Heineken Cup talks "have now ended"

[Amiga500]

The question for me is - how are the Dragons spending their money? I think that the Dragons need to justify what they are spending their allocation of the funding on.

+1

Really, the ideal situation is to grow the pie rather than cut it into uneven pieces.

+2


That slice the PRL have proposed giving the Italians is starting to look a bit small, and to add insult to injury, undercooked to me.

 

[psychic duck]

Yup, I agree there as well.

A comparison could be made with British and Irish Athletics. If the powers that be had a similar view to duck, then after a long period of underachievement in major competitions such as the Olympics, it would have been better to cut funding and give it to more successful sporting bodies. However money was ploughed into athletics nationwide, and the benefits were seen at the 2012 Olympics.

Without money, there's little chance that struggling sides can improve. Even the big success story of Exeter was bankrolled by someone. If they didn't have the money to make quality signings, or retain those they had developed then they'd probably still be in the first division, or would have returned there soon after gaining promotion.

Dullonien, I'm afraid you couldn't be more wrong here. A main part of the reason for the added success at the Olympics has been an achievement based funding system that has allowed the cycling team for instance to get state of the art facilities and training techniques. Achievers like cycling, athletics, boxing and rowing all got the most funding in place of wasting money on stuff like Handball, Basketball and Volleyball where GB barely managed to win a game.

The sports have to show some sign of promise and improvement to get a funding rise.

A better comparison would be a weight loss competition where only the winners of the first round were allowed exercise from that point on, and the loser get bashed for staying morbidly obese 10 rounds down the line.I'd watch it.

A even better comparison would be a national basketball federation giving funds to a town that consistently produces useless 5ft midgets instead of giving it to the town with 7ft giants.

I wonder if you believe the same thing in real life, such as the NHS etc. Those darn people paying little into the pot allowed to get the same amount out of it.

I firmly believe that there is talent emerging in Gwent, with the likes of Ieuan Jones, Jack Dixon, Hallam Amos, Jonathan Evans, Sam Parry, Matthew Screech (Blues weren't prepared to develop him), and Jason Tovey potential future Welsh internationals (okay, Tovey has been touted for a while, but he's back playing quite well).

Looking at the recent U20's squads, the breakdown is much more evenly distributed, with a healthy percentage of the players playing their trade in Gwent.

Maybe in 10 years time, it'll the Dragons who are developing the majority of Wales' international players. It's somewhat down to the luck of the draw as to the quality of the players coming through in the region. Cut the Dragons funding and you risk jeopardising the region as a whole. We've already mostly cut off the Valleys, and now you want to do something similar with Gwent? It's very difficult to reverse actions such as these.

Yes things are difficult at the moment, but jeopardising the long term in an attempt to secure some short-term success for the other regions isn't the way to fix things.

Looking back at historical trends, there is a much lower chance of any of those "talents" succeeding at the Dragons than the other regions. It's not down to luck of the draw, it's down to all the other regions having far superior developmental systems that produces better talents than the ones mentioned above, and indeed even when the first choice XV was gone in Japan all the Dragons could get in the team was Andrew Coombs.

There's as much chance as the Dragons developing the majority of Wales' international players as there is them winning a trophy. Ie none.

Meanwhile, all the other regions who the WRU rely on for the national team are losing their players steadily and having their success diminished. Players leaving abroad is hurting Wales' chances in the long term, and the added failure of the regions because of it also harms the national team.

Then we have those who would happily grab a few more quid from their neighbour, even if it meant the long term decline of the sport into a niche, played only in a few areas deemed worthy.

As opposed to the long term decline of all regions into the uncompetitive nothingness they are turning into now. This season there is a real chance that all 3 regions could finish bottom of the pool in Europe, 2 years ago there were 3 competitive teams in Europe.

 

[dullonien]

In this argument, I feel that there isn't a right or wrong, but that people are looking at things from different perspectives. (Much like all politics, I guess.)

On the one hand, you seem to be supporting what is best for the collective. You want fairness between the regions, giving as much of a chance for all to develop as equals.

On the other hand, psychic duck seems to be looking at things from more of an individualist approach, believing that some regions are inherently going to be stronger, and thus need more support, than others.

I think you are both right, it's just that your priorities are different.

If we take psychic duck's approach, then the wage and player base disparity between the three other regions, and Newport, will widen. Not only would they get less money from the WRU, but they also benefit less than the other regions in terms of gate receipts, having by far the smallest crowd. The idea of developing Newport as a rugby region becomes basically impossible. As a fan, it'll be difficult to overcome the apathy of not being supported as well as the other regions.

However, if we take dullonien's approach, then resources may not be concentrated as well as they could be, a contributing factor for why the regions cannot compete.

Personally, I'm starting to feel that whatever amount the Dragons get from the WRU, dividing that by three and distributing it amongst the other regions is probably not going to make the biggest difference to competing. It would improve the other regions by a minor amount, whilst effectively destroying the Dragons.

The question for me is - how are the Dragons spending their money? I think that the Dragons need to justify what they are spending their allocation of the funding on.

Really, the ideal situation is to grow the pie rather than cut it into uneven pieces.

Mostly agree with that. Although I'd almost argue that the larger clubs (Ospreys etc.) should be able to better sustain themselves from increased gate and sponsorship revenues, so in that case the Dragons may need a little more support from the WRU for the medium term until they can grow to match that.

I suppose the big question is whether the Gwent region can supply enough quality players to support the Dragons in the long term. This unfortunately comes back to the make-up of the regions once again. Would it be beneficial to place Ponty and a couple of the other abandoned clubs into the Gwent region, even if it doesn't quite make sense geographically? They may be more prepared to get behind the Dragons than 'evil' Cardiff. It's not as if it's a long commute between Ponty and Newport.

I have questioned what the Dragons are spending their money on in the past. I'd love to know the breakdown.

 

[Peat]

Also as you yourself said, it's an obvious point that Leinster wouldn't be able to get away so easily if the opposition (say Munster for example) were full strength and gunning for a playoff place. Which is exactly why the league needs to have full teams more often and more riding on the matches to make it a better product.

Actually, I very much expressed my doubt that this would follow. As

a) Some teams might be very happy just to get to 6th and throw everything at the HEC year in, year out - old Munster would have done

and more importantly

b) Leinster - or at least Leinster a couple of years back - could have probably walked to a Pro 12 semi-final using their 2nds even if everyone else was going full tilt. Or at the very least done about half the league games and allow the other guys to pick up the rest.

So, I'm honestly not certain they'd have to change what they were doing a great deal. Particularly the big Irish provinces, who I think are currently financially a great deal ahead of the pack. They've already been getting the league positions with far more onerous international restrictions than the rest of the league.


Re - Funding for Dragons - tbh, I can see PD's point and I think Welsh rugby needs to consider it. Yes, the way Connacht was treated was shabby, and yes the IRFU are doing the right thing for Irish rugby in smoothing it over now - but Irish rugby is in a different position to the Welsh. Irish rugby has built three thriving provinces and can afford to start looking around at ways to improve the fourth - even then, I understand a lot of it was left in Connacht's hands. The Welsh need some standard bearers. They need a team to win whatever European competition is going, they need teams who will regularly draw in 15,000 a go (Ulster will do that when Ravenhill is big enough), they need teams who are successful and have big names. And then, hopefully, they can start boosting up the regions left behind. You don't want to wind up the Dragons. But if the Dragons can survive a few seasons floating on the wind doing their best with the scraps from the table, maybe Ospreys or Blues can become something. Because, right now, I think Welsh regional rugby is sliding into a trap of being equally crap.

 

[Amiga500]

As opposed to the long term decline of all regions into the uncompetitive nothingness they are turning into now. This season there is a real chance that all 3 regions could finish bottom of the pool in Europe, 2 years ago there were 3 competitive teams in Europe.

The regions problem is not WRU funding. Its their own funding and a Welsh public that is by large happy to go see Wales or the clubs, but not the regions. Crowd figures are not big enough, which affects the sponsorship the region is able to generate.

Don't cry about lack of funding or lack of big names. They had the big-budget galacticos a while back - no boom in crowds or influx of sponsors. They've won the league - no boom in crowds or influx of sponsors. Right now they've got numerous Welsh internationals and Lions - still no boom in crowds or influx of sponsors.

The apathy toward the regions is the issue. That will take decades to overcome. Even so, the crowds are creeping up. They will probably continue to do so as long as the regions are reasonably competitive in the league. The WRU are realising this now and are increasing funding appropriately. But they won't fund the regions to compete with Toulon. Probably never will.

 

[Groundhog]

What some are forgetting when idiotically throwing out the Connacht example is that Connacht are in a far weaker position than the other provinces today because of total negligence towards the province in the past. They we're underfunded, poorly treated, while a series of poor policies allowed other provinces to poach any half decent young lad they produced. In 2003 the IRFU tried to cut the province to redirect funds to fund our more successful provinces who we're successful because they we're historical rugby strongholds for their own reasons.
NOW however the IRFU is committed to improving Connect and they're getting results. They outlined every other province this summer in my opinion because they we're given an advantage in terms of NIQ. WHY THE **** would they cut funding to a quarter of the country, a large potential always growing market. Connacht fans are turning from supporting Munster and supporting Connacht as they're playing European Rugby at a high level. The results have not come yet but they will. We haven't seen results in the past because they we're subject to the suggested total inequality in terms of funding and support. We have to give "the fat kid at the sports day a medal" because the other kids we're given steroids as babies. Now there is a basis for Connacht qualifying unfairly, and they are being propped up by Leinster but that's no reason from an Irish standpoint to cut their funding. I'm glad they're getting a leg up.
Tl;dr give them the funding, the internationals will come

 

[j'nuh]

The apathy toward the regions is the issue. That will take decades to overcome. Even so, the crowds are creeping up. They will probably continue to do so as long as the regions are reasonably competitive in the league. The WRU are realising this now and are increasing funding appropriately. But they won't fund the regions to compete with Toulon. Probably never will.

I made this:



To compare:

 

[Amiga500]

I made this:

Good work.

Over the long term, they aren't even creeping up!!

[Mistakenly, I had just glanced at the ospreys over the past couple of years and assumed it represented a trend. Should know better than that! Even worse, aren't they now counting free kid entries as tickets sold?]

Ultimately the problem is the Welsh public do not support the regions.

Interesting article:

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/sport/rugby/rugby-news/special-report-story-welsh-rugby-2024649

The entire Welsh rugby community, that is, regions, WRU and premiership clubs need to get their ***** together and sort something out for the good of the welsh game.

Perhaps better dealt with in the Welsh rugby thread?

 

[smartcooky]

And what about the ARU on the verge of bankruptcy having lost 19m over the past 2 years despite a lucrative Lions tour ?

You've over-egged the pudding as usual. The loss for 2012 was AUD$8m. Read for yourself (if you can understand it)

http://www.rugby.com.au/ARUHQ/AnnualReports.aspx

....and that was before the Lions tour not after it. There are no published figures for 2013 yet.

Also, the ARU are not "on the verge of bankruptcy", they have hedge funds and cash reserves that will hold them in good stead for the next 5 -0 10 years.

As usual, you are making things up.

The top 14, through its employment market has done more for rugby development than all the Unions and IRB combined.

Clubs in that regard are non discriminatory and will employ you solely based on your performance which is why they are doing a better job than the unions at developing the sport.

These have to be the two funniest things I have read in weeks.

Clubs flog players mercilessly. That is why in countries where clubs control the players, the injury rates are twice as high as they are in ones where unions are responsible for managing players welfare. The Clubs generally treat the welfare of their players with utter disdain, with insufficient rest periods (and in the case of the French clubs, striking illegal deals to make the Unions rest players during the time they are supposed to be available for their National teams), and forcing players to play with injuries not fully healed or recovered. They simply take the next cab off the rank when a player is spent.

And as for player development, take a look at the NZRU, and see how deep the talent pool goes. Especially, have a look at the depth in key positions such as 10, 7, 2, 15. You lot in other parts of the world see the sudden appearance of prodigious talents like Ben Smith, Beauden Barrett, Julian Savea and you wonder where the hell we get them from. It looks like we have a hidden "talent conveyor belt", and we do. Its called the ITM Cup.

New talents appearing does not happen by accident, it happens because of the NZRU's excellent player management, excellent talent identification systems, and their continued realisation that the ITM Cup, while losing money every year, is absolutely vital to the continued development of rugby in New Zealand. We see these players two to three years before you do, playing in the ITM Cup, and I've been watching a fresh lot this year. Write these names down... Ihaia West, Ardie Savea, Marty Banks.... you could be hearing their names a lot in a few years time.

But not only do we develop our own players, we develop players for the rest of the world too....


[TEXTAREA]NZ Born players at the 2011 RWC

Samoa (15): Census Johnston (Auckland), Anthony Perenise (Wellington), Olé Avei (Wellington), Daniel Leo (Palmerston North), Kane Thompson (Paraparaumu), Kahn Fotuali'i (Auckland), Jeremy Sua (Wellington), Tusi Pisi (Auckland), Sailosi Tagicakibau (Auckland), James So'oialo (Wellington), Ti'i Paulo (Christchurch), Filipo Lavea Levi (Hamilton), Junior Poluleuligaga (Auckland), Tasesa Lavea (Taihape), Paul Williams (Auckland)

Australia (2): Quade Cooper (Auckland), Digby Ioane (Wellington)

Canada (1): Jeremy Kyne (Wellington)

England(2) : Dylan Hartley (Rotorua), Shontayne Hape (Auckland)

Fiji (3): Nicky Little (Tokoroa), Deacon Manu (New Plymouth), Michael Tagicakibau (Auckland)

Ireland (1): Isaac Boss (Tokoroa)

Japan (6): Luke Thompson (Christchurch), Michael Leitch (Christchurch) Shaun Webb (Blenheim), Justin Ives (Mosgiel), James Arlidge (Hamilton), Murray Williams (Lower Hutt)

Tonga (7): Tukulua Lokotui (Auckland), Kurt Morath (Takapuna), Ephraim Taukafa (Auckland), Thomas Palu (Wellington), Andrew Ma'ilei (Auckland), William Helu (Otahuhu), Siale Piutau (Auckland)

USA (1): James Paterson (Christchurch)
[/TEXTAREA]

There are 38 of them, enough for a whole RWC squad, with spares!

With only a few exceptions (and don't bother posting which ones, as I have already acknowledged there are a few), these players came through the NZRU's development systems, and are now benefiting teams all over the planet.

So, don't tell me your bullshiit story about how much better the Top 14 is at producing talent. Tell me how many Top 14 players were born in France, grew up in France, played all their rugby in France, and then ended up playing at a World Cup for a country other than France. You'll probably struggle to find any.

ETA: I've just checked for RWC2011. The number of French born, raised and developed players playing for other countries is........ ZIP!

 

[profitius]

Lot of good debate here. For me the question is do you want to see plenty of competition of a more meritocracy where the strong get stronger and the weak fall behind. Sport in itself is about the drama of competition and thats what fans love to see. Two evenly matched teams battling it out with no clear cut winner. Why people want to see the strong get stronger and the weak get weaker makes little sense to me. That is anti competitive!


Don't get me wrong, I fully agree that teams should be rewarded for being successful but there needs to be a balance between the reward and what the weaker teams get. Otherwise it'll create a vicious circle like the premiership soccer league where the same teams are on top and will be for the foreseeable future.

I made this:

View attachment 2506

To compare:

View attachment 2507

I'd say the success of Swansea and Cardiff in the soccer has been a massive blow to the regions. Sports compete with each other for fans and players.


Regarding the Dragons. I'd like to see in the future a second PRO 12 division. It would be ideal for the likes of the Dragons and other teams and for those teams they'd get rewarded with promotion if they were good enough. Where would the teams come from? Well another Italian, a Spanish, another Scottish and maybe Irish, A portugese, Belgian, Dutch, German, maybe English or French region etc. Long way away but not impossible to see it happening.

 

[Tony Manx]

Clubs flog players mercilessly. That is why in countries where clubs control the players, the injury rates are twice as high as they are in ones where unions are responsible for managing players welfare. The Clubs generally treat the welfare of their players with utter disdain, with insufficient rest periods and forcing players to play with injuries not fully healed or recovered. They simply take the next cab off the rank when a player is spent.

Do not wish to enter into an argument between friends but have to say that this is my experience of what happens in France.

 

[smartcooky]

Do not wish to enter into an argument between friends but have to say that this is my experience of what happens in France.

I'm not surprised. I hear it a lot from players who have played in France and returned to New Zealand.

PS: Don't worry about the "entering the argument" Tony. I have never mistaken him for a friend!

 

[Amiga500]

Don't get me wrong, I fully agree that teams should be rewarded for being successful but there needs to be a balance between the reward and what the weaker teams get.

They do.

Its called a trophy.

 

[Prestwick]

Do not wish to enter into an argument between friends but have to say that this is my experience of what happens in France.

I too don't wish to step in but echo Tony's thoughts. I think you're seeing a big difference between how the PRL clubs treat players and how the LNR clubs treat theirs. Many PRL clubs like Bath, Saints, Saracens, Tigers have what I'd call comprehensive player well being plans around their players where they work as hard as they can to keep their stars in shape and out of injury and if they do, consult in depth with the RFU (who have also stepped up their game in regards to player welfare) on what course of action to take. Players now get far more help in terms of work experience training so that if the worst does happen they have the skills to make it in "civvy street" so to speak.

Around the time of the demise of the long form agreement, there was mutual distrust between club and RFU over player welfare and I believe both accused the other of not treating players properly. These days there is far more joined up thinking and I think again Andrews, Lancaster and Richie have done amazing things in collaboration with the clubs in protecting and resting England's top stars (and starlets in women's rugby) than we did a decade ago.

Its really sad whats happening in France but sooner or later, when France start to get pummelled by cricket scores in international rugby and when that happens suddenly a lot of the French club owners will start to look a lot less popular.

 

[coolbawn]

So perhaps the more responsible clubs of the EPL have picked a fight with the wrong people by letting the militants in the PRL loose ? Perhaps they should have allied themselves (in behind-the-scene discussions) with like-minded elements in Raboland and France ? Perhaps they have ?

 

[Prestwick]

I honestly don't think that the PRL even had either a coherent PR policy regarding the HEC breakaway or if they did they didn't have the means to keep all the PRL clubs in line.

You can see this on other issues such as the salary cap. There shouldn't be such open disagreement on the cap with guys like Ryan Walkinshaw of Gloucester and Eddie Griffiths of Saracens cynically sticking their oar in especially when PRL had already conducted several excellent and well thought out interviews with the news media.

Letting the owners of Bath, Saracens and others weigh into the argument when Mark McCafferty had already laid out the reasons why PRL were leaving ERC in a concise and sensible manner was a mistake for the PRL/LNR camp.

 

[St George]

Of course there will be some fluke/underdog victories here and there. That's what you get when there are 380 games per season in the Premier League (compared to the Aviva Premiership's 135).

Doesn't change from the fact that there are 3 teams competing for a ***le any given year, and the top 4 remain the same for a better part of a decade each time, and it is mostly based on money.

No way would I like rugby to emulate this.

I take it you do not watch the Rugby World Cup for the very same reason?

 

[Amiga500]

I take it you do not watch the Rugby World Cup for the very same reason?

Are New Zealand the best in the world at rugby because of money?

 

[Packman]

...For me the question is do you want to see plenty of competition of a more meritocracy where the strong get stronger and the weak fall behind. Sport in itself is about the drama of competition and thats what fans love to see. Two evenly matched teams battling it out with no clear cut winner. Why people want to see the strong get stronger and the weak get weaker makes little sense to me. That is anti competitive!


Don't get me wrong, I fully agree that teams should be rewarded for being successful but there needs to be a balance between the reward and what the weaker teams get. Otherwise it'll create a vicious circle like the premiership soccer league where the same teams are on top and will be for the foreseeable future....

That's it in a nutshell. Edinburgh beating Munster and Llanelli beating Quins were the matches of the weekend for me. I love it when the underdog wins. Even Glasgow's amazing fightback was entertaining.

A European cup without the likes of Exeter, Treviso, Connaught and Edinburgh derailing a super-club's ***le ambitions will be a greyer place. The knock on effect on Italy's development the international game would turn test match rugby into a duller spectacle too. Italy have beaten France and Ireland over the last two years. I believe wins like that would not be possible without exposure to the best club competition on the planet. Don't take Europe away from them. Rugby will be the loser.

 

[St George]

Are New Zealand the best in the world at rugby because of money?

Again irrelevant to a reply i have posted to someone else's post. You're very good at that.

For although he mentions money as being a factor, i think it is easy to assume his disdain for the EPL is due to the same teams in the top places each year. So it's blindingly obvious my comment is regarding most peoples view that the same teams win the RWC.

It goes without saying that more money can improve the fortunes of a sporting entitity, whether an individual or as a collective (team). So whether that money comes from a rich private investment, a Union handout, Government, better attendance or success from achievement, etc it can still result in the same teams being at the top of the pile. If people need to see pinnacle success to warrant supporting a team then the whole ethos of sport is lost on them.

As i have mentioned, i am a Leeds United fan, and i supported them during their highly successful 70s period. And still when they were in the 2nd tier for a decade. And still when they gained promotion and went on to win the 1st tier ***le in 92. Still there when they got to the Champions Cup Semis, and then for the next 6yrs as we fell down to the 3rd tier. We are now in the 2nd tier and just a bit of investment away from the playoffs again. That's what being a fan is all about for me.