Do we need this sort of plum in rugby?

TheDocForgotHisLogon · Fri Jun 30, 2017 9:15 am

In the Telegraph before the first Test, Tony Rowe, chairman of the English champions, Exeter, led the charge. “We’re in a professional game and it’s about money. No matter which way you cut it, it’s about money,” Rowe said. “And the reality is, the amount of money we get from the Lions is farcical, if you compare that to the product or assets they’re actually borrowing. It could well come down to the fact that the English clubs say, ‘Well, no. Unless you’re prepared to pay this amount of money, you can’t have our asset’. ”

What the utter fudge.

naki · Post by **naki** » Fri Jun 30, 2017 9:19 am

"Assets"

Spivs just don't get it

blindcider · Post by **blindcider** » Fri Jun 30, 2017 9:19 am

TheDocForgotHisLogon wrote:
In the Telegraph before the first Test, Tony Rowe, chairman of the English champions, Exeter, led the charge. “We’re in a professional game and it’s about money. No matter which way you cut it, it’s about money,” Rowe said. “And the reality is, the amount of money we get from the Lions is farcical, if you compare that to the product or assets they’re actually borrowing. It could well come down to the fact that the English clubs say, ‘Well, no. Unless you’re prepared to pay this amount of money, you can’t have our asset’. ”
What the utter fudge.

You might want to find out some more about this chap before you start being an even bigger plum than normal.

Chuckles1188 · Post by **Chuckles1188** » Fri Jun 30, 2017 9:20 am

Given that the whole game would cease to exist at the top level if someone wasn't counting the pennies, yes, we do

redderneck · Post by **redderneck** » Fri Jun 30, 2017 9:20 am

TheDocForgotHisLogon wrote:
In the Telegraph before the first Test, Tony Rowe, chairman of the English champions, Exeter, led the charge. “We’re in a professional game and it’s about money. No matter which way you cut it, it’s about money,” Rowe said. “And the reality is, the amount of money we get from the Lions is farcical, if you compare that to the product or assets they’re actually borrowing. It could well come down to the fact that the English clubs say, ‘Well, no. Unless you’re prepared to pay this amount of money, you can’t have our asset’. ”
What the utter fudge.

It's bound to happen. From their POV, they're right. Either the BILInc will start stumping up a hell of a lot more to the the Home Unions than the current £50 k per player/straight 4 way split of profits generated, who will then filter fnds back to clubs as they see necessary to keep the peace; or the premiership clubs will seek a direct per player payment of their own, or somesuch other arrangement.

slick · Post by **slick** » Fri Jun 30, 2017 9:23 am

Exeter have been pretty consistent on this and to be fair to them they have built that club incredibly well.

What I think they don't understand or chose to ignore is that rugby would die on its arse without the international game. Rugby is my absolute passion, but I have little interest in the pro club game and would be quite happy with my local amateur club and the international game. I'm not alone.

PornDog · Post by **PornDog** » Fri Jun 30, 2017 9:24 am

I find his choice of language deplorable, but there is a perfectly reasonable point in there somewhere.

Frodder · Post by **Frodder** » Fri Jun 30, 2017 9:24 am

He's talking like a club football manager when players are playing for international sides in competitions.

It's a sign of the times and he's protecting his clubs interests. Like it or not I understand where he's coming from

lorcanoworms · Post by **lorcanoworms** » Fri Jun 30, 2017 9:25 am

Chuckles1188 wrote:Given that the whole game would cease to exist at the top level if someone wasn't counting the pennies, yes, we do

Are they counting the pennies at Saracens?

SaintK · Post by **SaintK** » Fri Jun 30, 2017 9:25 am

blindcider wrote:
TheDocForgotHisLogon wrote:
In the Telegraph before the first Test, Tony Rowe, chairman of the English champions, Exeter, led the charge. “We’re in a professional game and it’s about money. No matter which way you cut it, it’s about money,” Rowe said. “And the reality is, the amount of money we get from the Lions is farcical, if you compare that to the product or assets they’re actually borrowing. It could well come down to the fact that the English clubs say, ‘Well, no. Unless you’re prepared to pay this amount of money, you can’t have our asset’. ”
What the utter fudge.
You might want to find out some more about this chap before you start being an even bigger plum than normal.

Hear,hear!

Chuckles1188 · Post by **Chuckles1188** » Fri Jun 30, 2017 9:26 am

slick wrote:Exeter have been pretty consistent on this and to be fair to them they have built that club incredibly well.

What I think they don't understand or chose to ignore is that rugby would die on its arse without the international game. Rugby is my absolute passion, but I have little interest in the pro club game and would be quite happy with my local amateur club and the international game. I'm not alone.

There's the international game, and then there's the Lions. The former is the foundation of the sport, the latter is an exercise in giving fans a jolly while funnelling a big splurge of cash towards the SANZAR unions, and of course sponsors. I don't think there's any question that rugby would be on its uppers without the international game, but I suspect it could survive the death of the Lions concept

Chuckles1188 · Post by **Chuckles1188** » Fri Jun 30, 2017 9:26 am

lorcanoworms wrote:
Chuckles1188 wrote:Given that the whole game would cease to exist at the top level if someone wasn't counting the pennies, yes, we do
Are they counting the pennies at Saracens?

What do Saracens have to do with this?

redderneck · Post by **redderneck** » Fri Jun 30, 2017 9:26 am

slick wrote:Exeter have been pretty consistent on this and to be fair to them they have built that club incredibly well.

What I think they don't understand or chose to ignore is that rugby would die on its arse without the international game. Rugby is my absolute passion, but I have little interest in the pro club game and would be quite happy with my local amateur club and the international game. I'm not alone.

Indeed, you are not.

slick · Post by **slick** » Fri Jun 30, 2017 9:29 am

Chuckles1188 wrote:
slick wrote:Exeter have been pretty consistent on this and to be fair to them they have built that club incredibly well.

What I think they don't understand or chose to ignore is that rugby would die on its arse without the international game. Rugby is my absolute passion, but I have little interest in the pro club game and would be quite happy with my local amateur club and the international game. I'm not alone.
There's the international game, and then there's the Lions. The former is the foundation of the sport, the latter is an exercise in giving fans a jolly while funnelling a big splurge of cash towards the SANZAR unions, and of course sponsors. I don't think there's any question that rugby would be on its uppers without the international game, but I suspect it could survive the death of the Lions concept

Yes, I agree, I was just making a wider point about clubs v international. You hear clubs almost daily complaining about player release, player burn out from internationals etc.

Chuckles1188 · Post by **Chuckles1188** » Fri Jun 30, 2017 9:31 am

Well yes, because they're the ones who actually have to look after the players year round. If you ran a business and someone came along and took your best employees off you for weeks at a time and then returned them to you physically and emotionally exhausted, you would probably also want to put something in place to make sure you're getting some kind of compensation for it

Mick Mannock · Post by **Mick Mannock** » Fri Jun 30, 2017 9:31 am

Chuckles1188 wrote:
slick wrote:Exeter have been pretty consistent on this and to be fair to them they have built that club incredibly well.

What I think they don't understand or chose to ignore is that rugby would die on its arse without the international game. Rugby is my absolute passion, but I have little interest in the pro club game and would be quite happy with my local amateur club and the international game. I'm not alone.
There's the international game, and then there's the Lions. The former is the foundation of the sport, the latter is an exercise in giving fans a jolly while funnelling a big splurge of cash towards the SANZAR unions, and of course sponsors. I don't think there's any question that rugby would be on its uppers without the international game, but I suspect it could survive the death of the Lions concept

Yes, I agree with you.

slick · Post by **slick** » Fri Jun 30, 2017 9:33 am

Chuckles1188 wrote:Well yes, because they're the ones who actually have to look after the players year round. If you ran a business and someone came along and took your best employees off you for weeks at a time and then returned them to you physically and emotionally exhausted, you would probably also want to put something in place to make sure you're getting some kind of compensation for it

Yes.

bimboman · Post by **bimboman** » Fri Jun 30, 2017 9:35 am

Mick Mannock wrote:
Chuckles1188 wrote:
slick wrote:Exeter have been pretty consistent on this and to be fair to them they have built that club incredibly well.

What I think they don't understand or chose to ignore is that rugby would die on its arse without the international game. Rugby is my absolute passion, but I have little interest in the pro club game and would be quite happy with my local amateur club and the international game. I'm not alone.
There's the international game, and then there's the Lions. The former is the foundation of the sport, the latter is an exercise in giving fans a jolly while funnelling a big splurge of cash towards the SANZAR unions, and of course sponsors. I don't think there's any question that rugby would be on its uppers without the international game, but I suspect it could survive the death of the Lions concept
Yes, I agree with you.

Agree with the above, also it's harder for English clubs as they have no central contracts.

TheDocForgotHisLogon · Fri Jun 30, 2017 9:36 am

blindcider wrote: You might want to find out some more about this chap before you start being an even bigger plum than normal.

Err, whatever. No idea what I've done to offend you but someone talking about players in those terms is highly objectionable imo.

Chuckles1188 · Post by **Chuckles1188** » Fri Jun 30, 2017 9:37 am

TheDocForgotHisLogon wrote:
blindcider wrote: You might want to find out some more about this chap before you start being an even bigger plum than normal.
Err, whatever. No idea what I've done to offend you but someone talking about players in those terms is highly objectionable imo.

Rowe doesn't pretend to be a lifelong die-hard rugby fan, but he bleeds Chiefs. Goes to every single game they play, no matter where it is or in what competition, and makes a point of chatting with the players and keeping a good relationship with them. Flats and Shanks did a pod episode from Sandy Park with Jack Nowell as a guest and they all made a specific point of name-checking Rowe as someone with an unusually close relationship with the players. He's definitely not a spiv. If he's talking in terms of assets it's because his background is that of a businessman, but that doesn't mean his concerns aren't sincere and about more than just the financial element

blindcider · Post by **blindcider** » Fri Jun 30, 2017 9:40 am

redderneck wrote:
slick wrote:Exeter have been pretty consistent on this and to be fair to them they have built that club incredibly well.

What I think they don't understand or chose to ignore is that rugby would die on its arse without the international game. Rugby is my absolute passion, but I have little interest in the pro club game and would be quite happy with my local amateur club and the international game. I'm not alone.
Indeed, you are not.

I think the big thing that is becoming ever clearer is that professional team sports are incompatible with international representative competition without drastic compromises being made.

The question that needs to be asked is if the compromises worth it? The Barbarians need to be get rid of, I love the Lions concept but I think this is the tour that kills it. They need to take a hard look at the concept and come up with a solid strategy of how these tours should be conducted. International competition needs to be treasured, but not at the expense of the clubs that develop and allow these players to dedicate their entire lives to the sport.

Slider · Post by **Slider** » Fri Jun 30, 2017 9:44 am

It is important to separate the Lions from the broader international games. International teams have home games to earn revenue, some of which filters back to the clubs. It's a mutually beneficial arrangement so the clubs will support it. The Lions don't have home games.

When you factor in the losses incurred by the home unions touring with weakened teams and shortened schedules, it may well be the case that the Lions don't have an overall positive commercial contribution. If money is the factor then I can't see it continuing.

TheDocForgotHisLogon · Fri Jun 30, 2017 9:49 am

It's more than semantics because rugby stands apart as a sport - I've got no interest in being a consumer of a product produced by assets. I've got a great deal of interest in watching the current crop of players playing a game I used to play and still love.

Maybe I'm just showing my age...

Chuckles1188 · Post by **Chuckles1188** » Fri Jun 30, 2017 9:51 am

TheDocForgotHisLogon wrote:It's more than semantics because rugby stands apart as a sport - I've got no interest in being a consumer of a product produced by assets. I've got a great deal of interest in watching the current crop of players playing a game I used to play and still love.

Maybe I'm just showing my age...

Well, whether you're interested in it or not, that's what you are. I'm sure Tony is really sorry that you're bothered by that fact

JM2K6 · Post by **JM2K6** » Fri Jun 30, 2017 9:53 am

TheDocForgotHisLogon wrote:It's more than semantics because rugby stands apart as a sport - I've got no interest in being a consumer of a product produced by assets. I've got a great deal of interest in watching the current crop of players playing a game I used to play and still love.

Maybe I'm just showing my age...

I don't think you can ignore the commercial imperatives of professional rugby. I mean, you'd have to be willfully blind to not recognise the Lions is, these days, first and foremost an exercise in making an astonishing amount of money.

redderneck · Post by **redderneck** » Fri Jun 30, 2017 9:53 am

blindcider wrote:
redderneck wrote:
slick wrote:Exeter have been pretty consistent on this and to be fair to them they have built that club incredibly well.

What I think they don't understand or chose to ignore is that rugby would die on its arse without the international game. Rugby is my absolute passion, but I have little interest in the pro club game and would be quite happy with my local amateur club and the international game. I'm not alone.
Indeed, you are not.
I think the big thing that is becoming ever clearer is that professional team sports are incompatible with international representative competition without drastic compromises being made.

The question that needs to be asked is if the compromises worth it? The Barbarians need to be get rid of, I love the Lions concept but I think this is the tour that kills it. They need to take a hard look at the concept and come up with a solid strategy of how these tours should be conducted. International competition needs to be treasured, but not at the expense of the clubs that develop and allow these players to dedicate their entire lives to the sport.

Margin_Walker · Post by **Margin_Walker** » Fri Jun 30, 2017 9:54 am

Hell of an asset though tbf

TheDocForgotHisLogon · Fri Jun 30, 2017 9:57 am

Chuckles1188 wrote:
TheDocForgotHisLogon wrote:It's more than semantics because rugby stands apart as a sport - I've got no interest in being a consumer of a product produced by assets. I've got a great deal of interest in watching the current crop of players playing a game I used to play and still love.

Maybe I'm just showing my age...
Well, whether you're interested in it or not, that's what you are. I'm sure Tony is really sorry that you're bothered by that fact

Well no. Firstly I don't consume his product and likely never will. Secondly that's not and will never be my perspective on Wests, Lions, Hurricanes, or All Blacks.

dameshirleybassey · Post by **dameshirleybassey** » Fri Jun 30, 2017 9:58 am

Nobody cares a whole heap about Exeter outside of Devon. Woohoo they won a premiership! Noone cares really though. They've never got nextdoor near anything in Europe and the only reason they exist in any business sense is because of the success of rugby as a global sport. England winning and hosting world cups, Lions tours etc. Without all of this Exeter would have remained a completely amateur club. He would do well to remember that. How many season tickets get sold because Jack Nowell, the Lion, will be doing his stuff for Exeter? Quite a few I'd suggest.

Plums out.

A5D5E5 · Post by **A5D5E5** » Fri Jun 30, 2017 9:59 am

The RFU and Premiership Rugby have a pretty good working relationship to the mutual benefit of England's national team and the clubs.

The Lions are a hangover from the amateur era and should be abolished.

TheDocForgotHisLogon · Fri Jun 30, 2017 9:59 am

JM2K6 wrote:
TheDocForgotHisLogon wrote:It's more than semantics because rugby stands apart as a sport - I've got no interest in being a consumer of a product produced by assets. I've got a great deal of interest in watching the current crop of players playing a game I used to play and still love.

Maybe I'm just showing my age...
I don't think you can ignore the commercial imperatives of professional rugby. I mean, you'd have to be willfully blind to not recognise the Lions is, these days, first and foremost an exercise in making an astonishing amount of money.

To be clear, and my apologies, I wasn't meaning to talk about the money split from the lions. I was objecting to the language / attitude to the sport.

JM2K6 · Post by **JM2K6** » Fri Jun 30, 2017 10:03 am

dameshirleybassey wrote:Nobody cares a whole heap about Exeter outside of Devon. Woohoo they won a premiership! Noone cares really though. They've never got nextdoor near anything in Europe and the only reason they exist in any business sense is because of the success of rugby as a global sport. England winning and hosting world cups, Lions tours etc. Without all of this Exeter would have remained a completely amateur club. He would do well to remember that. How many season tickets get sold because Jack Nowell, the Lion, will be doing his stuff for Exeter? Quite a few I'd suggest.

Plums out.

This is a really strange post. Quite a bit of cart before horse allied to a complete ignorance of English rugby.

JM2K6 · Post by **JM2K6** » Fri Jun 30, 2017 10:03 am

TheDocForgotHisLogon wrote:
JM2K6 wrote:
TheDocForgotHisLogon wrote:It's more than semantics because rugby stands apart as a sport - I've got no interest in being a consumer of a product produced by assets. I've got a great deal of interest in watching the current crop of players playing a game I used to play and still love.

Maybe I'm just showing my age...
I don't think you can ignore the commercial imperatives of professional rugby. I mean, you'd have to be willfully blind to not recognise the Lions is, these days, first and foremost an exercise in making an astonishing amount of money.
To be clear, and my apologies, I wasn't meaning to talk about the money split from the lions. I was objecting to the language / attitude to the sport.

Ah fair enough - yeah it's irritating for sure. But what he says might be aggravating, what he does has been a huge positive to the sport in England

guy smiley · Post by **guy smiley** » Fri Jun 30, 2017 10:07 am

JM2K6 wrote:
TheDocForgotHisLogon wrote:It's more than semantics because rugby stands apart as a sport - I've got no interest in being a consumer of a product produced by assets. I've got a great deal of interest in watching the current crop of players playing a game I used to play and still love.

Maybe I'm just showing my age...
I don't think you can ignore the commercial imperatives of professional rugby. I mean, you'd have to be willfully blind to not recognise the Lions is, these days, first and foremost an exercise in making an astonishing amount of money.

I had a general anaesthetic this week so maybe that's a factor in my feeling almost completely divorced from the reasoning being argued here.

Firstly, the cash generating aspect of a Lions tour isn't the first thing I think of when they're discussed. Far from it. It is, to me a lucrative benefit of having the tour.

Secondly, the argument that professional sport must be divorced from international competition is just laughable, so I must be missing something here.

What the actual hell?

blindcider · Post by **blindcider** » Fri Jun 30, 2017 10:12 am

guy smiley wrote:
JM2K6 wrote:
TheDocForgotHisLogon wrote:It's more than semantics because rugby stands apart as a sport - I've got no interest in being a consumer of a product produced by assets. I've got a great deal of interest in watching the current crop of players playing a game I used to play and still love.

Maybe I'm just showing my age...
I don't think you can ignore the commercial imperatives of professional rugby. I mean, you'd have to be willfully blind to not recognise the Lions is, these days, first and foremost an exercise in making an astonishing amount of money.
I had a general anaesthetic this week so maybe that's a factor in my feeling almost completely divorced from the reasoning being argued here.

Firstly, the cash generating aspect of a Lions tour isn't the first thing I think of when they're discussed. Far from it. It is, to me a lucrative benefit of having the tour.

Secondly, the argument that professional sport must be divorced from international competition is just laughable, so I must be missing something here.

What the actual hell?

Who's making that second argument?

guy smiley · Post by **guy smiley** » Fri Jun 30, 2017 10:16 am

blindcider wrote:
guy smiley wrote:
JM2K6 wrote:
TheDocForgotHisLogon wrote:It's more than semantics because rugby stands apart as a sport - I've got no interest in being a consumer of a product produced by assets. I've got a great deal of interest in watching the current crop of players playing a game I used to play and still love.

Maybe I'm just showing my age...
I don't think you can ignore the commercial imperatives of professional rugby. I mean, you'd have to be willfully blind to not recognise the Lions is, these days, first and foremost an exercise in making an astonishing amount of money.
I had a general anaesthetic this week so maybe that's a factor in my feeling almost completely divorced from the reasoning being argued here.

Firstly, the cash generating aspect of a Lions tour isn't the first thing I think of when they're discussed. Far from it. It is, to me a lucrative benefit of having the tour.

Secondly, the argument that professional sport must be divorced from international competition is just laughable, so I must be missing something here.

What the actual hell?
Who's making that second argument?

I may have translated loosely but that's how I read your statement here

blindcider wrote:
I think the big thing that is becoming ever clearer is that professional team sports are incompatible with international representative competition without drastic compromises being made.

nardol · Post by **nardol** » Fri Jun 30, 2017 10:17 am

Exeter lost how many players to the lions?

Shut up you cvnt.

If it's that's much trouble they are free to sign up non international players to their squad.

JM2K6 · Post by **JM2K6** » Fri Jun 30, 2017 10:18 am

guy smiley wrote:
JM2K6 wrote:
TheDocForgotHisLogon wrote:It's more than semantics because rugby stands apart as a sport - I've got no interest in being a consumer of a product produced by assets. I've got a great deal of interest in watching the current crop of players playing a game I used to play and still love.

Maybe I'm just showing my age...
I don't think you can ignore the commercial imperatives of professional rugby. I mean, you'd have to be willfully blind to not recognise the Lions is, these days, first and foremost an exercise in making an astonishing amount of money.
I had a general anaesthetic this week so maybe that's a factor in my feeling almost completely divorced from the reasoning being argued here.

Firstly, the cash generating aspect of a Lions tour isn't the first thing I think of when they're discussed. Far from it. It is, to me a lucrative benefit of having the tour.

Indeed. However, it's what's actually keeping the Lions going, and why so much effort is put into it by Sky and the unions. It's not "for the good of the fans" - as Lions fans we've effectively ignored that the tour has been a weird bastardised version of what was, historically, a much longer tour that the fans never gave a shite about. The 97 tour was a great story and Living With Lions was a great vid that unfortunately convinced The Powers That Be to ramp up the commercialisation of every. fucking. thing. the Lions did and turned it into the ugly behemoth we have now. The Lions makes an amazing amount of money for the hosts and a pretty big amount for the organisers. That money is why such an anachronistic tour still exists.

Secondly, the argument that professional sport must be divorced from international competition is just laughable, so I must be missing something here.

What the actual hell?

I wasn't making that argument and I don't think anyone has.

nardol · Post by **nardol** » Fri Jun 30, 2017 10:19 am

English clubs want to create a soccer premier league style rugby dominance where they dictate what happens in world rugby.

JM2K6 · Post by **JM2K6** » Fri Jun 30, 2017 10:20 am

nardol wrote:Exeter lost how many players to the lions?

Shut up you cvnt.

If it's that's much trouble they are free to sign up non international players to their squad.

Exeter are fine with international players. There's a largely good symbiotic relationship between the RFU and the clubs that benefits everyone.

Watching players get flogged in a doomed tour led by an idiot that puts demands on players far beyond what's normal while not being fairly compensated for their employees compared to everything else in the sport is going to rankle, though.