isthatrightref says...

@ Steve1036 says... "pretty tough to say the Aussie Conference has been weak for quite a few years. 2010 they had 3 out of 4 teams in the top 6 making them essentially the strongest conference..."

2010 was the last year of S14 i.e. only 4 x oz teams, which rather suggests that adding a 5th has weakened all of them somewhat as they scramble after the talent available: one could argue that the Rebels' picking up Beale & O'Connor has hurt the Force & Waratahs more than it's helped the Rebels.

The conf system is the best (possibly only) way of addressing SR's biggest problem, namely the logistics of getting teams across the Indian Ocean. It also helps maintain interest in what could otherwise become dead-rubber matches: the Reds & Waratahs can still rate themselves a chance of overhauling the Brumbies for a seat at the top table, unlikely though it is.

The only problem I have with the conf system is the guaranteed Top-3 spot for whoever happens to win a particular conf: by all means have them in the 6 even if they're say 7th or 8th on overall points - winning your conf has to be worth something or the whole exercise becomes pointless imo - but then rank them where they actually sit in relation to the other 5 i.e. Brumbies would currently sit 6th, not 3rd.

Lastly, and again, does anyone actually have a better structure in mind? One that doesn't require an even longer season that cuts into the SA & NZ domestic comps more than it already does, and that doesn't impose crippling transport & accommodation costs on the teams? If so, I'd love to hear about them. If not it's just "mine is better than yours" bullsh1t.

Posted 01:00 13th May 2012

sergeblanco says...

Those HC pools would be brilliant staph_glorious.

Glasgow managed to attract almost 6k against Connacht last week. That is about 4.5k more than a few seasons ago. The reason? There was something tangible to play for. 38k at the Edinburgh HC quarter underlines this point as does the excellent atmosphere at the Ospreys game tonight.

Unfortunately the 16 team HC won't happen as the administrators of the game in each nation are far too concerned about preserving their own importnace rather than growing the game sadly. Just ask Romania who were regularly beating the Home Nation teams in the 80s.

Posted 00:17 12th May 2012

melkdave says...

@Henry-Friz&Stelenboched

How countries allocate their HC places isnt the problem .The discussion is how to make the Pro12 a more exciting and competative league .HC qualification on merit is one idea it isnt set in stone, but its an easy fix your suggestions also have merit .AND SHOULD BE DISCUSSED .To many Pro12 matches are meaningless atm and carry no concqences either for wining or losing and theire is a lack of high pressure matches for the fans to get excited about .These matches as ive said before are the clubs bread and butter matches its where they play the vast majority of games,its where they should be making the bulk of their income from gate recepits and hopefully a tv deal .That atm isnt true because the fans are staying away in these hard times and TV companies arnt interested because with the exception of maybe Munster-Leinster there just isnt any high pressure big games.No one is saying the rugby isnt good ,but the games are meaningless as teams have nothing really to play for in the later half of the season or be rewarded for .Theres no goal to strive for except the league title at the start of the season and Munster and Leinster have that wrapped up 9 out of 10 years ,because of the size and class of their squads..If HC was given on merit this year there would be 3 Irish 3 welsh and 1 scottish club qulified for 2013 i also dont see why the previous HC winners place couldnt go to the top Italian team for the next 2-3 years so they can become competative ,but only till they are competative

Posted 11:22 11th May 2012

sergeblanco says...

I am not so sure why the Scottish and Italian sides are getting such a bashing here. Glasgow made the play-offs for the 2nd time in 3 years and Edinburgh made the last 4 in the HC. Treviso have taken plenty of big name scalps as well. When you compare the budgets of these teams with their competitors they have massively over achieved.

I agree that HC qualification spots for the top x number of teams would lead to a more competitive Rabbo. But would a HC with only 3 or 4 nations be good for the long term growth of rugby? This has been the most successful season for the pro sides in Scotland in terms of results and crowds. There isn't a big rugby community here but surely it is in the interests of all rugby nations to ensure professional rugby is a success in as many countries as possible? Killing pro rugby in Scotland and Italy is hardly going to send a positive message to up and coming nations like Georgia.

A possible (although not ideal) solution would be 3 conferences in the Rabbo like in Super rugby before a play off. Less fixtures, so less 2nd strings and more riding on each game. It is important that each nation gets a HC berth but the remaining places can be dependent on a teams placing in the non-conference matches.

I also think a 16 team HC would make more sense. 4 pools. Top 2 progressing to the quarters would be more exciting as in the present format there are often a lot of dead rubbers on the final weekend and the best runner up is often from the pool with Aironi or a French team that couldn't be bothered. I would guarantee each nation in the Rabbo a place. 3 each to the Top 14 and Zurich Prem. The remaining 6 places would be allocated to leagues on their performance in the HC and go on performance in that league. The big teams that miss out would add to the Amlin.

Posted 22:51 10th May 2012

HenryFitz says...

"Times are hard and fans arnt going to pay to watch meaningless league games.TV companies arnt going to pay to televise meaningless matches with low attendances and sponsers arnt going to sponser teams with low attendances either when they can use radio or tv and reach alot more potential customers."

So the solution is to ensure that fewer Rabo teams have the financial windfall of HC games? Whatever way the Entente want to dress it up, as a quest for fairness, a boon for the competition, or an altruistic desire to raise standards and crowds in the Rabo, this is a land-grab, pure and simple. The Entente want proportionally greater representation, and therefore more money. That's it. They also want a greater chance of winning, as it's apparently unfair that other countries are allowed to organise their domestic rugby anyway they see fit. The Welsh, Italian, Scottish and Irish unions should instead organise their domestic comps in a way that will provide a similar handicap to relegation in the AP or the huge fixture list in the Top14. Perhaps you are being sincere, but I can tell you I'm pretty angry at the arrogance of the Entente to think they can force other countries to change the way they run their rugby.

All these calls for change are just bad losing. Ireland has won five out of the last seven HCs, and the puffed-up egos of the AP and the Top14 just can't take it. Le natural order must be restore้.

Posted 18:54 10th May 2012

staph_glorious says...

GCP_JONES,

Couldn't that move suffocate the SRU and FIR? Be damned or be damned, all at the behest of Anglo-Franco bullies. I would think an interjection would be made by other unions and governing bodies such as the ERC, perhaps even the IRB.

The basis of Heineken Cup allocation is fair, as it simply entitles the respective unions to nominate a number of teams, corrected in some way for their playing figures. After this, the responsibility falls on these unions to form a system for nominees, i.e qualification. Should the French or English wish to nominate the same six sides, regardless of league position, on a permanent or short-term basis (e.g 3 or 4 years), in order to alleviate pressures in their domestic competitions, they are welcome to that alternative. However, to pull their weight in order to meddle in the affairs of another, separate, and foreign European competition - not a domestic league - would amount to the most unfair of all actions in this whole ordeal.

Restructuring of the Heineken and Amlin, as I outlined below, looks a best fit for all, including the competition within the RaboDirect, though that it is secondary in this plot. Perhaps England and France need to flex their many muscles first. If it really does come to it, the so-called PRO12 teams boast, at present, the best product of European rugby, followed by a slew of attractive 'running-rugby' sides that do well to compensate for any of the sport's shortfalls. I would expect of them the balls to counter any foreign angst.

Posted 15:11 10th May 2012

chesh10 says...

I think the PRO 12 having to compete for the Heineken is a good call, it makes the premiership far more entertaining that teams are battling for 5th/6th place, playoffs and relegation. Financially though the Pro12 is struggling right? With the Welsh regions struggling for crowds, I'd imagine its because the best players don't play that much (therefore the biggest squads tend to dominate). Something must be done...

I think relegation should probably go in the AP too, for maybe 3 seasons, see how the ticket sales go . If the sales go up (because the rugby's better then great), maybe they could look to expand by 3 teams (have applications like Super League, depending on who can fit the stadium allocation etc., for example, Leeds, Bristol and Cornish Pirates?) and play less games (maybe only 2 or 3 mind, but try and have more games at Wembley/Twickenham etc. to make up the cash).

That way you get players playing less games, a better spectacle of rugby, a (potentially) more sustainable financial model and theoretically a better England team (as more youth player get played etc.).

Posted 14:29 10th May 2012

GCP_JONES says...

@leinster_goy

My God Man your speaking sense WOW.

@peachlegs.....

If Bristol lose against the Corninsh Pirates no club will be relegated from the top flight, its a farce. I have to say I watch a bit of the premiership and have seen some cracking games this season.

Posted 13:13 10th May 2012

peachlegs says...

at blame the ref: the reason the rabo direct plays such entertaining rugby and therefore teams pushing top of the heineken cup each year is because there is no relegation!!!!English clubs stop playing expansive rugby the second the fear for relegation, its 10 man up the jumper crap which is horrendous to watch!Therefore this is impacted on the limited style of play england play internationally, as players are not used to ball handling and playing outside 12!Jerry Guscott says himself they need to scrap relegation to focus on increasing skills and playing free flowing rugby!Look at the super 15, no relegation, free flowing rugby, top international sides!Same is beginning to happen with the Rabo direct, look at how edinburgh played against ulster, that will only benefit scotland, ireland, wales, italy in the long run!If italy get there teams relegated then bam, they are back to square one in terms of developing their own players. Guiness premiership needs changing!

Posted 11:05 10th May 2012

GCP_JONES says...

@staph_glorious...

they would be very quick in agreeing terms if the French/English withdrew and started their own competition. they have both been drafting up a plan that they are bringing to the ERC's table proposing that very thing.the current situation has 2 seasons left to run, but after that you can bet your house on it there will be changes.

Its basically not fair IMO if there clubs have to finish in a certain position or they don't qualify, while the Scots and italians don't have to arsed about their Pro12 games and automatically get into the Marquee competition.Turkey shoots for matches does not make a good spectacle, for the good of rugby in the pro12 unions it has to change.

if the Scots and Italians teams are so weak then they should have 1 professional national team ,being fed by the respective amateur teams that could compete in league, Europe and at test level.

Posted 09:25 10th May 2012