Ireland Team Talk/Gossip/Rumour Thread V

bilston

The solution is obvious. I've said it for a while. Scrap the Pro 12 and create a B&I league. It is the only way we can compete financially with the English and French.

OldRio

irishbucsfan wrote: »

You're either misunderstanding or being intentionally misleading.

Noone said when we use things in our favour it's unfair. We use our central contracting system completely in our favour and it's absolutely fair. Noone said it's unfair that the Pro 12 is based in Dublin, you just didn't read that properly.

It's unfair when we are enriching ourselves unfairly against the will of a pariticipant because their unions did a deal they disagreed with. That no longer happens. It's been dealt with fairly and it's over

In your eyes, indeed it has, but others have different opinions. Like them or not.

awec

bilston wrote: »

The solution is obvious. I've said it for a while. Scrap the Pro 12 and create a B&I league. It is the only way we can compete financially with the English and French.

I doubt there'd be any interest from the English sides to a B+I league. The Welsh have been whoring themselves to the English setup for ages and can't even get to first base.

irishbucsfan

OldRio wrote: »

In your eyes, indeed it has, but others have different opinions. Like them or not.

People are perfectly entitled to opinions on it. When I said "it's over" I was just referring to the previous status quo.

irishbucsfan

awec wrote: »

I doubt there'd be any interest from the English sides to a B+I league. The Welsh have been whoring themselves to the English setup for ages and can't even get to first base.

I think they'd happily take it, so long as they were majority shareholders!

Neil3030

irishbucsfan wrote: »

You're either misunderstanding or being intentionally misleading.

Noone said when we use things in our favour it's unfair. We use our central contracting system completely in our favour and it's absolutely fair. Noone said it's unfair that the Pro 12 is based in Dublin, you just didn't read that properly.

It's unfair when we are enriching ourselves unfairly against the will of a pariticipant because their unions did a deal they disagreed with. That no longer happens. It's been dealt with fairly and it's over.

I'm glad you included the bold part because it saves me searching back for other examples.

So to summarise:

Irish clubs getting a great deal because of tournament rules agreed between unions instead of clubs - unfair and needs to be changed.

English clubs getting a great deal because of their TV population advantage, the punt of a broadband company to destroy its competitor - fine.

I'm not saying one is better or worse than the other, it just baffles me how (I'm presuming) Irish people who (I'm presuming) support Irish provinces are so negative about advantages we may have (or had), while at the same time remaining mute or defending advantages of English clubs. Each to their own, but I can't imagine that the mindset works the other way around.

OldRio

awec wrote: »

I doubt there'd be any interest from the English sides to a B+I league. The Welsh have been whoring themselves to the English setup for ages and can't even get to first base.

Thats the problem. It must be awful trying to negotiate on behalf of the pro12 when in talks with the English clubs. You must wonder which side of the table the Welsh clubs sit?

awec

OldRio wrote: »

Thats the problem. It must be awful trying to negotiate on behalf of the pro12 when in talks with the English clubs. You must wonder which side of the table the Welsh clubs sit?

Well I think the Welsh problem is that support for their makey-uppy teams has never really taken off, not helped by the fact that only one of them has ever been decent.

I think they believe that games against English clubs would do more to attract the welsh public.

Utopia Parkway

OldRio wrote: »

Thats the problem. It must be awful trying to negotiate on behalf of the pro12 when in talks with the English clubs. You must wonder which side of the table the Welsh clubs sit?

The Welsh would drop the Pro 12 in an instant if there was even the slightest whiff that the English would take them. They are not wanted though. Why would the English clubs want to dilute their share of the pie with the Welsh or even us for that matter?

irishbucsfan

Neil3030 wrote: »

I'm glad you included the bold part because it saves me searching back for other examples.

So to summarise:

Irish clubs getting a great deal because of tournament rules agreed between unions instead of clubs - unfair and needs to be changed.

English clubs getting a great deal because of their TV population advantage, the punt of a broadband company to destroy its competitor - fine.

I'm not saying one is better or worse than the other, it just baffles me how (I'm presuming) Irish people who (I'm presuming) support Irish provinces are so negative about advantages we may have (or had), while at the same time remaining mute or defending advantages of English clubs. Each to their own, but I can't imagine that the mindset works the other way around.

Can you not see the difference between those?

When Irish clubs got a great deal it was at the expense of their competitors. We were sharing the same pie, its just our slices were bigger. That's why it needed to be adjusted.

The English deal has nothing to do with us, so of course it's fine, and it's certainly no punt from anyone that's just your opinion based off very little by way of evidence, I'd be careful of that.

There's nothing wrong with us getting way more of the 6 Nations TV money to our clubs for example, because that money is divided fairly and it's distribution is within our control. It would be no problem if the Pro 12 deal and the BT deal switched places, because again there's no plunder, to use the Bastiat terminology, involved.

Neil3030

I'm sure our live and physical attendances grossly outweigh that of the Welsh. I read somewhere that 122k watched a recent Munster V Leinster on TG4, while an additional 30k watched on Sky, in ROI alone.

awec

Neil3030 wrote: »

I'm sure our live and physical attendances grossly outweigh that of the Welsh. I read somewhere that 122k watched a recent Munster V Leinster on TG4, while an additional 30k watched on Sky, in ROI alone.

In the Pro12?

Irish attendances are certainly highest by some distance.

But Irish teams are the only teams with any history before the league was setup. The Scottish, Welsh and Italian teams are all just made up entities for pro rugby that fans had no prior connection to.

jacothelad

Neil3030 wrote: »

But even if the league generated more funds we would still need to compete with teams happy to go into massive debt. We're going to hell in a handcart.

The European Cup - as was - has been great for Irish Rugby. The forthcoming 6 ns might tell us more about where were as a Rugby nation.The 4 provinces would never be allowed to run up massive debts - Thomond aside, which is a different issue.

Do we need a radical rethink of how each operates?

GETTING THE RIGHT PLAYERS.

I don't know about the set ups at the other provinces but there is more than a suspicion among many well connected insiders at Ulster for example that some of the personnel involved are actually often operating to the detriment of the team. More specifically to the selection / exclusion in the development of the young players and general recruitment. This involves among other things, senior staff making 10 second snap judgements on the ability of young players that are clearly wrong. I have actually seen this done in front of me without the U.R. 'coach' even bothering his hole to look at a bunch of young guys. The two most high profile ones being Gilroy and McCloskey whose talents eventually could not be ignored despite being told 'they would never be pro players.'

Another glaring example is that of former Ireland U20 prop, Chris Taylor, one of those rare things in Ireland - a tight head prop - who wasn't offered an academy place so fecked off to Canada where he is getting good reviews. He may not have made it but he should have been given a chance. The second best T.H. prop I've seen playing in Ulster is a guy called Simpson. I'm pretty certain he is better than Lutton and Ross (Bronson that is, not Mike:D) Maybe he isn't interested in being a pro but he does play for the Ravens - and is clearly a very, very good prop.

Then, in keeping with the poor treatment of young players, there are the twin mysteries of McCall and O'Connor. I'm sure everyone can see that they are proving to be pretty high quality players with much to add yet they were both sidelined, I am told, by one of the coaches - until Kiss arrived and suddenly they are back in the team. In McCall's case after about 2 years from his debut as a tight head. In AOC's case he spent most of his time this season in the AIl behind Lewis 'Penalty Machine' Stevenson.

Then there is the case of the sheer waste of money in recruiting poor or in some cases, totally useless player simply because - it seems - that they are I.Q. R. Murphy, Windsor, Browne, Rowley, Reidy, C, Ross currently but the list of those who were brought here, paid and never pulled on the shirt or did so once is awful. The list above being the latest empty shirts. Browne may not be totally terrible but he is not a great acquisition on any viewing to date. Reidy is getting better and even C.Ross has played o.k. recently. I would contend that there are better players turning out in the AIL. Those who didn't go to one of the 'Big' rugby schools operate under a type of sporting apartheid. Anyway, they couldn't be worse and would have the merit of wanting to play for the shirt. Who on Earth thought recruiting a dose of players from London Welsh was a step forward for Ulster?

awec wrote: »

The two go hand in hand.

If the league were more competitive, with less dead rubber games with half the team rested, or less games where the result is a foregone conclusion, then it would generate more interest which would generate more money.

So we in fact need the bottom 3 or 4 sides to be more competitive.

AdamD wrote: »

French population: 66m
English population: 53m


Irish population: 6.4m
Scottish population: 5.3m
Welsh population: 3m
Italian population: 60m
Italian population who care about rugby: 76

There's a big reason why the French and English teams generate more tv money, they've more people to watch the games.

I remember seeing the Sky viewing figures for Premiership rugby union and they were pathetic in reality.

Neil3030

awec wrote: »

In the Pro12?

Irish attendances are certainly highest by some distance.

But Irish teams are the only teams with any history before the league was setup. The Scottish, Welsh and Italian teams are all just made up entities for pro rugby that fans had no prior connection to.

It must be Pro 12. Though they list the game as Leinster V Munster, which, technically, won't happen until April.

http://www.runningrugby.com/media/rugby-dominates-irish-tv-ratings-in-2015/

Putting those figures in context, the highest viewed game in BT's first season showing English rugby was 277k.

former total

Neil3030 wrote: »

I'm glad you included the bold part because it saves me searching back for other examples.

So to summarise:

Irish clubs getting a great deal because of tournament rules agreed between unions instead of clubs - unfair and needs to be changed.

English clubs getting a great deal because of their TV population advantage, the punt of a broadband company to destroy its competitor - fine.

I'm not saying one is better or worse than the other, it just baffles me how (I'm presuming) Irish people who (I'm presuming) support Irish provinces are so negative about advantages we may have (or had), while at the same time remaining mute or defending advantages of English clubs. Each to their own, but I can't imagine that the mindset works the other way around.

See, if this really is just a ploy by BT to run Sky out of business, or a publicity stunt to sell broadband, then that works out great for us. If the English clubs make massive commitments in terms of player salaries but the TV money underpinning it proves to be unsustainable, then they'll be completely f**ked and the Irish clubs will be more competitive again.

TV rights money generally only goes in one direction, however...

stephen_n

awec wrote: »

It's tighter because the best clubs in the league have got worse, not because the poor sides have got better. This is concerning.

There has been a lot of disruption caused by the world cup, which affected the top teams more than the bottom. It's hard to draw much from the league this season in terms which clubs are where. Though the lack of performance in Europe is a worrying indicator.

CMOTDibbler

former total wrote: »

See, if this really is just a ploy by BT to run Sky out of business, or a publicity stunt to sell broadband, then that works out great for us. If the English clubs make massive commitments in terms of player salaries but the TV money underpinning it proves to be unsustainable, then they'll be completely f**ked and the Irish clubs will be more competitive again.

TV rights money generally only goes in one direction, however...

I have a sneaking suspicion that you may be proven right.

Much of the promise of the ECPR has yet to be delivered. But putting that aside for the moment, the dilution of the TV audience can only have had a negative impact on viewer numbers in relation to the money spent. Certainly the Challenge cup matches don't seem to have been covered to the same extent. Attendances are certainly down based on last year's figures and I await this year's figures to see if that trend has reversed.

But the other issue is the sponsorship one. Heineken reportedly saved themselves a fair wedge with the new deal and I wonder did Turkish Airlines manage to bridge that gap.

Neil3030

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Can you not see the difference between those?

When Irish clubs got a great deal it was at the expense of their competitors. We were sharing the same pie, its just our slices were bigger. That's why it needed to be adjusted.

The English deal has nothing to do with us, so of course it's fine, and it's certainly no punt from anyone that's just your opinion based off very little by way of evidence, I'd be careful of that.

You really aren't getting this for some reason - I. DON'T. CARE. I want what's best for Irish provinces. The fact that you care more about the English teams getting a fair shake, than Irish provinces remaining competitive is the part that I can't understand. Or maybe you're just naive to the impending exodus of players, or maybe you saw this as inevitable no matter what we did. But in any event, looking back on the deals that ultimately sounded the death knell for Irish provincial rugby, I just can't find phrases like "it needed to be adjusted".

irishbucsfan

Neil3030 wrote: »

You really aren't getting this for some reason - I. DON'T. CARE. I want what's best for Irish provinces. The fact that you care more about the English teams getting a fair shake, than Irish provinces remaining competitive is the part that I can't understand. Or maybe you're just naive to the impending exodus of players, or maybe you saw this as inevitable no matter what we did. But in any event, looking back on the deals that ultimately sounded the death knell for Irish provincial rugby, I just can't find phrases like "it needed to be adjusted".

I would much rather we are competitive in a fair environment than dominant in an unfair one.

I live and play (well currently coach due to injury) in England and a lot of my best friends in rugby are from England and France. I want us all to be happy with the state of rugby in Europe, between 2009-2012 they certainly weren't.

Neil3030

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I would much rather we are competitive in a fair environment than dominant in an unfair one.

I live and play (well currently coach due to injury) in England and a lot of my best friends in rugby are from England and France. I want us all to be happy with the state of rugby in Europe, between 2009-2012 they certainly weren't.

Well, I don't live or coach in England, so I really don't care how happy they are!! Fair enough if you've a personal connection, I can understand that.

irishbucsfan

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

I have a sneaking suspicion that you may be proven right.

Much of the promise of the ECPR has yet to be delivered. But putting that aside for the moment, the dilution of the TV audience can only have had a negative impact on viewer numbers in relation to the money spent. Certainly the Challenge cup matches don't seem to have been covered to the same extent. Attendances are certainly down based on last year's figures and I await this year's figures to see if that trend has reversed.

But the other issue is the sponsorship one. Heineken reportedly saved themselves a fair wedge with the new deal and I wonder did Turkish Airlines manage to bridge that gap.

Which of the promises of the EPCR are yet to be delivered? They've increased revenue, they've reformed qualification, moved to a 20-team structure, they've added the 3rd tier qualification tournament. Which was the exact promise that you don't think has been delivered on?

I believe the combined sponsorship is a fair bit higher than before now, I haven't seen the figures. It's easy to manipulate those figures either way because while Heineken were title sponsors before they also had smaller partnerships, so it's very hard to say.

MJohnston

irishbucsfan wrote: »

a lot of my best friends [..] are from England and France. I want us all to be happy

I think that's a logical impossibility, isn't "Happy Englishman" an oxymoron? :pac:

irishbucsfan

Neil3030 wrote: »

Well, I don't live or coach in England, so I really don't care how happy they are!! Fair enough if you've a personal connection, I can understand that.

But are you saying you'd be happy to be dominant even if you knew the competition was rigged in your favour? Would you not be happier with an even playing field? Are you Sepp Blatter?

Neil3030

irishbucsfan wrote: »

But are you saying you'd be happy to be dominant even if you knew the competition was rigged in your favour? Would you not be happier with an even playing field? Are you Sepp Blatter?

Straw man argument is a straw man argument. I can play too:

You treated Leinster's Heineken cup triumphs with a "meh, the game is rigged"?

CMOTDibbler

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I would much rather we are competitive in a fair environment than dominant in an unfair one.

I live and play (well currently coach due to injury) in England and a lot of my best friends in rugby are from England and France. I want us all to be happy with the state of rugby in Europe, between 2009-2012 they certainly weren't.

We were dominant for a period. The same as the French were and some English teams were. The same as Toulon are now. That dominance was already tailing off when the system changed. Munster had not been really competitve for some time, Leinster were knocked into the Challenge Cup and Ulster have not got to another final. In fact no province has gone beyond a semi-final in the last four years.

I suspect that will continue.

Larbre34

irishbucsfan wrote: »

But are you saying you'd be happy to be dominant even if you knew the competition was rigged in your favour? Would you not be happier with an even playing field? Are you Sepp Blatter?

Do you think it was rigged in favour of the Pro12 teams before? I hate to rake over endless threads of rancour on the topic, but the Pro12 teams never had the private money of England or France, and they could still only field 15 men at a time.

In the opinion of many rugby supporters, not just in Ireland, the new structure has gutted the spirit and magic of the old Heineken Cup competition and left us with a truncated and less valued replacement.

Synode

irishbucsfan wrote: »

But are you saying you'd be happy to be dominant even if you knew the competition was rigged in your favour? Would you not be happier with an even playing field? Are you Sepp Blatter?

But it's not an even playing field. It's now positioned (I won't say rigged) in favour of English and French teams by way of their dominant financial positions and playing numbers. Do you not think some allowance for this should be made?

Zzippy

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I think they'd happily take it, so long as they were majority shareholders!

I doubt it, seeing as some of them would be in a second division of any such league. As it stands they have a cosy cartel with significant barriers to entry, and a nice pie to divide up amongst themselves. Why would they give up any of that?

Larbre34

Larbre34 wrote: »

Do you think it was rigged in favour of the Pro12 teams before? I hate to rake over endless threads of rancour on the topic, but the Pro12 teams never had the private money of England or France, and they could still only field 15 men at a time.

In the opinion of many rugby supporters, not just in Ireland, the new structure has gutted the spirit and magic of the old Heineken Cup competition and left us with a truncated and less valued replacement.

I'm sure I'm joining this debate late... but whats wrong with the new format?

awec

Zzippy wrote: »

I doubt it, seeing as some of them would be in a second division of any such league. As it stands they have a cosy cartel with significant barriers to entry, and a nice pie to divide up amongst themselves. Why would they give up any of that?

Indeed, I imagine it would meet very strong resistance from the lower ranking English clubs.

irishbucsfan

Neil3030 wrote: »

Straw man argument is a straw man argument. I can play too:

You treated Leinster's Heineken cup triumphs with a "meh, the game is rigged"?

No I certainly didn't, but I was conscious of it. It was still a massive achievement.

I actually went to the Leinster-Ulster final with a group from Leicester because of a family connection. They were massively complimentary about how tough the feat was to put two provinces in a final and huge fans of the way Leinster had been playing under Schmidt, and it was a great day out at Twickenham. At the same time we were able to discuss it and certain alicadoos from that club went on to be pretty important over the next few years. They weren't discrediting our achievements, just looking to make improvements.

I'm wrong to use the word rigged, that's a massive overstatement.

irishbucsfan

Larbre34 wrote: »

In the opinion of many rugby supporters, not just in Ireland, the new structure has gutted the spirit and magic of the old Heineken Cup competition and left us with a truncated and less valued replacement.

How?

CMOTDibbler

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Which of the promises of the EPCR are yet to be delivered? They've increased revenue, they've reformed qualification, moved to a 20-team structure, they've added the 3rd tier qualification tournament. Which was the exact promise that you don't think has been delivered on?

The qualifying competition is a bit of a joke. Two places in the Challenge cup which in itself has got so little coverage that it's also becoming a joke. I used to watch pretty much a Challenge Cup match every match week. I doubt I've seen more than three in total in the last two years.

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I believe the combined sponsorship is a fair bit higher than before now, I haven't seen the figures. It's easy to manipulate those figures either way because while Heineken were title sponsors before they also had smaller partnerships, so it's very hard to say.

As I said. There is very little information coming out of ECPR regarding finances. None whatsoever would be an accurate description.

irishbucsfan

Synode wrote: »

But it's not an even playing field. It's now positioned (I won't say rigged) in favour of English and French teams by way of their dominant financial positions and playing numbers. Do you not think some allowance for this should be made?

The competition isn't positioned in their favour in any way whatsoever. Their domestic leagues outperform ours financially and that has absolutely nothing to do with European rugby.

irishbucsfan

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

The qualifying competition is a bit of a joke. Two places in the Challenge cup which in itself has got so little coverage that it's also becoming a joke. I used to watch pretty much a Challenge Cup match every match week. I doubt I've seen more than three in total in the last two years.

All very subjective. The current 3rd tier competition is certainly better than the old one, which didn't exist. It's also gaining ground. To call it a joke is very disrespectful really, the future of rugby is in that competition and in the development of those sides.

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

As I said. There is very little information coming out of ECPR regarding finances. None whatsoever would be an accurate description.

This is really the first year they've been running the competition, it may be 18 months before we know anything.

jm08

irishbucsfan wrote: »

All very subjective. The current 3rd tier competition is certainly better than the old one, which didn't exist. It's also gaining ground. To call it a joke is very disrespectful really, the future of rugby is in that competition and in the development of those sides.


This is really the first year they've been running the competition, it may be 18 months before we know anything.

Its a joke of a competition that has competitive rugby being played in Siberia in winter.

errlloyd

Marty Moore leaving Leinster for Wasps has nothing to do with the change from H/Cup to Champions Cup. These are the factors that are worth discussing.

1. BT signed a massive domestic broadcasting contract with the English teams making them all richer
2. The English Salary Cap was increased
3. The lack of salary cap enforcement became an open secret.
4. Wasps became a big spender in the wake of moving ground and issuing bonds.
5. Irish provinces saw a drop in revenue due to declining attendances

irishbucsfan

jm08 wrote: »

Its a joke of a competition that has competitive rugby being played in Siberia in winter.

You're talking about the Challenge Cup?

irishbucsfan

errlloyd wrote: »

Marty Moore leaving Leinster for Wasps has nothing to do with the change from H/Cup to Champions Cup. These are the factors that are worth discussing.

1. BT signed a massive domestic broadcasting contract with the English teams making them all richer
2. The English Salary Cap was increased
3. The lack of salary cap enforcement became an open secret.
4. Wasps became a big spender in the wake of moving ground and issuing bonds.
5. Irish provinces saw a drop in revenue due to declining attendances

Wasps have not at any point been suspected of breaching the salary cap, according to them. So no, it's not a factor worth discussing in his move to the Premiership, that's unfair on Wasps. It is maybe worth discussing in relation to Keith Earls, however it'll be 2 seasons since Sarries "breached" it when he arrives.

CMOTDibbler

Synode wrote: »

But it's not an even playing field. It's now positioned (I won't say rigged) in favour of English and French teams by way of their dominant financial positions and playing numbers. Do you not think some allowance for this should be made?

ibf used the word 'rigged' and although he's retreated from the use of it, it's the thrust of what he's been saying.

I used the phrase semi-subsidised. The truth is somewhere around there. The reality is that the ERC was started before the Celtic League and long before the Italians joined the Pro12. The plan was to have the top European sides dook it out in a tournament every year. Since Ireland, Italy, Scotland and Wales didn't have a league worthy of the name and certainly not a professional league, 'top' meant whatever they could muster up to a maximim (pre agreed) number of teams per Nation. The professional leagues in France and England got a higher number as befitting their size.

The bone of contention that caused the vertical displacement of articles of amusement from within the perambulator was that the 'Celtic Nations'* (Italians are Celts for the purposes of this discussion) were getting an unfair chunk of the money because they didn't have to qualify for the tournament and were qualifying (relatively) easily into the knockouts because they could rest players from their league. Oh! and too many were getting into the tournament in the first place from the Pro 12 and taking that money off the good guys.



*Forget the Italians**, it was really the Irish (and Edinburgh... once).

**Well it was the Italians really, because they were loitering in the pools and letting Munster, Ulster and Leinster (and Edinburgh... once) into the knockouts by default.

Synode

irishbucsfan wrote: »

The competition isn't positioned in their favour in any way whatsoever. Their domestic leagues outperform ours financially and that has absolutely nothing to do with European rugby.

So explain what advantage Irish teams had before the shake up?

errlloyd

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Wasps have not at any point been suspected of breaching the salary cap, according to them. So no, it's not a factor worth discussing in his move to the Premiership, that's unfair on Wasps. It is maybe worth discussing in relation to Keith Earls, however it'll be 2 seasons since Sarries "breached" it when he arrives.

I never suggested Wasps broke the salary cap, in fact I kind of implied the opposite. Wasps were one of the teams abiding by the salary cap, but I am suggesting now that it has been nonesensed they feel less restricted by it than they did previously. That doesn't mean I think they are going to be breaking it next season, but I do think they are more free to make acquisitions which bring them close the the salary cap. (Previously being close the cap would have been a risk, because it would have prevented you giving a player who wanted to leave a raise, for example).

former total

Synode wrote: »

But it's not an even playing field. It's now positioned (I won't say rigged) in favour of English and French teams by way of their dominant financial positions and playing numbers. Do you not think some allowance for this should be made?

And we have a dominant financial position and much better playing numbers compared to the Italian sides. What allowance should we make for that?

Like, no-one is happy that the English and French teams have more money, but I've yet to hear a concrete solution as to what can be done about it, or indeed how it's unfair.

Synode

former total wrote: »

And we have a dominant financial position and much better playing numbers compared to the Italian sides. What allowance should we make for that?

Like, no-one is happy that the English and French teams have more money, but I've yet to hear a concrete solution as to what can be done about it, or indeed how it's unfair.

The Italian teams should be given more money to try get them up to scratch and allow them compete properly.

jm08

Treviso was going well there for a while until the recent upheaval meant that a lot of their players left (presumbably for security). Leicester picked up a few for example.

Now that everything is settled down, perhaps some will return back to Italy.

CMOTDibbler

former total wrote: »

And we have a dominant financial position and much better playing numbers compared to the Italian sides. What allowance should we make for that?

Like, no-one is happy that the English and French teams have more money, but I've yet to hear a concrete solution as to what can be done about it, or indeed how it's unfair.

Funny enough the Italians have a bigger professional game than we do. Afaik, the Eccellenza is professional as well as the two Pro 12 teams.

That's a bit more than us. Below that level there are a further four leagues.

Zzippy

former total wrote: »

And we have a dominant financial position and much better playing numbers compared to the Italian sides. What allowance should we make for that?

Like, no-one is happy that the English and French teams have more money, but I've yet to hear a concrete solution as to what can be done about it, or indeed how it's unfair.

I think since the new deal the Italians get a similar share to Ireland, despite providing half the number of teams. Same goes for Scotland. I'd say that's a pretty good allowance. The Welsh certainly aren't happy about it judging by Simon Thomas on twitter.

CMOTDibbler

irishbucsfan wrote: »

All very subjective. The current 3rd tier competition is certainly better than the old one, which didn't exist. It's also gaining ground. To call it a joke is very disrespectful really, the future of rugby is in that competition and in the development of those sides.

I think you misunderstood what I thought was amusing. Two sides qualifying is a joke. It's literally just a balancing act to make up the numbers for the Challenge Cup. If the Top 14 became the Top 16, guess where those two slots would go?

irishbucsfan wrote: »

This is really the first year they've been running the competition, it may be 18 months before we know anything.

This is actually the second year that the tournament has been run under the auspices of the EPCR and by its rules. That it actually had to be contracted out to the ERC in the first year because they hadn't got their act together is irrelevant to what money was made and disbursed.

Which information has yet to be published.

phog

Mahatma Geansai wrote: »

Unashamedly robbed from Yer Man on PlanetRugby, here are some stats from the provinces in Europe. Munster's surprising setpiece strength and Leinster's overall performance the standouts.

Team stats from the European Pool stages:

Scrums:
1 - Connacht - 44/46 = 95.7%
2 - Munster - 32/35 = 91.4%
3 - Ulster - 38/44 = 86.4%
4 - Leinster - 29/37 = 78.4%

Lineouts:
1 - Connacht - 81/91 = 89.0%
2 - Munster - 78/88 = 88.6%
3 - Ulster - 56/68 = 82.4%
4 - Leinster - 50/63 = 79.4%

Discipline:
1 - Munster - 1 card + 55 pens
2 - Connacht - 2 cards + 58 pens
3 - Ulster - 4 cards + 63 pens
4 - Leinster - 4 cards + 73 pens

Tries:
1 - Ulster - 21
2 - Connacht - 20
3 - Munster - 15
4 - Leinster - 5

Because we play different teams in the pool stages it's not fair to compare but considering Munster's set piece got some criticism those stats for us don't look too shabby

phog

According to Balls.ie CJ only heard he was included in the Irish Squad a few minutes before the squad was announced.

I'm shocked at that.

We got an e-mail, like five minutes before the media knew.

I was stressed, very stressed, it was a difficult two or three nights before that because there’s a lot of questions in your head but just to get that e-mail... I worked hard to get there and now I want to put hand up and see where it goes from there.