Maybe this is why I don't get the NH club rugby

[jonny24]

Short people make the best leaders though!

 

[smartcooky]

I think Little Guy is a terrible member. How are we meant to be taken seriously if our staff is admitting to being short.

Are you suggesting that scrum-halves should not be taken seriously?

Hang on, you may have something there!!

 

[Draggs]

Referees and scrum halves is the rugby equivalent of dogs and mailmen

 

[FrenchFan]

This is a very shortsighted response. The point is that the more players you have, the stronger the depth will be for the national team. Probably the evidence that NZ and South Africa has won 2 World Cups and France zip...

>>It is what it is. I cant see why this is a bother to you. If my view is narrowminded, yours barely fits in a keyhole. You cant see beyond your national team. The WC only comes every 4 years, it is simply not possible nor realistic given the structure of the season here to structure everything around the national side or the WC. Considering the demands of the domestic league AND European cups and the poor coaching of the french team over the years, I think Fra has been punching above its weight at Intl level. We cant certainly fill 2 or 3 national teams and we dont need to.

I haven't followed the conversation but of course this is a "non event" as you put it. France could pull out two Tier one level sides, one almost equally as strong as the other, two full 23 sides. I could compose the 23's on demand for fun but again that's not a question. I'm sure England could do it too, I don't know about the rest though...
In fact, for the heck of it, it would be totally awesome if we could make France 1 go against France 2 !...

>>you didnt follow the conversation. NON we cant field 2 or 3 Intl sides like NZ can. But thats OK. We dont need to. This is NOT an issue. Its just Southerners puffing their chest bout their national side. THey're trying to have you believe this is an issue. Its not.

 

[Tony Manx]

I sense another argument about club rugby being more important than International rugby beginning to form.........Oh no it isn't....Oh yes it is.........Oh no it isn't....Oh yes it is.....etc etc

 

[FrenchFan]

Second paragraph DEFINITELY not .
I think a larger league has a better feel to it . Having all the imports isn't having a detrimental affect to the national team so far . Last year was PSAs fault not the talent pool . France are still able to put out a crazily strong team and the top 14 is good to watch .

Everyone's a winner

>>Hurraayyy....yes thank you..what about the fact that the Top14 is also a great product and a great competition to watch
Nobody can call it, and it was the same last year, the top 6 can all win it, it will be a battle until the end. But how many of the ill-informed SH doomsayers are actually wathcing the Top 14, not many...

 

[smartcooky]

>>It is what it is. I cant see why this is a bother to you. If my view is narrowminded, yours barely fits in a keyhole. You cant see beyond your national team. The WC only comes every 4 years, it is simply not possible nor realistic given the structure of the season here to structure everything around the national side or the WC. Considering the demands of the domestic league AND European cups and the poor coaching of the french team over the years, I think Fra has been punching above its weight at Intl level. We cant certainly fill 2 or 3 national teams and we dont need to.

With over 124,000 senior male players (SAF has only 113,000, AUS has only 57,000 and NZL has only 27,000, ) you are punching well below where you should be.

>>you didnt follow the conversation. NON we cant field 2 or 3 Intl sides like NZ can. But thats OK. We dont need to. This is NOT an issue. Its just Southerners puffing their chest bout their national side. THey're trying to have you believe this is an issue. Its not.

The All Black supporter in me wants to see us win the RWC every time its held, but the Rugby fan in me wants to see more than just four teams winning it.

Watching the All Blacks play Ireland on the EYOT was bizarre for me. As the game progressed, I wanted Ireland to win, but at the same time, I didn't want the All Black to lose.

 

[Maverick1987]

>>Hurraayyy....yes thank you..what about the fact that the Top14 is also a great product and a great competition to watch
Nobody can call it, and it was the same last year, the top 6 can all win it, it will be a battle until the end. But how many of the ill-informed SH doomsayers are actually wathcing the Top 14, not many...

There's only 9 points separating 8th and 2nd . I only really watch the highlights but it's seems a high standard league . Obviously it has low scoring games but so does every other league .

 

[Maverick1987]

With over 124,000 senior male players (SAF has only 113,000, AUS has only 57,000 and NZL has only 27,000, ) you are punching well below where you should be.

In your way of thinking everyone is punching below their weight . Just because you have a lot of players doesn't mean you always have the quality . NZ children are all bought up playing rugby , English and French children tend to lean towards football and rugby is mostly the second sport if not lower in these countries . Maybe it's the standard of coaching or something but it's not always as clear cut as you make out

 

[Peat]

I would agree defining a nation's performance as over or underperforming against its absolute potential is pointless. Cultural factors must be counted in.

I also think measuring things by registered players is equally pointless. It just shows the popularity of the sport as something to play as an adult, nothing more, nothing less. A far better measuring stick is "How many kids play and learn the game in an environment where their talent will be maximised?" and we have no figures for that. That's what you need for performance on the international stage. The grass roots game and the elite game are barely connected at the adult stage. It's during childhood it needs to happen.

However... I think even when you've got this measuring stick in place, even allowing for the cultural difference, I'm going to guess England and France will still look like they're underperforming.

 

[jonny24]

Back to the OP, people will support their home team almost no matter what. Certainly not changing due to imports. Hell, the Boston Bruins are one of the most popular hockey teams there are and they only have three Americans on their roster.

 

[smartcooky]

In your way of thinking everyone is punching below their weight . Just because you have a lot of players doesn't mean you always have the quality . NZ children are all bought up playing rugby , English and French children tend to lean towards football and rugby is mostly the second sport if not lower in these countries . Maybe it's the standard of coaching or something but it's not always as clear cut as you make out

OK, take the elite game as a yardstick. France has 30 fully professional teams. How did they go in the Six Nations last year... err last wasn't it?

When was the last time France finished last in the 6N? - Never

When was the last time France finished last in the 5N? (before the introduction of the whipping boys) - 1999 (Scotland won it!)

And before that? - 1969!

FFS, how could a country with 30 fully professional rugby teams, more than any other country in Europe, not be able to find just 22 players good enough to avoid the wooden spoon?

I'll bet the FFR could answer that!!

 

[gaston le gaff]

OK, take the elite game as a yardstick. France has 30 fully professional teams. How did they go in the Six Nations last year... err last wasn't it?

When was the last time France finished last in the 6N? - Never

When was the last time France finished last in the 5N? (before the introduction of the whipping boys) - 1999 (Scotland won it!)

And before that? - 1969!

FFS, how could a country with 30 fully professional rugby teams, more than any other country in Europe, not be able to find just 22 players good enough to avoid the wooden spoon?

I'll bet the FFR could answer that!!

This is beginning to get a little pathetic, so France had one really bad year The All Blacks won the first world cup at home in the 198ies (the year is fading fast), then the last one at home in 2011 both against France in between they have never won anything in World Cups out of New Zealand, is anyone saying New Zealand are shi***, no they are not, they were just not as good as anyone else during 20 odd years when the world cup comes around. We in France have a brilliant TOP 14, and yes the National team is suffering at the moment but for your average rugby follower this is less important than their Top 14 team. Yes we have loads of foreigners, but the quality and competiveness of the games are of a very high standard, between the 2nd and 8th there are just 9 points that is not even 2 bonus point wins, and we are into the 17th day next weekend, nearly 3/4 way through if that is not competion, what is!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Why are you continually knocking the French team over one bad year maybe 2 at the very worst, with the 6 Nationa startig in 2 weeks time if France beat England does that make them again wonderful, no it does not, the system we have in France is different, right or wrong it is enjoyed by all who watch it have a look at the attendances.. Everybody said the All Blacks were the strongest in the world, why did they not win all the World Cups, because it was vertually impossible even for them, but nobody or very few critised their ability, what happens in one country does not always work in another. Everybody wants to critise the French and the TOP 14 AND ITS WICKED WAYS, but funnily enough is is broadcasted live in all the rugby countries of the world i wonder why!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Laissez les Frogs tranquille, they will be back one dayprobably sooner than later !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Rich Taff]

Just wanted to make a comment on the comparison with the NFL.

The NFL owns all the teams, and 'rents' them out as franchises.
This allows them to do something that, I personally feel, is fantastic.
At the end of the season, the worst team is given the number 1 draft pick, 2nd worst 2nd pick etc etc.
This means that teams like the Detroit Lions (who sucked sooooooo badly a few years ago) then got to pick up the best player coming out of college.
It ensures that whilst disparity still exists, there's never such a huge gap with the Superbowl only ever containing the same few teams, and the rest making up the numbers.
Obviously this couldn't work in Rugby/Football etc due to the history of the clubs/regions. As they are privately owned and success is the only thing that matters, the richest get richer and the poorest get poorer. Plus there's no 'Collegiate system' in place.
Hope that made sense.

 

[snoopy snoopy dog dog]

Just wanted to make a comment on the comparison with the NFL.

The NFL owns all the teams, and 'rents' them out as franchises.
This allows them to do something that, I personally feel, is fantastic.
At the end of the season, the worst team is given the number 1 draft pick, 2nd worst 2nd pick etc etc.
This means that teams like the Detroit Lions (who sucked sooooooo badly a few years ago) then got to pick up the best player coming out of college.
It ensures that whilst disparity still exists, there's never such a huge gap with the Superbowl only ever containing the same few teams, and the rest making up the numbers.
Obviously this couldn't work in Rugby/Football etc due to the history of the clubs/regions. As they are privately owned and success is the only thing that matters, the richest get richer and the poorest get poorer. Plus there's no 'Collegiate system' in place.
Hope that made sense.

I think you're slightly out on the ownership model in the NFL but I'm open to correction. Each franchise is privately owned and the franchises make up the league. New franchises can be set up if there's a large majority of acceptance by other teams in the league and it meets certain criteria.

In rugby parlance that would see the Union controlled teams on an equal footing with the privately owned teams eg everyone has a voice and the RFU can't dictate to PRL. Unions and clubs work side by side rather than being at loggerheads with each other. This could be achieved by, say the IRFU being granted 3 or 4 franchises and dividing it however they wish. The RFU are granted 12-14 franchises and grant them to PRL to divide up etc.

The draft system couldn't work in rugby as you rightly say. There are other benefits to it though which would suit rugby:
1. Great "product" for TV which translates into more money for participants.
2. Fewer games means full strength sides play more often. Smaller squads are needed saving money for owners. Every team in every country has the same schedule resulting in no more issues with player release since the club and international calendars don't clash.
3. Opportunity to expand into Eastern Europe and broaden rugby's base. The present model won't allow for strong leagues to pop up elsewhere since the Top 14 especially is too strong financially and will hoover up all talent.

We can have a situation where the sport grows internationally through expansion club teams in Eastern Europe. For example, a Belgian franchise would have a lot of Belgian players in it playing at a higher standard than they are in their domestic league. Private club owners capitalize on this through larger TV deals. Success matters but I'm sure profit matters more to private investors. So many foreign owners are getting involved with lower level Premier League clubs to benefit from it's growing commercial rights, not out of love for Fulham etc and certainly not because they believe their clubs can challenge for honours. I use Belgium as an example in rugby because it has a developed economy and has shown an appetite for rugby in Brussels which is easy to get to from the 6 Nations countries. The same holds for Georgian, Romanian, Spanish, German, Russian, Ukrainian, Portugese, Swiss teams etc. Georgia and Romania remain the best options from a purely rugby point of view.

It's pie in the sky stuff for now but I think in the medium to long term it could be explored to help everyone.

 

[Rich Taff]

I think you're slightly out on the ownership model in the NFL but I'm open to correction. Each franchise is privately owned and the franchises make up the league. New franchises can be set up if there's a large majority of acceptance by other teams in the league and it meets certain criteria.

In rugby parlance that would see the Union controlled teams on an equal footing with the privately owned teams eg everyone has a voice and the RFU can't dictate to PRL. Unions and clubs work side by side rather than being at loggerheads with each other. This could be achieved by, say the IRFU being granted 3 or 4 franchises and dividing it however they wish. The RFU are granted 12-14 franchises and grant them to PRL to divide up etc.

The draft system couldn't work in rugby as you rightly say. There are other benefits to it though which would suit rugby:
1. Great "product" for TV which translates into more money for participants.
2. Fewer games means full strength sides play more often. Smaller squads are needed saving money for owners. Every team in every country has the same schedule resulting in no more issues with player release since the club and international calendars don't clash.
3. Opportunity to expand into Eastern Europe and broaden rugby's base. The present model won't allow for strong leagues to pop up elsewhere since the Top 14 especially is too strong financially and will hoover up all talent.

We can have a situation where the sport grows internationally through expansion club teams in Eastern Europe. For example, a Belgian franchise would have a lot of Belgian players in it playing at a higher standard than they are in their domestic league. Private club owners capitalize on this through larger TV deals. Success matters but I'm sure profit matters more to private investors. So many foreign owners are getting involved with lower level Premier League clubs to benefit from it's growing commercial rights, not out of love for Fulham etc and certainly not because they believe their clubs can challenge for honours. I use Belgium as an example in rugby because it has a developed economy and has shown an appetite for rugby in Brussels which is easy to get to from the 6 Nations countries. The same holds for Georgian, Romanian, Spanish, German, Russian, Ukrainian, Portugese, Swiss teams etc. Georgia and Romania remain the best options from a purely rugby point of view.

It's pie in the sky stuff for now but I think in the medium to long term it could be explored to help everyone.

Yeah, I phrased it incorrectly. Probably should have said the NFL owns the brand, and franchises it out.

Another huge obstacle would be all teams agreeing to the salary cap, which is pretty much the problem facing ERC at the moment (and back onto topic we arrive )

 

[Amiga500]

Another huge obstacle would be all teams agreeing to the salary cap, which is pretty much the problem facing ERC at the moment (and back onto topic we arrive )

Not to mention all teams actually adhering to it - and even worse everyone being happy and comfortable that they do adhere to it.

 

[snoopy snoopy dog dog]

Another huge obstacle would be all teams agreeing to the salary cap, which is pretty much the problem facing ERC at the moment (and back onto topic we arrive )

A salary cap isn't a necessity and wouldn't be a sticking point in negotiations. MLB doesn't have one and the NBA has a "soft" cap (teams can freely go over the cap and pay a luxury tax to the league).

What I want is strong club rugby in all the 6 Nations countries and the season tidied up with fewer games played but at a higher intensity/standard. A Euroleague can do this and also broaden the sport outside it's traditional base. Lack of a salary cap or draft won't detract from it in my opinion.

 

[munstermuffin]

A salary cap isn't a necessity and wouldn't be a sticking point in negotiations. MLB doesn't have one and the NBA has a "soft" cap (teams can freely go over the cap and pay a luxury tax to the league).

What I want is strong club rugby in all the 6 Nations countries and the season tidied up with fewer games played but at a higher intensity/standard. A Euroleague can do this and also broaden the sport outside it's traditional base. Lack of a salary cap or draft won't detract from it in my opinion.

But on that Snoop you'd need to set up a decent reserve type league too

 

[FrenchFan]

This is beginning to get a little pathetic, so France had one really bad year The All Blacks won the first world cup at home in the 198ies (the year is fading fast), then the last one at home in 2011 both against France in between they have never won anything in World Cups out of New Zealand, is anyone saying New Zealand are shi***, no they are not, they were just not as good as anyone else during 20 odd years when the world cup comes around. We in France have a brilliant TOP 14, and yes the National team is suffering at the moment but for your average rugby follower this is less important than their Top 14 team. Yes we have loads of foreigners, but the quality and competiveness of the games are of a very high standard, between the 2nd and 8th there are just 9 points that is not even 2 bonus point wins, and we are into the 17th day next weekend, nearly 3/4 way through if that is not competion, what is!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>absolutely. But this is lost on smartcooky: he/she doesnt watch the Top14. His take is to berate our rugby not engage in meaningful debate.

Why are you continually knocking the French team over one bad year maybe 2 at the very worst, with the 6 Nationa startig in 2 weeks time if France beat England does that make them again wonderful, no it does not, the system we have in France is different, right or wrong it is enjoyed by all who watch it have a look at the attendances.. Everybody said the All Blacks were the strongest in the world, why did they not win all the World Cups, because it was vertually impossible even for them, but nobody or very few critised their ability, what happens in one country does not always work in another. Everybody wants to critise the French and the TOP 14 AND ITS WICKED WAYS, but funnily enough is is broadcasted live in all the rugby countries of the world i wonder why!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Laissez les Frogs tranquille, they will be back one dayprobably sooner than later !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

>>its the insular Kiwi mentality. They think because they have the AB everything should run like NZ. Sheep farmers think that way.

With over 124,000 senior male players (SAF has only 113,000, AUS has only 57,000 and NZL has only 27,000, ) you are punching well below where you should be.



The All Black supporter in me wants to see us win the RWC every time its held, but the Rugby fan in me wants to see more than just four teams winning it.

Watching the All Blacks play Ireland on the EYOT was bizarre for me. As the game progressed, I wanted Ireland to win, but at the same time, I didn't want the All Black to lose.