Star Signing

[Rizzo]

Personally, I'd much rather have team players than "stars" .

[Qbec]

I think the point being made about the top two tiers of football are stopped during internationals is something that the Clubs should look at, Although I am not holding out a lot of hope it would be taken up.
As I'm sure that others club would be happy to carry on with the way things are as it is better for them, If so then the arrangement/compensation to clubs such as Tigers needs to addressed for the future.

[me2]

Club rugby stopping during Internationals wouldn't work for 2 big reasons:

1. Domestic games are actually played during International periods BECAUSE the majority of clubs voted to do so. When the Premiership started, there was no club rugby on 5N/6N weekends but then the clubs decided to change this and the majority voted to play on the same weekends as Internationals. (This was done to smooth out revenue over the whole year & also to capitalise on the extra interest that the sport got during international periods.


2. If breaks were taken for international weekends, more club games would need to be played midweek (especially towards the end of the season). Player welfare is (rightly) far more of an issue now than it was a decade ago and the physicality of the game has also increased. Players are no longer able to play 3 games in the space of 8 or 9 days as would be required with mid-week games & so midweek games are only played if absolutely essential (ie due to postponed matches that cannot be resceheduled to any other time).

[Qbec]

I hear what you are saying, But my question to that would be at what point would it be that "a" club that was so affected by "call ups to international squads" they were only able to make a complete team by fielding its "A Squad".
That would not be reasonable to expect that club or indeed the players to do.

The point I was making was that clubs affected by such conditions could have their games postponed until they were able to compete in a fair & reasonable manner, after all if they are to continue to be encouraged to bring on English players then something has to done to ensure they are then not penalised for doing so.

[BJ.]

2. If breaks were taken for international weekends, more club games would need to be played midweek (especially towards the end of the season).

The need for which would be greatly alleviated if we got rid of the LV Cup.

[me2]

Correct BJ, but the LV Cup is retained as the clubs want it to stay because for the revenue it generates. Even Tigers would like it to remain as they get to include tickets to it in their ST packages & therefore get the guaranteed income even if the fans don't turn up in person. Not to mention the sponsorship & TV income that also gets divided equally amongst the clubs...no matter how hard (or not) they try to win the tin pot.


Qbec, you simply CAN'T postpone games involving clubs affected by the RWC as that would mean Tigers having to play a quarter of the league as midweek games at the business end of the season! That would have a knock-on impact not just on the 7 games postponed but also on the 7 or 8 games already scheduled on the weekends either side of the midweek fixtures.
Either way, those games would be played with weakened squads as players are not able to play Sat/Weds/Sat/Weds/Sat/Weds/Sat/... and give anything close to 100%. Injuries become more common (both minor & more serious ones) and potentially careers could be ended prematurely by over-playing/over-working already tired players.

Is that really what you want? Rugby players are human beings, not machines. They need chance to recover properly between matches!

[crateman]

The season, fixture list and compensation for missed players will not be sorted out fairly and to the benefit of ALL the clubs, i.e. including Tigers, until the lesser clubs put their self-interest to one side.

Or when hell freezes over.

My money's on the latter.

[JWM]

Oh please, not 'stars'!

Apart from the whole salary cap issue... to play at top level you need to have a certain self-confidence and driveness. But it's a fine line between that and arrogant self-importance, which the accolade of 'stardom' all too often milks, especially in this modern era of the cult of celebrity.

I want team players, not self-promoters and show-boaters. I want homegrown talent to be brought on and nurtured wherever possible. I want loyalty and commitment - more of the Jonnos, and Corrys, and Chutes, and Kays, and Castros of this world - not short-termists who will leave at the drop of a hat because of the smell of money. I want people who play well, and also provide a great whole-person role model for our kids and young people. Heaven forbid that they become any more like the ridiculous roundy ball preening primadonnas (viz Tevez). The playing abilities of mercenaries may be impressive, but they're not admirable.

[me2]

The season, fixture list and compensation for missed players will not be sorted out fairly and to the benefit of ALL the clubs, i.e. including Tigers, until the lesser clubs put their self-interest to one side.

Or when hell freezes over.

My money's on the latter.

How do you propose sorting it out "for the benefit of all sides"?
Surely if it is restructured to benefit clubs like Tigers it will have to be at the expense of clubs like Falcons? If it wasn't then they wouldn't vote to retain the status quo!

However it is structured there will ALWAYS be self-interest involved, whether that self-interest is Tigers or another club. Each club will always vote for what favours them the most. Tigers just happen to be in the minority at present. If/when they are in the majority & the focus of the salf-interest shifts that doesn't mean it will be "for the benefit of all sides" as you suggest.

Like the other 11 clubs, Tigers are a commercial business & will always want what is best for them individually, not necessarily what is best for the greater good. Every other club is the same.

[crateman]

The season, fixture list and compensation for missed players will not be sorted out fairly and to the benefit of ALL the clubs, i.e. including Tigers, until the lesser clubs put their self-interest to one side.

Or when hell freezes over.

My money's on the latter.

How do you propose sorting it out "for the benefit of all sides"?
Surely if it is restructured to benefit clubs like Tigers it will have to be at the expense of clubs like Falcons? If it wasn't then they wouldn't vote to retain the status quo!

However it is structured there will ALWAYS be self-interest involved, whether that self-interest is Tigers or another club. Each club will always vote for what favours them the most. Tigers just happen to be in the minority at present. If/when they are in the majority & the focus of the salf-interest shifts that doesn't mean it will be "for the benefit of all sides" as you suggest.

Like the other 11 clubs, Tigers are a commercial business & will always want what is best for them individually, not necessarily what is best for the greater good. Every other club is the same.

It would be fairer if the clubs producing the england players, actually got the compensation money. The cock up was having all the clubs deciding on divvying it up in the 1st place. It should never have been up to the lesser clubs to decide where the cash went, it was none of their business.

But, now that the deals done, self-interest will always get in the way, and a fair result now is pretty much impossible.

As I said, hell will freeze over first. You did read that far didn't you?

It seems we agree.

[Hull Fan]

I think the point being made about the top two tiers of football are stopped during internationals is something that the Clubs should look at, Although I am not holding out a lot of hope it would be taken up.
As I'm sure that others club would be happy to carry on with the way things are as it is better for them, If so then the arrangement/compensation to clubs such as Tigers needs to addressed for the future.

I agree, to some extent but with my cynical head on over the next few years i think Tigers will be less affected by call ups than they are at present. Deacon will go, as will Murphy,Waldrom probably wont be called up again. Ayerza may well consider his international future due to game time at WC, although Argentina may well lose some of the older props. Even Ben Youngs may get overtaken in pecking order, so we might enter into a period when we are in a better situation.

[Old Hob]

Oh please, not 'stars'!

Apart from the whole salary cap issue... to play at top level you need to have a certain self-confidence and driveness. But it's a fine line between that and arrogant self-importance, which the accolade of 'stardom' all too often milks, especially in this modern era of the cult of celebrity.

I want team players, not self-promoters and show-boaters. I want homegrown talent to be brought on and nurtured wherever possible. I want loyalty and commitment - more of the Jonnos, and Corrys, and Chutes, and Kays, and Castros of this world - not short-termists who will leave at the drop of a hat because of the smell of money. I want people who play well, and also provide a great whole-person role model for our kids and young people. Heaven forbid that they become any more like the ridiculous roundy ball preening primadonnas (viz Tevez). The playing abilities of mercenaries may be impressive, but they're not admirable.

I whole-heartedly agree. Otherwise you get:
http://www.leicestertigers.com/forum/vi ... =1&t=33022

[me2]

The season, fixture list and compensation for missed players will not be sorted out fairly and to the benefit of ALL the clubs, i.e. including Tigers, until the lesser clubs put their self-interest to one side.

Or when hell freezes over.

My money's on the latter.

How do you propose sorting it out "for the benefit of all sides"?
Surely if it is restructured to benefit clubs like Tigers it will have to be at the expense of clubs like Falcons? If it wasn't then they wouldn't vote to retain the status quo!

However it is structured there will ALWAYS be self-interest involved, whether that self-interest is Tigers or another club. Each club will always vote for what favours them the most. Tigers just happen to be in the minority at present. If/when they are in the majority & the focus of the salf-interest shifts that doesn't mean it will be "for the benefit of all sides" as you suggest.

Like the other 11 clubs, Tigers are a commercial business & will always want what is best for them individually, not necessarily what is best for the greater good. Every other club is the same.

It would be fairer if the clubs producing the england players, actually got the compensation money. The cock up was having all the clubs deciding on divvying it up in the 1st place. It should never have been up to the lesser clubs to decide where the cash went, it was none of their business.

But, now that the deals done, self-interest will always get in the way, and a fair result now is pretty much impossible.

As I said, hell will freeze over first. You did read that far didn't you?

It seems we agree.

I agree that it would be fairer for the money to be given to the clubs providing the players but that is not "fairly and to the benefit of ALL the clubs"
(My bold, your capitals).

You cannot have a system that benefits all clubs. PRL have voted for the method that benefits the majority, even if this isnt the method that Tigers (and Tigers fans) feel is the fairest.

[Ben the Tiger]

Talking of signings has anyone heard anymore about the Adam Ashley Cooper supposed signing? IMHO he would be a very good signing, but I struggle to see where he'd fit into the team, unless Tuilagi senior does go to New Zealand.

[PM76]

Talking of signings has anyone heard anymore about the Adam Ashley Cooper supposed signing? IMHO he would be a very good signing, but I struggle to see where he'd fit into the team, unless Tuilagi senior does go to New Zealand.

He is joining the waratahs from the Brumbies after the WC so he must have been looking to go somewhere different. At 27 he can wait 4 more years and then pick his European pension fund later. I presume it was him or Tait in the utility back role, if Tait is at his best for a reasonable period of time they are very similar players IMO but given Tait's start I would have prefered AAC.