HEC SF draw - is it fair?

[MrPartridge]

Just a personal view.

I don't like the fact (and never have) that the SF of the HEC are randomly drawn out of the hat.

The competition adopts a common sense seeding approach for the QF's whereby teams the teams finish in the Top 4 from the pool stages get a home QF. I have no problem with that - logical.

But then at the SF stage the seedings are entirely overlooked. Result - Clermont (2nd seeds) now have to beat us at home and then travel for their potential SF. Toulon (3rd seeds) get lucky in the draw and will be in the final of the competition if they can win 2 home games. I don't see how that is fair on Clermont or consistent with the approach taken in the QFs.

I appreciate some here don't like American Football and other American sports but I like their approach in that teams that excel in the pools/regular seasons benefit thereafter. Plus there is no need for mickey mouse TV draws moving four balls from one pot to another.

Rant over…

[Bill W (2)]

I feel sure I posted a reply to this already.

Perhaps it was too abrasive for the mods.

However, I agree with you!

[mol2]

What's even dafter is that the winners of the Amlin get more ranking points that the H cup quarter finalists! By definition they either haven't qualified for the H cup proper or got knocked out in the pool stages - yet beating the other losers is scores more points!

[fleabane]

More reasons to get rid of the ERC!

[Bill W (2)]

More reasons to get rid of the ERC!

Just so!!

[lee]

You don't really get a home draw though..... All the draw means is which country the game is played in, so When tigers win and if sarries win the game will be in England, and as far as I can remember the club doesn't get to choose which stadium its played at

[ellis9]

Lee, you are correct. ERC pick the semi final venues

http://www.ercrugby.com/heinekencup/rules.php

[tig1]

It seems to me that in the good old days, sport worked perfectly well enough without all this seeding.

It was brought in to protect the big boys being eliminated too early by being drawn against each other....which both the television and big clubs wanted.

[Noddy555]

Yes I agree with you it is unfair, why they can't adopt the formula from other sports I don't know! If that would follow the winner of Ulster/Saracens (Top seed v 8th seed) would play Munster/Toulouse (4th & 5th seeds). Then the other march would Clermont/Tigers v Toulon/Leinster.

[biffer]

Yes I agree with you it is unfair, why they can't adopt the formula from other sports I don't know! If that would follow the winner of Ulster/Saracens (Top seed v 8th seed) would play Munster/Toulouse (4th & 5th seeds). Then the other march would Clermont/Tigers v Toulon/Leinster.

Someone would no doubt complain when one SF had the 8th seed v 5th seed and the other had 2nd v 3rd.

If you don't have some element of a draw about things, then the seeding becomes self-perpetuating. If you're seeded in the group stages then you have an easier route to get to the QFs and maintain your seeding for next year, and so it goes on - see football. Tig1 is absolutely right - it's done for the purposes of tv and money, nothing else. I'd rather just have a draw for the QFs and be done with it.

I wouldn't mind properly neutral venues for the SFs as well. Leinster v Tigers in Cardiff or Ulster v Toulon at Welford Road, for example.

[TomWeston]

I wouldn't mind properly neutral venues for the SFs as well. Leinster v Tigers in Cardiff or Ulster v Toulon at Welford Road, for example.

I'd be happy with those fixtures!

[Isambard]

No it isn't fair. It has been evident for many years that the ERC tend towards self serving and self interest. The actions taken to remove them from running a club European competition are, I believe the outcome of complete frustration with their greed and lack of any interest in the spirit and fabric of rugby.

[Bill W (2)]

No it isn't fair. It has been evident for many years that the ERC tend towards self serving and self interest. The actions taken to remove them from running a club European competition are, I believe the outcome of complete frustration with their greed and lack of any interest in the spirit and fabric of rugby.

[Baggy Trousers]

Yes I agree with you it is unfair, why they can't adopt the formula from other sports I don't know! If that would follow the winner of Ulster/Saracens (Top seed v 8th seed) would play Munster/Toulouse (4th & 5th seeds). Then the other march would Clermont/Tigers v Toulon/Leinster.

Someone would no doubt complain when one SF had the 8th seed v 5th seed and the other had 2nd v 3rd.

If you don't have some element of a draw about things, then the seeding becomes self-perpetuating. If you're seeded in the group stages then you have an easier route to get to the QFs and maintain your seeding for next year, and so it goes on - see football. Tig1 is absolutely right - it's done for the purposes of tv and money, nothing else. I'd rather just have a draw for the QFs and be done with it.

I wouldn't mind properly neutral venues for the SFs as well. Leinster v Tigers in Cardiff or Ulster v Toulon at Welford Road, for example.

Jeepers Biffer, have you no sense of concern for the fans? At least one set get to go without being utterly ripped off with the current system. I added a fair few quid to the Leicester economy over a long weekend & don't begrudge one penny of it, but I'm not made of money.

Check out the cost of a hotel room in Cardiff on a certain weekend in May, that would be replicated for the semis to an extent with your scenario.

Guys, I think that there is a "fairness" phobia pervading this excellent forum. However much of the drama that this fine tournament has engendered over the last 2 decades is partly down to "the luck of the draw" & drama keeps us all excited.

Next year its increasingly likely that all 6 nations will once again compete and the "rugby" change that will take effect, rather than the finance etc, will be the reduction to 5 pools and a third best losers qualifying. That in my view will improve the "fairness" aspect by making the pools more balanced & only two rather than 4 runners up missing out.

I see no acceptable scenario other than the existing one for the semis. The notion that would make seeds 2 & 3 meet in a semi cannot be right as it gives no. 1 seeds too great an advantage when often the no.1 seeds have a relatively comfortable group courtesy of "the luck of the draw".

Anyway chaps, I wish you well for your trip to France, we may yet meet again this season. Thanks too for great company & an excellent weekend - superb hospitality.

[TomWeston]

Your 'fairness phobia' needn't have been aired at all if our CeltItalian friends hadn't been so intransigent right up to the last minute. They saw that the rules weren't fair, clearly albeit belatedly, and agreed to change them, all too late.