Euro rugby in crisis
6 Apr 2007
The European Cup was thrown into further disarray when England’s top clubs joined French teams in boycotting next season’s competition.
The clubs reached their decision after the RFU refused to give them a stake in the northern hemisphere’s version of the Super 14. French clubs had voted 14-3 in favour of pulling out earlier on Thursday.
“We are not competing in the European Cups organised by European Rugby Cup. It is non-reversible,” said French National League (LNR) president Serge Blanco.
An agreement for the European Rugby Cup, which has been in place for eight years and does not cover clubs having a stake in the running of the tournament, ends this season. The problem is the RFU refuses to let go of their percentage to the clubs.
A statement issued by Premier Rugby League (PRL) said its members felt it was “appropriate” that clubs should have some say, and that this had been a “fundamental principle” of negotiations for a new agreement which had been going on for over 12 months.
“LNR and PRL both believe a position was clearly reached last year which confirmed that clubs would have a much greater say in any minimum seven-year agreement, and that they would both hold shares in the new ERC,” the statement continuted. “The clubs remain by this position reached in October 2006 as the basis for any future agreement.
“Regrettably, while the Federation Francaise de Rugby (FFR) and the Federazione Italiana Rugby (FIR) have confirmed this position, the Rugby Football Union (RFU) appears no longer to accept this. As a result, LNR and PRL clubs are not willing to participate in the absence of a new agreement based on last year’s position and which is inclusive of all parties.”
79 Comments
Pages: « 1 [2] Show All
6 Apr 2007, 15:04 pm
PissAnt. Do you realy believe that the yanks would buy in to Rugby?
After all soccer has tried and is still largly a woman and childrens game there.
Second question. Is it not our failure to take the game forward in SA that is the route of our problems?
An example is the way the Bulls have lost against the Crusaders in exactly the same manner in the last three games. It is as if nothing was learned.
Would playing in another competition make any difference or is it just a case of punishing the Kiwi’s for playing more intelegently and moving the game on at our expence?
6 Apr 2007, 15:15 pm
Hi all
It is all about viewers. Aussies are not good enough for 4 teams and bonus points need to be awarded for every 2 tries above 4 and so on
6 Apr 2007, 15:18 pm
The Kiwis, have got excellent coaches-SA has not go those
Aussie has got great administration and SA play under qwota restrictions. That is why SA is behind
6 Apr 2007, 15:27 pm
gretep,
It is a bit of a catch 22 in my opinion when trying to asses the strength of rugby outside the current big 5 nations.
I do believe in ‘power in numbers’ to a large extent which is also one of the things I reckon we are doing wrong in SA specifically and might answer your question you asked about the Bulls.
The USA has more registered rugby players than NZ and Aus. The only reason I believe rugby in the USA is not up to standard is simply their exposure to good competitions.
In the USA most of the rugby players are linked to Universities and learning institutions and not so much private clubs or unions. The problem with this is quite obvious – once the guy leaves the institution, he stops playing rugby.
However, if an incentive type competition is created (a professional comp like the S14 or Heineken Cup) more players would attempt to make a career out of it.
It is the step of making the sport move from amateur to professional level where the game struggles – not only in the USA but also in a country like Argentina who cannot offer any incentive or counter to the money European clubs offer these players.
No player WANTS to go and play in a foreign country – but they are in fact – forced to.
Coming back to SA and power in numbers, it is our biggest mistake too.
SA has the second most registered rugby players in World Rugby next to the UK – but the only reason they have more is because of the foreign influence they have which is directly related to the power of the Pound.
It is then very strange that SA, has 5 big unions through which all our rugby is channeled through and developed.
Dont make a mistake to think that the rest of the 14 unions that makes up Saru has any role in this other than breeding these guys who are snapped up by the big 5.
The obvious and most logical problem is this though:
Out of tens of thousands of rugby players in SA, only about 450 will ever see the light of professional rugby and get good coaching and earn enough to make rugby a career – i.e. only 450 players has a realistic chance of making it and developing their game to become world class.
I get to this figure taking our recent most successful professional union the Bulls, who when I last checked had 90 players contracted on their books.
Multiply that and you get to a number of less than 500 if the big 5 follows similar suit.
As an example of what we are missing: The Eastern Cape and Border specifically (if I remember correctly) has over 500 clubs!!! That is massive (I got that from an IOL article last year).
Now lets say for arguments sake we have 20 000 players in SA.
Only 500 gets to develop their game to become world class.
Now how many players are we losing?
How many Naas Botha’s, Dan Carters, Ruben Krugers, Mof Myburgh’s, Frik du Preez’s and the likes are out there that we will never know about or discover because of the systems currently in SA Rugby?
It is sickening for me that as the country with the second most registered players and where rugby is a tradition and religion, we are struggling to find 3 decent number 10′s who can play Super 14 let alone Springbok and World Cup rugby!!!
You say the Bulls make the same mistakes, but so do many other SA teams. The problem is, we make the same mistakes, because we play the same way, with the same type of players and playing styles, under the same type of structures – that we played with 40 years ago!!!
Rugby has evolved and in SA it has stood still.
It is not our talent, we have that in abundance – it is our structures and the centralization of our rugby strength, finances and talent that is holding us back.
Centralization which occurs through the big 5 controlling everything to do with rugby, and not willing to let that power go.
If we de-centralize our resources and strengths SA rugby will be the leader everyone follows.
One thing that always comes to mind when I chat about this is what the Ozzie commentators said a while ago – “The day SA Rugby sort out their problems, no other nation will be able to compete with them.”
With our resources, traditions and natural rugby talent in SA – we should be bigger than what the All Blacks can dream to be.
6 Apr 2007, 15:32 pm
JL1,
I hate the bonus poins system.
In my view it rewards losers and negative rugby.
Rugby is about winning, and if you lose you should not get any points.
Also, once we take this stupid 4 try bonus thing away teams wanting to stop their opposition getting a bonus point (by scoring 4 tries) and this playing very negative rugby – will stop.
6 Apr 2007, 15:41 pm
gotta agree with cane,kiwis arent arogant,except the tackler.but then again no one accepts him.
6 Apr 2007, 16:02 pm
Gentlemen, the dela runs out in 2010.
It was a five year deal.
2006 – 1
2007 – 2
2008 – 3
2009 – 4
2010 – 5
Cane, kiwis ARE the most arrogant people in rugby. BELIEVE me I should know.
6 Apr 2007, 16:03 pm
Heh, thats classic someone called Fern saying kiwis arent arrogant.
Would that be short for Silver fern ?
6 Apr 2007, 16:21 pm
PissAnt 54
Do you maybe think there are troubles at school level coaching (specifically primary) that can maybe be added to your concerns?
I am convinced (from what I have seen in the past and experienced myself) that coaching structures at schools in SA need to be revised and FAST. There are basically no emphasis put on skills development in primary schools – the ball is given to the biggest kid on the park who steamrollers his way over defenders. The smaller kids always play in the shadow of one or two bigger kids, the latter who will normally travel to coaching clinics to improve their game. In short, primary schools suffer from a Bigness mentality.
Furthermore, in high school(specifically in the so-called bigger rugby schools), the structures do not allow kids to enjoy their rugby to the full. And only just are kids allowed to enjoy their rugby at primary school level. Kids are pressurised from numerous angles to deliver, and often resort to using anabolic steroids to get even bigger and stronger. And the gameplan(s) in high school rugby and even at the Craven week also revolve around brute power and one-dimensional attacks.
Of course, I have not even referred to the schools on the interior, where the coaching facilities and expertise are even poorer…and as you state from your USA example, these kids just stop playing the game when they leave school.
The fact that we only have approximately 500 contracted rugby players in the country is shocking; it is a true eye-opener to me. There is no doubt that this is a death sentence to the incentives of other players who want to make it to the higher level. But for me, coaching received in the past at junior levels and the accompanying mentality of rugby at school level is a further problem not to be underestimated. This is something that needs to be addressed and eradicated in expedient fashion.
6 Apr 2007, 16:36 pm
Perhaps teams could get relegated from the Super14s to the European competition if they come last
6 Apr 2007, 16:56 pm
Willie,
Spot on buddy.
It all starts at schools and specifically the way the game is played and coached.
Personally I have a huge problem with that.
As you pointed out, rugby in schools is dominated by size but more concerningly – perception.
If you are really fast as a 10 year old, you play wing.
if you are chubby, you play prop.
If you are tall, you play lock.
Problem is, these kids never develop any other part of their game like kicking, passing, tackling, running (balanced running) etc etc etc when they are categorized as position specific from a very young age.
The FUN factor is also a huge problem.
If you are chubby, or tall, you are a bit of an outcast at school and you are labelled and also labelled in rugby.
No kid wants to play prop!!! Simply because a flyhalf or center is seen as a ‘superstar’ position’ and one all the girls like!!!
So you immediately do not want to be associated with it as a kid cause it is not cool, and everything in school is about being cool.
There is a very simple solution for this imo.
Rugby in schools need to change.
A system where kids 16 and younger needs to be addapted where kids either play a 7, 10 or 12 man game where emphasis is taken away from line-outs and scrums and more geared towards skills such as running, passing, kicking and tacklin – almost league style rugby or Sevens rugby.
This will teach kids of all sizes and shapes to develop basic skills of the game of rugby.
Also remember – these kids are going to grow taller, fatter, thinner, faster as they grow older – no big kid is going to stay big necessarily and thus it is vitally important that he learns all the basic skills we see NZ players being so damn good at from wing to prop.
At age 16 – the kids are then taught position specific skills as they are now older, wiser and more developed physically to more or less see where they will end up playing according to their physique.
I would go one step further here.
kids from age 16 up need to get away from the rugby schooling coaching environment and get involved with clubs or specific rugby schools where qualified coaches are paid to coach players – not part-time teachers suffering from the hitler effect or some oke wanting to live his dream he never accomplished through some school kid.
Kids these days leave school as ‘professional’ rugby players but has no idea what the big bad world out there holds for them.
Start a ‘scholar’ type system ala USA scholarships for Grade 10′s up to Grade 12 pupils in clubs and rugby schools/clinics.
Teaching them not only about rugby but also education/business or any other professional career type scholarship.
People always tell me when I highlight this that there is no money – Bullshit.
For all the money wasted on so-called development in SA and over-blown player salaries for so-called professional players that is anything but professional there is more than enough money.
Everything needs to start at school level, and if clubs get involved with players from ages 16 an up you will see one moer of a change in club rugby in SA too becoming more professional and more proficient.
It is definately the way forward.
6 Apr 2007, 18:14 pm
PissAnt, good points. About the props thing, maybe a campaign at schools level showing the value of a prop? Something highlighting how you maybe can get away with a **** center but how crucial a solid tight 5 is. Maybe even a ‘real men play prop’ campaign
RL, why are you so against New Zealand Rugby? Why do you want to see their demise? Just like I’m sure most All Black supporters like to see their team beat a STRONG Springbok team, It won’t be as valuable for me if I see the Springboks beat a weak All Black team.
Think of how awesome the two 2005 tests between these two sides were.
Rugby needs a healthy Springbok and All Black rivalry, with the rest of the world looking at that in awe and wanting to aspire to that level of competition
.
6 Apr 2007, 18:28 pm
Willievz, PA
Surely the NZ system of weight groups rather than age is the way to go at u/14 level?
BTW
No European Rugby may slow the flow of SA players to Europe for a while. I don’t think the RFU will hold out on their stance for long though.
6 Apr 2007, 19:02 pm
David 63
Yes, that is a step in the right direction I believe. But it does not address the core issue – COACHING…..we have to do something about it expecially at primary school level.
There is a perception in many schooling environments that ALL male teachers know something about rugby, and that they should coach a certain age group. Of course, me and you know better than this…
6 Apr 2007, 19:33 pm
Willie
The problem is the lack of trained coaches at primary level. A solution may be to have a pool of coaches who cover a number of schools. The thing is though, that rugby at this level should be treated purely as a game with the concentration on handling and running, not on contact.
6 Apr 2007, 19:50 pm
David
Of course, I agree 100%…this is the age group where skills development should take place. At the moment our skills development takes place at the highest levels, hence the neglect of this in the lower ranks are evident. Really, at the highest game, skills should only be shaped, not developed.
The road forward is very long and tough for us in this regard.
6 Apr 2007, 22:25 pm
Rugby can, and has, survived and thrived without South African participation in the past. There’s no one country who’s bigger than the game.
So, if the disappointment of never ever having won S12/14 and living ever up to the usual huge pre-season brag burns into the national soul, it’s no remedy to pull out and to play minnow nations in the hope of restoring lost pride.
You have to BEAT the best to BE the best. No short-cuts around this axiom.
7 Apr 2007, 00:09 am
+Tackler, as always, brings his educated solution to every problem
7 Apr 2007, 01:29 am
As ever.
7 Apr 2007, 01:46 am
Thanks
7 Apr 2007, 02:34 am
You’re welcome. We do our best, you know!
7 Apr 2007, 03:23 am
Oh yes, I know
That’s why my gut feeling tells me that NZ will be the big surprize at the CWC, with Bond currently having the best average and economy rate
That’s why NZ will have 2 teams in this year’s S14 final
That’s why there will be no competition for NZ in France
And all that because they belief in their abilities and enjoy what they are doing
7 Apr 2007, 04:02 am
Nope. The Baggy Greens will retain the CWC because they’re the best at cricket. It’s that simple.
That’s exactly why beating Oz at cricket is so sweet — you know you’ve beaten the very best there is. Same applies to beating the AB’s at rugby.
Can’t be fairer than that.
7 Apr 2007, 05:36 am
Yeah, even if someone else wins the CWC, we all know Australia is the team to beat.
If theres no super 14, I guess it’ll just make the NPC a lot stronger ?
7 Apr 2007, 06:28 am
Maybe all this posturing and politics will end up in mess or perhaps some good will come out of it. One global season, gate takings being split more evenly and perhaps a step back to more tours. Clubs however, especially in the NH are based on buying in players and are very soccer like in their focus. The most successful rugby “club” the Crusaders has developed world class players from within, created a rugby family and has the results to go with it. Look at NSW who with the ARU’s blessing spent more money on league players than anyone else, has the biggest base and cant get results – compare that to Brumbies again a develop from the ground up or the Force who according to Mitchell is based on the Crusaders way of doing things.
SA rugby is in turmoil over internal issues and they wont go away playing Pommie clubs. The NH clubs have essentially eroded the international teams especially in the Uk and with the new TV deal for France that will happen there too. NZ took their top 22 players out and have created at least 6 top class players who were previously undiscovered.
7 Apr 2007, 07:11 am
75. kiwi in Oz
The Crusaders are great at making people think they are a local team, but many of their most loyal stars are from outside the Franchise catchment and 19 of the current Crusaders squad are not local lads.
7 Apr 2007, 11:40 am
maybe traditional rugby schools such as paarl boys,affies and grey should be run as clubs so that all youngsters could be included not only the wealthy ones
8 Apr 2007, 02:16 am
The “outsiders” who don’t actually attend Boishaai, Affies, Grey etc and actually get taught their woodwork or history or maths by the same master who also happens to coach the 1st XV are going to feel rather “left out”, and they will surely run and grizzle about all their grievances to someone like Butane Kompeller if they get dropped down to the 2nd or 3rd or 7th XV…
21 May 2007, 05:55 am
62 => The rivalry you mention is of the former times when ABs and SBs play each other once every 3 or 4 years. Nowadays this happens so frequently that this looks very ordinary and the rivalry has vanished for 4 or 5 years I would say.
Although considered to be of the highest level that test rugby can achieve the ABs-SBs test matchs don’t have the same appeal in Europe as le Crunch for example which benefits of a very long tradition. That’s a pity but that’s what happens when a so far extraordinary event becomes very usual.
Pages: « 1 [2] Show All
Have your say
You must be logged in to post a comment.