Star Signing

[DickyP]

What has been missed so far in this thread is the real cause of all the aggro: there just far, far too many international games. A minimum of 10 or 11 in the NH and even more in the SH. There should be no more than 6 or 7. (Just think there used to be 1 or perhaps 2 autumn internationals, 4 x 5 nations games and some years a short summer tour.)

At the behest of the money grubbing unions, particularly those in countries without a viable league structure, everything is driven by internationals, which just doesn't work. All these countries are seeing a decline in the spectator base for domestic rugby. I'll be intrigued to see what effect, if any, the 'success' of Wales at the RWC has on attendance at club games in Wales where currently they are very poor compared with wendyball despite rugby being their 'national sport'.

[Lincs Stu]

All these countries are seeing a decline in the spectator base for domestic rugby. I'll be intrigued to see what effect, if any, the 'success' of Wales at the RWC has on attendance at club games in Wales where currently they are very poor compared with wendyball despite rugby being their 'national sport'.

I live in Wales and I suspect that attendances will rise as the success of the success of the national team filters down. The biggest problem for the Welsh is that there is still a significant resentment to the the Regional teams and also three of the four regions are shown live on terrestrial TV each weekend. Tempting to stay in the warmth on a Friday night and watch on the box, than pay £15 to watch in the cold and a half empty soulless modern football stadium!

[Cardiff Tig]

What has been missed so far in this thread is the real cause of all the aggro: there just far, far too many international games. A minimum of 10 or 11 in the NH and even more in the SH. There should be no more than 6 or 7. (Just think there used to be 1 or perhaps 2 autumn internationals, 4 x 5 nations games and some years a short summer tour.)

At the behest of the money grubbing unions, particularly those in countries without a viable league structure, everything is driven by internationals, which just doesn't work. All these countries are seeing a decline in the spectator base for domestic rugby. I'll be intrigued to see what effect, if any, the 'success' of Wales at the RWC has on attendance at club games in Wales where currently they are very poor compared with wendyball despite rugby being their 'national sport'.

i disagree - the summer tours have no effect on anybody (except if a player gets seriously injured) - and the fourth autumn international was agreed by the clubs, they never had to accept the deal the RFU proposed, the IRB only enforces 3 autumn internationals. so that leaves 8 internationals in a season (ignoring the one the clubs agreed to) and now that the LV cup is played during this time as well clubs are not affected to badly. obviously WC year is the exception but that only happens every 4 years so theres ample oppurtunity for spectators to watch games will full strength teams etc domestically. the negative impact of the world cup on tigers is probably countered slightly by the general increase in rugby followers following the WC - although maybe not this year after englands performance!

[loretta]

me2 said "You cannot have a system that benefits all clubs. PRL have voted for the method that benefits the majority, even if this isnt the method that Tigers (and Tigers fans) feel is the fairest."

Surely there would be some benefit to the game in England as a whole, including clubs like Newcastle, if the dis-incentive to produce home grown internationals was reduced. A more successful England side brings increased gates all over the country, look at 2003/4.

As it stands, Tigers might be more successful (particularly in years like this) if comprised primarily of sub-internationals from other nations instead of English players. I don't think anyone wants to go down that road, but I'm sure Cockers has been quoted speaking along these lines and if clubs like ours went that way you could kiss England success goodbye.

[Purebob]

The salary cap means that "star signing" that might cost £350k a year would cost us three squad players/ Where would that have left us during the last six weeks ?

Also if another club signed Castro, or Croft do you think they would celebrate signing a "star signing" ? I do.

[loretta]

The salary cap means that "star signing" that might cost £350k a year would cost us three squad players/ Where would that have left us during the last six weeks ?

Also if another club signed Castro, or Croft do you think they would celebrate signing a "star signing" ? I do.

Quite right, our club is littered with quality, it's just that we tend to develop promising players into stars rather than buy the finished article. That way, we should get a tighter squad with better esprit de corp. Of course we do then rather take them for granted.

[DickyP]

What has been missed so far in this thread is the real cause of all the aggro: there just far, far too many international games. A minimum of 10 or 11 in the NH and even more in the SH. There should be no more than 6 or 7. (Just think there used to be 1 or perhaps 2 autumn internationals, 4 x 5 nations games and some years a short summer tour.)

At the behest of the money grubbing unions, particularly those in countries without a viable league structure, everything is driven by internationals, which just doesn't work. All these countries are seeing a decline in the spectator base for domestic rugby. I'll be intrigued to see what effect, if any, the 'success' of Wales at the RWC has on attendance at club games in Wales where currently they are very poor compared with wendyball despite rugby being their 'national sport'.

i disagree - the summer tours have no effect on anybody (except if a player gets seriously injured) - and the fourth autumn international was agreed by the clubs, they never had to accept the deal the RFU proposed, the IRB only enforces 3 autumn internationals. so that leaves 8 internationals in a season (ignoring the one the clubs agreed to) and now that the LV cup is played during this time as well clubs are not affected to badly. obviously WC year is the exception but that only happens every 4 years so theres ample oppurtunity for spectators to watch games will full strength teams etc domestically. the negative impact of the world cup on tigers is probably countered slightly by the general increase in rugby followers following the WC - although maybe not this year after englands performance!

The summer tours do affect teams - they count towards the number of games a player is allowed. And Even it wasn't I still think that even 8 internationals in a season cheapens them - not to mention that they are 8 out of 30 games allowed to members of the England squad (agree we shouldn't count the RWC in these discussions).

[Cardiff Tig]

out if interest which internationals would you get rid of then?

[Will S]

There are lots of quality players out there but to be honest I am very happy with the squad we have - it would just be nice if we were allowed to play half of them!

The only player I would love to see in a Tigers shirt is Sam Tomkins. He would be exceptional!

[me2]

Yes, which Internationals would you get rid of?


Before you suggest the Summer Tour I'll give you a few hints:

Don't forget that the NH "Summer" tour to the SH is essentially the SH "Autumn Internationals" and vice versa.
You couldn't just say to scrap the Summer Tour & keep the AIs as they bring in money as obviously it is the opposite for the SH teams & they wouldn't agree to have one & not the other, just as NH Unions wouldn't agree to lose the AIs but keep the Summer tour.

Don't forget that the 4th Autumn International is the one where all of the revenue goes to PRL. If you drop an AI the Premiership clubs get less money.

If you return the 6N to the 5N you permanently relegate one of the unions to the second tier. Good luck getting that one approved by the other unions!


So...which Internatinals would you get rid of?

[Cardiff Tig]

does anyone else think the autumn internationals should be a tour of one nation or possibly two, not just 4 games against 4 different teams? think it would be better if we had 2 or 3 games against australia for example and then a different nation the year after etc. the novelty of playing the big 3 is wearing off a little bit for me!

[WhitecapTiger]

does anyone else think the autumn internationals should be a tour of one nation or possibly two, not just 4 games against 4 different teams? think it would be better if we had 2 or 3 games against australia for example and then a different nation the year after etc. the novelty of playing the big 3 is wearing off a little bit for me!

Maybe they could go for a SH version of the B&I Lions? Call them the Cheetahs?

[DickyP]

.. So...which Internatinals would you get rid of?

I'd get rid of all the S Tours and AIs as currently done.

One nation to tour NH from SH in Autumn and vice versa. Maximum of 7 or 8 internationals in a season. (8th is an International against a Tier 2 nation). In fact I'd rather have no internationals against SH nations at all except in RWC or Lions years and extend the 6N to include Georgia. I'd just let then go ahead and change completely to Rugby League rules as they want to and get back to playing Rugby Union with competing for the ball at the breakdown, mauls, rucks and so on.

[Kinoulton]

Quite simply, rugby needs to decide where it's going.

Cricket has cleared its conscience and decided to decimate the county game by taking loads of top players away for virtually an entire year of tests, tournaments, one day internationals etc, leaving counties like Notts completely without their best players. But it's all factored in somehow.

Whereas rugby is burying its head in the sand and pretending that it's OK to develop a fixture list which calls for a massively depleted Tigers squad to contend an important league fixture against a squad which is virtually unaffected.