Heineken Cup no nearer a resolution

Forum to discuss everything that is Tigers related

Moderators: Rizzo, Tigerbeat, Tigers Press Office, Tigers Webmaster

Locked
Cardiff Tig
Gold Member
Gold Member
Posts: 1270
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2011 9:25 pm

Re: Heineken Cup no nearer a resolution

Post by Cardiff Tig » Wed Aug 28, 2013 6:46 pm

As I said I have no problem with clubs trying to maximise revenue from the TV etc, it makes perfect sense especially with the emergence of BT to compete with Sky.

I just can't see the salary cap situation changing enough to make a difference in Europe, its very unlikely to get as ridiculously high as the French anytime soon.

mol2
Super User
Super User
Posts: 3644
Joined: Wed May 02, 2007 5:48 pm
Location: Cosby

Re: Heineken Cup no nearer a resolution

Post by mol2 » Wed Aug 28, 2013 7:57 pm

I'm with Cardiff Tig - it's nothing to do with Tigers how any of the other nations nominate their participating clubs in the H cup.

It is up to English teams to decide if they are getting a fair share of the TV revenue and accept or reject on a hard nosed business case. Ultimately they know they are the big TV draw as far as the advertising money men are concerned.
(France being the other big draw but perhaps not to the same advertising market)

Likewise it's not the fault of the Irish teams if the English teams voluntarily agree to a salary cap which ultimately prevents them having a real chance of winning in Europe.

TigerAlex
Silver Member
Silver Member
Posts: 628
Joined: Wed Mar 18, 2009 9:20 pm

Re: Heineken Cup no nearer a resolution

Post by TigerAlex » Wed Aug 28, 2013 8:17 pm

mol2 wrote:I'm with Cardiff Tig - it's nothing to do with Tigers how any of the other nations nominate their participating clubs in the H cup.

It is up to English teams to decide if they are getting a fair share of the TV revenue and accept or reject on a hard nosed business case. Ultimately they know they are the big TV draw as far as the advertising money men are concerned.
(France being the other big draw but perhaps not to the same advertising market)

Likewise it's not the fault of the Irish teams if the English teams voluntarily agree to a salary cap which ultimately prevents them having a real chance of winning in Europe.
Quite agree with that- I only made my post in response to the people claiming that it's just going to result in the same teams playing each other (more so than already) and that we may end up with no Scottish or Italian teams. I was just pointing out that it doesn't have to happen that way.

Also, whilst it may be none of our business that certain clubs rest their best players before HC games, but the format is unfair as it is because it's much easier to come 10th out of 12 than it is to come 6th out of 12.

ozwaldcopperpot
Top Cat
Top Cat
Posts: 73
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 8:54 pm

Re: Heineken Cup no nearer a resolution

Post by ozwaldcopperpot » Wed Aug 28, 2013 9:52 pm

biffer wrote:
ozwaldcopperpot wrote:apart from the Irish (and a blip from Edinburgh) when was the last time a Rabo team made it past the group stage ?!
Cardiff 2011-12
Ospreys 2009-10
Cardiff and Ospreys 2008-09
Cardiff and Ospreys 2007-08
Scarlets 2006-07
not a very good return is it ? given it's their whole season (according to some)

is Europe all these clubs really play for ?!

maybe Cardiff this time around (on the plastic !!) for the double :smt002
...Devil's advocate

tig1
Gold Member
Gold Member
Posts: 971
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2006 6:43 pm
Location: nottingham

Re: Heineken Cup no nearer a resolution

Post by tig1 » Wed Aug 28, 2013 10:02 pm

Cardiff Tig wrote:
TigerAlex wrote:
Cardiff Tig wrote: But that's the same as destroying a perfectly good cup competition that the fans clearly love (going by attendances!) just to give a couple of teams from one country more chance of winning occasionally.
1. It's not a perfectly good cup competition because it is fundamentally unfair in its existing format and organisation.
Its only fundamentally unfair in regards to finances - and I have no problem with the English and French clubs refusing to continue the current agreement, especially as the English clubs have shown they can get a much better commercial deal. However, the fact that some clubs choose to rest players before key games isn't anything to do with Tigers. Maybe Tigers should do that more often and target sixth place in the league rather than a top two spot. Its the salary cap that forces English clubs to have to compete so hard in the premiership all season as it evens out the teams leaving possibly only 1 or 2 games a season where some players can be rested.

As a fan the extra money will not make one difference to my enjoyment as a Tigers supporter - we won't be able to keep up with the French spending, there will always be a salary cap by the looks of things and I get to see plenty of good players whatever team is picked for Tigers already. I know that there have been lots of suggestions of formats, I have no problem with a change in format as long as Tigers are guaranteed to play 6 games a season against opposition from the as many different countries as possible! I would be happy with the 32 team format that has been suggested, but that would definitely not stop the Irish teams from resting players before cup games!!

Well put Cardiff. There's is no possibility of an equal playing field across Europe, so just enjoy the rugby for what is is. And be glad you support Tigers who at least can compete pretty well.

JohnB
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 262
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 12:38 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: Heineken Cup no nearer a resolution

Post by JohnB » Thu Aug 29, 2013 5:41 pm

biffer wrote:
ozwaldcopperpot wrote:apart the Irish (and a blip from Edinburgh) when was the last time a Rabo team made it past the group stage ?!
Cardiff 2011-12
Ospreys 2009-10
Cardiff and Ospreys 2008-09
Cardiff and Ospreys 2007-08
Scarlets 2006-07

If you take out three of the strongest AP teams plus another team who made a run at the HC, say Leicester, Quins, Northampton and Bath, what's the English equivalent?
In terms of the Celtic League currently sponsored by Rabo Bank that above list should correctly read as follows:

Llanelli - 1996-97, 1998-99, 1999-2000, 2001-02, 2002-03,
Scarlets - 2003-04, 2006-07,
Cardiff - 1995-96, 1996-97, 1997-98, 1999-2000, 2000-01, 2007-08, 2008-09, 2011-12
Pontypridd – 1998-99
Swansea - 2000-01,
Ospreys – 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10
Edinburgh - 2003-04, 2011-12

jgriffin
Super User
Super User
Posts: 7369
Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2012 5:49 pm
Location: On the edge of oblivion

Re: Heineken Cup no nearer a resolution

Post by jgriffin » Thu Aug 29, 2013 6:23 pm

I think attitudes on this forum to some extent, and on others, are conditioned by the comments of Rabo team fans in the past. I personally have been subject to some comments that would not be made to my face, and endured a considerable amount of chest-beating about how great their teams are - while fans in that league can stand a good chance of NEVER seeing the players who compete in the HC. That's not my complaint, it's from fans in Wales that I have sat with in pubs from Swansea to Newport.

I personally don't care much about the HC, I care a lot more about the honest competition in the AP and Tigers' progress.
Leicester Tigers 1995-
Nottingham 1995-2000
Swansea (Whites) 1988-95
A game played on grass in the open air by teams of XV.

trendylfj
Gold Member
Gold Member
Posts: 1887
Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 5:16 am
Location: MARKET HARBOROUGH

Re: Heineken Cup no nearer a resolution

Post by trendylfj » Fri Aug 30, 2013 9:00 am

Just by the way of throwing in a googlie (if that's how they spell it) hows about this to solve the problem.

All but the bottom 4 teams in each league qualify for the HC (8 from PL, 8 from Rabo, 10 from top 14) = 26 teams. In order to bring it up to 32, the 12 bottom teams play a home and away fixture at the end of the season when the top teams are playing their championship games by means of an FA cup style draw. No seeding or seperating countries just a simple luck of the draw as to who you get. 6 winners then join the HC, 6 losers go into the plate with 2 promoted clubs from France and England = 8 clubs

Round 1

The 32 teams then have a simple FA cup draw to create 16 home and away fixtures and again - no seeding or seperation of countries = 2 games per club

Round 2

Repeat the process with 16 winners. 16 losers + 8 play a plate competion = 2 games per club. The plate would then have 12 clubs left

Round 3

Repeat the process with 8 winners = 2 games per club - plate to follow suit

Semi final

HC

Semi finals on home and away basis = 2 games per club

Plate (6 teams) play a 2 match league - 2 leagues of 3 - each would get one home game and one away game - league winners progress to final = 2 games per club

Finals as is now

I know that this would give the French 2 more places at the start of the process but who knows how it would pan out after the end of season games for the lower clubs.

The best teams in any season from the 3 leagues would then be in the draw for the following season which is what I believe most people want. It would take away the main point of contention that some clubs qualify because of the number of clubs from a particular country means they all qualify.

I will now retreat to my bunker and continue to help Santa to wrap the presents.
Hehehehehehehehe

ozwaldcopperpot
Top Cat
Top Cat
Posts: 73
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 8:54 pm

Re: Heineken Cup no nearer a resolution

Post by ozwaldcopperpot » Fri Aug 30, 2013 9:28 am

JohnB wrote:
biffer wrote:
ozwaldcopperpot wrote:apart from the Irish (and a blip from Edinburgh) when was the last time a Rabo team made it past the group stage ?!
Cardiff 2011-12
Ospreys 2009-10
Cardiff and Ospreys 2008-09
Cardiff and Ospreys 2007-08
Scarlets 2006-07

If you take out three of the strongest AP teams plus another team who made a run at the HC, say Leicester, Quins, Northampton and Bath, what's the English equivalent?
In terms of the Celtic League currently sponsored by Rabo Bank that above list should correctly read as follows:

Llanelli - 1996-97, 1998-99, 1999-2000, 2001-02, 2002-03,
Scarlets - 2003-04, 2006-07,
Cardiff - 1995-96, 1996-97, 1997-98, 1999-2000, 2000-01, 2007-08, 2008-09, 2011-12
Pontypridd – 1998-99
Swansea - 2000-01,
Ospreys – 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10
Edinburgh - 2003-04, 2011-12
unless i'm very much mistaken, didn't the following happen

Llanelli became the Scarlets and Swansea became the Ospreys etc etc.

still a very poor return from clubs who only care about Europe !!

and Cardiff the only club to make it to the final ?1

top 5 from each league and the holders, 4 groups of 4, top 2 from each group qualify for the knockout rounds

"simples"
...Devil's advocate

drc_007
Super User
Super User
Posts: 3276
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 9:28 am

Re: Heineken Cup no nearer a resolution

Post by drc_007 » Fri Aug 30, 2013 9:42 am

ozwaldcopperpot wrote:top 5 from each league and the holders, 4 groups of 4, top 2 from each group qualify for the knockout rounds
This would be my preferred option by far. Anything to get rid of the "next best runner up" farce.

BJ.
Super User
Super User
Posts: 5170
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 12:08 pm
Location: One step ahead of the rest of the herd

Re: Heineken Cup no nearer a resolution

Post by BJ. » Fri Aug 30, 2013 10:08 am

ozwaldcopperpot wrote:top 5 from each league and the holders, 4 groups of 4, top 2 from each group qualify for the knockout rounds.
That sounds fine but obviously it wouldn't generate sufficient revenue to keep the bean counters happy as there would only be 56 matches as compared to 79 in the current format, assuming my mental arithmetic is working this morning.
Whatever you do, don't argue. We might never hear from you again.

drc_007
Super User
Super User
Posts: 3276
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 9:28 am

Re: Heineken Cup no nearer a resolution

Post by drc_007 » Fri Aug 30, 2013 4:07 pm

BJ. wrote:
ozwaldcopperpot wrote:top 5 from each league and the holders, 4 groups of 4, top 2 from each group qualify for the knockout rounds.
That sounds fine but obviously it wouldn't generate sufficient revenue to keep the bean counters happy as there would only be 56 matches as compared to 79 in the current format, assuming my mental arithmetic is working this morning.
Since most of the income comes from TV and sponsorship I doubt the number of games is the overriding concern. An "elite" competition may also be able to charge a premium. In addition you could argue that the pot should be distributed between a smaller group of participants.

stevetelcom2000
Gold Member
Gold Member
Posts: 1612
Joined: Mon Jan 16, 2006 1:20 pm
Location: A village in South Leicestershire

Re: Heineken Cup no nearer a resolution

Post by stevetelcom2000 » Sat Aug 31, 2013 7:42 am

[quote="jgriffin"]I personally have been subject to some comments that would not be made to my face,
I personally don't care much about the HC, quote]

If I don't care much about something, I tend not to have opinions about it, never mind post them on public forums and I'd be more then happy to tell you to your face as well :smt042

stevetelcom2000
Gold Member
Gold Member
Posts: 1612
Joined: Mon Jan 16, 2006 1:20 pm
Location: A village in South Leicestershire

Re: Heineken Cup no nearer a resolution

Post by stevetelcom2000 » Sat Aug 31, 2013 7:49 am

I wonder why none of the many Rugby Paper readers on here haven't posted this by now?
In the interests of balance of course:
http://www.therugbypaper.co.uk/featu...-with-peanuts/

Jeff Probyn: Proposed Heineken deal leaves Rabo with peanuts

I often wonder if Premiership Rugby chief executive Mark McCafferty is living in the real world or one that is dominated solely by what is good for the Premiership clubs. Last week’s article in The Rugby Paper promising no u-turn on Europe seems to me as a statement that was designed to send a wave of terror through our Celtic and Italian cousins, when in reality it is PRL that should be worried.

Although McCafferty has insisted that the French clubs are more determined than PRL to implement change in the way that the European competitions are structured, it is also true that the French have said that they do not want to pull out of the competition, even if there isn’t any change.

What McCafferty seems to be trying to sell to both the French and the RaboDirect is an increase in funds for a reduced number of games played and teams taking part.

With six from each league there would be a reduction in the number of teams but only in those from the RaboDirect, both the French Top 14 and the Premiership will retain the six that they now have, while in all probability both Wales and Ireland will be expected to lose a team or two, given that both Scotland and Italy will be guaranteed a place even if they finish outside the qualifying top six.

Admittedly that should ‘heat up’ the levels of competition in the RaboDirect with only the top four qualifying but that could potentially leave either Ireland or Wales with limited representation.

Ah, but the extra money, McCafferty will say, it is a sweetener for all as it will increase the overall earnings from TV from around £40m to just over £70m a year.

However judging by the figures in last weeks’ report both the Top 14 and the PRL stand to gain around £14m (increasing from £10.56 to £24m) while the RaboDirect will only get just over an extra £1m (up from £22.8m to £24m) hardly an incentive for change.

It may seem a little unfair that the Rabo share is currently twice as much as both the Top 14 and the Premiership but the fact that the Rabo money is split between Wales, Ireland, Scotland and Italy it actually works out at around £5.7m – half as much as England or France.

I must admit that I am struggling to understand the figures quoted because the original PRL deal with BT was for around £152m over four years for all Premiership games and three years for European games but the new figure quoted is £70m a year for European games which is £280m in total, almost double the original combined figure.

That is unless it is £24m annually for each of the participating leagues (Top14, Premiership and RaboDirect) which would amount to £72m for each over the three-year European period.

If that is correct you can understand why, from McCafferty’s point of view, as chief executive of PRL, this deal is essential as it would effectively earn the PRL more money for a contracted European competition (£24m) than the whole Premiership season, which, even with the new BT deal, is a round £1.6m per club per season (£20m).

If the French also split the money between all Top14 clubs it would be an extra £1m for each but for the Rabo it is just £250,000 per country which in the scheme of things is peanuts and hardly worth the disruption that restructuring the whole of the European competition would cause.

Part of the reason the French want change is nothing to do with the money and all about a reduction in the number of games in their crowded season.

The French season is already around two months longer than ours, which despite their wage cap being around €7m puts an enormous strain on the players and so increases squad size, and that increases financial pressures on the clubs.

Unlike Premiership rugby the French earn more for TV rights to their league games (around £28m) than for European competitions and are set to renegotiate a new deal at the end of this season which they expect will increase their revenues substantially.

The RaboDirect is not in such a fortunate position and must rely on collective bargaining by their Unions who have their own interests at heart when it comes to TV partners and although BT is set to become one of, if not the, biggest TV sports providers in England, it will not necessarily dominate the Irish, Welsh, Scottish or French markets. Particularly as it is those countries (except the French) that have always favoured terrestrial broadcasters over subscription whether satellite or cable.

McCafferty’s comments that the PRL have been talking to American Football teams and the South African Super xv sides have made him sound more than a little desperate as the idea that there could be any number of games between Premiership rugby clubs and NFL teams in a kind of hybrid game is ludicrous.

It may be that a one-off game would attract a curious audience but it would not be more than that and certainly would not replace the Heineken as a revenue generator.

South African teams coming here may be a possibility given the number of ex-pats living in this country – but as Saracens found when they muted the possibility of a game down south it did not go down well with fans and without the option of a return fixture the costs would be prohibitive.

All in all, if PRL want a change in Europe they will have to come to a better financial arrangement than one that gives them all the extra money and leaves the Rabo to suffer the cost.

tb1
Gold Member
Gold Member
Posts: 1169
Joined: Sat Oct 24, 2009 3:50 pm

Re: Heineken Cup no nearer a resolution

Post by tb1 » Sat Aug 31, 2013 8:30 am

Its because Jeff Probyn is a dinosaur with no concept of the professional game who is well known for hating the leadership of the AP clubs.

You might as well post some junk from the Irish Independent.

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: TigerFeetSteve and 2 guests