BT VISION - Rugby Union broadcast rights - UPDATED

[Starburst]

Few could argue against the fact many Welsh clubs would have gone the way of London Scottish or Richmond if regional rugby had not come to Wales. Presumably thats why they voted (not forced by unions)to go regional. It was their choice as it is the choice of the Premier league clubs not to. Its probably also fair to point out that its not just the Celtic regions that receive financial support from their unions.

The tag region / club is largely irrelavent. The regions in reality are just clubs. They don't gain some intangible benefit from the tag "region". I would think that the vast funding Stade receive is of far more benefit to them than the tag "region" is to Connacht. They could probably afford to run 3 or 4 squads the quality of Connachts, Dragons or Glasgows. In fact they could probably run 2 teams equal to Leinster, Munster or Scarlets. Does that make it unfair on the Celtic teams. Perhaps we should impose a salery cap on squads chosen for the European cup. Just to make things fair for all the teams.

But the nub of the argument isn't really about how unfair that the celtic league is and its certainly not about any concern with the lack of relegation / promotion etc (and i'm not saying it is or isn't right). It's about money.

None of the proposals regarding Europe seek to change the structure of the Celtic league only its contribution of clubs to European competition.

If the 4 Welsh regions disbanded and left the Celtic league would everyone be happy for 6 Welsh teams (the same as Englands representation) from their 12 team top league to enter the European cup? And then another 6 Irish teams from their 12 team top league etc.

Incidently I dont have sky or BT vision so the only rugby I will get to see is on freeview. S4C, BBC2 Wales or NI. Lots of celtic league but little else :(

[Kinoulton]

I abandoned pay TV long ago. If I want to see a match badly enough I go to a pub in Hornsea and drink J2O. It works out cheaper over a season!

[yellow_balaclava_hunter]

Few could argue against the fact many Welsh clubs would have gone the way of London Scottish or Richmond if regional rugby had not come to Wales. Presumably thats why they voted (not forced by unions)to go regional. It was their choice as it is the choice of the Premier league clubs not to. Its probably also fair to point out that its not just the Celtic regions that receive financial support from their unions.

The tag region / club is largely irrelavent. The regions in reality are just clubs. They don't gain some intangible benefit from the tag "region". I would think that the vast funding Stade receive is of far more benefit to them than the tag "region" is to Connacht. They could probably afford to run 3 or 4 squads the quality of Connachts, Dragons or Glasgows. In fact they could probably run 2 teams equal to Leinster, Munster or Scarlets. Does that make it unfair on the Celtic teams. Perhaps we should impose a salery cap on squads chosen for the European cup. Just to make things fair for all the teams.

But the nub of the argument isn't really about how unfair that the celtic league is and its certainly not about any concern with the lack of relegation / promotion etc (and i'm not saying it is or isn't right). It's about money.

None of the proposals regarding Europe seek to change the structure of the Celtic league only its contribution of clubs to European competition.

If the 4 Welsh regions disbanded and left the Celtic league would everyone be happy for 6 Welsh teams (the same as Englands representation) from their 12 team top league to enter the European cup? And then another 6 Irish teams from their 12 team top league etc.

Incidently I dont have sky or BT vision so the only rugby I will get to see is on freeview. S4C, BBC2 Wales or NI. Lots of celtic league but little else :(

A European wage cap structure definitely should be implemented and I am hoping that the Welsh ask for it in return for them agreeing to reduce their automatic qualifiers.

The tournament is intended to be a club Rugby tournament not a regional tournament. The Welsh would not have needed to form regions if they had been more prudent with their spending on player wages etc.

I don't agree with professionalism but it appears that everyone else wants it so if the Welsh national sport cannot create enough interest to pay wages that keep players at Welsh clubs then their club system should be a reflection of that and not an artificial regional structure designed to win eight or nine games a season.

The Welsh were well within their rights to change to a regional structure but as a result the clubs are within their rights to refuse to play them. When the Welsh regions were formed I was arguing that they should not be allowed to play in the Heineken Cup.

If you read the article by Brian Moore, it appears that the non celtic nations are largely funding the tournament but not receiving a share of the money that reflects this.

I don't mind a situation where the money is shared out equally but it has to be split by clubs and not unions plus with a situation where the clubs are playing regions with the clubs funding the tournament and then the regions having an advantage on the pitch and taking the trophy as well as a bigger slice of money then you can easily see why the clubs want a change.

Would I prefer to see a Ukrainian Rugby club or a Georgian Rugby club play Tigers instead of the Ospreys? The answer to that is definitely.

I am bored of these soulless regions that lack any history and are just a sub section of the national team of whichever country they are from. Would I prefer to see Bridgend or Pontypridd play Tigers than a Georgian or Ukrainian team then the answer to that question is also yes.

I would be happy for the English and French to reduce their entry into the Heineken Cup if the other nations entered clubs. I would also be happy for the English and French to reduce their entry if the Rabo reduces its entry.

The promotion and relegation argument and whether the English and French should adopt the Rabo model is irrelevant as the league is the most important competition in any domestic Rugby calendar whereas the European Cup is an added extra not the sole competition for a club. The Irish, Welsh, Scottish and Italians have completely forgotten this.

The issue is not the risk of relegation from the league that affects a clubs performance in Europe, it is the risk of failing to qualify for the tournament next season.
The current qualifying is the equivalent of asking one group of runners to run a qualifying race for next seasons London Marathon a week before they run in this seasons race but then allowing another group of runners to qualify automatically each year.

The clubs do not ask their players to play too many matches, they are playing a manageable amount but when they come up against regional teams whose players have been preparing for weeks for this one match whether it is a group game, knock out round or final, it is a massive advantage for the regions and the club players also have a greater risk of injury playing in a test match equivalent game against more rested players.

[Bill W (2)]

. It's about money.

:(

Money is not a prime motivator. It is used as an excuse for poor hygeine factors.

It is possible Bill Beaumont may broker a solution involving money.

But the hygeine factors will remain preeminent!

[Bill W (2)]

The regions in reality are just clubs. They don't gain some intangible benefit from the tag "region". :(

No they are not. They are preotected franchises directly under the control of their repective unions and with no relegation risks or promotion threats.

So they have both tangible and intangible benegits.

[mol2]

Is the salary cap a good idea? Well that depends on who you are and which club you are.
Top level rugby is a professional sport - the players make their living by being paid to play.

The salary cap may well mean that more club sides get to compete at a level higher than they would if it didn't exist. However rugby is a competitive sport and why should the better teams fight with one arm tied behind their backs and thus not reach the level they could if they were allowed to spend their income on salaries. Naturally if you spend more than you earn you'll go bust so clearly the clubs' directors have to be thoughtful as to how they spend their money and risking their security on the promises of a rich sugar daddy.

The flip side is that it means that a number of players don't have the opportunity to earn what they might and clubs who have the money to pay them are prevented from doing so.

If you are clearly a superstar then you'll do OK. However if you are below international level you may well force many players to choose between rugby, by definition a short term career and a "proper job" where thay may well earn more.

The current set up of the H cup effectively means that, as far as the English and French clubs are concerned, they are giving up TV money that should be coming to them so subsidise the Irish, Scottish and Welsh sides, who are getting a better deal from the current arrangement. The English & French clubs also state that the qualification process is harder for them than it is for the other countries. I have less sympathy for this suggestion as the individual countries have autonomy over their own qualification process and, as far as I am aware, don't have to base it on domestic league positions.

Would any of us suggest that Tigers should share our gate money with Edinburgh? Is it fair that Tigers get 26000 people turning up to home games when Sale only get a few thousand? It's up to Sale to increase their own gates and I doubt anyone would argue about that.
So what's different about TV rights?

Rugby is professional and clubs should be free to enter into whatever TV/sponsorship deals they like and spend the money as they like.

Those who can't or won't chase the income should accept that they are amateur. Nothing wrong with that - playing for pleasure and honour is what most sport is about.

Those in between should accept that they aren't likely to win the big competitions, stop acting like parasites and look at themselves to see how they can step up to the level of the big clubs.

The big clubs & national assosciations also need to recognise that they have a responsibility to support the grass roots rugby that feeds them. This is something that Tigers do.

However I don't think the big clubs should support the indifferent professional outfits who don't bust a gut to seek their own income.

[Cardiff Tig]

The tag region / club is largely irrelavent. The regions in reality are just clubs. They don't gain some intangible benefit from the tag "region". I would think that the vast funding Stade receive is of far more benefit to them than the tag "region" is to Connacht. They could probably afford to run 3 or 4 squads the quality of Connachts, Dragons or Glasgows. In fact they could probably run 2 teams equal to Leinster, Munster or Scarlets. Does that make it unfair on the Celtic teams.

Exactly. The region excuse is ridiculous, Wales can only support four full time professional clubs, Scotland two and Ireland four. The level below the regions in each country are a poor standard when compared to the top level, same as most of the clubs in the Championship. They are no different than Sarries, Toulouse, Clermont etc. The "feeder" clubs for the region are no different from Tigers academy players that are registered for Nottingham as well. The only differnce with Tigers is that we don't have a wealthy backer - but that is the same difference that we have with other teams in England and France.

It's all about the money.

The current set up of the H cup effectively means that, as far as the English and French clubs are concerned, they are giving up TV money that should be coming to them so subsidise the Irish, Scottish and Welsh sides, who are getting a better deal from the current arrangement. The English & French clubs also state that the qualification process is harder for them than it is for the other countries. I have less sympathy for this suggestion as the individual countries have autonomy over their own qualification process and, as far as I am aware, don't have to base it on domestic league positions.

That's the crux of the argument - the celtic sides get a lot more money than they put in. I doubt that the English clubs would pull out of the HC if the commercial side of it was actually maximised in everyones favour.

I agree that we shouldn't dictate how other countries allocate their qualification spots. It stinks of being a bad loser just because English clubs have had a barren few years.

[Bill W (2)]

Might I suggest that people read the comments of the two Peters in todays matchday programme?

[stevetelcom2000]

I am bored of these soulless regions that lack any history and are just a sub section of the national team of whichever country they are from. Would I prefer to see Bridgend or Pontypridd play Tigers than a Georgian or Ukrainian team then the answer to that question is also yes.

Provincial Rugby in Ireland is older than Leicester Tigers, no lack of history there. How anyone can refer to the likes of Ulster, Leinster or Munster being soulless is quite frankly, absurd. The Welsh followed the Irish format because it made financial sense with the advent of professionalism.
I'm sure you would prefer to see Leicester Tigers run 10+ more tries against small clubs like Bridgend or Pontypridd or the likes of Lansdowne, Garryowen & Belfast Harlequins. Not quite sure if BT/Sky/ESPN would be waving their cheque books around for the quality of them fixtures however.
As for Provinces being unfair as they are a region, so we must assume bigger. England have 12 professional clubs against a population of 53M averaging 4.42M per team. Ireland has 4 teams within a population of 6.5M an average of 1.63M per team.
If this argument is to be followed it's the English teams that should be watered down is it not? Stickly in the quest for fairness of course.

[Bill W (2)]

Wales can only support four full time professional clubs, Scotland two and Ireland four..

Is this not reason the for Ireland and Wales to have two places each in the HC and Scotland one (France 7 and England 6)?

[Cardiff Tig]

Maybe, but a competition where over 2/3 of the teams come from two countries isn't exactly a showcase of european rugby and doesn't sound so appealing to me. The qualification argument is weak in my eyes, its only in the last 3 years that the issue has come up, before that the premierships relegation and HC qualification fights were touted as an advantage by many, including the PRL.

As I said, the main issue is the money.

[Bill W (2)]

As I said, the main issue is the money.

And as I said before, I beg to differ, athough if a solution is brokered it may well involve money.

It is actually about survival and development. PRL have demonstrated that English Clubs would survive and develop without ERC. Would Celtic Clubs survive (let alone develop) without the subsidy from England that ERC provide?

[Cardiff Tig]

It is actually about survival and development. PRL have demonstrated that English Clubs would survive and develop without ERC. Would Celtic Clubs survive (let alone develop) without the subsidy from England that ERC provide?

But survival and development depends solely on money - theres no chance that PRL would have served notice to ERC if the commercial aspect of european competitions was already maximised in regards to the english clubs. They could easily set up a 3rd tier competition now which the top two join the Amlin Cup.

Your argument is based on the fact that the Celtic nations get more money that they are entitled to - so its based on money!

[Bill W (2)]

Your argument is based on the fact that the Celtic nations get more money that they are entitled to - so its based on money!

Nope! It is based on vision. Read the two Peters in yesterdays match day programme. One (the Celts) is of maintenance of the "status quo" in terms of competitions development, game development and funding. The other (PRL) involves developing the game, the competions and participation AT ALL LEVELS. The measures used and the mechanisms to achieve may involve (and almost certainly do) money. And any brokered solution to the ERC impasse certainly would. But the primary issue is not money. It is development of the game.

[yellow_balaclava_hunter]

I am bored of these soulless regions that lack any history and are just a sub section of the national team of whichever country they are from. Would I prefer to see Bridgend or Pontypridd play Tigers than a Georgian or Ukrainian team then the answer to that question is also yes.

Provincial Rugby in Ireland is older than Leicester Tigers, no lack of history there. How anyone can refer to the likes of Ulster, Leinster or Munster being soulless is quite frankly, absurd. The Welsh followed the Irish format because it made financial sense with the advent of professionalism.
I'm sure you would prefer to see Leicester Tigers run 10+ more tries against small clubs like Bridgend or Pontypridd or the likes of Lansdowne, Garryowen & Belfast Harlequins. Not quite sure if BT/Sky/ESPN would be waving their cheque books around for the quality of them fixtures however.
As for Provinces being unfair as they are a region, so we must assume bigger. England have 12 professional clubs against a population of 53M averaging 4.42M per team. Ireland has 4 teams within a population of 6.5M an average of 1.63M per team.
If this argument is to be followed it's the English teams that should be watered down is it not? Stickly in the quest for fairness of course.

I didn't mention the Irish teams, my main issue is with the Welsh and Scottish who I believe could support domestic leagues that do not contain less than five teams but instead have relegated their domestic leagues to a permanent second tier in their countries in order to try to gain success in one tournament which may not exist in a few years.

If you want to debate the Irish provinces then the question is whether they should have been allowed into the competition in the first place. My opinion is that the tournament was intended to be a club competition and therefore they should not have been but were allowed in to make up the numbers. The English didn't enter the first year of the Heineken so it is very difficult for them to argue against having the provinces involved but the Welsh, Scottish and Italians changed their structures after the tournament was formed and therefore others clubs involved have a right to object to their entry as a result.

My preference for watching Bridgend over the Ospreys has nothing to do with how many tries Tigers may score and more to do with the fact that the club history of the likes of Bridgend interests me more than an artificially created team that was made for the sole purpose of winning the Heineken Cup.

The population argument is irrelevant as there can only be fifteen players on the field at any time and there are limits to the size of a Premiership squad due to the salary cap. The thing that isn't fair which I will repeat for the umpteenth time is that the Rabo teams are able to rest their players and still qualify for next years tournament which gives them fifteen better prepared players. Of course someone will now turn around and say that the English and French should change their systems to match the Rabo however the difference is that the English and French value their domestic club structure and have the decency not to butcher it in order to try to win a tournament that may not exist in a few years time.