Heineken Cup no nearer a resolution

[johns]

Rabo have said they will not be sponsoring the Celts after this season.

So no RABO

Possibly a watered down (No French & English) Heineken Cup.

They need to look at generating more revenue quickly, may play into the hands of the French & English.

[tig1]

What almost every poster (for, against or neutral) has suggested involves real competition and qualifying, something that is the sticking point seemingly for ERC and the Rabo. So who's out of step?

I dont JG

Rugby is now way too physical a sport,and the funds too limited, to expect elite players to have to qualify for an elite competition, play in the current elite competition, and play International rugby all at the same time, to the highest level of performance.

[cidermark]

Technically, tig1, the English and French clubs do have to qualify for the elite competitions by having to finish in the top portions of their leagues.

The Rabo clubs "qualify" by virtue of the fact that they are in the Rabo League.

[tig1]

Hi Cider, maybe you misread my post, but yes I know that.

Here is my point. The last English team to reach the HC final was Northampton. Vs. Leinster in Cardiff.
Northampton walked all over Leinster in the first half, before physically collapsing at half time as a result of playing an AP semi at Tigers the week before. A similar thing happened to Tigers a couple of years earlier in Edinburgh, although not quite as dramatic.

Is it seriously in the interests of the game to want the Rabo teams to be brought down to the same physical condition as Northampton were that day ? Surely the question has to be how an English club can turn up in that physical condition in the most important game of the season ?

Those asking for the Rabo to become more competitive have no interest in the Rabo per se. They do so in the only in the interest of the Celtic teams being unable to play fresh and fit players in the HC.
In the interests of Rugby, my opinion is that is the wrong way around. And we should be asking how the English and French structure is changed to ensure players are fresh for the HC.

[biffer]

Hi Cider, maybe you misread my post, but yes I know that.

Here is my point. The last English team to reach the HC final was Northampton. Vs. Leinster in Cardiff.
Northampton walked all over Leinster in the first half, before physically collapsing at half time as a result of playing an AP semi at Tigers the week before. A similar thing happened to Tigers a couple of years earlier in Edinburgh, although not quite as dramatic.

Is it seriously in the interests of the game to want the Rabo teams to be brought down to the same physical condition as Northampton were that day ? Surely the question has to be how an English club can turn up in that physical condition in the most important game of the season ?

Those asking for the Rabo to become more competitive have no interest in the Rabo per se. They do so in the only in the interest of the Celtic teams being unable to play fresh and fit players in the HC.
In the interests of Rugby, my opinion is that is the wrong way around. And we should be asking how the English and French structure is changed to ensure players are fresh for the HC.

well said sir

[tigerburnie]

Hi Cider, maybe you misread my post, but yes I know that.

Here is my point. The last English team to reach the HC final was Northampton. Vs. Leinster in Cardiff.
Northampton walked all over Leinster in the first half, before physically collapsing at half time as a result of playing an AP semi at Tigers the week before. A similar thing happened to Tigers a couple of years earlier in Edinburgh, although not quite as dramatic.

Is it seriously in the interests of the game to want the Rabo teams to be brought down to the same physical condition as Northampton were that day ? Surely the question has to be how an English club can turn up in that physical condition in the most important game of the season ?

Those asking for the Rabo to become more competitive have no interest in the Rabo per se. They do so in the only in the interest of the Celtic teams being unable to play fresh and fit players in the HC.
In the interests of Rugby, my opinion is that is the wrong way around. And we should be asking how the English and French structure is changed to ensure players are fresh for the HC.

I think you miss the point re qualification over nomination, it's not just about resting players. If the FFR proposal for a 20 team competition gets wings, then the competitions won't clash as they do now.
By definition a competition should have sides that are "competative", those that are there by qualification, not just because they were given a shot to keep the numbers up. Many have complained for years that the groups with an Italian side are easy and those without are "groups of death", if you qualify, that does not apply.
I think Edinburgh were a classic example of how the system was "abused" at the expense of their league , a couple of years ago. That did nothing for their long term rugby advancements either.

[tig1]

I completely disagree with you Tigerburnie.

Edinburgh performed to a level in the HC that they would have been unable to do do had they been committed to a domestic league campaign at the same time.

Now that might make English clubs unhappy, but surely you want Edinburgh to play the best players in the best competition, and perform to the highest level.
They cant do both. So either you do one (the HC), or you force Edinburgh to play average rugby across all competitions.

Tiger's (and other English clubs)performance in the HC is compromised by their domestic league committments. That is very clear.

Whichever format is chosen, The English clubs will still overplay their players, already with the constraints of the salary cap.

[TigerAlex]

Edinburgh performed to a level in the HC that they would have been unable to do do had they been committed to a domestic league campaign at the same time.

Now that might make English clubs unhappy, but surely you want Edinburgh to play the best players in the best competition, and perform to the highest level.
They cant do both. So either you do one (the HC), or you force Edinburgh to play average rugby across all competitions.

Tiger's (and other English clubs)performance in the HC is compromised by their domestic league committments. That is very clear.

Whichever format is chosen, The English clubs will still overplay their players, already with the constraints of the salary cap.

It works both ways doesn't it? You say why should we bring the Rabo Teams 'down' to our level in the Heineken Cup? I say why should we have to dumb down our league to be able to compete in Europe? You have a non-competitive league where teams regularly rest their best players and put out second string teams and that's bad for the supporters. A lot of supporters are less likely to be turn up to games where the best players aren't playing, or to games which are perceived as unimportant.

It's all very well for some of the Rabo teams who make most of their money off the back of the Heineken Cup, and are more-or-less guaranteed a place in the competition so can almost ignore poor attendances in league games. The English and French do not have this luxury and are effectively subsidising rival teams to play the system and win.

To be honest, I agree with you that players are massively overplayed in England and something certainly needs to be done to afford players regular breaks for their own welfare. However, ERC's refusal to negotiate any move from the status quo (which is clearly flawed, whichever way you look at it) is not going to help anything.

[stevetelcom2000]

Thus you can see why some of the English and French would be bored of playing the same teams over and over again, whereas the Celtic teams at least get more variety of opposition.

At no point have the French or the PRL ever said that they were 'bored playing the same teams over and over again' It is however something you keep banging on about.
And what's your ludicrous idea for more variety? less teams???

[JohnB]

Hi Cider, maybe you misread my post, but yes I know that.

Here is my point. The last English team to reach the HC final was Northampton. Vs. Leinster in Cardiff.

Northampton walked all over Leinster in the first half, before physically collapsing at half time as a result of playing an AP semi at Tigers the week before. A similar thing happened to Tigers a couple of years earlier in Edinburgh, although not quite as dramatic.

Is it seriously in the interests of the game to want the Rabo teams to be brought down to the same physical condition as Northampton were that day ? Surely the question has to be how an English club can turn up in that physical condition in the most important game of the season ?

Those asking for the Rabo to become more competitive have no interest in the Rabo per se. They do so in the only in the interest of the Celtic teams being unable to play fresh and fit players in the HC.

In the interests of Rugby, my opinion is that is the wrong way around. And we should be asking how the English and French structure is changed to ensure players are fresh for the HC.

Doesn't that situation cut both ways though? In 2010 Leinster lost their League Final to the Ospreys 3 weeks after playing their HEC semifinal away to Toulouse. In 2011 they lost their League Final to Munster a week after winning their HEC Final against the Saints. In 2012 they lost their League Final against Ospreys again a week after winning their HEC Final against Ulster. Last season they won they won their League Final against Ulster a week after winning the lesser European competition, the ACC Final. Complaining about the scheduling of one's League versus the HEC is a waste of time as there's always going to be scheduling difficulties if one's team is involved in the Final of both League and HEC. Suffice to say that it is extremely difficult to win both League and HEC in the same season!

[tig1]

Edinburgh performed to a level in the HC that they would have been unable to do do had they been committed to a domestic league campaign at the same time.

Now that might make English clubs unhappy, but surely you want Edinburgh to play the best players in the best competition, and perform to the highest level.
They cant do both. So either you do one (the HC), or you force Edinburgh to play average rugby across all competitions.

Tiger's (and other English clubs)performance in the HC is compromised by their domestic league committments. That is very clear.

Whichever format is chosen, The English clubs will still overplay their players, already with the constraints of the salary cap.

It works both ways doesn't it? You say why should we bring the Rabo Teams 'down' to our level in the Heineken Cup? I say why should we have to dumb down our league to be able to compete in Europe? You have a non-competitive league where teams regularly rest their best players and put out second string teams and that's bad for the supporters. A lot of supporters are less likely to be turn up to games where the best players aren't playing, or to games which are perceived as unimportant.

A couple of answers to that Alex. The AP is already dumbed down relative to HC. Tigers have been in the last 9 AP finals, and cant make any headway in Europe. Its dumb downed partly because its compromised by the Six Nations and AI, partly by elite player agreements, partly by salary cap, and partly by exhausted players.

The point is very simple. The best players cannot play their best rugby by having to compete domestically, in Europe and Internationally.

The Celtic way is that the best players are available to play their best in the premier competition. The English way is not.

I understand that all of us supporters dont want to hear that because we want to watch competetive club rugby at Tigers and in the AP.

There is no easy solution that ensures an equal playing field and ensure the highest playing standards, short of a salary capped european league, and the domestic leagues being treated like the Currie cup of provincial tournaments in Aus/NZ.

[TigerAlex]

A couple of answers to that Alex. The AP is already dumbed down relative to HC. Tigers have been in the last 9 AP finals, and cant make any headway in Europe. Its dumb downed partly because its compromised by the Six Nations and AI, partly by elite player agreements, partly by salary cap, and partly by exhausted players.

The point is very simple. The best players cannot play their best rugby by having to compete domestically, in Europe and Internationally.

The Celtic way is that the best players are available to play their best in the premier competition. The English way is not.

I understand that all of us supporters dont want to hear that because we want to watch competetive club rugby at Tigers and in the AP.

There is no easy solution that ensures an equal playing field and ensure the highest playing standards, short of a salary capped european league, and the domestic leagues being treated like the Currie cup of provincial tournaments in Aus/NZ.

Well there are a number of possible reasons for Leicester's success domestically compared to in Europe, beyond an inherent difference in quality of games. The first is that the AP is a much longer campaign than the Heineken Cup, so one or two bad results in the AP are not automatically fatal to the club's hopes of getting to the final. There are only two knock-out games in the AP (including the final) compared to three in the HC (including the final) so the role of luck is drastically reduced overall. Now I'm not saying that luck is the only reason teams have progressed in the HC, but it is an important factor. For instance, you have one game where a key player gets injured, or is unable to play from the start, or a game which is decided on the bounce of a ball, or a refereeing decision and that could be your Heineken Cup campaign over. Not so for the AP.

Another possible reason is the timing of the games. Tigers are known for having a training programme whereby the players peak at the end of the season, so they play better rugby in the final few games of the season compared to the ones earlier in the season. Obviously, this is no use if they've already been knocked out.

The thing is, in order to attract supporters, there has to be at least one of two factors: the first is a winning team. More new supporters want to get behind a team that regularly wins things than a team that loses more games than it wins, this somewhat compensates for a lack of competitive, meaningful games. Not every team can win everything though, so the second factor is competition. If the games are competitive and meaningful, if the club cares about the games it's playing, this will filter down to the support. If the club is (perceived to be) not taking a game (or competition) seriously, why should the supporters take it seriously? You're more likely to get a good attendance to matches which mean something to the clubs involved. This is why derby games are usually sell-outs. One of the things I actually like about the current domestic layout is that even up to the very end of the season there are very few dead-rubber matches because nearly every team still has something to play for- whether it's fighting relegation, trying to get into a HC spot, trying to get a play-off spot or trying to get a home semi-final, it makes for more entertaining games because they actually mean something.

I take your point about the best players not being able to play their best rugby all the time if they're playing so many games and I do think that the season needs to either be slimmed down or spread out over more of the year so players get more rest. However, professional rugby's priority should be sustainability which means attracting more supporters and widening the fan base- something I think clubs could and should be doing much more to bring about. For this you need regular meaningful games and the promise of watching the top players on a regular basis.

[Cardiff Tig]

Thus you can see why some of the English and French would be bored of playing the same teams over and over again, whereas the Celtic teams at least get more variety of opposition.

At no point have the French or the PRL ever said that they were 'bored playing the same teams over and over again' It is however something you keep banging on about.
And what's your ludicrous idea for more variety? less teams???

Exactly. At the moment Tigers are guaranteed to play 6 games against teams that they don't play in the league. Lowering the number of teams in the HC and keeping the same number of English teams means there is more chance of watching Tigers play Quins/Saracens/Saints 4 times a season which is less appealing than watching Tigers play Ospreys/Treviso/Ulster IMO.

[biffer]

In the last five years Tigers have played 13 different teams, only one of the English, in the HC. In an Anglo French tournament that wouldn't happen.

Tig1's point about trying to solve our problems by making other teams come down to our level is valid. And doing that wont make us any more successful in Europe, because the French will still be at their current standard and will therefore go on to absolutely dominate the competition. I don't really fancy a Heineken Cup with three or four French semi finalists every year.

[mol2]

If the English clubs get the TV money that comes to the H cup because the English teams play in it then they may have more money to pay for bigger & better squads. Currently that money effectively goes to subsidize the Rabo teams.

That's why it's really about money.
There's nothing that the English teams can do about the spending power of the French sides and the English sides don't feel they get their share of TV money which in turn means that don't do as well as they might which hits other sponsorship income.