RFU win!!!
Moderators: Tigerbeat, Rizzo, Tigers Press Office, Tigers Webmaster
I think the assertion the RFU have 'won' could be mistaken. I doubt there will be any winners here, only degrees of loss. The judge included in his judgement that the parties should be resolving these issues without resorting to litigation. Money that would be better spent on rugby is lining lawyers pockets. I fear this will end in tears.
If Tigers become Lions, how do Lions become Pussycats?
-
- Super User
- Posts: 4454
- Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 8:50 am
- Location: Tonbridge
I very much agree with you nwnreader.
Its time now for both parties to start talking to each other more sensibly without threats and counter threats. Time to start negotiating a common good for the game like negotiating around not playing during the internationals periods etc.
The two sides are making Rugby Union a laughing stock in this country.
Its time now for both parties to start talking to each other more sensibly without threats and counter threats. Time to start negotiating a common good for the game like negotiating around not playing during the internationals periods etc.
The two sides are making Rugby Union a laughing stock in this country.
-
- Super User
- Posts: 7106
- Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 8:40 pm
- Location: NW Leics
Some say that the RFU WANT to keep annoying the premiership teams, to the point where they win the central contract argument. In which case, spats like this will continue.Sim wrote:BOOOOOO TO THE RFU, GET LOST AND FIND SOME OTHER PLAYERS OR JUST SIMPLY STOP ANNOYING US PREMIERSHIP TEAMS, GRRRRRRR
They may be right.
A 'break away' moves one small step closer.
-
- Super User
- Posts: 4454
- Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 8:50 am
- Location: Tonbridge
Dailywaffle, I can understand your argument about the aims of the RFU. But would a break-away by the clubs really be for the benefit of the fans and for rugby in general in this country and also I wonder if the clubs could feasibly manage their own league. Also, there is the fact that the English clubs would I believe then be unable to play European rugby so there would be some loss of revenue. I believe a break-away move would have serious financial effects on all Premiership clubs.
INHO the breakaway is indeed one step nearer.
The RFU in the small print of its submission said that no PRL player would play more than 8 matches. Thus the Argentina game is relagated to a "Saxons Team" but where does that leave training days?
Doubtless the RFU will now try and throw money at the problem.
But it is all too late.
Will end in tears - as it was always going to.
The RFU in the small print of its submission said that no PRL player would play more than 8 matches. Thus the Argentina game is relagated to a "Saxons Team" but where does that leave training days?
Doubtless the RFU will now try and throw money at the problem.
But it is all too late.
Will end in tears - as it was always going to.
-
- Super User
- Posts: 4454
- Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 8:50 am
- Location: Tonbridge
But, Bill, what good is a break-away if it damages rugby in this country or at least weakens the clubs financially? Although I very much understand frustration with the RFU too. It seems that the RFU have arranged the extra game to prove a point. The Argentina game will not sell so well now if it is to be a Saxons Game. Also, why did we need two games against SA?
-
- Super User
- Posts: 7106
- Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 8:40 pm
- Location: NW Leics
Hi Simon - Indeed, these are some of the issues that have prevented a more dramatic response from the clubs. It is not at all clear (to me at least) that a stand alone premiership is currently viable. The clubs cannot move until it is, which some would say is what the RFU is banking on. In other words, the RFU hopes that they have the clubs by the short and curlies, ultimately passing player control to the RFU. I genuinely have no idea which side will win, but the status quo is clearly absurd to any observer. RU is still a joke in this country, organisationally speaking, and one of the reasons why I no longer have a season ticket.simon redshaw wrote:Dailywaffle, I can understand your argument about the aims of the RFU. But would a break-away by the clubs really be for the benefit of the fans and for rugby in general in this country and also I wonder if the clubs could feasibly manage their own league. Also, there is the fact that the English clubs would I believe then be unable to play European rugby so there would be some loss of revenue. I believe a break-away move would have serious financial effects on all Premiership clubs.
Bill - nice to hear from you - miss anything whilst I was away in the States ?
Simon
I do not think a breakaway is a good thing - but it is becoming IMHO inevitable.
I also do not think the RFU planned the NZ game to "prove a point" - they did it because they thought it was a "good idea" and wouild make money - they did not think any further - remember they believe they "own" all PRL players.
Do Club England need all these games - with the associated training sessions? Only to generate revenue for the RFU.
It will all end in tears.
Where is "El Supremo?"
I do not think a breakaway is a good thing - but it is becoming IMHO inevitable.
I also do not think the RFU planned the NZ game to "prove a point" - they did it because they thought it was a "good idea" and wouild make money - they did not think any further - remember they believe they "own" all PRL players.
Do Club England need all these games - with the associated training sessions? Only to generate revenue for the RFU.
It will all end in tears.
Where is "El Supremo?"
-
- Super User
- Posts: 7106
- Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 8:40 pm
- Location: NW Leics
-
- Super User
- Posts: 4454
- Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 8:50 am
- Location: Tonbridge
-
- Super User
- Posts: 4454
- Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 8:50 am
- Location: Tonbridge