It seems that no agreement could be reached to ensure the future of the ERC.
This sees the breakaway of English and French clubs at the end of the current season.
This break away seems to have the European club rugby sector in some turmoil as no one is sure what the next step should.
There are talks of forming 2 new competitions with 20 teams each from the existing 6 nations.
The French again confirmed that they will not play in any competitions that does not include English sides.
The French and English clubs are pushing Premiership Rugby toe create a new competition for 2014/15 as soon as possible.
Rumour has it that they are looking into a global competition. A competition that will be available to teams from any nation.
Could this be the end to all current competitions and see a lot of teams going over to a global competition.
If it does go that far it would be interesting to see how countries using central contracting will handle this scenario.
From Dublin:
All parties reaffirm commitment to ERC negotiations
Despite recent reports, all parties involved in the formulation of a new ERC Accord, including the Ligue Nationale de Rugby (LNR) and Premiership Rugby, have reaffirmed their commitment to the process. A meeting focused solely on the negotiations will be convened by ERC as soon as practicable.
It was agreed at a scheduled ERC Board meeting in Dublin today (Wednesday, 11 September 2013) that ERC would facilitate the discussions and that the current points of difference, including the share of central revenues, qualification and season dates, would all be on the table.
The Board reiterated that European club competitions must be organised by ERC and that any purported cross-border club tournaments needed the approval both of the IRB, and of the relevant Unions who are shareholders of ERC.
Surprise was expressed at the timing and content of yesterday’s media announcements by the Ligue Nationale de Rugby (LNR) and Premiership Rugby, and representatives of both bodies were invited to explain their positions.
It was pointed out that there was a range of proposals made by stakeholders, none of which were acceptable to all parties, and it was agreed that the negotiations towards a definitive solution needed to begin again in earnest.
Attendees at today’s ERC Board meeting
Jean-Pierre Lux (ERC Chairman)
René Bouscatel (Ligue Nationale de Rugby)
Olivier Keraudren (Federation Française de Rugby)
Philip Browne (Irish Rugby Football Union)
Peter Boyle (Irish Rugby Football Union)
Peter Wheeler (Premiership Rugby)
Roy Headey (Rugby Football Union)
Ian McLauchlan (Scottish Rugby)
Dominic McKay (Scottish Rugby)
Roger Lewis (Welsh Rugby Union)
Stuart Gallacher (Regional Rugby Wales)
Fabrizio Gaetaniello (Federazione Italiana Rugby)
SARU would do well to consider particpating in BOTH Super Rugby, as well as in the new British Telecom sponsored Series with English & French Clubs from 2014-2016 – South Africa has sufficient depth for each of the 6 franchises to have two teams participating in the NH & SH to derive double the income & revenue from broadcast, sponsors & advertisers – putting South African Rugby as the most powerful financial entity in rugby.
From Dublin:
All parties reaffirm commitment to ERC negotiations
Despite recent reports, all parties involved in the formulation of a new ERC Accord, including the Ligue Nationale de Rugby (LNR) and Premiership Rugby, have reaffirmed their commitment to the process. A meeting focused solely on the negotiations will be convened by ERC as soon as practicable.
It was agreed at a scheduled ERC Board meeting in Dublin today (Wednesday, 11 September 2013) that ERC would facilitate the discussions and that the current points of difference, including the share of central revenues, qualification and season dates, would all be on the table.
The Board reiterated that European club competitions must be organised by ERC and that any purported cross-border club tournaments needed the approval both of the IRB, and of the relevant Unions who are shareholders of ERC.
Surprise was expressed at the timing and content of yesterday’s media announcements by the Ligue Nationale de Rugby (LNR) and Premiership Rugby, and representatives of both bodies were invited to explain their positions.
It was pointed out that there was a range of proposals made by stakeholders, none of which were acceptable to all parties, and it was agreed that the negotiations towards a definitive solution needed to begin again in earnest.
Attendees at today’s ERC Board meeting
Jean-Pierre Lux (ERC Chairman)
René Bouscatel (Ligue Nationale de Rugby)
Olivier Keraudren (Federation Française de Rugby)
Philip Browne (Irish Rugby Football Union)
Peter Boyle (Irish Rugby Football Union)
Peter Wheeler (Premiership Rugby)
Roy Headey (Rugby Football Union)
Ian McLauchlan (Scottish Rugby)
Dominic McKay (Scottish Rugby)
Roger Lewis (Welsh Rugby Union)
Stuart Gallacher (Regional Rugby Wales)
Fabrizio Gaetaniello (Federazione Italiana Rugby)
SARU would do well to consider participating in BOTH Super Rugby, as well as in the new British Telecom sponsored Series with English & French Clubs from 2014-2016 – South Africa has sufficient depth for each of the 6 franchises to have two teams participating in the NH & SH to derive double the income & revenue from broadcast, sponsors & advertisers – putting South African Rugby as the most powerful financial entity in rugby.
There was a good article on the old Voldy that gave 8 reason why SA should go north. The author, the founder of the site, actually made a good argument for SA to go north. It won’t be a bad idea for SA. Good viewing times, similar time zones and of course the lure of the Euro and Pound. And a fresh, new competition. And some of the allure of the past in test matches between SA and NZ would return.
3 @ Lion4ever:
For a European Competition, which includes ANY Southern Hemisphere participation, to take place, a Global Season would have to be addressed first.
When will this competition run? August till March?
Whilst time zones, flight times, broadcasting slots and the financial implications are concerned, it makes sense… there are just many stumbling blocks which need to be gotten out of the way first!
I am not familiar with the “old Voldy” site – please supply a link
Thanks
It is a good argument – but it excludes SANZAR the historical well from which SARU draws its funds from and it would serve no purpose to leave NZ & OZ out on their own – they need us & they know it.
So why not establish another well in the NH from which to underwrite South African Rugby?
This would be developing South African rugby into a super power.
Rather than be strategically out thought in 2009 and again in 2013/4 open up the markets for broadcasters and multinational corporates like any multi-national (with savvy) would do.
@ TonyM:
I agree with your idea. There will be some logistical issues, but that can be sorted. This can make SA a rugby super power.
6 @ TonyM:
How do you see or propose we get past playing too much rugby in such a scenario… and how does one curb player fatigue.
I’m not against the idea, understand me well.
It might mean that the Currie Cup would have to fall away, alternatively that both the Vodacom Cup and Currie Cup fall away.
4 @ grootblousmile:
Better for the NH clubs to play in their summer.
Reasoons are twofold.
1. UK and (most of ) France’s summer is not too hot to make Rugby unplayable.
2. Take the focus of Rugby Union away from the congested soccer period over November – March. So allowing Rugby Union to gain some spectators hat might otherwise watch the round ball game.
Rugby League changed to a summer sport in UK quite a few years ago and it has arguably helped save the sport and even help it grow in the South.
@ grootblousmile:
There is the Heineken Cup void to fill.
SA has more players in Europe than any other nation.
We have a 6th franchise looking to play in 2014 and beyond.
We have over 800,000 registered players with a stream heading offshore.
To play in Super Rugby and in the “BT Sport” with 180 players in each is only a total of 360 players, at the same time suits us and gives our elite South African players in the Vodacom Cup, ABSA Currie Cup, Super Rugby & BT Sport huge opportunity to play domestic and international rugby in Southern & Northern Hemispheres.
SA players add value to the NH & SH tournaments – just look at Ireland, Scotland, Premiership & France.
Time this is all put together so that instead of watching regional NZ matches broadcast here, or Australian Rules, we watch our boys in Europe playing rugby for their SA based teams.
Greater inventory, greater content, more airtime, more players, more sponsors, more advertisers, more games, more profitable unions.
Now this is a rugby administrator:
http://www.espnscrum.com/heineken-cup-2013-14/rugby/story/198083.html
“We need to make sure our clubs and players have cross-border competitions of integrity and value so that whether it is Geoff Parling, Manu Tuilagi, Owen Farrell or George Ford – they are in competition against teams that will contain players who they might meet on the international stage,” he said. “We want a dynamic tournament that is of benefit to the English game.
“Second, we must do something of commercial value to the clubs for their welfare and sustainability. Most of our clubs are losing money.
He added: “All we are seeking is a competition that is fairly and competitive structured – both in terms of qualification and seeding – and equal distribution of the revenue. The ERC is controlled by the unions and yet it is really the French and English clubs in their numbers that give it real value in terms of viewing public, wider broadcasting and sponsors.
“So we have been bold. We have put a stake in the ground with the French. Instead of shilly-shallying, we have said: ‘OK everybody, someone is going to have to move on this otherwise we will have another seven months of wafting.'”
Premiership Rugby’s hardline stance has also been echoed by their French counterparts. “There is no threat not to participate in the European Cup, we will not participate,” LNR president Paul Goze told Rugby365.fr. “The decision was taken not to play the competition in the current configuration.”
On the subject of the proposed re-vamp of the existing competition he said: “Our model puts everyone on an equal footing. The presidents of the Top 14 all gave us their approval.”
Any new tournament has to be sanctioned by the unions and International Rugby Board but Goze is also confident that the clubs will dictate the future. “The IRB will not oppose this new competition, the clubs are masters of the situation,” he said. “I think that there is no alternative.”
10 @ TonyM:
I hear you… but do you want Northern Hemisphere based Saffas only to compete in that format?
Would they then have to form SA Europe based Clubs?
Put it this way, unless there is a Global Season, I do not see sides based in South Africa competing in this new format.
@ TonyM:
At least the French and English (seem to) have the testes to DO WHAT IS RIGHT for their players and clubs.
Something that the people running SARU seem either incapable or unable to do.
@ TonyM:
So for each franchise to have two teams competing in each tourney that would mean we have to have at least 80 players of international standard. A squad of 40 for each tourney. Where do you think we will get them? This year my Sharks had so many injuries and we had to loan players from the Lions to be competitive. We simply did not have enough players to fill the gaps where the injured left.
Also the players we got from everhwhere eventually not just the Lions, not all of them were of the same quality of the players that were injured. NOT talking about the Lions players are they were of same quality.
I doubt it will work unless we had that amount of players of quality in each franchise. For starters the Vodacom will have to fall away and we bring in those players. Are they of international quality? They might be to send to the north to play.
Also where would the TOP players want to play? The north would be easier for them and so the money. So then would we be sending the weaker team to play in SR where they will be thrashed? As that is where the strongest teams are playing. Would NZAR want the under strength Saffa teams there? I doubt it very much.
It is a nice idea but would not work. Someone on The Roar suggested yesterday we send 3 of our Super Rugby teams up north and the other 3 to play in SR. Then we have enough players, however, that too will never work.
Think we will stay in the sh where the rugby is better for us. Sure the financial part is better going north but never the standard of rugby. Not from I have seen.
@ Puma:
Sorry in a teleconference so making mistakes again.
2nd Paragraph should read: NOT talking about the Lions players AS they were of the same quality.
@ Puma:
PUMA – a multitasker!
All good points that have to be considered.
The problem with not only the Sharks but the other franchises is that the same players are being played week in and week out and that is not right on the players and their careers are ended via injury.
This is a debate for sure but each of the 6 franchises has around 100 elite players and one can field two squads quite easily from this to play a NH and a SH tournament.
The question of which players to field will centre around weather conditions and particularly the rotation of players in these two tournaments so they are all rested, not just a few and that they can play an optimum game.
This format will upskill and bring through more elite rugby players that are now currently lost to the regions because positions are being held by a few.
I can assure you that behind every Sharks player in every position, there are another 4 of equal ablity & skill or about 5-10% off on experience. So now with more game time to a greater pool comes more experience.
I think the other way to look at this scenario is that let take the top 6 teams in SA. Bulls, Kings, Lions, Sharks, Stormers & Cheetahs. Cancel the vodacom cup competition. En have the currie cup run parallel with the new global competition.
Much like the Ausies and Kiwi’s do with the Bledisloe cup.
Then the bigger unions should draw in the players from lower ranked teams like the falke, pumas, bulldogs ext.
This way by the time we have bok selection, you have 13 or 14 players in each postitions to choose from with international rugby experience. So if the big six can each have two teams playing one in the super series and one in the global competition with players contracted from smaller clubs in SA then we will develop so much depth and not overplay players. But to ensure that players do not get overplayed they will still have to enforce a system where player are limited to so many minutes ext. And if a player plays this much minutes in one competition he can not play in the other ext.
But as a whole if SA can manage to get only two teams into this competition, it will still be a win win. As depth is created for the Boks. With 2 teams you are already looking at 44 players exstra to choose from at the least.
16 @ TonyM:
Tony, you seem to be touting basically 12 SA Franchise teams (or the like in player numbers anyway), when in fact a lot doubt we have enough quality players IN South Africa to make up a competative 6-Franchise Super Rugby scenario.
Basically you go to 360 Players when some doubt that SA should field 180.
Whereas there is logic in competing with the North, something will have to give somewhere, in other words weaken the squads participating in the Southern Hemisphere competitions OR send weakened sides to compete in the Northern competitions.
One simply cannot have your bread buttered both sides, that is the reality.
Just look at the difference in class between the top SA Super Rugby squads compared to the bottom SA Currie Cup First Division sides, it is a vast chasm!
One simply also cannot have NO OFF SEASON, there has to be a window of rest at the end of the season… no player will play all year round and be happy. The general consensus by players and administrators is the same, the season is too full already!
@ grootblousmile:
And GBS you have left out all the South African players abroad.
These seasons overlap from Feb-March only – think about it rotation of 360 players is the way to go.
19 @ TonyM:
Yes, but they play for Euro & UK & Japanese Clubs… how do you entice them back to SA based Provinces without breaking the bank?
In fact, they will be inside and part of some of the opposition you envisage…
Getting these Saffas back is largely an unrealisable expectation, it is a nice pipe dream though!
There is so much up in the air at the moment with the club rugby over here. Added to all this commotion about the European (Heineken) Cup that has been dragging on for a while is the uncertainty that the ‘Celtic league’ (currently known as the RaboDirect PRO12) teams have with this being the last season that the Rabo group will be sponsoring it. So a new sponsor has to be found for this 12 team club competition that has teams from Ireland, Italy, Wales and Scotland playing in.
I really don’t know what the ideal answer to all of this is, I guess if I did I would be earning a lot as part of the negotiating teams, but anyway one thing am not too pleased about is this possible break away from European rugby by English and French clubs, especially if its to the detriment of Scottish rugby, it would be a competition that I would struggle to support or promote.
16 @ TonyM:
Tony it simply would not work mate. It is a great idea just not gonna work at all.
Look no way at all do we have the international quality of players for each team to have 80 players for two tournements.
If we did get ourselves into the north and the SR then I can tell you the best will want to go north. Simply because of the money and less travel. However, the rugby there is not of the same standard as in SR. Where it is a much faster powerful game. So if we had to send our weaker players off to play the kiwi sides we would be gifting them at least 60 points most of the time. We would be smashed to smithereens. NZ and Oz would drop us on our backsides of we sent poor sides like that over there. Also think about it. Who will even want to turn on the tv to watch such lopsided games? NOT one person. The Broadcasters will think it was a flop as well and might pull out. No mate it will not work at all.
We do have depth here, but in all levels. Our Vodacom cup brings players up to CC level. Our CC level eventually brings players upto Super Rugby level. We simply don’t have 80 players for each franchise at Super Rugby level.
Just look at my Sharks now. We without so many of our Bok players and we only just hanging on by our teeth to stay in the top 4 in CC. We have lost 11 players and it has been hard to fill the gaps. The good thing is we are giving players a chance to play and some, not all, will be ready for SR next year. Right now we struggling without our big players. Alberts, Marcell, Beast, Jannie and Bissie. We simply do not have like for like replacements. I worry for Deysel as well, he is not being rotated as we just do not have another big ball carrier in his class with the Boks out. So how on earth will be able to suddenly have two set of international teams to go north and south? Nah, it is a pipe dream mate.
We simply have to negotiate a good deal for ourselves in SR for after 2015. We only (all of us) head north if the Aussies and Kiwis insist we get lumped only with Arg. That will never do. Then we cut ties in SR and head north, that would be 2nd best for our rugby. As the rugby played here in the south is of a higher standard. Especially SA and in NZ.
@ Puma:
PUMA – this is succession planning and it especially shows with the Sharks, now that you feel the pain, because of the exit of 6 players the team is taking strain to perform. The management of the elite players is key.
The Sharks have an outstanding Academy and a few of the elite players make it across to the IRA as a finishing school. However, the elite pool is kept too small.
So in the scenario of a Heineken Cup replacement tournament plus a Super Rugby tournament there is only a 2 month overlap so you can spread your elite and pool of players into each of the tournaments.
I grant you that the visionaries do not exist in our rugby administration but here is an opportunity to at the very least open a dialogue with the NH to seek out a European tournament that includes our SA teams. New markets new broadcasters and increased audiences will amp up the revenues for SA rugby and its struggling unions.
24 @ TonyM:
You do not address the required OFF SEASON of 2 months, each hemisphere has… and the player organisations stance on that issue is clear… there will be NOT MORE RUGBY and there will be an OFF SEASON.
Your solution is flawed to the bone, it is undoable, unrealistic.
@ grootblousmile:
I am with you on this, would absolutely love for it to work… but so far it just does not seem practical as either the North or South would have to make sacrifices.
The French and the English wont give an inch.
26 @ MacroBull:
Part of the solution lies in the Global Season, cut in such a way that Northern Hemisphere Rugby is played along the time frame and lines of the Southern Hemisphere season and not the other way round.
It would mean a global rest period over the Festive Season and it would largely suit weather conditions in Europe (not totally mind you).
Once a Global Season is defined, THEN and ONLY THEN can cross Hemisphere Competition solutions become a true reality, otherwise one lot would always be at a disadvantage.
@ grootblousmile:
Feisty GBS………….must be that Blue Bull blood………..there is an OFF season and that will be applied – has to be – but not TWO months but ONE month.
Just yesterday the Tigers endorsed the new proposed NH UK/France/Other Nations tournament and more will follow.
Now GBS assume you are at the negotiating tables – one in Sydney with Greg Peters and Co and a week later with Mark McCafferty & Co at Premiership.
Background to this is you only made R6m profit on R648m last year and NZ & OZ are resisting the natural expansion of South African franchises and are only paying lip service to include all 6 franchises and Mark McCafferty has 152m from BT Sport OR R2.4 billion to make this happen.
This should be getting the best deal for South African rugby players fans and sponsors.
The death of the Heineken Cup and the announcement of an Anglo-French breakaway is the culmination of a number of years of dissatisfaction on the part of the English and French clubs over the way the competition is run.
They have had a series of long-standing concerns.
For one, there is the issue of the qualification process. They are unhappy that their system is based purely on merit via league positions, whereas the same does not apply in the Pro12. In particular, they are unhappy that the four Scottish and Italian teams qualify for the Heineken Cup regardless of where they finish in the table.
The English and French have long called for a system of meritocracy to be introduced to the Pro12. They argue the absence of such a system puts them at a disadvantage as they are unable to rest players from league matches in order to keep them fresh for the Heineken in the way that PRO12 teams can do because of the lack of pressure over qualification.
Secondly, there is the issue of the distribution of competition revenue. The same with SANZAR although Hoskins and Marinos surrendered R125m to NZ & OZ – now we have chance to claw this back. See the parallels below as the irony here is that SA should be back to its 38.2% of the pot and not the 1/3 each that O’Neill and Tew shoved at Hoskins and Marinos in Dublin in 2009.
Currently, the Pro12 clubs receive 52 per cent of the funding, with the English and French receiving 24 per cent each.
That has seen the Pro12 clubs benefit to the tune of £25.5m over the last five years, according to calculations from Premiership Rugby, the umbrella organisation for the English top-flight clubs.
The English and French clubs have long been calling for an equal three-way split in funding between the three participating leagues.
Finally, there is the way the competition is run by organisers ERC.
The English and French clubs don’t believe it is governed well and they feel its value is not fully exploited commercially by the Dublin-based body.
All these continuing concerns reached a head in June 2012 when they gave two years’ notice of their withdrawal from the European club competitions run by ERC.
They were delivering a clear warning that they would not be taking part in the Heineken Cup after 2014 unless radical changes were implemented.
WHAT HAS HAPPENED SINCE THEN?
Many people saw the proclamation from the English and French as mere sabre rattling and that they would not go ahead with their threat to walk away.
And that may well have been the case had not BT entered the equation and changed everything.
Unhappy with the commercial value ERC were extracting from the Heineken Cup, the English clubs looked to find out just what it was worth. The answer they received from BT was jaw-dropping.
In September of last year, the end-result of these behind-the-scenes talks hit the headlines in dramatic fashion.
Premiership Rugby announced they had signed a new four-year TV deal with BT Sport which included the rights to show English clubs’ European games. They claimed the deal, worth £152m, was 50 per cent better than the offer from existing Heineken Cup broadcasters Sky.
ERC immediately responded by claiming Premiership Rugby did not have the rights to a European competition to sell and announced their own new four-year deal with Sky.
Effectively what you had was two TV deals for a competition that was in serious danger of no longer existing after the 2013-14 season.
The question was could agreement be reached to save that tournament?
With the TV money in the bag, the English, backed by the French, presented their proposals for a new-look Euro landscape.
WHAT WERE THE PROPOSALS FROM THE ENGLISH AND THE FRENCH?
They wanted to see the Heineken Cup reduced from its current 24-team format to a 20-side event.
That would be made up of six teams from each of the three main European leagues – the Aviva Premiership, the French Top 14 and the RaboDirect Pro12.
The remaining two places would be filled by the winners of the Heineken Cup and the Amlin Challenge Cup, which would have a revamped 20-team format as well.
The English and French were also demanding a change to the qualification process from the Pro12, so that it would be merit-based. That could either mean the top-six finishers qualifying for the Heineken Cup regardless of what country they were from or just one guaranteed qualifier from Wales, Ireland, Scotland and Italy, with the two remaining slots decided on merit.
They were also insisting on a change in the way the revenue from European competition was divided, so there should be an even three-way split between the three leagues rather than the current arrangement of 52 per cent going to the Pro12 countries and 24 per cent to them.
Such a change would see the English and French being the primary beneficiaries from the injection of the new BT cash.
According to reports, the Aviva Premiership and Top14 clubs would each gain around £14m (up from £10.56 to £24m), while the four Pro12 countries combined would get just over an extra £1m (up from £22.8m to £24m).
That would, in theory, work out as around £250,000 a year more for Wales, Ireland, Scotland and Italy or, for example, about £60,000 more for each of the four Welsh regions.
The English-French proposals have failed to meet with the approval of the Pro12 countries, with numerous off-the-fields talks delivering no sign of an end to the impasse.
While there has been much focus on the qualification issue, it would seem it’s the financial split that’s the real stumbling block. It would appear to offer limited incentive for the PRO12 countries to accept a significantly reduced involvement in Europe’s elite competition.
As ever, money looks to be at the root of the problem and SARU needs to find a way to participate in both Hemispheres for the sake of growing our game regionally nationally and through to 2023.
Phew.
28 @ TonyM:
Great insight into the positions up north, the current stance in negotiations, and the financial implications!
So, the question is now, what would you propose as a South African model / concept / proposal to get in here and share in this wonderful bag of tricks? I am directly asking you to put a model forward for this to happen.
Then, in this model, what are the implications for SA regarding:
1. SA Teams to participate… and exactly how many team spots for SA
2. Rugby Season changes, SA Competitions at stake or to fall away (eg Vodacom Cup, Currie Cup ect)
3. Continued participation in competitions down South (Super Rugby, The Rugby Championship)
4. Stretching of player resources in SA and fatigue levels
5. South African players abroad and EXACTLY where they would fit into the structures
6. SARU’s ability or inability to negotiate this deal
7. SA Broadcasters
8. SA Sponsors
9. Southern Hemisphere Sponsors and broadcasters in general and their views to this
10. Watering down of the quality of Super Rugby and Super Rugby quality squads in overlapping periods
11. How to bring more “lower quality” SA players through to bolster the needed and required numbers who will have to participate
12. Initial funding of these fundamental changes, structures… and funding of the Franchises / Provinces who will have to take part
13. Qualifying format of SA sides (seeing as there is already a problem with Celtic League qualifying)
14. Additional things I might have overlooked in brief
Looking at the broad spectrum, these questions:
1. Does this then suddenly exclude Celtic League participation in this new structure to make place for 6 SA Franchises (if it’s going to equal the French and English models)?
2. What should the overall format of the competition be… 3 Pools, how many games and where will they be held?
3. From when till when will this be played?
4. When will the off-season be and will it be different for up north (middle of the year) versus south (Festive season)?
5. Is there a widely accepted want or urge from the Provinces / Franchises as well as SARPA in SA to embrace this monumental change, as it stands now, or will that have to be overcome and cultivated too?
6. Is there a collective will at SARU to make something like this happen?
7. Is there a collective will and eagreness by the French and English to embrace South Africa into the format, yet shun Australia and new Zealand from it?
8. How does this globally benefit / affect rugby… and here I am not only referring to the exclusion of the Anzac brothers down under… it will materially affect the Celtic League Nations, Argentina and the rest of the awakening European Rugby powers?
9. Is this not almost equal to totally re-writing the global rugby structures and landscape and a mammoth task which would rather be tackled piece by piece over a number of phased in years to make it more workable OR can this be done in one foul sweep?
I’m very, very keen to see how you envisage a possible format / solution / workable proposal to achieve this… then maybe it could be delivered to the right hands for taking it much further…
Earning all those Euros and Pounds sounds marvelous… but at what cost… and is it ultimately doable?
Oh yes… and just a final note, I am a bit feisty at times, I apologise for that… but the passion for the game makes me do it!
the NH teams wont want to travel to south africa.
Users Online
Total 224 users including 0 member, 224 guests, 0 bot online
Most users ever online were 3735, on 31 August 2022 @ 6:23 pm
No Counter as from 31 October 2009: 41,335,757 Page Impressions
_