Tier 2 & 3 Rugby Forum

Your feelings on the World League proposal (poll reset)

Are you:

For
6
10%
Against
54
90%
 
Total votes : 60
User avatar
Posts: 1272
Joined: Thu, 28 Apr 2016, 14:02
Location: Las Canteras, Uruguay
National Flag:
UruguayUruguay

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

Postby NaBUru38 » Fri, 15 Mar 2019, 18:43

TheStroBro wrote:£1.75BB...holy smokes.

Indeed, but how long is the contract?

Posts: 1560
Joined: Tue, 27 May 2014, 20:40
Location: Europe
National Flag:
Great BritainGreat Britain

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

Postby Thomas » Wed, 20 Mar 2019, 10:13

Has anyone picked up on the fact that Philippe Blatter is CEO running the consortium to buy the Nations Championship rights? direct competition to CVC

The Company is Infront they are offering a payment of £5bn to the countries involved in the new global tournament — an estimated £1.5bn more than they currently earn — in return for the competition’s commercial and broadcast rights.

FROM THE FT:

Private equity and World Rugby battle for control of the sport
https://www.ft.com/content/51eb8b22-471 ... a37d002cd3

We are in for a ride

Posts: 1858
Joined: Thu, 23 Feb 2017, 01:37
National Flag:
United StatesUnited States

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

Postby TheStroBro » Wed, 20 Mar 2019, 19:09

Yeah, a couple pages ago.

User avatar
Posts: 2952
Joined: Wed, 30 Apr 2014, 16:57

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

Postby 4N » Fri, 22 Mar 2019, 23:01

Ouch

Image

Posts: 557
Joined: Wed, 11 Jun 2014, 07:45
National Flag:
ArgentinaArgentina

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

Postby carbonero » Fri, 22 Mar 2019, 23:57

Ouch? That account is embarrassing. How many times did they patronize T2’s claiming shit was good for them when it only favored the Pacific Islands. Remember Dan Leo advocating for Nonu and Kaino to play for Samoa after 50+ tests with the All Blacks? I’m sure they denounced the clear path they got after failing to qualify directly to the RWC 2019. Or the structural corruption of their federations. Or how WR grants still account for 99% of their revenue.

User avatar
Posts: 2952
Joined: Wed, 30 Apr 2014, 16:57

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

Postby 4N » Sat, 23 Mar 2019, 00:05

You know they represent over 600 players in every major competition right? Good luck getting anything done without them on board.

Posts: 557
Joined: Wed, 11 Jun 2014, 07:45
National Flag:
ArgentinaArgentina

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

Postby carbonero » Sat, 23 Mar 2019, 00:10

You know those 600 players don’t make a dime in international rugby right? It’s pretty easy to get them on board.

User avatar
Posts: 2952
Joined: Wed, 30 Apr 2014, 16:57

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

Postby 4N » Sat, 23 Mar 2019, 00:21

You know PRPW also includes loads of non-PI internationals like Manu Tuilagi the Vunipolas right?

Posts: 5546
Joined: Sat, 05 Jul 2014, 02:44
National Flag:
AustraliaAustralia

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

Postby thatrugbyguy » Sat, 23 Mar 2019, 00:22

Look, the Pacific Islands are important in the conversation but they do act sometimes like they have some type of divine right to be given preferential treatment. Seldom do I hear them talk about anybody but themselves when it comes to T2 issues.

Posts: 557
Joined: Wed, 11 Jun 2014, 07:45
National Flag:
ArgentinaArgentina

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

Postby carbonero » Sat, 23 Mar 2019, 00:27

4N wrote:You know PRPW also includes loads of non-PI internationals like Manu Tuilagi the Vunipolas right?

You think they are going to renounce to that succulent RFU paycheck? Isn’t Nadolo also on that lobby group? Look how fast he went for the money.

Online
Posts: 3760
Joined: Tue, 06 Oct 2015, 22:54
National Flag:
SpainSpain

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

Postby Armchair Fan » Sat, 23 Mar 2019, 00:32

Contradictory feelings. I can't bear Dan Leo and company, carbonero is totally right, they have always tried to occupy all debate about Tier 2 and rugby global expansion. By Tier 2 nations they only mean Fiji, Samoa and Tonga and they don't accept the slightest criticism. Let's just remember their campaign to get World Rugby Council representation without acknowledging the deep issues SRU still have. But in the end they are a necessary ally given the sympathy so many have for them... Georgia or Sudamerica Rugby concerns about Nations Championship didn't reach even 10% of what they reach.

User avatar
Posts: 2952
Joined: Wed, 30 Apr 2014, 16:57

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

Postby 4N » Sat, 23 Mar 2019, 00:37

carbonero wrote:
4N wrote:You know PRPW also includes loads of non-PI internationals like Manu Tuilagi the Vunipolas right?


You think they are going to renounce to that succulent RFU paycheck? Isn’t Nadolo also on that lobby group? Look how fast he went for the money.
That would be a good point if their primary employers, French and English clubs, weren’t also against the proposal. It’s been pointed out that Fiji would have a tough time getting their squad assembled from Europe in November especially. It’s almost like you think all of this wasn’t considered before that tweet was sent.

Posts: 557
Joined: Wed, 11 Jun 2014, 07:45
National Flag:
ArgentinaArgentina

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

Postby carbonero » Sat, 23 Mar 2019, 00:55

Argentina got all their European based players from 2012 to 2015. Why can’t Fiji do the same? The TRC and the November window operate within Regulation 9. If that is the case, then Fiji can’t be included in any type of expansion.

Posts: 5546
Joined: Sat, 05 Jul 2014, 02:44
National Flag:
AustraliaAustralia

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

Postby thatrugbyguy » Sat, 23 Mar 2019, 01:09

Armchair Fan wrote:Contradictory feelings. I can't bear Dan Leo and company, carbonero is totally right, they have always tried to occupy all debate about Tier 2 and rugby global expansion. By Tier 2 nations they only mean Fiji, Samoa and Tonga and they don't accept the slightest criticism. Let's just remember their campaign to get World Rugby Council representation without acknowledging the deep issues SRU still have. But in the end they are a necessary ally given the sympathy so many have for them... Georgia or Sudamerica Rugby concerns about Nations Championship didn't reach even 10% of what they reach.


They are necessary, but they need to stop acting like they are the only ones who matter the most.

Posts: 269
Joined: Sat, 03 May 2014, 00:22
National Flag:
New ZealandNew Zealand

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

Postby Scoob » Sat, 23 Mar 2019, 02:17

Anyone find it amusing that the SANZAAR nations are in this for $$$ basically to fund there unions,as they have no other alternatives.
I think the Sth hemisphere have agreed to promotion relegation,the stumbling block is Ireland,Italy,Scotland who fear losing revenue if they lose to most probably Georgia or USA.
Who would have thought when game went professional that the one of the biggest decisions in professional rugby has come down to the progress of these 2 nations in international rugby and weather Italy,Ireland,Scotland agree to promotion relegation. I think in the back of Scotland,Italy,Ireland mind is the fact that Georgia has dealed to them in under 20 world cups which resulted in Ireland narrowly avoiding relegation to the trophy competition,and when one of the celtic nations got relegated out of the under 18 fira comp of few years back. They all threw there toys out of the cot and ran away never to play Georgia and co again.

Posts: 5546
Joined: Sat, 05 Jul 2014, 02:44
National Flag:
AustraliaAustralia

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

Postby thatrugbyguy » Sat, 23 Mar 2019, 02:31

The Southern Hemisphere wouldn't even be in this position if they had actually planned things correctly when the game when professional. There should have been enough foresight to know back in the mid 90's that Japan and South East Asia was the area where Australia and New Zealand needed to invest their future in. Sure the All Blacks thrashed Japan by 145 points in the 95 World Cup, but frankly there was no excuse for ignoring a nation with such a strong rugby heritage as Japan for so long. If a long term strategy was put in place we probably would have seen Asia as a much more viable option for AUS and NZ as Japan and the region would be stronger, and we wouldn't be in this situation where they are willing to do anything for a cash injection.

Posts: 1858
Joined: Thu, 23 Feb 2017, 01:37
National Flag:
United StatesUnited States

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

Postby TheStroBro » Sat, 23 Mar 2019, 02:58

Armchair Fan wrote:Contradictory feelings. I can't bear Dan Leo and company, carbonero is totally right, they have always tried to occupy all debate about Tier 2 and rugby global expansion. By Tier 2 nations they only mean Fiji, Samoa and Tonga and they don't accept the slightest criticism. Let's just remember their campaign to get World Rugby Council representation without acknowledging the deep issues SRU still have. But in the end they are a necessary ally given the sympathy so many have for them... Georgia or Sudamerica Rugby concerns about Nations Championship didn't reach even 10% of what they reach.

I can't stand him either.

Posts: 1012
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 20:56
National Flag:
GeorgiaGeorgia

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

Postby fullbackace » Sat, 23 Mar 2019, 03:01

Honestly I've never heard Dan Leo's opinions about anything before this whole debacle.
Don't Pray For Easy lives, Pray for enough Beer!

Posts: 1573
Joined: Sun, 18 May 2014, 13:27
National Flag:
AustraliaAustralia

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

Postby Working Class Rugger » Sat, 23 Mar 2019, 05:42

4N wrote:
carbonero wrote:
4N wrote:You know PRPW also includes loads of non-PI internationals like Manu Tuilagi the Vunipolas right?


You think they are going to renounce to that succulent RFU paycheck? Isn’t Nadolo also on that lobby group? Look how fast he went for the money.
That would be a good point if their primary employers, French and English clubs, weren’t also against the proposal. It’s been pointed out that Fiji would have a tough time getting their squad assembled from Europe in November especially. It’s almost like you think all of this wasn’t considered before that tweet was sent.


What exactly are the English/French clubs issue with the proposal? That they aren't going to get a slice? Because at present the structure I've seen runs during the exact same windows that already exist.Regarding the Dan Leo it's all about money. Not just for him. I'm not suggesting that but what the PI's get on top of what they currently do. I suspect if WR came out and broke it down the split along the lines of D1 = £10m/ D2 = £7.5m and D3 = £5m I suspect he'll clam up pretty quick.

Posts: 2132
Joined: Sun, 20 Apr 2014, 16:57
Location: Leicester
National Flag:
Great BritainGreat Britain

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

Postby sk 88 » Sat, 23 Mar 2019, 10:03

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union/2019/03/22/world-rugbysplans-new-national-championship-may-damage-game/?WT.mc_id=tmg_share_tw

Rugby Europe, for some reason anonymously, also against the proposal.


“The proposal to open up the Six Nations now does not make any sense from an economic perspective because you are not creating any value and for the nation that is relegated, it could be catastrophe and for the nation that is promoted it will be very hard to raise the level of execution and revenues to keep pace.

“What we need to do in the first step is organise more games, regular games against the Six Nations sides to increase the standards on the field and off the field to make the notion of promotion and relegation something that would create value and not destroy value.

“The Six Nations generates the biggest value outside of the Rugby World Cup and we currently generate very little value but we have huge volume. That is where we are complementary and get benefit each other by working together.”

Posts: 2132
Joined: Sun, 20 Apr 2014, 16:57
Location: Leicester
National Flag:
Great BritainGreat Britain

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

Postby sk 88 » Sat, 23 Mar 2019, 10:19

Working Class Rugger wrote:
4N wrote:
carbonero wrote:
4N wrote:You know PRPW also includes loads of non-PI internationals like Manu Tuilagi the Vunipolas right?


You think they are going to renounce to that succulent RFU paycheck? Isn’t Nadolo also on that lobby group? Look how fast he went for the money.
That would be a good point if their primary employers, French and English clubs, weren’t also against the proposal. It’s been pointed out that Fiji would have a tough time getting their squad assembled from Europe in November especially. It’s almost like you think all of this wasn’t considered before that tweet was sent.


What exactly are the English/French clubs issue with the proposal? That they aren't going to get a slice? Because at present the structure I've seen runs during the exact same windows that already exist.Regarding the Dan Leo it's all about money. Not just for him. I'm not suggesting that but what the PI's get on top of what they currently do. I suspect if WR came out and broke it down the split along the lines of D1 = £10m/ D2 = £7.5m and D3 = £5m I suspect he'll clam up pretty quick.


It doesn't run in the same window. It runs in a four week window rather than a three week window. And originally was proposed to run for 5 matches in 6 weeks. This space does not exist in the calendar as it's when the Heineken Cup gets played.

They've already said they'll allow extra Bledisloe tests outside this competition, so it is blatantly obvious that teams will quickly start playing additional friendlies before the official games. The justification will be "our first game is New Zealand/important for staying up/important for winning our pool and we can't afford to go in cold." We've all seen it before, it happens every time.

Then you've got player welfare, the idea of playing away games in Japan, South Africa and Argentina in consecutive weeks after the normal season is just totally mental. Even for for rugby. The Premiership and RFU just announced a joint player welfare scheme that involved capping minutes, RWC members not touring the summer after, Lions tourists not playing all the Autumn games after the tour. That's not going to work if the RFU is involved in a relegation battle or title push. The clubs and the RFU are also partners who rely on each other for a vast array of schemes. Whilst the clubs are growing quicker than the RFU and now collectively out earn them its still a very close thing and they don't want the RFU to suddenly drop £100m of income as that would have a massive knock on effect.

You've also got the principled rejection of anything that was not even discussed with them before it was announced. The San Francisco agreement involved all parties, very few got exactly what they wanted and clubs made a lot of compromises. Then the unions have taken those compromises the clubs made as the new normal and thrown out all the things they compromised on to try and ambush them into a naked land and cash grab. So I'd guess the feeling at the moment is just fuck them. They don't give a shit about us. Demonstrably. So why should we play along nicely?

Posts: 1573
Joined: Sun, 18 May 2014, 13:27
National Flag:
AustraliaAustralia

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

Postby Working Class Rugger » Sat, 23 Mar 2019, 11:35

sk 88 wrote:
Working Class Rugger wrote:
4N wrote:
carbonero wrote:
4N wrote:You know PRPW also includes loads of non-PI internationals like Manu Tuilagi the Vunipolas right?


You think they are going to renounce to that succulent RFU paycheck? Isn’t Nadolo also on that lobby group? Look how fast he went for the money.
That would be a good point if their primary employers, French and English clubs, weren’t also against the proposal. It’s been pointed out that Fiji would have a tough time getting their squad assembled from Europe in November especially. It’s almost like you think all of this wasn’t considered before that tweet was sent.


What exactly are the English/French clubs issue with the proposal? That they aren't going to get a slice? Because at present the structure I've seen runs during the exact same windows that already exist.Regarding the Dan Leo it's all about money. Not just for him. I'm not suggesting that but what the PI's get on top of what they currently do. I suspect if WR came out and broke it down the split along the lines of D1 = £10m/ D2 = £7.5m and D3 = £5m I suspect he'll clam up pretty quick.


It doesn't run in the same window. It runs in a four week window rather than a three week window. And originally was proposed to run for 5 matches in 6 weeks. This space does no exist in the calendar as it's when the Heineken Cup gets played.

They've already said they'll allow extra Bledisloe tests outside this competition, so it is blatantly obvious that teams will quickly start playing additional friendlies before the official games. The justification will be "our first game is New Zealand/important for staying up/important for winning our pool and we can't afford to go in cold." We've all seen it before, it happens every time.

Then you've got player welfare, the idea of playing away games in Japan, South Africa and Argentina in consecutive weeks after the normal season is just totally mental. Even for for rugby. The Premiership and RFU just announced a joint player welfare scheme that involved capping minutes, RWC members not touring the summer after, Lions tourists not playing all the Autumn games after the tour. That's not going to work if the RFU is involved in a relegation battle or title push. The clubs and the RFU are also partners who rely on each other for a vast array of schemes. Whilst the clubs are growing quicker than the RFU and now collectively out earn them its still a very close thing and they don't want the RFU to suddenly drop £100m of income as that would have a massive knock on effect.

You've also got the principled rejection of anything that was not even discussed with them before it was announced. The San Francisco agreement involved all parties, very few got exactly what they wanted and clubs made a lot of compromises. Then the unions have taken those compromises the clubs made as the new normal and thrown out all the things they compromised on to try and ambush them into a naked land and cash grab. So I'd guess the feeling at the moment is just fuck them. They don't give a shit about us. Demonstrably. So why should we play along nicely?


The model that was released post Dublin had the Six Nations being integrated as per usual and the same for the RC. There would be three games in June/July. I really cannot feel sorry for the teams and the travel aspect as that's exactly what we do in SR. As for allowing a 2nd Bledisloe outside the window. Well bless. But that already happens now anyway and both Aus and NZ select primarily from SR so any impact on clubs would be absolutely minimal. The 4 week window in November is only applicable to two teams. Again, it's very unlikely to have a real impact on the clubs. Certainly not nearly as much as the Six Nations does. But they won't touch that of course because they care so much about tradition. Until they don't.

The clubs issues with the proposal from my perspective is all about money. This proposal has the potential to shift the balance back to the Unions and the primacy of the international game. Which is against the clubs interests. There's not point pretending otherwise.

Posts: 5546
Joined: Sat, 05 Jul 2014, 02:44
National Flag:
AustraliaAustralia

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

Postby thatrugbyguy » Sat, 23 Mar 2019, 12:35

sk 88 wrote:https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union/2019/03/22/world-rugbysplans-new-national-championship-may-damage-game/?WT.mc_id=tmg_share_tw

Rugby Europe, for some reason anonymously, also against the proposal.


“The proposal to open up the Six Nations now does not make any sense from an economic perspective because you are not creating any value and for the nation that is relegated, it could be catastrophe and for the nation that is promoted it will be very hard to raise the level of execution and revenues to keep pace.

“What we need to do in the first step is organise more games, regular games against the Six Nations sides to increase the standards on the field and off the field to make the notion of promotion and relegation something that would create value and not destroy value.

“The Six Nations generates the biggest value outside of the Rugby World Cup and we currently generate very little value but we have huge volume. That is where we are complementary and get benefit each other by working together.”


The consistent theme running through all of this is that WR haven't spoken to anyone outside of the 6N or TRC unions. The shear arrogance of this organisation, and frankly all of these T1 unions, astounds me. This isn't 30 years ago. We've got a whole group of nations developing towards a competitive level who aren't going to simply jump when they are told to anymore, who are sick and tired of being given scraps to work with. WR and the T1 unions don't even have the decency to contact the very nations this proposal is suppose to 'help'. To call this shambles is an understatement.

Posts: 2132
Joined: Sun, 20 Apr 2014, 16:57
Location: Leicester
National Flag:
Great BritainGreat Britain

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

Postby sk 88 » Sat, 23 Mar 2019, 13:06

Working Class Rugger wrote:
sk 88 wrote:It doesn't run in the same window. It runs in a four week window rather than a three week window. And originally was proposed to run for 5 matches in 6 weeks. This space does no exist in the calendar as it's when the Heineken Cup gets played.

They've already said they'll allow extra Bledisloe tests outside this competition, so it is blatantly obvious that teams will quickly start playing additional friendlies before the official games. The justification will be "our first game is New Zealand/important for staying up/important for winning our pool and we can't afford to go in cold." We've all seen it before, it happens every time.

Then you've got player welfare, the idea of playing away games in Japan, South Africa and Argentina in consecutive weeks after the normal season is just totally mental. Even for for rugby. The Premiership and RFU just announced a joint player welfare scheme that involved capping minutes, RWC members not touring the summer after, Lions tourists not playing all the Autumn games after the tour. That's not going to work if the RFU is involved in a relegation battle or title push. The clubs and the RFU are also partners who rely on each other for a vast array of schemes. Whilst the clubs are growing quicker than the RFU and now collectively out earn them its still a very close thing and they don't want the RFU to suddenly drop £100m of income as that would have a massive knock on effect.

You've also got the principled rejection of anything that was not even discussed with them before it was announced. The San Francisco agreement involved all parties, very few got exactly what they wanted and clubs made a lot of compromises. Then the unions have taken those compromises the clubs made as the new normal and thrown out all the things they compromised on to try and ambush them into a naked land and cash grab. So I'd guess the feeling at the moment is just fuck them. They don't give a shit about us. Demonstrably. So why should we play along nicely?


The model that was released post Dublin had the Six Nations being integrated as per usual and the same for the RC. There would be three games in June/July. I really cannot feel sorry for the teams and the travel aspect as that's exactly what we do in SR. As for allowing a 2nd Bledisloe outside the window. Well bless. But that already happens now anyway and both Aus and NZ select primarily from SR so any impact on clubs would be absolutely minimal. The 4 week window in November is only applicable to two teams. Again, it's very unlikely to have a real impact on the clubs. Certainly not nearly as much as the Six Nations does. But they won't touch that of course because they care so much about tradition. Until they don't.

The clubs issues with the proposal from my perspective is all about money. This proposal has the potential to shift the balance back to the Unions and the primacy of the international game. Which is against the clubs interests. There's not point pretending otherwise.


Did you actually read what I wrote?

There are several strands of reasoning as to why they don't like it. Most of those boil down to encroaching on the club game. AGAIN. Rather than "pretending otherwise" I am literally saying that is the reason.

No one is asking for sympathy on stupid travel, I am explaining why the clubs are against it. Other competitions also having stupid travel is not relevant.

The point regarding extra Bledisloe matches is that there will clearly be no ban on playing outside of these windows. So the Unions (the European ones to be crystal clear) will arrange extra money spinning fixtures as they do at the moment. So it will just encroach and encroach and encroach and makes any claim to the window being the same size void.

Your comments about the 6N betray a lack of knowledge about European rugby. The 6N would not be launched in this format now if it didn't already exist. But it does. The clubs are constantly pushing to get rid of at least one of the rest weeks if not both.

Posts: 2132
Joined: Sun, 20 Apr 2014, 16:57
Location: Leicester
National Flag:
Great BritainGreat Britain

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

Postby sk 88 » Sat, 23 Mar 2019, 13:10

thatrugbyguy wrote:
sk 88 wrote:https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union/2019/03/22/world-rugbysplans-new-national-championship-may-damage-game/?WT.mc_id=tmg_share_tw

Rugby Europe, for some reason anonymously, also against the proposal.


“The proposal to open up the Six Nations now does not make any sense from an economic perspective because you are not creating any value and for the nation that is relegated, it could be catastrophe and for the nation that is promoted it will be very hard to raise the level of execution and revenues to keep pace.

“What we need to do in the first step is organise more games, regular games against the Six Nations sides to increase the standards on the field and off the field to make the notion of promotion and relegation something that would create value and not destroy value.

“The Six Nations generates the biggest value outside of the Rugby World Cup and we currently generate very little value but we have huge volume. That is where we are complementary and get benefit each other by working together.”


The consistent theme running through all of this is that WR haven't spoken to anyone outside of the 6N or TRC unions. The shear arrogance of this organisation, and frankly all of these T1 unions, astounds me. This isn't 30 years ago. We've got a whole group of nations developing towards a competitive level who aren't going to simply jump when they are told to anymore, who are sick and tired of being given scraps to work with. WR and the T1 unions don't even have the decency to contact the very nations this proposal is suppose to 'help'. To call this shambles is an understatement.


Quite.

PreviousNext

Return to Rugby Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 3 guests