Comments on: Aviva Premiership clubs in new plan to ring-fence competition

By: Mig Dennis

Mig Dennis — Mon, 02 Mar 2015 14:25:58 +0000

David Flatman has come out with the suggestion that the AV should be ring fenced for a period of 5 years and then a review carried to see whether promotion/relegation is a viable option .It clearly is not working at the moment

By: Mig Dennis

Mig Dennis — Fri, 27 Feb 2015 18:48:08 +0000

actually those at the bottom play not to lose ,which is different.This season has been a bit different because its been pretty much on the cards tor some time hat LW would face relegation which takes the pressure off the teams above .Without that fear teams can express themselves more freely, pretty much as the Falcons have been doing, despite result not going their way.

By: brighty

brighty — Fri, 27 Feb 2015 11:32:28 +0000

With the whole European cup restructure discussion much was made about the deficiencies of the Pro 12 – a main one being the lack of relegation and the assumption this means loads of dead rubbers, etc. I therefore fully expect most people to now think the AP will be a poorer league.

By: Leon

Leon — Fri, 27 Feb 2015 11:15:47 +0000

Pablito I could not agree more with your statement above.
It seems to me that these talks are a knee jerk reaction to London Welsh’s poor season when really that was a result of your last two points combined with Welsh bringing in 15+ journeymen who failed to perform as well as the players that won them promotion in the first place.
If Worcester get promoted this year I think they will ocme back leaner fitter stronger as a result.
Newcastle’s change in form / style is less a result of lack of relegation fear and more as a result of their new surface and a change in style to suit.

p.s. earlier i was not actually suggesting we bring back the pilkington cup, as it would be too many games, just refferencing the FA cup as the great underdog story. I realise that the gulf in rugby is far greater than football, where one lucky goal can swing a game, but I don’t think that is a reason to stop lower league teams from having aspirations to challenge themselves against better teams. I remeber Saints getting the shock of their life when Moseley decimated their pack in the pilkington cup with fond memories and im a Saints fan.

By: Pablito

Pablito — Fri, 27 Feb 2015 10:53:28 +0000

Idiotic idea. As it is every time its floated.

Do this and we can say goodbye to stories like Exeter’s, fighting their way up from the lower league and adding excitement and a whole new geographical base of fans to the Premiership

We can say goodbye to the drama of relegation that can see such great clubs as Harlequins and Northampton fall from grace and yet come back again – leaner, fitter and stronger for their experience

We can say hello to largely meaningless matches in the bottom half of the table which in turn will lead to lower crowds at those clubs, less local interest in the club and therefore less money being taken

Should people not want another London Welsh, then there are 2 solutions. 1. Scrap the silly play-off system in the championship so a club has to be consistently top across the season 2. Give the club coming up the same amount of money as the other premiership clubs receive – not £3 mil less

By: Mike

Mike — Fri, 27 Feb 2015 10:43:33 +0000

Leon, unfortunately the romance of the FA Cup in rugby would be “the romance of 15 first team injuries”. the gulf between London Welsh and the rest of the premiership is a stark example of what an open league competition would be. The difference being that Welsh is professional so has professional conditioning and medical teams. While endless drubbings are not necessarily a reason not to have the competition, injuries would be.

That aside, the difference in funding is a disgrace. All teams in the premiership should receive the same funding each season. Additional funding should be on the basis of results (such as ECC qualification, or play-off placing).

I am interested in the idea of a closed competition. But like you I am concerned about the length of a 14 team season. The problem is the additional games on top of the regular season. would a closed league mean they can support bigger squads, and are not under such pressure to play a top team at all times. Then set player match limits (excluding or including internationals?), or exclude players from playing in both LV games and ECC games.

NZ run a very effective two tier system. The ITM sits below the Super 15, but is separate. In fact the ITM teams are feeder clubs, and some/most? of the super league players will take part in ITM season. IF the Aviva is closed then we must move towards this format to keep the lower leagues engaged.

Additionally a 3 or 5 year “franchise review” can allow for underperforming clubs to be replaced by top clubs in league 1

By: twelvestocks

twelvestocks — Fri, 27 Feb 2015 10:30:42 +0000

The AP expand the number of teams, meanwhile all the safety talk is about making sure that players play less rugby. A circle to be squared.

That said I think some kind of franchise structure without promotion and relegation has to come in at some stage.

By: Jacob

Jacob — Fri, 27 Feb 2015 09:56:23 +0000

At first glance I’m always against this – but I think I’ve changed my mind.

I don’t buy the “allows teams to play better rugby” nonsense. Load of rubbish. We’ve essentially played this season without a chance of relegation for the teams and no one has played a different brand of rugby. They play to win still, as normal in professional sport.

In terms of the infrastructure of professional rugby, I think this would benefit clubs invest in the long term. In facilities, in their academies. Clubs can’t spent money in those areas because short term investments are always coming first.

I’m also desperate to never see another repeat of what we’ve had with Welsh this season. Awful.

By: Leon

Leon — Fri, 27 Feb 2015 09:40:32 +0000

Lower level teams must always have aspirations to better themselves we already have done away with any sort of cup competition which allows them to pit themselves against the best and the sport is poorer for it. You just need to take a look at the world of football and the romance of the FA cup to see what it means for a lower league team to have that opportunity.

Also on a seperate point I would rather not see us move to a 14 team premiership. In a fortnight where there has been so much talk about player welfare and the length of the season it suprises me that they would want to move from a 22 game season to a 26 games one. France play a longer season and look what that has done to their national team performance.

Don’t let the money men ruin our game

By: Mig Dennis

Mig Dennis — Fri, 27 Feb 2015 09:39:22 +0000

I am very much in favour of ringfencing as I believe it will lead to a better brand of rugby ,particularly by those clubs at the lower end of the league.They will be far more inclined to play a more adventurous style of rugby and more inclined to give their academy players a chance ,rather than signing foreigners in a desperate attempt to avoid the drop. The American NFL which has no relegation , also has system whereby the club that ends at the bottom each season has first call on the available players .That could be introduced here

By: cnicholl33

cnicholl33 — Fri, 27 Feb 2015 08:30:30 +0000

Not surprised this is now being talked about. Promotional & relegation are so important in sports. Would rather see them copy Super League’s new format (Play 16 games before split. Total of 23 league games) than go the route they are talking about. I think Super League’s new format would suit the English premiership down to the ground. Unfortunately like the new European champions cup it is all about the money, money, money.

By: billyburgess

billyburgess — Fri, 27 Feb 2015 08:28:24 +0000

This is utter rubbish. Teams in lower league must have opportunity to get to highest level! What a load of utter crap!