Chat Forum
It is currently Wed Jun 19, 2019 6:04 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 206 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 1:58 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 21836
Jeff as a Welsh man you should understand how the extra TV money works


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 2:16 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 30, 2012 5:46 am
Posts: 9674
IMG with a late 1.75B offer for the 6N. Wow.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 2:22 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 3577
Location: STRAYA CUNT!!!
Jeff the Bear wrote:
Anyone else tried to do the maths on this mythical 5 billion?

5 billion divided by 12 years, divided by 12 competitors = approximately 35 million each, per year.

Yet the talk is of only 10 million per team per year. What's happening with the other 25 million per team?


It's 12 teams in the 1st division. There's another 28 nations across two further divisions who'll feature in the structure. I imagine they'll see some of that. And then there's other nations outside this that will likely see funds flow down.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 2:53 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 25, 2014 10:33 pm
Posts: 2227
Brumby_in_Vic wrote:
T the IRB is delaying Six Nations relegation till 2026. After hearing that I would just say no. Unions won’t know where the money is from and delaying relegation is putting off something they don’t want.

They can fudge off. No tier 1 tests til 2026? that is f**king ridiculous and 2027 is a world cup year. which means 8 straight years of no T1 tests at the very least.

Tier 2 might as well close down their unions and hang up the boots.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 3:27 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15457
Two years ago the 6 Nations agreed to play more tests against tier two test nations in the July window. Than Pichot launched his abomination of a World League which goes back to a closed shop for over a decade, trying to follow what UEFA are doing with their Nations League and four of the 6 Nations unions appear to be against it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 3:28 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 30, 2012 5:46 am
Posts: 9674
FullbackAce wrote:
Brumby_in_Vic wrote:
T the IRB is delaying Six Nations relegation till 2026. After hearing that I would just say no. Unions won’t know where the money is from and delaying relegation is putting off something they don’t want.

They can fudge off. No tier 1 tests til 2026? that is f**king ridiculous and 2027 is a world cup year. which means 8 straight years of no T1 tests at the very least.

Tier 2 might as well close down their unions and hang up the boots.


Yep. Just let the 6N do what they want but don’t sign up for this.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 6:56 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 5456
Location: LOL! WISDOM!
Working Class Rugger wrote:
Jeff the Bear wrote:
Anyone else tried to do the maths on this mythical 5 billion?

5 billion divided by 12 years, divided by 12 competitors = approximately 35 million each, per year.

Yet the talk is of only 10 million per team per year. What's happening with the other 25 million per team?


It's 12 teams in the 1st division. There's another 28 nations across two further divisions who'll feature in the structure. I imagine they'll see some of that. And then there's other nations outside this that will likely see funds flow down.

Plus the unspecified ladies competition.
If the money is correct, I don't see how they can turn it down.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 9:19 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 20033
Jeff the Bear wrote:
Anyone else tried to do the maths on this mythical 5 billion?

5 billion divided by 12 years, divided by 12 competitors = approximately 35 million each, per year.

Yet the talk is of only 10 million per team per year. What's happening with the other 25 million per team?


Wasn't the rest supposed to be invested by World Rugby? There is also the fact they'll set-up a women's version and invest in the women's game to speed up the development in many countries. Some of the money will be going to tier two nations and global infrastructure.

However I alsoc an't work out how most of it is used. It could be the 10 million is a guarantee each yera and there is more to be paid out.

I'd be more down on this except it seems the 6 Nations has another offer, this time from IMG, to invets in the 6 Nations.


Quote:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union ... nvestment/

he Six Nations is to receive details on Friday of a third multi-million pound offer as bidding for the game’s prize assets intensifies, The Daily Telegraph can reveal.

World Rugby launched its own salvage mission in Dublin on Thursday, unveiling a £5 billion Nations Championship project that will guarantee at least a £10 million uplift per year to each of the 12 competing unions over the next dozen years, with the hope that it will head off a rival £500 million bid by CVC to the Six Nations.

There is little doubt that there is a scramble to secure rugby’s future, with World Rugby hoping that it has put enough on the table to persuade the sceptical Six Nations’ unions that it has the commercial clout to compete with other interested parties.

However, The Telegraph understands that the Six Nations is to be presented with a £1.75 billion investment proposal by the International Management Group, one of the world’s leading sports agencies, which will look to be pliable in its relationship with the European governing body so that it might have a global reach, too. A competition format is yet to be discussed, although it will include all the world’s leading nations. The money matches other bidders.

A Six Nations meeting on Sunday will consider the detail of the IMG proposal, known as Project Light, which has been 18 months in gestation.


There had been fears that CVC’s involvement, offering instant riches for a 30 per cent equity stake, would lead to the collapse of the global initiative proposed by World Rugby. There are still significant stumbling blocks to the World Rugby deal being voted through at a council meeting in Dublin on May 22, promotion and relegation being one of them, relationships with the English and French clubs another.

The Six Nations remains opposed to promotion and relegation, with Scotland and Ireland both sceptical. England retain “an open mind”. World Rugby acknowledges that there are “reservations and concerns … and it remains a discussion point to find a pathway solution”.

The mood was upbeat, however, as the 40 representatives broke after a three-hour meeting, with one saying it was “a Lazarus moment”, while another spoke of the project getting “a kiss of life”.

The IMG proposal would seek to keep the equity in the sport as opposed to the CVC approach. Agustin Pichot, the World Rugby vice-chairman, said that it would be “madness” to go with a private equity group, as an element of control would be lost.

There is a lot of due diligence to be done. Certainly there is a diplomatic mission to be mounted concerning the English and French clubs, who have threatened legal action over a perceived encroachment on their schedules. World Rugby has partially recognised that complaint by ditching the proposed semi-final slot, thus also reducing the player workload. The players’ unions still have concerns over the amount of travel involved.

Unions will want assurances that the £5 billion reserve of funding that has been guaranteed by Swiss-based Infront Sports, headed up by Sepp Blatter’s nephew, Philippe Blatter, will provide a smooth release of money into the game.

“Our financial model is [now] clearer and more robust,” said Brett Gosper, the World Rugby chief executive.

The promotion and relegation issue will not be easily resolved, although under World Rugby’s Nations Championship it would probably not come into operation until 2026. At that point, there would be a provision for the bottom side in the Six Nations to have a play-off against the aspiring team, such as Georgia or Romania. The same would apply in the southern hemisphere.

Given that there would be no competition at all in a World Cup year and no relegation or promotion in a Lions year, there would only be three such play-off scenarios in any 12-year cycle. That match would take place on the same weekend as the final, which could see two teams from the same hemisphere contesting the title. The top two points-scorers in the 12-team competition, with each country playing each other once across a calendar year, will make up the finalists.

The southern hemisphere welcomed the World Rugby project. “This is now the next step change that World Rugby needs to look at to make sure it remains relevant,” said Raelene Castle, the Australia chief executive, while her South African counterpart, Jurie Roux, said: “Change in rugby is needed and this is an opportunity for change.”

World Rugby has made its play. “The other propositions under consideration are for entities of the world game,” Gosper said. “This is the only offer on the table where there is a world game solution. We would like to know by May 22 whether it is a deal or no deal, in or out, for all concerned.”


This offer certainly sounds better than the CVC "We'll own your asses" version.

Back to the £5 Billion, if CVC think a third of the 6 Nations is work a quarter of a billion then the entirety of test rugby for 12 years could be valued at £5 Billion. The fact is somewhere in the business world multiple companies have switched on and clocked that Rugby can make them a lot of money. It's no coincidence all these deals are being offered suddenly, the word has clearly got round the business world there is huge scope for money in Rugby and these companies want in.

I suspect it is due to the fact they have suddenly seen that sports many be one of the only streamer proof TV industries out there and one where advertisers are hugely effective. Now looking at Rugby it's fairly large global sport with a wide reach. The Olympics and football are way to expensive to get invested in now, as are the big USA sports. So these companies are looking at the next level and not many sports have a bigger global reach than Rugby.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 9:19 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 20033
Jeff the Bear wrote:
Anyone else tried to do the maths on this mythical 5 billion?

5 billion divided by 12 years, divided by 12 competitors = approximately 35 million each, per year.

Yet the talk is of only 10 million per team per year. What's happening with the other 25 million per team?


Wasn't the rest supposed to be invested by World Rugby? There is also the fact they'll set-up a women's version and invest in the women's game to speed up the development in many countries. Some of the money will be going to tier two nations and global infrastructure.

However I alsoc an't work out how most of it is used. It could be the 10 million is a guarantee each yera and there is more to be paid out.

I'd be more down on this except it seems the 6 Nations has another offer, this time from IMG, to invets in the 6 Nations.


Quote:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union ... nvestment/

he Six Nations is to receive details on Friday of a third multi-million pound offer as bidding for the game’s prize assets intensifies, The Daily Telegraph can reveal.

World Rugby launched its own salvage mission in Dublin on Thursday, unveiling a £5 billion Nations Championship project that will guarantee at least a £10 million uplift per year to each of the 12 competing unions over the next dozen years, with the hope that it will head off a rival £500 million bid by CVC to the Six Nations.

There is little doubt that there is a scramble to secure rugby’s future, with World Rugby hoping that it has put enough on the table to persuade the sceptical Six Nations’ unions that it has the commercial clout to compete with other interested parties.

However, The Telegraph understands that the Six Nations is to be presented with a £1.75 billion investment proposal by the International Management Group, one of the world’s leading sports agencies, which will look to be pliable in its relationship with the European governing body so that it might have a global reach, too. A competition format is yet to be discussed, although it will include all the world’s leading nations. The money matches other bidders.

A Six Nations meeting on Sunday will consider the detail of the IMG proposal, known as Project Light, which has been 18 months in gestation.


There had been fears that CVC’s involvement, offering instant riches for a 30 per cent equity stake, would lead to the collapse of the global initiative proposed by World Rugby. There are still significant stumbling blocks to the World Rugby deal being voted through at a council meeting in Dublin on May 22, promotion and relegation being one of them, relationships with the English and French clubs another.

The Six Nations remains opposed to promotion and relegation, with Scotland and Ireland both sceptical. England retain “an open mind”. World Rugby acknowledges that there are “reservations and concerns … and it remains a discussion point to find a pathway solution”.

The mood was upbeat, however, as the 40 representatives broke after a three-hour meeting, with one saying it was “a Lazarus moment”, while another spoke of the project getting “a kiss of life”.

The IMG proposal would seek to keep the equity in the sport as opposed to the CVC approach. Agustin Pichot, the World Rugby vice-chairman, said that it would be “madness” to go with a private equity group, as an element of control would be lost.

There is a lot of due diligence to be done. Certainly there is a diplomatic mission to be mounted concerning the English and French clubs, who have threatened legal action over a perceived encroachment on their schedules. World Rugby has partially recognised that complaint by ditching the proposed semi-final slot, thus also reducing the player workload. The players’ unions still have concerns over the amount of travel involved.

Unions will want assurances that the £5 billion reserve of funding that has been guaranteed by Swiss-based Infront Sports, headed up by Sepp Blatter’s nephew, Philippe Blatter, will provide a smooth release of money into the game.

“Our financial model is [now] clearer and more robust,” said Brett Gosper, the World Rugby chief executive.

The promotion and relegation issue will not be easily resolved, although under World Rugby’s Nations Championship it would probably not come into operation until 2026. At that point, there would be a provision for the bottom side in the Six Nations to have a play-off against the aspiring team, such as Georgia or Romania. The same would apply in the southern hemisphere.

Given that there would be no competition at all in a World Cup year and no relegation or promotion in a Lions year, there would only be three such play-off scenarios in any 12-year cycle. That match would take place on the same weekend as the final, which could see two teams from the same hemisphere contesting the title. The top two points-scorers in the 12-team competition, with each country playing each other once across a calendar year, will make up the finalists.

The southern hemisphere welcomed the World Rugby project. “This is now the next step change that World Rugby needs to look at to make sure it remains relevant,” said Raelene Castle, the Australia chief executive, while her South African counterpart, Jurie Roux, said: “Change in rugby is needed and this is an opportunity for change.”

World Rugby has made its play. “The other propositions under consideration are for entities of the world game,” Gosper said. “This is the only offer on the table where there is a world game solution. We would like to know by May 22 whether it is a deal or no deal, in or out, for all concerned.”


This offer certainly sounds better than the CVC "We'll own your asses" version.

Back to the £5 Billion, if CVC think a third of the 6 Nations is work a quarter of a billion then the entirety of test rugby for 12 years could be valued at £5 Billion. The fact is somewhere in the business world multiple companies have switched on and clocked that Rugby can make them a lot of money. It's no coincidence all these deals are being offered suddenly, the word has clearly got round the business world there is huge scope for money in Rugby and these companies want in. I suspect it is due to the fact they have suddenly seen that sports many be one of the only streamer proof TV industries out there and one where advertisers are hugely effective. Now looking at Rugby it's fairly large global sport with a wide reach. The Olympics and football are way to expensive to get invested in now, as are the big USA sports. So these companies are looking at the next level and not many sports have a bigger global reach than Rugby.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 9:27 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 20033
Brumby_in_Vic wrote:
Two years ago the 6 Nations agreed to play more tests against tier two test nations in the July window. Than Pichot launched his abomination of a World League which goes back to a closed shop for over a decade, trying to follow what UEFA are doing with their Nations League and four of the 6 Nations unions appear to be against it.


I'd be more accepting of the world league if

1) It was once every two years

2) The Lions year was used to tour the tier 2 nations. Maybe the 4th November test was used to host a Tier 2 nation.

3) Relegation and promotion was in.

I'm equally concerned for all this extra money that teams will lose cash from ticket sales. Usually the 6 Nations put in a years advertising for the November tests. Now they will be advertising tickets without knowing what team will turn-up. Lots of Rugby fans love the AIs specifically because they want to see Australia or The All Blacks.

I'm also concerned about this language "to give test more meaning". Since when do tests have little meaning? Certainly up north they have huge meaning, I suspect because there aren't are repeat games like in the SH.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 9:47 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 7:53 pm
Posts: 1238
My concern that is is all well and good for the Tier 1 teams but you only need one bad season and you are out and you loose all that revenue.

A big reward but a big risk. I can see why some unions are against it.

I could see a situation whereby the 10 tier 1 nations are protected and the Tier 2 nations are subject to promotion and relegation. A bit like (but not exactly the same as cricket with test status)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 10:40 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 17287
eldanielfire wrote:
Jeff the Bear wrote:
Anyone else tried to do the maths on this mythical 5 billion?

5 billion divided by 12 years, divided by 12 competitors = approximately 35 million each, per year.

Yet the talk is of only 10 million per team per year. What's happening with the other 25 million per team?


Wasn't the rest supposed to be invested by World Rugby? There is also the fact they'll set-up a women's version and invest in the women's game to speed up the development in many countries. Some of the money will be going to tier two nations and global infrastructure.



Still doesn't add up. If you work it the other way round, then 10 mill a year equals 1.44 billion over 12 years for 12 participants. Good money perhaps, but I'm not sure those 12 are going to sign up to a 5 billion project, when they are seemingly only going to get less than 30% of the dosh.

Growing the game is lovely and all, but the reason we're in the middle of a bidding war is because they're money grubbing plum looking to get their faces in the trough...I just can't see how 30% of any deal, even if that 30% is decent money, is any kind of deal these people will accept.

Like I said, something just doesn't add up.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 10:47 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 49481
Jeff the Bear wrote:
eldanielfire wrote:
Jeff the Bear wrote:
Anyone else tried to do the maths on this mythical 5 billion?

5 billion divided by 12 years, divided by 12 competitors = approximately 35 million each, per year.

Yet the talk is of only 10 million per team per year. What's happening with the other 25 million per team?


Wasn't the rest supposed to be invested by World Rugby? There is also the fact they'll set-up a women's version and invest in the women's game to speed up the development in many countries. Some of the money will be going to tier two nations and global infrastructure.



Still doesn't add up. If you work it the other way round, then 10 mill a year equals 1.44 billion over 12 years for 12 participants. Good money perhaps, but I'm not sure those 12 are going to sign up to a 5 billion project, when they are seemingly only going to get less than 30% of the dosh.

Growing the game is lovely and all, but the reason we're in the middle of a bidding war is because they're money grubbing plum looking to get their faces in the trough...I just can't see how 30% of any deal, even if that 30% is decent money, is any kind of deal these people will accept.

Like I said, something just doesn't add up.


It's 10m extra.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 1:51 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15457
eldanielfire wrote:
Brumby_in_Vic wrote:
Two years ago the 6 Nations agreed to play more tests against tier two test nations in the July window. Than Pichot launched his abomination of a World League which goes back to a closed shop for over a decade, trying to follow what UEFA are doing with their Nations League and four of the 6 Nations unions appear to be against it.


I'd be more accepting of the world league if

1) It was once every two years

2) The Lions year was used to tour the tier 2 nations. Maybe the 4th November test was used to host a Tier 2 nation.

3) Relegation and promotion was in.

I'm equally concerned for all this extra money that teams will lose cash from ticket sales. Usually the 6 Nations put in a years advertising for the November tests. Now they will be advertising tickets without knowing what team will turn-up. Lots of Rugby fans love the AIs specifically because they want to see Australia or The All Blacks.

I'm also concerned about this language "to give test more meaning". Since when do tests have little meaning? Certainly up north they have huge meaning, I suspect because there aren't are repeat games like in the SH.


Last paragraph it is just drivel from Pichot. It would be like saying that the majority of tests played before 1987 and outside of the Five Nations are meaningless due to not being part of a competition. Bullshít and also insulting to those players who played in those test matches.

Re ticket sales grassroots clubs also sell those tickets as a fundraiser.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 2:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2810
The title is not very subtle. :lol:

During the past years I have been posting several times about the businesses "under the table" commanded among others by Pichot and other elite of international rugby (Bill Beaumont).

What's new (apologies if already knew for others) is what's behind the Nations Championship is a contract of billons.

Infront Sports a division of Wanda Group have just signed an agreement with World Rugby for 5 billion Pounds for 12 years to manage the Nations Championship.

And Blatter? this Blatter is the nephew of former FIFA's boss Joseph Blatter and is the CEO of both Wanda and Infront.

So it seems to be now that the destinies of World Rugby and rugby will be mostly managed by a football manager who shares the infamous last name of one of the biggest crooks worldwide.

This same organization is algo a partner with FIFA.

This Nations Championship will have relegations, so some sides shouted (Scotland for example). World Rugby decided in order to compensate that, the 6N was sold (a share) to Bernie Ecclestone's CVC, 30% of the 6N for 500 millions Pounds.


All this money will have a direct impact on contracts of all players worldwide, among others unknown impacts (at least for me).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 2:06 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 20033
Brumby_in_Vic wrote:
eldanielfire wrote:
Brumby_in_Vic wrote:
Two years ago the 6 Nations agreed to play more tests against tier two test nations in the July window. Than Pichot launched his abomination of a World League which goes back to a closed shop for over a decade, trying to follow what UEFA are doing with their Nations League and four of the 6 Nations unions appear to be against it.


I'd be more accepting of the world league if

1) It was once every two years

2) The Lions year was used to tour the tier 2 nations. Maybe the 4th November test was used to host a Tier 2 nation.

3) Relegation and promotion was in.

I'm equally concerned for all this extra money that teams will lose cash from ticket sales. Usually the 6 Nations put in a years advertising for the November tests. Now they will be advertising tickets without knowing what team will turn-up. Lots of Rugby fans love the AIs specifically because they want to see Australia or The All Blacks.

I'm also concerned about this language "to give test more meaning". Since when do tests have little meaning? Certainly up north they have huge meaning, I suspect because there aren't are repeat games like in the SH.


Last paragraph it is just drivel from Pichot. It would be like saying that the majority of tests played before 1987 and outside of the Five Nations are meaningless due to not being part of a competition. Bullshít and also insulting to those players who played in those test matches.

Re ticket sales grassroots clubs also sell those tickets as a fundraiser.


Indeed. And as I we could end up in a situation where say Scotland never meets the All Blacks. Do we really think that is good for Scottish ticket sales or Scottish fans? Do we really think it's great Southern Hemisphere will never be present to see their team win a trophy?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 2:08 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 20033
CM11 wrote:
Jeff the Bear wrote:
eldanielfire wrote:
Jeff the Bear wrote:
Anyone else tried to do the maths on this mythical 5 billion?

5 billion divided by 12 years, divided by 12 competitors = approximately 35 million each, per year.

Yet the talk is of only 10 million per team per year. What's happening with the other 25 million per team?


Wasn't the rest supposed to be invested by World Rugby? There is also the fact they'll set-up a women's version and invest in the women's game to speed up the development in many countries. Some of the money will be going to tier two nations and global infrastructure.



Still doesn't add up. If you work it the other way round, then 10 mill a year equals 1.44 billion over 12 years for 12 participants. Good money perhaps, but I'm not sure those 12 are going to sign up to a 5 billion project, when they are seemingly only going to get less than 30% of the dosh.

Growing the game is lovely and all, but the reason we're in the middle of a bidding war is because they're money grubbing plum looking to get their faces in the trough...I just can't see how 30% of any deal, even if that 30% is decent money, is any kind of deal these people will accept.

Like I said, something just doesn't add up.


It's 10m extra.


Ah, that makes sense, it's more the taster, golden handshake sort of bonus for joining.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15457
Eldan agreed. It has been twenty years since Scotland last toured NZ. Might be another ten years if this diarrhoea with relegation is approved.

A deal from a Blatter is never going to add up. The fact the IRB pushed for it shows how desperate they are.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 26, 2019 5:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 11045
Location: EU
Quote:
World Rugby’s proposed Nations Championship has hit a major barrier after the Rugby Football Union said that England’s relegation from the Six Nations would be “catastrophic” for the game on these shores.

The acting chief executive, Nigel Melville, is determined to avoid the doomsday scenario – however unlikely – of a two-year spell outside of the sport’s most successful annual tournament. It has been speculated that were England to drop into a tier two competition, then Twickenham may have to be sold to cover for the inevitable collapse in revenue.

In a comment that appears to end the prospect of the Nations Championship being approved, Melville insists the RFU will not allow ownership of its 82,000-seater ground to ever be threatened.

Reflecting on that possibility, Melville said: “I think we make sure it doesn’t arise. That solves that problem. You just don’t want to get into a situation where you’re making decisions like that.

“For us it could be catastrophic being relegated, commercially. To be relegated, the catastrophe isn’t just the team being relegated, it’s our ability to fund the game as a governing body in England.

“Can we fund the community game in England to the level we do now if we don’t have the revenues we have? And on the point of promotion and relegation, there’s no promotion and relegation in a Lions year and there’s no tournament in a World Cup year.

“So when you’re relegated, you’re relegated for two years, not one. It’s not quite up and down, one season on the naughty step and go back up, it’s actually two years and that could be a disaster for people.”

The Nations Championship is World Rugby’s vision for the global game after Japan 2019 and takes the format of a cross-hemisphere league that would result in the top teams from the Six Nations and Rugby Championship meeting at the end of the year.

Relegation and promotion based on overall league performance is a foundation of the plan in the hope it will create depth by offering tier two teams a place among the elite, but some European unions including Ireland and Scotland are vehemently opposed.

World Rugby insists it has investment of £5bn over 12 years to inject into the Nations Championship, while the Six Nations have their own cash source in the shape of a large offer from private equity firm CVC Partners.

The RFU board will continue its discussions before another meeting of the Six Nations unions is held. A decision must be made in two weeks and for the Nations Championship to proceed, there has to be unanimous support from all teams involved.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 26, 2019 5:54 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 20033
The RFU comes in with the save. And the sensible suggestion that a major Union can't survive relegation.

I think that doesn't go far enough, if England were relegated from the 6 Nations, almost all the Unions finances would be damaged, by both ticket prices and interest from sponsorship and TV. I think they should shrink the scope here, make it an alternative year competition, separate it form the big championships already in place. IF you are going to have it. I still suspect the cash level means its going to pay TV and that is a disaster in itself.

Alternatively create a competition in Lions year. A Rugby Euros and an equivalent down south once every two years using the tour tests maybe?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 21, 2019 9:30 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 7:53 pm
Posts: 1238
https://www.foxsports.com.au/rugby/fiji ... 81aed90d49

Japan and Fiji to be sacrificed to get this over the line. To be honest I can see this getting over the line, but I can't see it ever expanding to include Fiji and Japan.

This part is very revealing

The 6 nations will never ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever agree to relegation. It's just not going to happen.

"The main obstacle to getting the tournament across the line remains the vexed issue of promotion/relegation.

Italy, Scotland and Ireland have been firmly against the concept of relegation because it doesn’t secure their Six Nations involvement. And with the competition to run every second year, so as to not interfere with the World Cup and British and Lions tour, relegation would see a nation be on the outer for at least two years.

France and England are less adverse to the concept, but even the Rugby Football Union said it would be “catastrophic” if they were relegated.

“For us it could be catastrophic being relegated, commercially,” RFU acting chief executive Nigel Melville said in March.

“To be relegated, the catastrophe isn’t just the team being relegated, it’s our ability to fund the game as a governing body in England.


“Can we fund the community game in England to the level we do now if we don’t have the revenues we have? And on the point of promotion and relegation, there’s no promotion and relegation in a Lions year and there’s no tournament in a World Cup year.

“So when you’re relegated, you’re relegated for two years, not one. It’s not quite up and down, one season on the naughty step and go back up, it’s actually two years and that could be a disaster for people.”


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 21, 2019 10:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 10118
naki wrote:
camroc1 wrote:
“With the proposed model incorporating competitions that are not owned or run by World Rugby, not all unions are presently in favour of immediate promotion and relegation,” World Rugby (WR) stated. “We continue to consider the feedback, but remain absolutely committed to an eventual pathway for all.”

At least two current members of the Six Nations are believed to be strongly resisting relegation.


These nations will never be in favour of pro/rel, which makes the entire concept a waste of time.

Can't see how this league would ever get off the ground without ring-fencing, yet WR cannot possibly ring-fence a competition of this scale and still call themselves "World" Rugby with a straight face.

Odds still firmly on the status quo remaining for the foreseeable future.


Could they rebrand as World* Rugby?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 21, 2019 10:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 10118
Money aside, which of course you can't, but the beauty of the 6N is its relative proximity. You can get to any of these locations in 3 hours or so - very cheaply. And they are all developed countries.

Looking at Div2 has this been put together by a boredie or is it official?

European Conference Div 1 = 6 Nations
European Conference Div 2 = Georgia, Romania, Russia, Spain, Portugal, Belgium


I'd have Georgia, Romania, Russia, Spain, Germany and Belgium. So Portugal and the Netherlands would miss out. If there was a way to incorporate these into the 6N, and not worry about the rest of the world. Keep that as it is. The 6Ns job would be to help develop Europe and Europe only. Play our A sides against them in two conferences that flipped every two years much like the P14.

Conf 1: England Saxons, Scotland A, Italy A, Georgia, Russia, Belgium - home or away
Conf 2: Wales A, Irish Wolfhounds, France A, Romania, Spain, Germany - home or away

Home games not played in Cardiff, London, Dublin etc but in Llanelli, Bath, Limerick, Tblisi, Bucharest etc. I think you'd get a good turnout (cheap tickets, maybe free for kids under 12 - as tv money is the big revenue driver) and could wrap it into the same 6N weekends. Any 6N tv deal includes this 2nd tier 6N moving forward. As this would eat up the P12 countries' professional players, you'd have no P14 for 2 months. I could handle that.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 21, 2019 11:31 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 7:53 pm
Posts: 1238
I guess SANZAAR are willing to toss Japan and Fiji aside to keep the 6N on side. Even more important if NZ and Aus are losing Rupert's money.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 22, 2019 12:02 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 33864
6N, at least the non spiv ones, won't bite.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 22, 2019 5:34 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 3577
Location: STRAYA CUNT!!!
LandOTurk wrote:
Money aside, which of course you can't, but the beauty of the 6N is its relative proximity. You can get to any of these locations in 3 hours or so - very cheaply. And they are all developed countries.

Looking at Div2 has this been put together by a boredie or is it official?

European Conference Div 1 = 6 Nations
European Conference Div 2 = Georgia, Romania, Russia, Spain, Portugal, Belgium


I'd have Georgia, Romania, Russia, Spain, Germany and Belgium. So Portugal and the Netherlands would miss out. If there was a way to incorporate these into the 6N, and not worry about the rest of the world. Keep that as it is. The 6Ns job would be to help develop Europe and Europe only. Play our A sides against them in two conferences that flipped every two years much like the P14.

Conf 1: England Saxons, Scotland A, Italy A, Georgia, Russia, Belgium - home or away
Conf 2: Wales A, Irish Wolfhounds, France A, Romania, Spain, Germany - home or away

Home games not played in Cardiff, London, Dublin etc but in Llanelli, Bath, Limerick, Tblisi, Bucharest etc. I think you'd get a good turnout (cheap tickets, maybe free for kids under 12 - as tv money is the big revenue driver) and could wrap it into the same 6N weekends. Any 6N tv deal includes this 2nd tier 6N moving forward. As this would eat up the P12 countries' professional players, you'd have no P14 for 2 months. I could handle that.


What happens if/when these teams start to manage to beat the A sides? Would promotion be an option or will it remain a closed shop? That and the Pro 14 nations not being overly keen on taking a 2 month break mid season are the only questions that I would need answered. Similar could be done with the RC. Add Japan and Fiji to the 1st division and then have the current 4 run A teams or in NZ case Maori in a similar two conferences:

Conference 1: South Africa A, Jaguars XV, Namibia, Kenya, Uruguay, Brasil.
Conference 2: Maori, Aus A, Samoa, Tonga, U.SA, Canada

Each team plays each once for 11 games plus a top 4 finals series. Would include arguable the top 24 teams in the world playing 11 games a year. They could the use the respective regional championships to promote nations who can compete for the right to play the bottom placed team in the 2nd division for the right to participate in the next years competition.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 22, 2019 8:28 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 7:53 pm
Posts: 1238
Working Class Rugger wrote:
LandOTurk wrote:
Money aside, which of course you can't, but the beauty of the 6N is its relative proximity. You can get to any of these locations in 3 hours or so - very cheaply. And they are all developed countries.

Looking at Div2 has this been put together by a boredie or is it official?

European Conference Div 1 = 6 Nations
European Conference Div 2 = Georgia, Romania, Russia, Spain, Portugal, Belgium


I'd have Georgia, Romania, Russia, Spain, Germany and Belgium. So Portugal and the Netherlands would miss out. If there was a way to incorporate these into the 6N, and not worry about the rest of the world. Keep that as it is. The 6Ns job would be to help develop Europe and Europe only. Play our A sides against them in two conferences that flipped every two years much like the P14.

Conf 1: England Saxons, Scotland A, Italy A, Georgia, Russia, Belgium - home or away
Conf 2: Wales A, Irish Wolfhounds, France A, Romania, Spain, Germany - home or away

Home games not played in Cardiff, London, Dublin etc but in Llanelli, Bath, Limerick, Tblisi, Bucharest etc. I think you'd get a good turnout (cheap tickets, maybe free for kids under 12 - as tv money is the big revenue driver) and could wrap it into the same 6N weekends. Any 6N tv deal includes this 2nd tier 6N moving forward. As this would eat up the P12 countries' professional players, you'd have no P14 for 2 months. I could handle that.


What happens if/when these teams start to manage to beat the A sides? Would promotion be an option or will it remain a closed shop? That and the Pro 14 nations not being overly keen on taking a 2 month break mid season are the only questions that I would need answered. Similar could be done with the RC. Add Japan and Fiji to the 1st division and then have the current 4 run A teams or in NZ case Maori in a similar two conferences:

Conference 1: South Africa A, Jaguars XV, Namibia, Kenya, Uruguay, Brasil.
Conference 2: Maori, Aus A, Samoa, Tonga, U.SA, Canada

Each team plays each once for 11 games plus a top 4 finals series. Would include arguable the top 24 teams in the world playing 11 games a year. They could the use the respective regional championships to promote nations who can compete for the right to play the bottom placed team in the 2nd division for the right to participate in the next years competition.


What ever happens there won't be promotion and relegation. Fiji and Japan will be in Division 2.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 22, 2019 8:52 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 3577
Location: STRAYA CUNT!!!
mdaclarke wrote:
Working Class Rugger wrote:
LandOTurk wrote:
Money aside, which of course you can't, but the beauty of the 6N is its relative proximity. You can get to any of these locations in 3 hours or so - very cheaply. And they are all developed countries.

Looking at Div2 has this been put together by a boredie or is it official?

European Conference Div 1 = 6 Nations
European Conference Div 2 = Georgia, Romania, Russia, Spain, Portugal, Belgium


I'd have Georgia, Romania, Russia, Spain, Germany and Belgium. So Portugal and the Netherlands would miss out. If there was a way to incorporate these into the 6N, and not worry about the rest of the world. Keep that as it is. The 6Ns job would be to help develop Europe and Europe only. Play our A sides against them in two conferences that flipped every two years much like the P14.

Conf 1: England Saxons, Scotland A, Italy A, Georgia, Russia, Belgium - home or away
Conf 2: Wales A, Irish Wolfhounds, France A, Romania, Spain, Germany - home or away

Home games not played in Cardiff, London, Dublin etc but in Llanelli, Bath, Limerick, Tblisi, Bucharest etc. I think you'd get a good turnout (cheap tickets, maybe free for kids under 12 - as tv money is the big revenue driver) and could wrap it into the same 6N weekends. Any 6N tv deal includes this 2nd tier 6N moving forward. As this would eat up the P12 countries' professional players, you'd have no P14 for 2 months. I could handle that.


What happens if/when these teams start to manage to beat the A sides? Would promotion be an option or will it remain a closed shop? That and the Pro 14 nations not being overly keen on taking a 2 month break mid season are the only questions that I would need answered. Similar could be done with the RC. Add Japan and Fiji to the 1st division and then have the current 4 run A teams or in NZ case Maori in a similar two conferences:

Conference 1: South Africa A, Jaguars XV, Namibia, Kenya, Uruguay, Brasil.
Conference 2: Maori, Aus A, Samoa, Tonga, U.SA, Canada

Each team plays each once for 11 games plus a top 4 finals series. Would include arguable the top 24 teams in the world playing 11 games a year. They could the use the respective regional championships to promote nations who can compete for the right to play the bottom placed team in the 2nd division for the right to participate in the next years competition.


What ever happens there won't be promotion and relegation. Fiji and Japan will be in Division 2.


A way around that is not have it as relegation from the respective conferences but the division as a whole. So you play everyone of the 11 other teams once and you are ranked 1-12 with the top 4 going through to the semi-final and final and the 12th ranked team into a pro/rel play off game. This way adding Fiji and Japan makes sense to create a buffer as I suspect we'll see one of those two at the bottom of the pile for a little while.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 22, 2019 12:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 7:53 pm
Posts: 1238
Working Class Rugger wrote:
mdaclarke wrote:
Working Class Rugger wrote:
LandOTurk wrote:
Money aside, which of course you can't, but the beauty of the 6N is its relative proximity. You can get to any of these locations in 3 hours or so - very cheaply. And they are all developed countries.

Looking at Div2 has this been put together by a boredie or is it official?

European Conference Div 1 = 6 Nations
European Conference Div 2 = Georgia, Romania, Russia, Spain, Portugal, Belgium


I'd have Georgia, Romania, Russia, Spain, Germany and Belgium. So Portugal and the Netherlands would miss out. If there was a way to incorporate these into the 6N, and not worry about the rest of the world. Keep that as it is. The 6Ns job would be to help develop Europe and Europe only. Play our A sides against them in two conferences that flipped every two years much like the P14.

Conf 1: England Saxons, Scotland A, Italy A, Georgia, Russia, Belgium - home or away
Conf 2: Wales A, Irish Wolfhounds, France A, Romania, Spain, Germany - home or away

Home games not played in Cardiff, London, Dublin etc but in Llanelli, Bath, Limerick, Tblisi, Bucharest etc. I think you'd get a good turnout (cheap tickets, maybe free for kids under 12 - as tv money is the big revenue driver) and could wrap it into the same 6N weekends. Any 6N tv deal includes this 2nd tier 6N moving forward. As this would eat up the P12 countries' professional players, you'd have no P14 for 2 months. I could handle that.


What happens if/when these teams start to manage to beat the A sides? Would promotion be an option or will it remain a closed shop? That and the Pro 14 nations not being overly keen on taking a 2 month break mid season are the only questions that I would need answered. Similar could be done with the RC. Add Japan and Fiji to the 1st division and then have the current 4 run A teams or in NZ case Maori in a similar two conferences:

Conference 1: South Africa A, Jaguars XV, Namibia, Kenya, Uruguay, Brasil.
Conference 2: Maori, Aus A, Samoa, Tonga, U.SA, Canada

Each team plays each once for 11 games plus a top 4 finals series. Would include arguable the top 24 teams in the world playing 11 games a year. They could the use the respective regional championships to promote nations who can compete for the right to play the bottom placed team in the 2nd division for the right to participate in the next years competition.


What ever happens there won't be promotion and relegation. Fiji and Japan will be in Division 2.


A way around that is not have it as relegation from the respective conferences but the division as a whole. So you play everyone of the 11 other teams once and you are ranked 1-12 with the top 4 going through to the semi-final and final and the 12th ranked team into a pro/rel play off game. This way adding Fiji and Japan makes sense to create a buffer as I suspect we'll see one of those two at the bottom of the pile for a little while.


The 6N will never agree to any form of relegation, ever.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 22, 2019 6:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 10118
mdaclarke wrote:
Working Class Rugger wrote:
mdaclarke wrote:
Working Class Rugger wrote:
LandOTurk wrote:
Money aside, which of course you can't, but the beauty of the 6N is its relative proximity. You can get to any of these locations in 3 hours or so - very cheaply. And they are all developed countries.

Looking at Div2 has this been put together by a boredie or is it official?

European Conference Div 1 = 6 Nations
European Conference Div 2 = Georgia, Romania, Russia, Spain, Portugal, Belgium


I'd have Georgia, Romania, Russia, Spain, Germany and Belgium. So Portugal and the Netherlands would miss out. If there was a way to incorporate these into the 6N, and not worry about the rest of the world. Keep that as it is. The 6Ns job would be to help develop Europe and Europe only. Play our A sides against them in two conferences that flipped every two years much like the P14.

Conf 1: England Saxons, Scotland A, Italy A, Georgia, Russia, Belgium - home or away
Conf 2: Wales A, Irish Wolfhounds, France A, Romania, Spain, Germany - home or away

Home games not played in Cardiff, London, Dublin etc but in Llanelli, Bath, Limerick, Tblisi, Bucharest etc. I think you'd get a good turnout (cheap tickets, maybe free for kids under 12 - as tv money is the big revenue driver) and could wrap it into the same 6N weekends. Any 6N tv deal includes this 2nd tier 6N moving forward. As this would eat up the P12 countries' professional players, you'd have no P14 for 2 months. I could handle that.


What happens if/when these teams start to manage to beat the A sides? Would promotion be an option or will it remain a closed shop? That and the Pro 14 nations not being overly keen on taking a 2 month break mid season are the only questions that I would need answered. Similar could be done with the RC. Add Japan and Fiji to the 1st division and then have the current 4 run A teams or in NZ case Maori in a similar two conferences:

Conference 1: South Africa A, Jaguars XV, Namibia, Kenya, Uruguay, Brasil.
Conference 2: Maori, Aus A, Samoa, Tonga, U.SA, Canada

Each team plays each once for 11 games plus a top 4 finals series. Would include arguable the top 24 teams in the world playing 11 games a year. They could the use the respective regional championships to promote nations who can compete for the right to play the bottom placed team in the 2nd division for the right to participate in the next years competition.


What ever happens there won't be promotion and relegation. Fiji and Japan will be in Division 2.


A way around that is not have it as relegation from the respective conferences but the division as a whole. So you play everyone of the 11 other teams once and you are ranked 1-12 with the top 4 going through to the semi-final and final and the 12th ranked team into a pro/rel play off game. This way adding Fiji and Japan makes sense to create a buffer as I suspect we'll see one of those two at the bottom of the pile for a little while.


The 6N will never agree to any form of relegation, ever.


Absolutely no way should we have relegation. My thoughts are we can get more money into the 6N and 6N (lite) by having negotiations with TV or CVC to include both competitions. If marketed well enough it would be a huge growth opportunity for the rugby teams and TV companies over the next decade or two. You would get significant viewing of the 6N lite and increased for the 6N from these lite countries.

If teams improve let's say Georgia, then maybe we can draft them into a 7N and add two more teams - Portugal and Netherlands to 7N lite. Its too early to tell now, but this is a potential scenario.

With Europe being a large population, pretty wealthy and on our doorstep, it makes much more sense for the 6N to focus on this.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 22, 2019 7:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 30, 2012 5:46 am
Posts: 9674
Another bid for the Six Nations. The value of the competition is going up now.

https://www.walesonline.co.uk/sport/rug ... h-16312209


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 22, 2019 9:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 7:53 pm
Posts: 1238
I personally like the idea of a closed shop 10 team tournament. I know most people will disagree with me but I think Rugby would be best served by concentrating on keeping the tier 1 teams strong.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 22, 2019 10:20 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 20033
mdaclarke wrote:
I personally like the idea of a closed shop 10 team tournament. I know most people will disagree with me but I think Rugby would be best served by concentrating on keeping the tier 1 teams strong.


You can keep tier one strong while supporting improvement to tier 2. Getting a few more countries competitive makes rugby a bit more exciting.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 23, 2019 12:47 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 3577
Location: STRAYA CUNT!!!
Apparently the offer has gone up to £6.2b over 12 years according to the Daily Mail. Guaranteeing £377m in funding annually.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 23, 2019 4:26 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 10118
Working Class Rugger wrote:
Apparently the offer has gone up to £6.2b over 12 years according to the Daily Mail. Guaranteeing £377m in funding annually.


Will this all just inflate wages?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 23, 2019 8:32 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 20033
LandOTurk wrote:
Working Class Rugger wrote:
Apparently the offer has gone up to £6.2b over 12 years according to the Daily Mail. Guaranteeing £377m in funding annually.


Will this all just inflate wages?



Probably. I'd love to think it will go into investing grassroot, supporting the non-elite levels of rugby, making the women's game paid. But agents will probably demand a cut and unions will cave.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 23, 2019 10:05 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2018 12:58 pm
Posts: 75
If this comes about the 6 Nations will become a pools stage of a WR competition, so run by WR ,how big will their cut for running it be.
To me this is just a way of WR getting a hold of NH money.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 23, 2019 12:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 33864
Jimcardiff wrote:
If this comes about the 6 Nations will become a pools stage of a WR competition, so run by WR ,how big will their cut for running it be.
To me this is just a way of WR getting a hold of NH money.

It has been from the very beginning.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 18, 2019 8:30 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 7:53 pm
Posts: 1238
https://www.rugbypass.com/news/world-ru ... -proposal/

New "deadline" friday

The 6N will never agree to relegation. Until this is taken off the table there will be no agreement.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 18, 2019 9:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2012 3:15 pm
Posts: 31454
Location: Planet Rock
Brumby_in_Vic wrote:
eldanielfire wrote:
Brumby_in_Vic wrote:
Two years ago the 6 Nations agreed to play more tests against tier two test nations in the July window. Than Pichot launched his abomination of a World League which goes back to a closed shop for over a decade, trying to follow what UEFA are doing with their Nations League and four of the 6 Nations unions appear to be against it.


I'd be more accepting of the world league if

1) It was once every two years

2) The Lions year was used to tour the tier 2 nations. Maybe the 4th November test was used to host a Tier 2 nation.

3) Relegation and promotion was in.

I'm equally concerned for all this extra money that teams will lose cash from ticket sales. Usually the 6 Nations put in a years advertising for the November tests. Now they will be advertising tickets without knowing what team will turn-up. Lots of Rugby fans love the AIs specifically because they want to see Australia or The All Blacks.

I'm also concerned about this language "to give test more meaning". Since when do tests have little meaning? Certainly up north they have huge meaning, I suspect because there aren't are repeat games like in the SH.


Last paragraph it is just drivel from Pichot. It would be like saying that the majority of tests played before 1987 and outside of the Five Nations are meaningless due to not being part of a competition. Bullshít and also insulting to those players who played in those test matches.

Re ticket sales grassroots clubs also sell those tickets as a fundraiser.

It's not bullshit and how can the phrase "more meaning" be construed to mean what went before had no meaning. That is absurd. Most people would accept a competitive game has more meaning than a friendly


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 206 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: A5D5E5, akann, alliswell, BBC 2, Boomslang, danthefan, eldanielfire, Gazzamonster, Google Adsense [Bot], lorcanoworms, Monk Zombie, obelixtim, Plato'sCave, Risteard, Ruggafan, Seez, tabascoboy, tiddle, UEARFC, unseenwork, ZappaMan and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group