those that were made, let's talk about those decisions.

It would be useful (to say the least) show that at least one of these decisions exist.
The next step would be to explain why there is a conflict of interest that prevented the current administration from making that decision.

If you can do both of these things about even just one single decision, then you might have a case. Otherwise, it's just hurling from the ditch without anything to base it on. This is simple enough logic.

What more information do you want exactly? I've listed 5 of the sorts of areas where we're uncompetitive. They don't suit you for some reason.

Any chance you can point out why the Top14 might be worth 30 times more than the Pro 12?

irishbucsfan

irishbucsfan wrote: »

What more information do you want exactly? I've listed 5 of the sorts of areas where we're uncompetitive. They don't suit you for some reason.

You could point out 200 areas without giving a single tangible example of a single decision that was made which backs up your assertion (that the current administration are the most important issue) and it would be worth just as much.

Nobody is saying that conflicts don't occur. However, it would be extremely useful for your point to offer a single example of a conflict that prevented 'the correct decision' being made by the current administration.

It would be necessary to present a single decision that was made that could arguably be not 'the correct decision' in order to do so.

Until then, we are without a single piece of evidence that supports your assertion that the biggest issue facing the league is its administration beyond your assertion!

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Any chance you can point out why the Top14 might be worth 30 times more than the Pro 12?

BEIN & Canal+ rights war for a long established league with a far larger regular audience drove prices up further than they ought to be.
Even without the price war the price would be significantly higher because of the significant differences in audience numbers.

None of this is surprising or can be changed by an administration change in the Pro12, unless you believe that an administration change of the Pro12 can cause population interests and numbers to explode in the countries that take part.

Teferi

On behalf of the rest of the forum I would just like to say: Please no. Please.

irishbucsfan

Deleted User wrote: »

You could point out 200 areas without giving a single tangible example of a single decision that was made which backs up your assertion (that the current administration are the most important issue) and it would be worth just as much.

Nobody is saying that conflicts don't occur. However, it would be extremely useful for your point to offer a single example of a conflict that prevented 'the correct decision' being made by the current administration.

It would be necessary to present a single decision that was made that could arguably be not 'the correct decision' in order to do so.

Until then, we are without a single piece of evidence that supports your assertion that the biggest issue facing the league is its administration beyond your assertion!

I think you're getting pretty hung up on this single example. Obviously a direct example of something which is so obscure and done behind closed doors is not going to be available.

Deleted User wrote: »

BEIN & Canal+ rights war for a long established league with a far larger regular audience drove prices up further than they ought to be.
Even without the price war the price would be significantly higher because of the significant differences in audience numbers.

None of this is surprising or can be changed by an administration change in the Pro12, unless you believe that an administration change of the Pro12 can cause population interests and numbers to explode in the countries that take part.

How significant is the difference in audience numbers? I'm pretty sure it's a maginal difference (I think Fanning pointed that out before). What are they doing about the difference in audience numbers?

The only reason there's a rights war over rugby is because it's an attractive product. Ours is not.

The problem isn't the teams, or the fans. Demographics are nowhere near that dissimilar (population is vastly different but rugby watching population is actually quite competitive for club rugby, not as much as international rugby which has a much wider draw).

Do you just think this is something that we can't fix?

thomond2006

Teferi wrote: »

On behalf of the rest of the forum I would just like to say: Please no. Please.

I bring up a relevant suggestion like handing the reins to John Hayes and it gets swallowed up in this muck. I mean, purrrrrlease.

jacothelad

thomond2006 wrote: »

I bring up a relevant suggestion like handing the reins to John Hayes and it gets swallowed up in this muck. I mean, purrrrrlease.

Who would run the pyjama factory in his absence?:D:D

thomond2006

jacothelad wrote: »

Who would run the pyjama factory in his absence?:D:D

You would be perfect, but who would run the Mike Gibson pyjama factory in your absence?

irishbucsfan

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I think you're getting pretty hung up on this single example. Obviously a direct example of something which is so obscure and done behind closed doors is not going to be available.

So how on earth you can assert that it's incredibly important to change the administration of the league in order to ensure any of the situations happening that you suggest might be happening is beyond logic. It is a belief only, nothing tangible available.

irishbucsfan wrote: »

How significant is the difference in audience numbers? I'm pretty sure it's a maginal difference (I think Fanning pointed that out before). What are they doing about the difference in audience numbers?

The only reason there's a rights war over rugby is because it's an attractive product. Ours is not.

The problem isn't the teams, or the fans. Demographics are nowhere near that dissimilar (population is vastly different but rugby watching population is actually quite competitive for club rugby, not as much as international rugby which has a much wider draw).

Do you just think this is something that we can't fix?

No. But the bits that make the T14 obviously more valuable are not things that an administration change can have any effect towards catching up.

Or would you like to offer anything contrary to that? What can the administration of the league do to make it more valuable?

Convince the 59m people in Italy to prefer rugby (Fanning's analysis included these)? Convince the masses of Scottish rugby that have no tie to Edinburgh or Glasgow rugby to get into it and start to pay into it? Or the disenfranchised Welsh? Get each club to partner with an Aviva Premiership team so that the huge rugby audience in England also begins to watch the league? Go on envoy missions to Kuwait and UAE to get the Sheiks interested in the sport?

Very impressive if anything that the people who are in charge of setting fixtures, picking referees, ensuring these rules are followed and organising the sale of sporting rights are able to do anything like that!

irishbucsfan

Deleted User wrote: »

So how on earth you can assert that it's incredibly important to change the administration of the league in order to ensure any of the situations happening that you suggest might be happening is beyond logic. It is a belief only, nothing tangible available.

You're absolutely right. It's a belief. What else were you expecting?

It's absolutely not beyond logic. I have attempted to spell the logic out for you as simply as possible. Do you just completely not accept the value of objectivism?

Deleted User wrote: »

No. But the bits that make the T14 obviously more valuable are not things that an administration change can have any effect towards catching up.

Which are what exactly? Are you going to claim the population of France as being one of these 'bits' while the population of Italy is not? Because the only relevant population of France and England are the people who tune in to watch club rugby on television, that's the only difference that matters demographically, and those numbers are entirely within reach of the Pro 12.

Is the difference between the Top 14 and the Pro 12 obviously a mulitplier of 30-70?

irishbucsfan

irishbucsfan wrote: »

You're absolutely right. It's a belief. What else were you expecting?

Any basis whatsoever for the belief.
It's a discussion forum, you presented a belief without any basis. I've asked multiple times for the basis of the belief.

irishbucsfan wrote: »

It's absolutely not beyond logic. I have attempted to spell the logic out for you as simply as possible. Do you just completely not accept the value of objectivism?

Not in the slightest. I'm very happy to discuss the lack of objectivity of any of the decisions made by any of the current administration. (Reality)
If indeed there are any instances whatsoever of this.

People who have conflicts of interest are able to make objective decisions you know? By controlling for their bias etc. An acting fiduciary looking after a parent's wellbeing a fine example.
If you want to offer us any examples of the current administration not objectively making decisions, I'm all ears. Until then, it's simple mud slinging with no basis.

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Which are what exactly? Are you going to claim the population of France as being one of these 'bits' while the population of Italy is not? Because the only relevant population of France and England are the people who tune in to watch club rugby on television, that's the only difference that matters demographically, and those numbers are entirely within reach of the Pro 12.

And how do we get them? Please don't answer with "we get a different administration that solves the problem". That is not an answer!

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Is the difference between the Top 14 and the Pro 12 obviously a mulitplier of 30-70?

Nope, not in the slightest. Are their obvious differences that mean that the T14 will almost certainly have a competitive advantage when it comes to sports rights vs the Pro12 (which is what I did say), and so no amount of administrative effort will fully bridge that gap?

Synode

Do you two do any work at all!

Synode

Synode wrote: »

Do you two do any work at all!

Next pay review in a little over 11 months.

irishbucsfan

Deleted User wrote: »

Any basis whatsoever for the belief.

Let's stop here now for a second.

Do you think you might be able to suggest what my basis for this belief might be? I've actually pointed it out repeatedly, it won't be hard to figure out.

And then moving on,

If the "obvious" differences that account for a 30-75 times multiplier are no in the demographics, what exactly are these? I'm afraid I can't see any obvious difference that means you should be giving the people who have failed to achieve a similar deal for the Pro 12 such an easy pass.

errlloyd

There are really two sides to the current structure.

At the moment pro12 is run by the same people who run the 6n and the Lions.

Benefits

• They have existing relationships with sponsors
• They have existing relationships with broadcasters
• They have at least some experience running a competition
• It gives referees an incentive as it is a very clear path to international reffing.

Negatives

1. Their primary focus may not be the pro12, lucrative sponsors etc may be encouraged to sponsor the 6N
2. They will never put club rugby ahead of the international season. The P12 will always end in time for the lions and the 6N
3. The competitions they run have always been "self selling" so it is hard to know how valuable their experience is
4. Their time is not 100% focussed on the Pro12.

irishbucsfan

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Let's stop here now for a second.
Do you think you might be able to suggest what my basis for this belief might be? I've actually pointed it out repeatedly, it won't be hard to figure out.
And then moving on,

Is it the Chinese whispers? Or the "objectivism" issue that you are unable to identify a single tangible example of any problems with the objectivity of the current administration?

irishbucsfan wrote: »

If the "obvious" differences that account for a 30-75 times multiplier are no in the demographics, what exactly are these?

You already asked if I said this, I told you that I didn't say that. I don't really understand why you're trying to make it look like I've said it. Again, that's not what I said. Please reread my last post if you are still confused.

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I'm afraid I can't see any obvious difference that means you should be giving the people who have failed to achieve a similar deal for the Pro 12 such an easy pass.

Ah. So I am to provide you with examples of things to back up things I say, but you are not expected to do the same?

Seems a bit unfair.

irishbucsfan

Deleted User wrote: »

Is it the Chinese whispers? Or the "objectivism" issue that you are unable to identify a single tangible example of any problems with the objectivity of the current administration?

It's not Chinese whispers. It's a belief that I have based on things I've heard but these things aren't exactly spoken about with a focus on specifics at the types of place I meet these guys. Hore's comments speak to exactly the same concern (it was Cardiff/Ospreys men I was with the last time I heard these complaints actually). So I don't have a specific example of a symptom, just an understanding of the cause.

Of course, a tangible real world example isn't absolutely necessary to discuss the concept. It's just rhetoric. It's a good example of the complex question fallacy.

Deleted User wrote: »

You already asked if I said this, I told you that I didn't say that. I don't really understand why you're trying to make it look like I've said it. Again, that's not what I said. Please reread my last post if you are still confused.

Great this is actually something that can be discussed.

So you do think that they are underperforming, it's probably best to next work out how much you think they are underperforming. If the Pro 12 isn't worth 3 cents of the Top 14 Euro, how much is it worth?

Should we be a tenth as valuable as them for example?

Should we be a twentieth as valuable as them?

If so, what do YOU think we should already have been doing in order to double or triple the size of our TV deal, and most importantly, why do you think we haven't already been doing it?

Deleted User wrote: »

Ah. So I am to provide you with examples of things to back up things I say, but you are not expected to do the same?

Seems a bit unfair.

Fair enough, I've given vague enough examples, that's all I'd expect in return but it's not too important.

irishbucsfan

irishbucsfan wrote: »

It's not Chinese whispers. It's a belief that I have based on things I've heard but these things aren't exactly spoken about with a focus on specifics at the types of place I meet these guys. Hore's comments speak to exactly the same concern (it was Cardiff/Ospreys men I was with the last time I heard these complaints actually). So I don't have a specific example of a symptom, just an understanding of the cause.

Of course, a tangible real world example isn't absolutely necessary to discuss the concept. It's just rhetoric. It's a good example of the complex question fallacy.

Absolutely no problem talking about the concept if that's all you wanted to do (though of course that wouldn't be in the rugby forum).
However you said that it applied in this case and was a major issue in the pro12. That's not discussing a concept. That's far more than that.

There's a marked difference with discussing autism and suggesting someone is autistic because "they could be".
So can we hear more about these Chinese Whispers? The ones that you're using to project the concept onto the pro12 administration?

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Great this is actually something that can be discussed.

So you do think that they are underperforming, it's probably best to next work out how much you think they are underperforming. If the Pro 12 isn't worth 3 cents of the Top 14 Euro, how much is it worth?

I've never once said that. Not once. In fact I've said pretty much nothing about the administration, I've asked you to explain why we shouldn't take what they've done as being in good faith though. Since you offered that they were the biggest issue that the league faces.

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Should we be a tenth as valuable as them for example?

Should we be a twentieth as valuable as them?

I plead utter ignorance, and given that I've only ever offered the suggestion that there will always be a disparity that favours the French, I don't see why I need to try to defend this? Perhaps you could ask me to defend any statements that I have made instead? Just like I've asked you to defend the ones you made.

irishbucsfan wrote: »

If so, what do YOU think we should already have been doing in order to double or triple the size of our TV deal, and most importantly, why do you think we haven't already been doing it?

Oh the complex question fallacy is it? :pac:

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Fair enough, I've given vague enough examples, that's all I'd expect in return but it's not too important.

.

Deleted User wrote:

BEIN & Canal+ rights war for a long established league with a far larger regular audience drove prices up further than they ought to be.
Even without the price war the price would be significantly higher because of the significant differences in audience numbers.

irishbucsfan

Deleted User wrote: »

I've never once said that. Not once. In fact I've said pretty much nothing about the administration, I've asked you to explain why we shouldn't take what they've done as being in good faith though. Since you offered that they were the biggest issue that the league faces.

OK hang on.

1) Do you think that the league should be worth 30 times less than the Top 14 to TV broadcasters?

2) If the answer to this is no -> What would be the cause of such a monstrous gap outside of the people involved in negotiating the deals? I don't see where else you'd be putting the blame for that, so I thought it was a fairly reasonable assumption to make.

Deleted User wrote: »

Absolutely no problem talking about the concept if that's all you wanted to do (though of course that wouldn't be in the rugby forum).
However you said that it applied in this case and was a major issue in the pro12. That's not discussing a concept. That's far more than that.

There's a marked difference with discussing autism and suggesting someone is autistic because "they could be".
So can we hear more about these Chinese Whispers? The ones that you're using to project the concept onto the pro12 administration?

I'm talking about the problem specifically affecting the Pro 12. It's not a difficult conceit to make.

irishbucsfan

irishbucsfan wrote: »

OK hang on.

1) Do you think that the league should be worth 30 times less than the Top 14 to TV broadcasters?

2) If the answer to this is no -> What would be the cause of such a monstrous gap outside of the people involved in negotiating the deals? I don't see where else you'd be putting the blame for that, so I thought it was a fairly reasonable assumption to make.

Quid Pro Quo I'm afraid. I'll partake in a conversation, but not an interview. Could you attempt to defend the statement that you offered (that the current administration are the biggest issue the league faces), in light of the questions I've asked of it? What have they done wrong etc?

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I'm talking about the problem specifically affecting the Pro 12. It's not a difficult conceit to make.

We discussed the concept. You said that it applied to the Pro 12. Please explain how it does. If I simply assert that the current administration have the ability (just as you have offered that there is also the ability otherwise) to objectively asses a proposal as their position requires them to, we are now at a stalemate. Your Objectivism issue meets my Professionalism response and they cancel each other out.

Unless of course you've got something other than the concept to tell us?

irishbucsfan

Deleted User wrote: »

Quid Pro Quo I'm afraid. I'll partake in a conversation, but not an interview. Could you attempt to defend the statement that you offered (that the current administration are the biggest issue the league faces), in light of the questions I've asked of it? What have they done wrong etc?

OK?

Deleted User wrote: »

We discussed the concept. You said that it applied to the Pro 12. Please explain how it does. If I simply assert that the current administration have the ability (just as you have offered that there is also the ability otherwise) to objectively asses a proposal as their position requires them to, we are now at a stalemate. Your Objectivism issue meets my Professionalism response and they cancel each other out.

Unless of course you've got something other than the concept to tell us?

I've explained why I think it does. From my own personal experiences talking to people involved. Is it not OK for me to form an opinion based on only that and then present that opinion? What more do I need to do in order to be allowed to form this opinion?

Also being able to objectively assess (you can keep your asses! ) a proposal is not the same thing as objectivism, just want to make sure you're aware of that?

irishbucsfan

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I've explained why I think it does. From my own personal experiences talking to people involved. Is it not OK for me to form an opinion based on only that and then present that opinion? What more do I need to do in order to be allowed to form this opinion?

You're entitled to hold it absolutely. I've not asked you to change your mind. I have asked you to explain what caused you to form it though. I have asked you to share the reasons. That's it. You've just made me ask the same questions 200 different ways!

I would question what exactly any other administration beyond what is currently in place would do differently tbh. I am ignorant, I don't know. But I would be extremely skeptical that there are enormous boosts in values available to anyone. It would require more than some Welsh Whispers :pac: to even allow me to present the idea that the administration of the league are anywhere near the largest problem the league faces.

It was a point that stuck out as fairly outrageous to me, so asked you to explain it.

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Also being able to objectively assess (you can keep your asses! ) a proposal is not the same thing as objectivism, just want to make sure you're aware of that?

Nope. Doesn't matter though.

Bazzo

irishbucsfan

Deleted User wrote: »

You're entitled to hold it absolutely. I've not asked you to change your mind. I have asked you to explain what caused you to form it though. I have asked you to share the reasons. That's it. You've just made me ask the same questions 200 different ways!

I would question what exactly any other administration beyond what is currently in place would do differently tbh. I am ignorant, I don't know. But I would be extremely skeptical that there are enormous boosts in values available to anyone. It would require more than some Welsh Whispers :pac: to even allow me to present the idea that the administration of the league are anywhere near the largest problem the league faces.

It was a point that stuck out as fairly outrageous to me, so asked you to explain it.

Yes... And I've said exactly what caused me to form this opinion. You're not really giving the sources the credibility they deserve (EDIT: just to say, I don't blame you for this), but I hold them in high regard and I can see no other stand-out reason why the league would be worth so much less than it's competitors. I've asked you to explain why you think it would be but obviously I've presumed too much in hoping for a response to that.

What any other administration would do? Allow greater access to scheduling for broadcasters and greater access to players for broadcasters and sponsors would be a fairly basic example. What about a reversal of the decision to abandon the highlights that they used to provide on youtube and were very popular (and a brilliant resource for online media)? The French and English leagues have been all over the new American league looking for fairly basic and low-level commercial relationships in case it takes off... not sure if we're doing that as well but we absolutely should be.

Deleted User wrote: »

Nope. Doesn't matter though.

We disagree on that. The point is that individuals are inherently self-interested and if these people who are running the competition are not primarily concerned and incentivised by the strength of the competition, it will suffer. Especially when they are primarily concerned by the strength of other, larger, competitions. I think that's a given really, the question is how much it's at play (it might have no noticeable bearing if the concern is misplaced).

jm08

Some meat for your debate:

On why the sponsorship of PRO12 isn't as good as other leagues:

Gerald Davies, Chairman of PRO12

GD: Let’s look at where we’ve come from. The Pro12 hasn’t had an easy passage. It’s been very difficult, even on a basic level. French and English leagues retained the same clubs as they made the transition from amateur to professional rugby, whereas for us, it’s a totally new concept. We must be given time to settle down. The civil war between the WRU and the Regions went on for two years. It was a very unsettling, awkward time, which affected the television rights and sponsorship deals. It created so much uncertainty. Companies weren’t going to invest in something where no one was sure of the future. Now we have people on board to move forward. There’s a certainty about the competition and we feel optimistic.

New PRO12 Managing Director Martin Anayi on interest in the PRO12 in comparison to Aviva Premiership:

MA: A Pro12 round pulls in about 500,000 viewers. For the Pro12 final, it was 379,000 – if Sky get over 200,000 viewers, they are delighted. We have a strong relationship with Sky and they’re happy with what we’re giving them but in the future maybe we need more quality, less quantity. We’re showing 130 games live and while we don’t want to reduce value, we want to improve the production qualities and make sure every time you watch the game you know it’s Pro12 product. At the moment, you probably don’t. We want the media to cover the great stories. We need to shout about it more. We sit down with our broadcasters and we ask ‘how can we make this more appealing’. It is a good position to be in.

Full interview here:

http://www.rugbyworld.com/countries/italy/the-big-pro12-interview-can-it-keep-pace-with-the-premiership-and-top-14-53103

icdg

That's an interesting quote, in that in January, some of the broadcasters (Sky, BBC Wales, BBC Alba, S4C, and BBC Scotland) began using new Pro 12 branded graphics. Viewers in Ireland may have been forgiven for not noticing though, because for whatever reason neither BBC NI or TG4 are using them. Seems like this is showing some of the thinking behind it. It's not unusual in sport these days (something the Champions League in football have been doing since the early 1990s) but interesting nonetheless.

irishbucsfan

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Yes... And I've said exactly what caused me to form this opinion. You're not really giving the sources the credibility they deserve (EDIT: just to say, I don't blame you for this), but I hold them in high regard and I can see no other stand-out reason why the league would be worth so much less than it's competitors. I've asked you to explain why you think it would be but obviously I've presumed too much in hoping for a response to that.

I'm not giving credit to information that I haven't been told which comes from people that we don't know anything about. I think that's a fine position to hold!

I don't know why I've to explain anything? I asked you to defend your assertion. You know, back up the statement you made with some tangible examples?

You wouldn't even need to tell us what your sources told you, nor who they are yet, simply present a single example of an issue that the administration botched first of all. Just one! It's not a crazy request.

If the administration are an issue, give us an example of the decision that they made that was not the best one for the league.

irishbucsfan wrote: »

What any other administration would do? Allow greater access to scheduling for broadcasters and greater access to players for broadcasters and sponsors would be a fairly basic example. What about a reversal of the decision to abandon the highlights that they used to provide on youtube and were very popular (and a brilliant resource for online media)? The French and English leagues have been all over the new American league looking for fairly basic and low-level commercial relationships in case it takes off... not sure if we're doing that as well but we absolutely should be.

Finally. 4123234 posts in you give an example of a problem.

Lets consider these

• Allow greater access to scheduling for broadcasters

You mean, kind of like exactly what they did already? A huge increase in games that kick off at 3pm (the time that Premier League games aren't allowed be shown in England).
Do you mean select when teams play each other (as in create the fixture list?)?
Does that happen elsewhere?

• Abandoning the youtube channel

This one? https://www.youtube.com/user/RaboDirectPRO12/videos
I agree that it's a superb outlet and should be kept up. However you can see that it's not exactly a commercial powerhouse with it's majority <4k views per video.
(pretty funny channel name actually!!)

• America

We both plead ignorance here. I have no idea. You have no idea. You do seem to suggest that it's likely that they are not doing this though. Strange negativity surely? This isn't a gripe I don't think, just a suggestion.

irishbucsfan wrote: »

We disagree on that. The point is that individuals are inherently self-interested and if these people who are running the competition are not primarily concerned and incentivised by the strength of the competition, it will suffer. Especially when they are primarily concerned by the strength of other, larger, competitions. I think that's a given really, the question is how much it's at play (it might have no noticeable bearing if the concern is misplaced).

Yes, beautifully abstract and fantastically rhetoric. Does the theory apply in this real world example though? As I have asked several times? I've given you the example of Fiduciary responsibility, where legally a person must put their self interest aside and work for the betterment of a third party. It would not be enough for me to suggest that a specific Fiduciary with a conflict of interest should be replaced based solely on the totally rational theory that the conflict of interest could make them incapable, would it?
That's the same rationale you're using here though.

thomond2006

The Pro12 is a gammy name.

irishbucsfan

Deleted User wrote: »

Finally. 4123234 posts in you give an example of a problem.

Apart from the things I've already listed.

irishbucsfan wrote: »

It's things like this. Or guarantees around availability to sponsors. Or a guarrantee of exposure. Or provision of materials for broadcasters, or greater allowance of control over scheduling to broadcasters. Or a different method of tendering for broadcasters.

No point though really continuing if only one person is expected to answer questions is there?

It's a bit of a waste of time. If anyone else wants to suggest a reason why the Pro 12 is 30-odd times less valuable than the Top 14 I'm definitely interested to hear it.

thomond2006

Al Kellock appointed Pro12 final referee: http://www.pro12rugby.com/news/19453.php#H8subVCbErYZ8Zz4.97

It got me for a few seconds...

CMOTDibbler

irishbucsfan wrote: »

It's a bit of a waste of time. If anyone else wants to suggest a reason why the Pro 12 is 30-odd times less valuable than the Top 14 I'm definitely interested to hear it.

I'll bite

Some of the reasons were given above by the Pro 12 Chairman and MD.

1. Uncertainty about the future: The civil war between the Welsh regions and the WRU was referenced, but there's also been uncertainty about the Italians and the Scottish where clubs changed/disappeared. So of the four nations involved, there's been uncertainty at some point or other with three of them. Even Ireland hasn't been immune with Connacht looking like being disbanded during the life of the league.

2. Multiple TV deals: Sky have just recently bought into the Pro 12 and are doing a very good job. However the broadcasting rights are split over two many outlets meaning that there's no exclusivity and this dilutes the value to any one broadcaster. In the short term, this might be a positive since it gives maximum coverage and helps build the 'brand'.

3. Age: The Pro 12 has been through many incarnations since its foundation as the Celtic League. Its maturity is not established and it's competing with leagues that have been in existence for decades in countries with massive populations (relatively) and enormous popular support (esp. T14).

4. Resources: The Pro 12 is not only the junior product in the six nations region but also has less money than the others (this is circular from the TV issue). As a result it can't compete with it's bigger siblings for star players or even hold onto its own home grown players. This is directly impacting on its popularity and hitting at TV revenues.

5. Management: IBF contends that the management of the league being handled by the same people who manage the 6N and the Lions means it's not getting the attention it requires to grow its value. errlloyd gave a list of pros and cons that could be extrapolated from this. On the negative side, a separate management structure would cost more and would not have the experience and clout of the current one.

6. The Pro 12 is a constructed league with no history and no real 'home'. The other leagues have national boundaries and feeder leagues which fosters continuity. A Pro D2 player can 'graduate' to the Top 14 without going anywhere really. Lower leagues in the Pro 12 seem to be cut off from the professional league and in the Welsh case there's actual hostility towards the professional regions.

Buer

thomond2006 wrote: »

Al Kellock appointed Pro12 final referee: http://www.pro12rugby.com/news/19453.php#H8subVCbErYZ8Zz4.97

Fair play to him, have been following his progress through lower levels over the season and he has been very highly rated, reports indicate.

irishbucsfan

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Apart from the things I've already listed.

None of those listed items are in any way tangible examples of any of the decisions that Pro12 have made, let alone get wrong. They are extraordinarily vague issues that the Pro12 admin deal with.

Tell us how they get the method for tendering to broadcasters wrong.

Which tangible issues did you list? Seriously, not being a sarcunt here as normal. Just quote a few in.

Examples of things that the Pro12 Administration did wrong? Because I know sweet **** all about barely any of the decisions that they've ever made, so have no idea what they've gotten wrong. Considering you believe that they're the biggest issue facing the league, there should be plenty of examples available to you?

irishbucsfan wrote: »

No point though really continuing if only one person is expected to answer questions is there?

I've answered plenty of relevant questions. You seem set on getting deep and philosophical instead of just talking about the Pro12 though?

irishbucsfan wrote: »

It's a bit of a waste of time. If anyone else wants to suggest a reason why the Pro 12 is 30-odd times less valuable than the Top 14 I'm definitely interested to hear it.

T14 Advantages
BEIN and Canal+ had a price war for the product.
http://advanced-television.com/2015/01/21/canal-retains-exclusive-top-14-rugby-rights/

Canal+ has a significant established foothold and can consider the T14 an integral part of the package that they deliver.

BEIN sports was attempting to establish a foothold in the market, and so is prepared to pay over market prices for the chance to get that coverage. (Just as BT inflated the Aviva Premiership rights in England)

The T14 is a long established (just the 124 years old this year), single nation, single market league with many years of coverage and an expectation of coverage.

The number of actual viewers is almost certainly larger. In 2011 the average was over 700,000 viewers. Paying subscribers.

In 2011, Canal+ indicated that evening matches were being watched by 800,000–850,000 viewers while afternoon matches were watched by around 700,000 viewers.[4]

Pro12 Disadvantages
In order to attain an 'exclusivity bonus' at least two broadcasters would have to cover the disparate nations and compete for the price. Sky cover all of the nations. Who else?

As a young fledgling league, a long term and prudent decision appears to have been made to as much as possible keep an FTA interest (available to all disparate nations) alive so as to foster the interest and grow it.

The teams competing in the league from Wales and Italy (half the league) are not exactly established themselves and they are fledgling and having their own issues to resolve.

Disparate nations means disparate markets, meaning disparate advertising interests.

These are structural, embedded issues that no administration can change.

Now, these qualifiers can't quantify the price difference of 70x. But they certainly explain a large part in the difference in valuations. Ignorance of them does not mean that they don't exist and don't effect the league's marketability and valuation.

awec

I don't even understand what this argument is about.

DGRulz

thomond2006 wrote: »

Al Kellock appointed Pro12 final referee: http://www.pro12rugby.com/news/19453.php#H8subVCbErYZ8Zz4.97

It got me for a few seconds...

April Fools?

connemara man

awec wrote: »

I don't even understand what this argument is about.

What can the Pro 12 do better and would new management achieve that over the current crop. I think

former total

awec wrote: »

I don't even understand what this argument is about.

It's like a nerdy Batman v Superman. No one knows how it came about, no one particularly likes it, but you can be damn sure there'll be multiple sequels.

phog

This might already be posted but I just saw it on Twitter now.

Simon Thomas of Wales Online interviews Martin Anayi Pro12 MD

irishbucsfan

phog wrote: »

This might already be posted but I just saw it on Twitter now.

Simon Thomas of Wales Online interviews Martin Anayi Pro12 MD

That's a great interview. I like the cut of his jib.

All I can say is I'm happy the Pro 12 have reacted positively to my withering/harrowing attack on them and have used the experience as the perfect opportunity to improve themselves. I hope it's not just window dressing to appease my fans.

razorblunt

Co-commentator on BBC Alba for Edinburgh - Zebre (he's an Edinburgh player) just referred to Sarto as "the Italian boy".
He's an Italian international who's signing for Glasgow so he'll be running rings around you next season sunshine.

errlloyd

irishbucsfan wrote: »

That's a great interview. I like the cut of his jib.

All I can say is I'm happy the Pro 12 have reacted positively to my withering/harrowing attack on them and have used the experience as the perfect opportunity to improve themselves. I hope it's not just window dressing to appease my fans.

He basically answered every question I could possibly ask.

Buer

Almost sure they're out of it but results go their way this week and next and the Ospreys have an outside chance of 6th. They've a BP in the bag at the Dragons.

neelia11

Edinburgh 3-0 zebre at half time. Sounds like the sort of game to bring a detention class to.

errlloyd

I'd be checking that now.

Diabhal Beag

I love Bundee's short fuse

icdg

icdg wrote: »

That's an interesting quote, in that in January, some of the broadcasters (Sky, BBC Wales, BBC Alba, S4C, and BBC Scotland) began using new Pro 12 branded graphics. Viewers in Ireland may have been forgiven for not noticing though, because for whatever reason neither BBC NI or TG4 are using them. Seems like this is showing some of the thinking behind it. It's not unusual in sport these days (something the Champions League in football have been doing since the early 1990s) but interesting nonetheless.

I say that this morning and lo and behold, TG4 changed to the new graphics tonight.