Tier 2 & 3 Rugby Forum

Your feelings on the World League proposal (poll reset)

Are you:

For
7
11%
Against
56
89%
 
Total votes : 63
User avatar
Posts: 5692
Joined: Sun, 27 Apr 2014, 11:50
National Flag:
ItalyItaly

Re: Your feelings on the World League proposal (poll reset)

Unread postby Canalina » Thu, 07 May 2020, 11:32

They are not obtaining an illicit advantage over the non-6N, they are just playing between themselves. They are not interfering with the right and the freedom of Georgia or Spain to play, they are not saying "we are the European champions and we don't want other nations to compete with us". They 'magnanimously' let the European senior title and U18 title to the others, just playing between themselves in their private championship. Is it short-viewing? Is it selfish? Maybe, but you must be in them to judge what is better for your federation. They are just not a cartel. Show me a fact demonstrating it; the Scotland U18 example is simply not a cartel's one

Posts: 3432
Joined: Wed, 14 Oct 2015, 13:30
National Flag:
GermanyGermany

Re: Your feelings on the World League proposal (poll reset)

Unread postby RugbyLiebe » Thu, 07 May 2020, 12:33

Canalina wrote: Maybe, but you must be in them to judge what is better for your federation. They are just not a cartel. Show me a fact demonstrating it; the Scotland U18 example is simply not a cartel's one


Easy.
1. Qualification for the Women's RWC. Why do three 6N teams get to play one REC team for qualification? A private tournament ahead of a continental championship? Cartel interests.
2. They control World Rugby to control their interests. Name one decision which was good for anybody else then them.
3. Two team GBs in the European 7s GP Series before the Olympics, then back to England+Wales the year after.
4. Tweaked Senior and U20 RWC qualifcations to perfectly fit their status to not play in a regional tournament. And if they do not qualify directly, again entry in the last round, without playing in the regular championship. That's interfering.
5. Ireland enters 7s. Pressure on Rugby Europe to directly change the pathway so they could have qualified directly from the lowest division (that's an arguable point, but it is again tweaking rules in their favour just "coincidently" at the right moment).

and that's just coming up with them as I wrote them. They are many more (votes at World Rugby in their favour etc.)

It is okay for you to deny it, but what on earth would qualify as a cartel in sport in your opinion if all of those points don't?


They bend the rules whenever their "not interfering" doesn't work.
How to grow rugby worldwide?
Look at the world ranking in July. Teams ranked 1-10 have to play one team from 11-20 (they don't play in a regular competition) away the next year. 11-20 play 21-30 away and so on. Yes, it really is that simple.

Posts: 717
Joined: Thu, 12 Dec 2019, 21:26
National Flag:
EnglandEngland

Re: Your feelings on the World League proposal (poll reset)

Unread postby Chester-Donnelly » Thu, 07 May 2020, 13:12

I don't care about the definition of a cartel. It would be nice if the conversation moved on past semantics. The Six Nations have the right to protect their tournament and to invite whoever they want to join the championship or not. But in my opinion the international age grade game and the women's game should be run by World Rugby or Rugby Europe. That is where tier 2 is being blocked out and also where old attitudes are being ingrained. It makes a mockery of international rugby. I think young English rugby players would enjoy a tour to Georgia and to stay in a hostel. If there is a risk that Scotland will get relegated, make the top division a bit bigger so they won't.

Posts: 6969
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: Your feelings on the World League proposal (poll reset)

Unread postby victorsra » Thu, 07 May 2020, 13:59

Canalina wrote:A cartel is not just a group above/separated by the others, but a group illicitly influencing the market through the majority obtained by forming the group itself. How is the 6N influencing illicitly the whole rugby panorama, or at least the European one?
By controlling the World Rugby voting thanks to their complicity with the 4N and the subsequent majority of votes, you could have said until a week ago. But the WR chairman election showed that there is not the supposed 6N+4N union and that they may differ also on a basilar thing like the choice of the world chairman.
If there are other ways in which the Six Nations are directly and negatively influencing the other federations for their own profit, please tell me and maybe I will change my mind

I said cartels split. You deny the cartel much before Pichot leading the split. Until now WR election had no real competition because T1s were united and, with this, controlling 30/51 votes. Cartel. And if they reach an agreement, like the revamped World League, it is Cartel again. If the T1s are happy together, T2s have no voting power to change anything. Cartel is in the power structure of WR. It only needs a happy marriage to be effective.

10 of 120 members can control everything. In fact, it only needs 9 of them (27 votes).
Brazilian Rugby News: www.portaldorugby.com.br

User avatar
Posts: 5692
Joined: Sun, 27 Apr 2014, 11:50
National Flag:
ItalyItaly

Re: Your feelings on the World League proposal (poll reset)

Unread postby Canalina » Thu, 07 May 2020, 15:35

RugbyLiebe wrote:...

They are all points applying also to Usa and Canada in North America, Argentina in South America, South Africa in Africa, Japan in Asia, NZ and Aus in Oceania. But I've never heard accusing Argentina to be part of a "cartel"; the guilty ones are always the old boring and powerful british men.
Anyway I admit that on the base of those points the 6N may enter in the meaning ambit of a "cartel". It's a matter of point of view: to me they are just a bunch of old rugby powers managing rugby in a meritocratic and noblesse-cratic way, not damaging the other nations but pulling them; to you they are a bunch of nations controlling the rugby panorama as a cartel, id est, according to the meaning I always gave to the word 'cartel', suffocating the development to the other nations. Let's maintain everyone our own view

victorsra wrote:...

So which is your purpose of votes partition? One member = one vote? Or just a more democratic distribution than now? Because in this second case you would have anyway a cartel. Let's imagine that the 11 tier1 have 3 votes each one, and the twelve T2 nations two votes each one, as the six continental confederations. We will have 69 votes in the whole. So it would be enough to have 11 tier one nations and two tier nations voting always in the same way to control World Rugby. Cartel!
The only way to have not a (supposed) cartel is to have 111 votes, one for each federation + each continental confederation.

Posts: 6969
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: Your feelings on the World League proposal (poll reset)

Unread postby victorsra » Thu, 07 May 2020, 17:50

Basically any system that doesn't have 60% of votes in the power of a very small number of countries that happen to be the ones also controlling the 3 only valuable competitions (the 2 they own, 6N and TRC, and the one they control by majority in the Council, the RWC).

I honestly don't support the idea of one-country-one-vote, because rugby isn't like football. FIFA has 211 members and even in tiny nations there are more clubs and players than rugby in the vast majority of countries. Even San Marino with 30k people has 15 clubs and professional players. Many T3 country don't have this.

It is fair IMO the Old Cartellian Nations being the countries with more votes, because they have more players and clubs. But they as a bloc can't have the majority, otherwise WR will always legislate according to the interests of the already established nations. It creates a vicious circle, as their interests come first, but they are not the countries that need more the WR support.

Also, most of the T2/3s (emerging nations :lol: ) don't play competitions outside their own continents - and is not logical to have them doing so, because rugby's economy is small. In this pespective, it is realy more important to have more power on the hands of the continental federations. And in the continental federations the system of one-country-one-vote is fair and needed.

We have discussed ideas for a voting system before here. They are not perfect, but is is a START to discuss this matter:

victorsra wrote:
RugbyLiebe wrote:
victorsra wrote:
victorsra wrote:The only thing that matters in the Council is the Men's RWC, which stopped in time, contracting the WR itself (as they are all the time talking about sevens and women's rugby). At least Olympic Sevens (Men's and Women's), Sevens World Series (as core team, maybe attached to the Olympic participation or even the RWC Sevens?) and women's RWC participation should count (3 in a row like the RWC?). This would basicaly mean at least Kenya and Spain should have a vote for their consistence in sevens (if they pass the governance criterea, that I if I'm not wrong prevents Tonga and Namibia to vote).


I would have it more open, but knowing that it isn't realistic to expect radical changes in the Council, I'd see fairer something like this:

- 1 vote for men's national teams performances: 2 RWC's in a row or 2 Olympics in a row;

- 1 vote for women's national teams performances*: 2 RWC's in a row or 2 Olympics in a row;
*WR already reserves 1 vote for women when the country has 2 or 3 vote. Make it reflect local women's rugby situation!

- 1 vote for professional leagues: country with a full professional league or at least 2 professional franchises in international full professional leagues;

And all conditioned to governance (regular elections with power rotation, open accounts...). If the country doesn't pass governance standards, it should have no votes.

For regional unions, we could have:
- 1 vote for promoting anual 15-a-side senior men's competitions with at least X% of full members involved + at least 1 senior women's competition;
- 1 vote for promoting anual 15-a-side junior competitions with at least X% of full members involved;
- 1 vote for promoting anual sevens with at least X tournaments and X% of full members involved;

This would make everybody work much more properly.


Hm, I think this is too complicated. Also imho, votes should never be based on how good you compete.
Have your national union pay a certain amount per member (or the "voting level" you reach) to World Rugby. Then allocate votes passed on number of members. By this you make sure, that numbers won't be inflated on purpose to gain more votes. Also you get serious numbers about your Union's members.

1) You get one vote, when:
a) You have over 5k, but under 20k members in your Union
b) you have active men's XV and 7s and women's teams (here 7s is enough). At least four games/ one 7s tournament a year is a must.
c) have an active national league system in men's XV with at least 20 active clubs taking part in various levels
d) you have active U18 and U20 sides (2 games per year per age group mandatory)
e) you have fulfilled all of the above for at least 5 years.

2) You get three votes, when
a) you fulfill all of the above and have over 100k members
b) have competed in a RWC, a Women's RWC or the World 7s Series in the past

3) You get 4 votes, when
a) you fulfill all of the above and have over 500k members

You get 5 votes, when
a) you fulfill all of the above and have over 1000k members

There is a review process on a set month every year. If a Union doesn't fullfil the requirements anymore, they are put on review (1e obviously is only for initial qualification). If they don't fullfil all the requirements for a second year, they lose their vote (or some of them).

Forget any idea of using number of players. There isn't a real global census to control it. Some Unions totaly lie about them.

Btw, who counts as a player? This definition doesn't exist as a parameter to the census, which makes it MUCH more complicated. And how to be sure everybody will properly do it every year (and who will pay?).

The strenght of the national team is defintly not realy fair, but no rupture will be possible. So it is the only realistic measure in the moment that is feasible to use and that could be accepted (or do you believe those Cartel Nations would accept to have the same number of votes than Madagascar?). It is the easiest control.


I posted the discussion I had with RugbyLiebe, that was very positive. We couldn't agree, but only showed that there is a path for a system that is more transparent, open and still fair with "established nations".

I honestly haven't calculated by my system how many votes each country would have. But even if there are more votes to Old Cartellians, it can be adjusted giving continents more votes.
Brazilian Rugby News: www.portaldorugby.com.br

Posts: 3432
Joined: Wed, 14 Oct 2015, 13:30
National Flag:
GermanyGermany

Re: Your feelings on the World League proposal (poll reset)

Unread postby RugbyLiebe » Fri, 08 May 2020, 06:44

This is one of the moments, why I like this forum so much. It is a great discussion and I actually can agree on Canalina's view even if I take another perspective. I take the cartel word, as this is how you can bring that meritocratic and noblesse-cratic way to a clearer view in a world dominated by money.
But as i said fair enough, it is great to be able to discuss this nuances.

I also like that we are going back to what a more democratic voting system would look like. I think when victor and I discussed, we focussed to much on the playing numbers. I think victor was right, that those numbers are hard to standardize.

Another suggestion bassed on the old one could be:

1) You get one vote, when:
b) you have active men's XV and 7s and women's teams (here 7s is enough). At least four games/ one 7s tournament a year is a must.
c) have an active national league system in men's XV with at least 20 active clubs taking part on various levels
d) you have active U18 and U20 sides (2 games per year per age group mandatory)
e) you have fulfilled all of the above for at least 3 years.

2) You get 2 votes, when
a) you fulfill all of the above for 5 years in a row
b) have competed in a RWC, a Women's RWC, the Olympics or the World 7s Series in the past

3) You get 3 votes, when
a) you fulfill all of the above and have a pro league in men's or women's rugby XV

Edit: I think Victors suggestion and mine are slowly coming together. That I disliked the most was, that if you fail to qualify (which is maybe even a good thing as it could mean that rugby becomes more competitive) you shouldn't be penalized even more.
How to grow rugby worldwide?
Look at the world ranking in July. Teams ranked 1-10 have to play one team from 11-20 (they don't play in a regular competition) away the next year. 11-20 play 21-30 away and so on. Yes, it really is that simple.

Posts: 1103
Joined: Wed, 15 Mar 2017, 09:56
National Flag:
RomaniaRomania

Re: Your feelings on the World League proposal (poll reset)

Unread postby Bogdan_DC » Fri, 08 May 2020, 08:13

Romania is probably the most disadvantged T2 country by far but still some of the ideas of this forum sounds like pure socialism.
Did you understand the term of "Private"? 6N is the most succesful PRIVATE sport event. The truth is that England and France are keeping rugby pro. Yeah, i hate that no T1 played Romania for 14 years!? outside WRC or that u18 6Nations are having psychological problems only if they are losing against Portuguese or Georgian kids.That sucks for sure and we need some RULES. Global rules&meritocracy in rugby.
But forget about opening 6N until you give them something AT LEAST that good.And 6N is the best rugby product in the world.

Posts: 2259
Joined: Sun, 20 Apr 2014, 16:57
Location: Leicester
National Flag:
Great BritainGreat Britain

Re: Your feelings on the World League proposal (poll reset)

Unread postby sk 88 » Fri, 08 May 2020, 09:40

RugbyLiebe wrote:
I also like that we are going back to what a more democratic voting system would look like. I think when victor and I discussed, we focussed to much on the playing numbers. I think victor was right, that those numbers are hard to standardize.

Another suggestion bassed on the old one could be:

1) You get one vote, when:
b) you have active men's XV and 7s and women's teams (here 7s is enough). At least four games/ one 7s tournament a year is a must.
c) have an active national league system in men's XV with at least 20 active clubs taking part on various levels
d) you have active U18 and U20 sides (2 games per year per age group mandatory)
e) you have fulfilled all of the above for at least 3 years.

2) You get 2 votes, when
a) you fulfill all of the above for 5 years in a row
b) have competed in a RWC, a Women's RWC, the Olympics or the World 7s Series in the past

3) You get 3 votes, when
a) you fulfill all of the above and have a pro league in men's or women's rugby XV

Edit: I think Victors suggestion and mine are slowly coming together. That I disliked the most was, that if you fail to qualify (which is maybe even a good thing as it could mean that rugby becomes more competitive) you shouldn't be penalized even more.


Just to be clear on the bolded, do you have to have competed at both a RWC and a Women's RWC and then either the Olympics or World Series, OR compete in any one single event?

I like this kind of progression. I think differential strength voting realistically needs to st stay somewhat because T1s like France, England, New Zealand etc have such different sizes of rugby economies to T3s like Sweden or Cote d'Ivoire, and we have to recognise that while also spreading the votes far more widely.

One other question, how would we define the final vote? What is a "pro league"? Would Argentina count for instance? They have 1 pro team in a foreign league, and then amateur leagues at home. Would Namibia count if the Welweitchias played in Currie Cup? Canada with the Toronto Arrows? Is MLR really "pro", does anyone live off these earnings? If it is just about being paid then does the Spanish League count? The Polish Ekstraliga has some Georgians in it, are they getting paid?

I didn't mean that last paragraph to grow so much but you see my point, it does spiral quite quickly.

Posts: 717
Joined: Thu, 12 Dec 2019, 21:26
National Flag:
EnglandEngland

Re: Your feelings on the World League proposal (poll reset)

Unread postby Chester-Donnelly » Fri, 08 May 2020, 10:34

To have a pro league is too much. Two times world cup winners Australia don't have a pro league. Having a professional team playing in a recognised pro league should be enough. But even then it's difficult to define. SLAR and GRR are pro leagues but they have a very short season.

Posts: 3432
Joined: Wed, 14 Oct 2015, 13:30
National Flag:
GermanyGermany

Re: Your feelings on the World League proposal (poll reset)

Unread postby RugbyLiebe » Fri, 08 May 2020, 10:51

Chester-Donnelly wrote:To have a pro league is too much. Two times world cup winners Australia don't have a pro league. Having a professional team playing in a recognised pro league should be enough. But even then it's difficult to define. SLAR and GRR are pro leagues but they have a very short season.


Australia does have a pro league - the NRC. Also they have 4 franchises in another league. You have a good point though about other countries like Scotland. Should be changed to teams in a pro-league.

On the other hand I absolutely think that for the growth of the game a professional league is extremely important.

sk 88 wrote:Just to be clear on the bolded, do you have to have competed at both a RWC and a Women's RWC and then either the Olympics or World Series, OR compete in any one single event?


Any of them. I wouldn't care if you would say two out of them. My point is, that a missed qualification isn't a bad thing per se and shouldn't be penalized as long as the previous fullfilments are still matched.
How to grow rugby worldwide?
Look at the world ranking in July. Teams ranked 1-10 have to play one team from 11-20 (they don't play in a regular competition) away the next year. 11-20 play 21-30 away and so on. Yes, it really is that simple.

Posts: 717
Joined: Thu, 12 Dec 2019, 21:26
National Flag:
EnglandEngland

Re: Your feelings on the World League proposal (poll reset)

Unread postby Chester-Donnelly » Fri, 08 May 2020, 11:06

I think a national union should get credit for investing in a pro team in a pro league. Even Malaysia and China have shown a real commitment to rugby by entering teams in GRR, despite these being basically foreign teams at the moment. I think that should earn them a vote, and it will be an incentive to other nations like South Korea, Singapore and UAE to get a professional team into a professional league.

Posts: 3432
Joined: Wed, 14 Oct 2015, 13:30
National Flag:
GermanyGermany

Re: Your feelings on the World League proposal (poll reset)

Unread postby RugbyLiebe » Fri, 08 May 2020, 11:24

Bogdan_DC wrote:Romania is probably the most disadvantged T2 country by far but still some of the ideas of this forum sounds like pure socialism.
Did you understand the term of "Private"? 6N is the most succesful PRIVATE sport event. The truth is that England and France are keeping rugby pro. Yeah, i hate that no T1 played Romania for 14 years!? outside WRC or that u18 6Nations are having psychological problems only if they are losing against Portuguese or Georgian kids.That sucks for sure and we need some RULES. Global rules&meritocracy in rugby.
But forget about opening 6N until you give them something AT LEAST that good.And 6N is the best rugby product in the world.


I doubt anybody on here wouldn't agree with you on this, but you mix up different things.
- French rugby would still be pro without the 6N or maybe even national teams. It lives from local rivalries and a very healthy absolutely open club system. That's actually quite interesting, that the most open league systems creates the healthiest league system with 30 teams very much capable of actually winning it with just a bit more effort/ sponsorship money, heck they had 31 clubs in the top14 since the game went pro in 1995/96.

- British rugby is only pro, because they needed to.

- This has nothing at all to do with socialism, this is actually the opposite as we are for open and equal competition. Protectionism over a longer period of time has never worked, there are numerous examples in history. Rugby has a massive fear of failing or losing their status quo. That's very atypical for any sport around the globe apart from Rugby and cricket. Nations failing to reach something are the salt in the soup (I am aware of the trend going the opposite way due to (again) fear of lower tv-income).
Last edited by RugbyLiebe on Fri, 08 May 2020, 11:59, edited 3 times in total.
How to grow rugby worldwide?
Look at the world ranking in July. Teams ranked 1-10 have to play one team from 11-20 (they don't play in a regular competition) away the next year. 11-20 play 21-30 away and so on. Yes, it really is that simple.

Posts: 3432
Joined: Wed, 14 Oct 2015, 13:30
National Flag:
GermanyGermany

Re: Your feelings on the World League proposal (poll reset)

Unread postby RugbyLiebe » Fri, 08 May 2020, 11:26

Chester-Donnelly wrote:I think a national union should get credit for investing in a pro team in a pro league. Even Malaysia and China have shown a real commitment to rugby by entering teams in GRR, despite these being basically foreign teams at the moment. I think that should earn them a vote, and it will be an incentive to other nations like South Korea, Singapore and UAE to get a professional team into a professional league.


Fair enough. Why not add a clause that you need two pro-teams (so Scotland has no fear of losing its votes) and have sustained them for at least 4 years.


3) You get 3 votes, when
a) you fulfill all of the above and have at least two pro-teams in a fully proleague in men's or women's rugby XV for at least 4 consecutive years
How to grow rugby worldwide?
Look at the world ranking in July. Teams ranked 1-10 have to play one team from 11-20 (they don't play in a regular competition) away the next year. 11-20 play 21-30 away and so on. Yes, it really is that simple.

Posts: 717
Joined: Thu, 12 Dec 2019, 21:26
National Flag:
EnglandEngland

Re: Your feelings on the World League proposal (poll reset)

Unread postby Chester-Donnelly » Fri, 08 May 2020, 11:37

RugbyLiebe wrote:
Chester-Donnelly wrote:I think a national union should get credit for investing in a pro team in a pro league. Even Malaysia and China have shown a real commitment to rugby by entering teams in GRR, despite these being basically foreign teams at the moment. I think that should earn them a vote, and it will be an incentive to other nations like South Korea, Singapore and UAE to get a professional team into a professional league.


Fair enough. Why not add a clause that you need two pro-teams (so Scotland has no fear of losing its votes) and have sustained them for at least 4 years.


3) You get 3 votes, when
a) you fulfill all of the above and have at least two pro-teams in a fully proleague in men's or women's rugby XV for at least 4 consecutive years


I think that's fair enough. That would also probably qualify Argentina because they have Los Ceibos playing in SLAR.

There would also be an incentive for Uruguay and Canada to both add another team to SLAR and MLR respectively.

Posts: 3432
Joined: Wed, 14 Oct 2015, 13:30
National Flag:
GermanyGermany

Re: Your feelings on the World League proposal (poll reset)

Unread postby RugbyLiebe » Fri, 08 May 2020, 11:57

sk 88 wrote:
One other question, how would we define the final vote? What is a "pro league"? Would Argentina count for instance? They have 1 pro team in a foreign league, and then amateur leagues at home.


If the SLAR is given pro-status (World Rugby can provide that and in my eyes they should get that) they should keep their 3 votes if not, they should try harder.

sk 88 wrote:Would Namibia count if the Welweitchias played in Currie Cup?

Nope. Two teams.

sk 88 wrote:Canada with the Toronto Arrows? Is MLR really "pro", does anyone live off these earnings?

MLR in my eyes, yes, as it is fully-pro during the season. Canada, no, they need a second team

sk 88 wrote:If it is just about being paid then does the Spanish League count? The Polish Ekstraliga has some Georgians in it, are they getting paid?
I didn't mean that last paragraph to grow so much but you see my point, it does spiral quite quickly.


Even German second division teams pay some players some money. The league has to be fully-pro at least as long as the season runs. Otherwise it doesn't count.


Remember my idea is not to discriminate, but to create reasons to put more efforts in.
How to grow rugby worldwide?
Look at the world ranking in July. Teams ranked 1-10 have to play one team from 11-20 (they don't play in a regular competition) away the next year. 11-20 play 21-30 away and so on. Yes, it really is that simple.

Posts: 6969
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: Your feelings on the World League proposal (poll reset)

Unread postby victorsra » Fri, 08 May 2020, 12:49

The idea of professional leagues/teams would basicaly need some criterea from WR (budgets or whatever) to determine who is and who is pro and who is semi pro.

Australia is pro because of Super Rugby. NRC I don't know, but it is important to determine Fiji's status.

World Rugby has a very good development work when it comes to education. Just look at how many programs and content they have we can access with WR Passport. They could have a section destined to sustainable professionalism. That would be the same people in charge of monitoring professional iniciatives and determing who is and who is not.

Anyway, professionalism is always relative to the currency and living standards of each country. You can't use budgets in pounds or euros to determine that. But this is easy to calculate.
Brazilian Rugby News: www.portaldorugby.com.br

User avatar
Posts: 2314
Joined: Tue, 15 Apr 2014, 18:36
National Flag:
RomaniaRomania

Re: Your feelings on the World League proposal (poll reset)

Unread postby iul » Fri, 08 May 2020, 13:39

victorsra wrote:The idea of professional leagues/teams would basicaly need some criterea from WR (budgets or whatever) to determine who is and who is pro and who is semi pro.

Australia is pro because of Super Rugby. NRC I don't know, but it is important to determine Fiji's status.

World Rugby has a very good development work when it comes to education. Just look at how many programs and content they have we can access with WR Passport. They could have a section destined to sustainable professionalism. That would be the same people in charge of monitoring professional iniciatives and determing who is and who is not.

Anyway, professionalism is always relative to the currency and living standards of each country. You can't use budgets in pounds or euros to determine that. But this is easy to calculate.

Perhaps if 30 players earn at least the average yearly wage in the country the club is from it counts the club as being pro. Perhaps this condition could be applied to the coaching staff... something like having 4 or 5 coaches on yearly average wage or higher.

Posts: 6969
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: Your feelings on the World League proposal (poll reset)

Unread postby victorsra » Fri, 08 May 2020, 14:42

Yes, something like this. But maybe to make things easier the best way is to use the rules of each competition. If a league determines minimum wages or budgets or something like this, it makes this regulation easier. This would mean that professional clubs that play semi-professional leagues woudn't be considered professional.

In other words, only countries with clubs/franchises in full-professional leagues (determined by the league rules for wages/budgets), either domestic leagues or transnational leagues.
Brazilian Rugby News: www.portaldorugby.com.br

User avatar
Posts: 2314
Joined: Tue, 15 Apr 2014, 18:36
National Flag:
RomaniaRomania

Re: Your feelings on the World League proposal (poll reset)

Unread postby iul » Fri, 08 May 2020, 14:57

victorsra wrote:Yes, something like this. But maybe to make things easier the best way is to use the rules of each competition. If a league determines minimum wages or budgets or something like this, it makes this regulation easier. This would mean that professional clubs that play semi-professional leagues woudn't be considered professional.

In other words, only countries with clubs/franchises in full-professional leagues (determined by the league rules for wages/budgets), either domestic leagues or transnational leagues.

If a euroleague comes through and it has teams both from Germany and from Georgia. How could such a competition have any sort of salary cup of minimum salary when the economic differences are so great?

Posts: 6969
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: Your feelings on the World League proposal (poll reset)

Unread postby victorsra » Fri, 08 May 2020, 16:48

Salary cap or salary floor? The cap only regulates the maximum budget for salaries, which is irrelevant for such discussion.

What can be done is to just place a salary floor rationed by each country's minimum wage. This would be just a way to make sure all the members of the league are professionals. "All players must have contracts with salaries of at least X minimum wages or average wages of the country where it is based". No big deal.

This to have a professional status awarded. If it is not possible, ok, the league keeps being semi professional and that's it.

It would be too bureaucratic and complicated for WR to look each team. It's easier to just look at each league's rules.
Brazilian Rugby News: www.portaldorugby.com.br

Posts: 717
Joined: Thu, 12 Dec 2019, 21:26
National Flag:
EnglandEngland

Re: Your feelings on the World League proposal (poll reset)

Unread postby Chester-Donnelly » Fri, 08 May 2020, 17:40

Rugby should be an ethical sport. Every recognised professional league should have a salary cap, to ensure the league is sustainable and the players are relatable, and a salary floor to ensure that players are not being exploited. If a league does not comply World Rugby will not accept it as an official professional league.
World Rugby should also be committed to reducing air miles to improve player welfare and reduce the sport's carbon footprint.

Online
Posts: 4272
Joined: Tue, 06 Oct 2015, 22:54
National Flag:
SpainSpain

Re: Your feelings on the World League proposal (poll reset)

Unread postby Armchair Fan » Fri, 08 May 2020, 20:27

Any World Rugby regulation on professional leagues will inevitably clash with national law. For example here the Sport Law is from 1990 and only recognises football and basketball men leagues as professional and their players as such. Of course there are guys and girls paid to play sport apart from these two, but law doesn't recognise them. And I doubt it's the only country where this happens.

Posts: 6969
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: Your feelings on the World League proposal (poll reset)

Unread postby victorsra » Sat, 09 May 2020, 00:13

But this would be indifferent for World Rugby I believe. They can put a salary floor anyway, right? And basically explain this legal issue.
Brazilian Rugby News: www.portaldorugby.com.br

Previous

Return to Rugby Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 25 guests