Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

General Rugby Discussion II

Options
1…6162646667…293

Comments

  • Options
    #1892
    irishbucsfan
    Registered Users Posts: 37,978 ✭✭✭✭irishbucsfan


    Podge_irl wrote: »
    No, it's only because I disagree that they are massive fundamental differences and you haven't done a very good job of convincing me otherwise.

    There are more ways to influence a competition then going "ah sure go out there and score piles of own goals lads". If you don't think that pressure would come on a province who is 0 from 5 to play their best team if a win in the final game could help another province get in as a qualifier then I think that is naive in the extreme.
    And if the IRFU did that, they would be the ones who ultimately lose out.
    irishbucsfan wrote: »
    It is extremely difficult to envision a scenario where Munster or Leinster would act maliciously to further the other at the expense of the competition. Because they are shareholders of the competition.

    Whereas Mohad Altrad is not a shareholder of EPCR. He could happily hand out "team orders", there is nothing protecting the competition against that. Which is absolutely not true of the IRFU.


  • Options
    #1893
    prawnsambo
    Registered Users Posts: 13,375 ✭✭✭✭prawnsambo


    Podge_irl wrote: »
    Yes they would have been. But it doesn't exactly take a massive leap of imagination to imagine that it was the team Munster playing who needed that result to knock out Leinster for example.
    Sorry, maybe I'm being a bit thick this morning, but I just can't follow your logic here. :confused:


  • Options
    #1894
    Podge_irl
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 26,886 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    irishbucsfan wrote: »
    And if the IRFU did that, they would be the ones who ultimately lose out.

    Only if they're stupid enough to make it obvious and get caught. I massively disagree with your premise here. They already distort the Pro14 with camps and resting periods.


  • Options
    #1895
    Podge_irl
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 26,886 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    prawnsambo wrote: »
    Sorry, maybe I'm being a bit thick this morning, but I just can't follow your logic here. :confused:

    If Wasps beat Munster by 4 tries then Wasps make the playoffs at Leinster's expense. Munster can't qualify no matter what and have several walking wounded players. They would generally rest them for a dead rubber but are pressured by the IRFU to put out their strongest team to give Leinster the best shot of qualifying.


  • Options
    #1896
    irishbucsfan
    Registered Users Posts: 37,978 ✭✭✭✭irishbucsfan


    Podge_irl wrote: »
    Only if they're stupid enough to make it obvious and get caught. I massively disagree with your premise here. They already distort the Pro14 with camps and resting periods.

    No. It's nothing to do with getting caught.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1897
    Podge_irl
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 26,886 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    irishbucsfan wrote: »
    No. It's nothing to do with getting caught.

    Yes. It's everything to do with getting caught.


    Gee, this debating lark is easy.


  • Options
    #1898
    irishbucsfan
    Registered Users Posts: 37,978 ✭✭✭✭irishbucsfan


    Podge_irl wrote: »
    Yes. It's everything to do with getting caught.


    Gee, this debating lark is easy.

    What I said has absolutely nothing to do with the IRFU getting caught or doing anything clandestine whatsoever. It would apply equally if they were completely allowed to do anything.


  • Options
    #1899
    Podge_irl
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 26,886 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    irishbucsfan wrote: »
    What I said has absolutely nothing to do with the IRFU getting caught or doing anything clandestine whatsoever. It would apply equally if they were completely allowed to do anything.

    How exactly does the competition suffer, and thus the IRFU suffer, if the IRFU apply imperceptible pressure on their teams which never comes to light?


  • Options
    #1900
    prawnsambo
    Registered Users Posts: 13,375 ✭✭✭✭prawnsambo


    Podge_irl wrote: »
    If Wasps beat Munster by 4 tries then Wasps make the playoffs at Leinster's expense. Munster can't qualify no matter what and have several walking wounded players. They would generally rest them for a dead rubber but are pressured by the IRFU to put out their strongest team to give Leinster the best shot of qualifying.
    But that's trying to win a game. Which is what teams play matches for. We've had numerous examples of teams going out in meaningless (to them) dead rubbers and turning over their opponents. Didn't Glasgow turn up in the last round and beat Exeter for their only win in the pool stages?

    I can't see how anyone would take issue with that.

    Edit: Just to add, that there may be a remote possibility that throwing a dead rubber might benefit say Leinster or Ulster, but I think that requires some odd permutations to have an affect. I'm actually struggling to come up with a scenario where that would work.


  • Options
    #1901
    irishbucsfan
    Registered Users Posts: 37,978 ✭✭✭✭irishbucsfan


    Podge_irl wrote: »
    How exactly does the competition suffer, and thus the IRFU suffer, if the IRFU apply imperceptible pressure on their teams which never comes to light?

    If the IRFU act anti-competitively the competition directly suffers.

    There is a short-term impact which is bad for the team who they screw over in whatever example you want to conjure up. That is a relatively minor impact.

    The long-term impact, the reduction in competitiveness and loss of credibility of the competition, is far greater and is exactly what organisations like UEFA and EPCR (and PRL) are protecting themselves against.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1902
    awec
    Administrators Posts: 53,796 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭awec


    irishbucsfan wrote: »
    Because a private individual takes money out of the game and can leave at any time. The NGBs are non-profits who directly depend on the future of the sport and would be directly damaged by that sort of collusion.

    Also, there absolutely is something that can be done about that in a practical sense. If the IRFU ever tanked a game in Europe to benefit another side the fallout would be monstrous.
    The IRFU just moved one player from one of it's teams to another of it's teams. They can do this on a whim really, inter-pro transfers are not really real transfers and contracts are fairly meaningless.

    In the strict sense this is a pretty unfair practice and is exactly why owners are not allowed to own multiple teams in most sports.

    So I get why the EPCR are against it, but it is fairly hypocritical. Do as I say, not as I do.


  • Options
    #1903
    Interested Observer
    Registered Users Posts: 13,105 ✭✭✭✭Interested Observer


    Podge_irl wrote: »
    How exactly does the competition suffer, and thus the IRFU suffer, if the IRFU apply imperceptible pressure on their teams which never comes to light?

    Do you not think the point is valid the the IRFU are far far far far far less likely to do this than a private individual is?

    I don't envisage the IRFU every attempting something like that. I would be shocked if they did.


  • Options
    #1904
    awec
    Administrators Posts: 53,796 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭awec


    Interested Observer wrote: »
    Do you not think the point is valid the the IRFU are far far far far far less likely to do this than a private individual is?

    I don't envisage the IRFU every attempting something like that. I would be shocked if they did.
    Not really.


  • Options
    #1905
    irishbucsfan
    Registered Users Posts: 37,978 ✭✭✭✭irishbucsfan


    awec wrote: »
    Not really.

    :confused:


  • Options
    #1906
    Interested Observer
    Registered Users Posts: 13,105 ✭✭✭✭Interested Observer


    awec wrote: »
    The IRFU just moved one player from one of it's teams to another of it's teams. They can do this on a whim really, inter-pro transfers are not really real transfers and contracts are fairly meaningless.

    In the strict sense this is a pretty unfair practice and is exactly why owners are not allowed to own multiple teams in most sports.

    So I get why the EPCR are against it, but it is fairly hypocritical. Do as I say, not as I do.

    For gods sake no they can't, or else he'd be at Ulster. How many times do we have to have this stupid discussion?


  • Options
    #1907
    Podge_irl
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 26,886 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    prawnsambo wrote: »
    But that's trying to win a game. Which is what teams play matches for. We've had numerous examples of teams going out in meaningless (to them) dead rubbers and turning over their opponents. Didn't Glasgow turn up in the last round and beat Exeter for their only win in the pool stages?

    I can't see how anyone would take issue with that.

    Edit: Just to add, that there may be a remote possibility that throwing a dead rubber might benefit say Leinster or Ulster, but I think that requires some odd permutations to have an affect. I'm actually struggling to come up with a scenario where that would work.

    Yes, but it is the fact the IRFU own both teams that is directly affecting the outcome nonetheless. It is less egregious than throwing a game, but it is still affecting the competition. Obviously it happens anyway, that's not really the point - the point is that the team could be incentivised/pressured to perform in a way they wouldn't if not for the fact the IRFU own both teams.

    Obviously throwing a game is less likely because the provinces are never in the same group.


  • Options
    #1908
    awec
    Administrators Posts: 53,796 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭awec


    irishbucsfan wrote: »
    :confused:
    The IRFU mess around in the league all the time, why people think them doing it in Europe is such a huge leap is baffling.


    Do the IRFU benefit from having multiple teams in Europe? 100%. Do they take steps to ensure maximum return from all their teams in Europe? 100%. Do they have means available to them, as a result of having more than one team, that are not available to others who don't own multiple teams? 100%.



    But lets all just pretend it doesn't really happen.


  • Options
    #1909
    prawnsambo
    Registered Users Posts: 13,375 ✭✭✭✭prawnsambo


    awec wrote: »
    The IRFU just moved one player from one of it's teams to another of it's teams. They can do this on a whim really, inter-pro transfers are not really real transfers and contracts are fairly meaningless.

    In the strict sense this is a pretty unfair practice and is exactly why owners are not allowed to own multiple teams in most sports.

    So I get why the EPCR are against it, but it is fairly hypocritical. Do as I say, not as I do.
    And as everyone (since this saga started) has pointed out, the IRFU cannot move players like chess pieces. The player has to want to move. Joey did not want to move to Ulster, but Munster was a better prospect for him to benefit his career. You can read all about it on The 42.


  • Options
    #1910
    irishbucsfan
    Registered Users Posts: 37,978 ✭✭✭✭irishbucsfan


    awec wrote: »
    The IRFU just moved one player from one of it's teams to another of it's teams. They can do this on a whim really, inter-pro transfers are not really real transfers and contracts are fairly meaningless.

    In the strict sense this is a pretty unfair practice and is exactly why owners are not allowed to own multiple teams in most sports.

    So I get why the EPCR are against it, but it is fairly hypocritical. Do as I say, not as I do.

    The IRFU moving players for game time is not an example of anti-competitive behaviour. Players move between private clubs all the time for all sorts of reasons.


  • Options
    #1911
    Podge_irl
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 26,886 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    Interested Observer wrote: »
    Do you not think the point is valid the the IRFU are far far far far far less likely to do this than a private individual is?

    I don't envisage the IRFU every attempting something like that. I would be shocked if they did.

    I don't think an impression that one entity is less likely to actually do it is an overly sound basis for a rule.

    I do think they are less likely to do it (I do not think the chance is as small as you do mind). I also think it will never actually be an issue because as you say the IRFU are part of EPCR. I do think it is slightly hypocritical though - but I'm not exactly about to go marching to Lausanne to complain about it.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1912
    irishbucsfan
    Registered Users Posts: 37,978 ✭✭✭✭irishbucsfan


    awec wrote: »
    The IRFU mess around in the league all the time

    No, they don't


  • Options
    #1913
    awec
    Administrators Posts: 53,796 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭awec


    irishbucsfan wrote: »
    The IRFU moving players for game time is not an example of anti-competitive behaviour. Players move between private clubs all the time for all sorts of reasons.
    Mid-contract without any compensation?

    Fire us up a few examples there.


  • Options
    #1914
    irishbucsfan
    Registered Users Posts: 37,978 ✭✭✭✭irishbucsfan


    Podge_irl wrote: »
    I also think it will never actually be an issue because as you say the IRFU are part of EPCR

    Wow what an excellent point!


  • Options
    #1915
    awec
    Administrators Posts: 53,796 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭awec


    irishbucsfan wrote: »
    No, they don't
    Ah you're right, I must have been dreaming when we have all these interpros consisting of B teams, players being given enforced rests after x number of games etc.


  • Options
    #1916
    irishbucsfan
    Registered Users Posts: 37,978 ✭✭✭✭irishbucsfan


    awec wrote: »
    Mid-contract without any compensation?

    Fire us up a few examples there.

    I think you're very mistaken if the move being mid-contract or involving any compensation (which we don't actually know, the42 seem to suggest that's not the case) is even remotely relevant to what we're discussing. Wasn't George Ford released early from his contract? Again, not that its remotely relevant.


  • Options
    #1917
    awec
    Administrators Posts: 53,796 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭awec


    irishbucsfan wrote: »
    I think you're very mistaken if the move being mid-contract or involving any compensation (which we don't actually know, the42 seem to suggest that's not the case) is even remotely relevant to what we're discussing. Wasn't George Ford released early from his contract? Again, not that its remotely relevant.

    Of course it's relevant. It's the entire point.


  • Options
    #1918
    irishbucsfan
    Registered Users Posts: 37,978 ✭✭✭✭irishbucsfan


    awec wrote: »
    Ah you're right, I must have been dreaming when we have all these interpros consisting of B teams, players being given enforced rests after x number of games etc.

    Ah here, what are you talking about :pac:

    Player Welfare is not "messing about" with the league!

    Just to be clear, the teams resting those players are the ones who have been by far the most successful teams in the league right? I honestly thought only the English fans were daft enough to trot out lines like this! I never thought someone who actually follows the league could believe this.


  • Options
    #1919
    prawnsambo
    Registered Users Posts: 13,375 ✭✭✭✭prawnsambo


    irishbucsfan wrote: »
    I think you're very mistaken if the move being mid-contract or involving any compensation (which we don't actually know, the42 seem to suggest that's not the case) is even remotely relevant to what we're discussing. Wasn't George Ford released early from his contract? Again, not that its remotely relevant.
    And although not a player, ROG being released by Racing to go to NZ with no compensation.


  • Options
    #1920
    awec
    Administrators Posts: 53,796 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭awec


    irishbucsfan wrote: »
    Ah here, what are you talking about :pac:

    Player Welfare is not "messing about" with the league!

    Just to be clear, the teams resting those players are the ones who have been by far the most successful teams in the league right? I honestly thought only the English fans were daft enough to trot out lines like this! I never thought someone who actually follows the league could believe this.
    Says IBF.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1921
    irishbucsfan
    Registered Users Posts: 37,978 ✭✭✭✭irishbucsfan


    awec wrote: »
    Of course it's relevant. It's the entire point.

    No, it's very much not relevant if players are moving between provinces when the exact same thing happens between private clubs for all sorts of reasons. DOC moving to Worcester for example, and that was mid-season iirc? Dan Tuohy to Bristol?

    I mean ultimately this isn't a remotely good point. It's turned the discussion down a very silly path indeed.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement