General Rugby Discussion II

thomond2006

OldRio wrote: »

Can I recommend OTB You Tube podcast 'State of the Union' with Keith Wood, Stuart Barnes, Ger Gilroy and Giles Morgan.
The first in a conversation about the future of the game. I really enjoyed it. Some interesting talking points.

"Atmosphere masks inadequacy".

So very true when you think about it.

I wouldn't be as dismissive as Wood of South Africa in the Pro14. The Cheetahs have been a good addition and were in contention for a second playoff qualification in three seasons. Free state rugby has massive history/tradition too, Grey College in Bloemfontein is a Springbok factory.

It's the Kings that have been an utter waste of a spot.

awec

thomond2006 wrote: »

"Atmosphere masks inadequacy".

So very true when you think about it.

I wouldn't be as dismissive as Wood of South Africa in the Pro14. The Cheetahs have been a good addition and were in contention for a second playoff qualification in three seasons. Free state rugby has massive history/tradition too, Grey College in Bloemfontein is a Springbok factory.

It's the Kings that have been an utter waste of a spot.

The Cheetahs are ok, I think "good addition" is OTT.

Both of them will struggle to get any better. So long as they are ineligible for top level competitions they will struggle to keep their better players.

If they were to disappear tomorrow I doubt anyone would miss them. That said, the same is true for other Pro14 sides, so maybe it's overly harsh.

AbusesToilets

Why are they ineligible for the HC? Is it due to travel distances or something?

Eod100

AbusesToilets wrote: »

Why are they ineligible for the HC? Is it due to travel distances or something?

I guess it's the European Champions Cup and yeah distance would probably play a part. I think originally when SA teams joined Pro14, EPCR had something in rules like for SA teams ineligible for at least 2 seasons implying they could in the future but I could have imagined that tbh.

pickarooney

awec wrote: »

The Cheetahs are ok, I think "good addition" is OTT.

Both of them will struggle to get any better. So long as they are ineligible for top level competitions they will struggle to keep their better players.

If they were to disappear tomorrow I doubt anyone would miss them. That said, the same is true for other Pro14 sides, so maybe it's overly harsh.

Ah no, we'd miss Ulster a bit

thomond2006

awec wrote: »

The Cheetahs are ok, I think "good addition" is OTT.

Both of them will struggle to get any better. So long as they are ineligible for top level competitions they will struggle to keep their better players.

If they were to disappear tomorrow I doubt anyone would miss them. That said, the same is true for other Pro14 sides, so maybe it's overly harsh.

I think breaking into the top 6 of the competition is as much as you can ask for.

Iompair

OldRio wrote: »

Can I recommend OTB You Tube podcast 'State of the Union' with Keith Wood, Stuart Barnes, Ger Gilroy and Giles Morgan.
The first in a conversation about the future of the game. I really enjoyed it. Some interesting talking points.

Some interesting stuff, but they're woefully out of date, talking about a rivalry between Leicester and Leinster as a reason for a B&I league. Leicester wouldn't be within an asses roar of Leinster given their form the last few seasons. Even the idea that the poorer premiership clubs, the Welsh teams and those on the cusp of being in the "second" division would agree to a joint league is not realistic.

Podge_irl

Iompair wrote: »

Some interesting stuff, but they're woefully out of date, talking about a rivalry between Leicester and Leinster as a reason for a B&I league. Leicester wouldn't be within an asses roar of Leinster given their form the last few seasons. Even the idea that the poorer premiership clubs, the Welsh teams and those on the cusp of being in the "second" division would agree to a joint league is not realistic.

Was there ever any semblance of a rivalry between Leinster and Leicester? Or they mean it could develop?

Leinster and Sarries is the only reasonable rivalry possible between Leinster and an English team as none of the others have been good enough for a while now. Or to be more generous, outside Sarries none of them have really tried very hard in the Euro cup.

connemara man

Barnes saying the player's ( that play a very dangerous game) are payed too much made me laugh

And the look inward for growth makes zero sense

Iompair

Podge_irl wrote: »

Was there ever any semblance of a rivalry between Leinster and Leicester? Or they mean it could develop?

Leinster and Sarries is the only reasonable rivalry possible between Leinster and an English team as none of the others have been good enough for a while now. Or to be more generous, outside Sarries none of them have really tried very hard in the Euro cup.

I think they mean one could develop, but it's hard to see how, from the looks of Leicester they have at least a season or 2 rebuilding to do, so if a B&I league did start, it would be a couple of years before they could think of matching Leinster and then a rivalry takes time to build on top of that. So say in 5/6 years time (being incredibly optimistic) Leicester v Leinster could be a rivalry. But in the podcast they talk like it would be an immediate thing.

They also would probably want to keep it simple so you're not talking about a conference system as apparently they're too complicated, so 20-24 teams in 2 leagues, nobody in either the pro14 or premiership would ever agree to go into a "lower" league.

AdamD

connemara man wrote: »

Barnes saying the player's ( that play a very dangerous game) are payed too much made me laugh

And the look inward for growth makes zero sense

I think in the UK its pretty unarguable that they are overpaid, every single club is running at a loss.

connemara man

AdamD wrote: »

I think in the UK its pretty unarguable that they are overpaid, every single club is running at a loss.

Overpaid in comparison to income yes, but not to risk of work

Squidgy Black

AdamD wrote: »

I think in the UK its pretty unarguable that they are overpaid, every single club is running at a loss.

The top 10% of players yes, but definitely not across the board. The average salary in the Premiership is between 70-120k for most players unless you're an international, and you pay a fairly hefty tax rate because they're classed as self employed too.

OldRio

connemara man wrote: »

Barnes saying the player's ( that play a very dangerous game) are payed too much made me laugh

And the look inward for growth makes zero sense

Money will be scarce therefore growing the game internally makes complete sense to me.

We enjoy a game that is not that popular. The idea of cracking the next 'big market' and global expansion is utter horse manure IMHO.

How any achievement on growing internally can be done I know not but some form of British and Irish league/conference makes sense.

pickarooney

Squidgy Black wrote: »

The top 10% of players yes, but definitely not across the board. The average salary in the Premiership is between 70-120k for most players unless you're an international, and you pay a fairly hefty tax rate because they're classed as self employed too.

How are they self employed?

connemara man

OldRio wrote: »

Money will be scarce therefore growing the game internally makes complete sense to me.

We enjoy a game that is not that popular. The idea of cracking the next 'big market' and global expansion is utter horse manure IMHO.

How any achievement on growing internally can be done I know not but some form of British and Irish league/conference makes sense.

But a BnI league isn't going to increase the amount of teams playing and spread the game internally and get more fans watching. If anything in England more teams will play at a lower level then they are now if it's a straight league. And if it goes along a conference method the 2 leagues will look relatively the same with a head to head competition at the end.

But the biggest thing a BnI league would do is make a European cup less special/important as over 2 thirds of those teams would play eachother on a semi regular basis.

I'm not against a B&I league in principle but it doesn't solve the bigger picture issues, if anything tightens the market.

Squidgy Black

pickarooney wrote: »

How are they self employed?

I could be wrong but had heard before that players were contractors as opposed to full time employees.

blackwhite

Squidgy Black wrote: »

The top 10% of players yes, but definitely not across the board. The average salary in the Premiership is between 70-120k for most players unless you're an international, and you pay a fairly hefty tax rate because they're classed as self employed too.

What exactly is the difference in tax rates for employees v self employed in the UK??

OldRio

connemara man wrote: »

But a BnI league isn't going to increase the amount of teams playing and spread the game internally and get more fans watching. If anything in England more teams will play at a lower level then they are now if it's a straight league. And if it goes along a conference method the 2 leagues will look relatively the same with a head to head competition at the end.

But the biggest thing a BnI league would do is make a European cup less special/important as over 2 thirds of those teams would play eachother on a semi regular basis.

I'm not against a B&I league in principle but it doesn't solve the bigger picture issues, if anything tightens the market.

Sorry but I can't agree that having more meaningful games would not increase attendances. A British and Irish league or conference has to be the way to go.
Conferences set up like the NFL is surely worth examining.

Whatever happens post COVID-19 (Whenever that is) things cannot remain the same.The money is simply not there.
If ever there was a time for joined up thinking, it is now.

connemara man

OldRio wrote: »

Sorry but I can't agree that having more meaningful games would not increase attendances. A British and Irish league or conference has to be the way to go.
Conferences set up like the NFL is surely worth examining.

Whatever happens post COVID-19 (Whenever that is) things cannot remain the same.The money is simply not there.
If ever there was a time for joined up thinking, it is now.

I didn't say attendances I said growth.

More people will go see the club's involved. So there's more money there. What about other teams? This stuff works for the provinces as there's an over arching body looking out for more than just the red line.

But (take just England) there'll be no room for another Exeter to happen. So when the game eventually after a few years hits saturation point what then? Will there be room if there's a huge boom I'm money for the Welsh to sort out there structures and possibly go to 5 team's will the Scots have room to expand?

Joined up thinking is important but the thinking needs to also be 10-20 years long.

The mé féinism of it all only works short term. Getting rugby to a place where it's a watched sport in other countries in Europe means you can sell TV rights of your league there and visa versa which creates A LOT more money than having a B&I league that will fall into the same problems there is now because of how clubs (mainly English) are owned, and an European cup that will be even less relevant since it changed hands.

pickarooney

I can't think that killing off Italian rugby would help the game long term.

OldRio

connemara man wrote: »

I didn't say attendances I said growth.

More people will go see the club's involved. So there's more money there. What about other teams? This stuff works for the provinces as there's an over arching body looking out for more than just the red line.

But (take just England) there'll be no room for another Exeter to happen. So when the game eventually after a few years hits saturation point what then? Will there be room if there's a huge boom I'm money for the Welsh to sort out there structures and possibly go to 5 team's will the Scots have room to expand?

Joined up thinking is important but the thinking needs to also be 10-20 years long.

The mé féinism of it all only works short term. Getting rugby to a place where it's a watched sport in other countries in Europe means you can sell TV rights of your league there and visa versa which creates A LOT more money than having a B&I league that will fall into the same problems there is now because of how clubs (mainly English) are owned, and an European cup that will be even less relevant since it changed hands.

I don't see a huge boom in money in the future. I also don't see another Exeter happening in the short or medium term.
We have to think short term because the pro game could be lost if we don't. Unfortunately this means less not more teams playing professionaly. More semi pro or amateur teams.
As for getting more people watching it in Europe? I'm sorry but we should concentrate on growing that market in these islands.
The financial pressure is huge at the moment. How we square the circle with the private owners in England and France I don't know but somethings got to give

AdamD

connemara man wrote: »

Overpaid in comparison to income yes, but not to risk of work

If the companies cant afford to keep paying them, they're overpaid.

AbusesToilets

The only viable solution to actually growing the game across Europe is a Europe wide league. It's a more attractive product to sell, and offers avenues for Jaguares like national teams to join and build the game. The problem is the entrenched positions of the various leagues and teams that would miss out. As ever, the NFL offers the best model to follow in that regard. A 32 team competition, with conferences and an alternating schedule would be ideal.

A proper seamless season, flowing from club game to internationals is key. You can't sell a product when the best players are missing. Promotion and relegation needs to go too, it's an archaic structure from the amateur days. Doesn't work in a professional set up, unless it's a private owner pumping millions into a team, which causes its own issues.

RugbyLover123

Have a fair bit of spare time with this lockdown so I gave what I’d like to see happen a go and what I think is most feasible. Obviously going to be impossible to keep everyone happy.


Northern Hemisphere Club Game:

40 teams (5 Conferences of 8 Teams)

3 British/Irish Zones and 2 French/Italy Zones

14 teams in France
2 teams in Italy
4 teams in Ireland
4 teams in Wales
2 teams in Scotland
And arguably 13 teams in England

That’s 39 teams. Try and develop one more team - either someone like Leeds, Ealing or one on the Scottish Borders. Or potentially a Spanish/Georgian team. Then that’s 40 teams.

Play each team in your conference home and away. Top in each zone, as well as best 3 runners-up go into seeded finals, similar to what we have currently in H-Cup.

Bottom in each of the French/Italy conference are relegated to the ProD2. With 2 teams from there brought up.

There’d obviously be some controversy with English Championship sides and it being closed off but realistically none of the sides at present or in the last 10 years (bar London Welsh) have been promoted.

That’s 14 Conference Games + 3 potential finals games.


Southern Hemisphere Club Game:

18 teams (3 Conferences of 6 Teams)

1 SA/Argentina Zone + 2 NZ/Oz/Japan Zones

2 Argentina Teams
4 South African
5 NZ
4 Oz
3 Japan

Same as Northern Hem. Play each team in your conference home and away. Top 2 plus best 2 3rd place teams into seeded finals.

I’m not sure what the intricacies of the Japanese Top League are but taking into consideration their playing pool, emergence of their national team, interest and financial situation they should be able to produce 3 quality pro sides that would be competitive in the NZ/OZ conferences. They’d be able to attract the best of the rest of the top teams as there’ll be smaller squads.

That’s 10 Conference Games + 3 potential finals games.

Slightly shorter then NH, but when you factor in the Mitre Cup and Currie Cup there will be more games for SH players.

-

Play first home/away Conference fixtures in 8 week block at start of February (30/31 Jan 2021)

1 Week Break (27/28 March 2021)

6 Week International Block
6 Nations/Rugby Championship - bring in Japan & Fiji + promotion/relegation with competition involving Samoa, Tonga, US, Canada, Uruguay, Russia
(Also play Mitre/Currie Cup fixtures)
(Ends 8/9 May 2021)

1 Week Break (15/16 May 2021)

Second 8 week club block (10/11 July 2021)

1 Week Break (17/18 July 2021)

3 Week Block of Zone Finals (7/8 August 2021)

1 Week Break (14/15 August 2021)

9 Week Block for World Cup/Lions Tour/Potential Nations Tournament or International Club Tournament every 4 years. (> 16/17 October 2021)

-


That gives players 10/11 weeks off & 5/6 weeks pre season.

Aligns both hemispheres with both given equal advantage when coming into WC.

Puts Lions Tours slightly later in the year coming into the Southern Hemispheres Summer, so better conditions.

Obviously this would mean the end of the Heineken Cup which pretty much everyone on here will not want to accept. But it would add importance to your conference fixtures and the knockout style finishes. I did contemplate adding a H-Cup style tournament but I’m not sure where you would squeeze in the 8 game weeks needed.

With less club games there will be no need for larger squads, which will mean the talent will need to be spread more evenly. Making other teams more competitive and stronger. For example, a good Leinster/Munster club player on the fringes would add much more to say the border Scottish team I mentioned or one of the Japanese clubs. Just an example.

If you listen to any current player they think there is too many games, currently around 34/35 games for some players. Here, the most games any player can play is 29.

You could package the TV rights in 2 parts. First half of the season and then second half of the season. With 6 Nations/RC in first half of season both parts carry pretty much equal measure unless it’s a WC or Lions year.

Have probably missed something blindingly obvious but open to criticism.

AbusesToilets

I'd knock off a team a piece from England and France, and add 3 national teams. One from Germany, Spain, and Georgia maybe.

Iompair

RugbyLover123 wrote: »

Have a fair bit of spare time with this lockdown so I gave what I’d like to see happen a go and what I think is most feasible. Obviously going to be impossible to keep everyone happy.
.......

Great to see some thought into a big plan. Lots I would agree with.

Major problem would be splitting the French and English clubs into groups, I would predict lots of complaints about ruining long term rivalrys even if they still got to play once a year. Also given the wailing and nashing of teeth over super 15 anything other than a straight league will be decried as "to complex".

It's also not great for "growing the game". There would probably need to be some sort of salary cap component to.

But less games is fine by me, I'd rather quality over quantity, the international component would keep things going unlike American football.

thomond2006

Super Rugby is a warning that overstretching competitions/expansion is not always a good idea. Sometimes you need to focus on solidifying your existing markets. Look at Australia here as an example where the attendance has declined by half in six seasons.

By the sounds of it rugby will be doing very well just to recover their leagues as is. There won't be any expansion for years. I do think a B&I league is going to happen in the next 4-5 seasons and that's a merger type situation versus an expansion.

The Lost Sheep

Iompair wrote: »

Great to see some thought into a big plan. Lots I would agree with.

Major problem would be splitting the French and English clubs into groups, I would predict lots of complaints about ruining long term rivalrys even if they still got to play once a year. Also given the wailing and nashing of teeth over super 15 anything other than a straight league will be decried as "to complex".

It's also not great for "growing the game". There would probably need to be some sort of salary cap component to.

But less games is fine by me, I'd rather quality over quantity, the international component would keep things going unlike American football.

there wouldnt necessarily be any issue in England with some games lost if it meant more games against other sides like Irish, Welsh or others that saw incomes increase.
You could have other lower tier with more sides from Georgia, Germany and have some element of promotion/playoffs to allow these sides progress to the top tier
Major area that isnt considered is north America and look to how pro rugby there goes and tie that in some how as well.

thomond2006 wrote: »

Super Rugby is a warning that overstretching competitions/expansion is not always a good idea. Sometimes you need to focus on solidifying your existing markets. Look at Australia here as an example where the attendance has declined by half in six seasons.

By the sounds of it rugby will be doing very well just to recover their leagues as is. There won't be any expansion for years. I do think a B&I league is going to happen in the next 4-5 seasons and that's a merger type situation versus an expansion.

well then how do you ever really expand the sport. If you dont truly look to help other countries and clubs improve then?
You have to look to expand as the sport simply isnt big enough to just keep looking inwards at its existing markets.
Australian rugby is struggling at lower levels. Kids playing etc. That doesnt help support of the pro game.

thomond2006

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

well then how do you ever really expand the sport. If you dont truly look to help other countries and clubs improve then?
You have to look to expand as the sport simply isnt big enough to just keep looking inwards at its existing markets.
Australian rugby is struggling at lower levels. Kids playing etc. That doesnt help support of the pro game.

I agree, my point was the chance of radical change is IMO zero over the next few years. Consolidation will the main aim. You might call expansion what others would call overstretching.