Mark McCafferty is a disgrace

Interview link below.

http://www.espnscrum.com/heineken-cup-2011-12/rugby/story/157976.html?CMP=OTC-RSS

Premiership Rugby chief executive Mark McCafferty has suggested that a flawed qualification system is largely to blame for English rugby's failure to make a significant impression on this season's Heineken Cup.

England's leading clubs have struggled to keep pace with their European rivals in recent seasons with only one side - Premiership champions Saracens - likely to make the quarter-finals this term. The Premiership provided just one quarter-finalist two seasons ago in the shape of Northampton and the Saints, beaten finalists last year, were one of only two teams alongside Leicester to make the knock-out stages in that competition.

McCafferty believes that the Premiership's leading sides and their French Top 14 counterparts are treated unfairly by qualifying arrangements that he claims favour those teams competing in the RaboDirect PRO12. The Celtic-Italian league provides 10 teams for the Heineken Cup with the three highest placed sides from Ireland and Wales and the two sides from Scotland and Italy guaranteed qualification. Additional places are available depending on the destiny of the previous season's Heineken Cup and Amlin Challenge Cup.

McCafferty argues that the battle to claim one of the six automatic spots open to the 12-team Premiership and the Top 14 is a much tougher task - a point that he is set to put to tournament organisers European Rugby Cup Ltd.

"At the moment pretty much everyone in the PRO12 knows they've qualified for next year's Heineken, whereas French and English sides are still fighting tooth and nail and will be doing so in the middle of the Heineken Cup next season to ensure qualification for the season after," he told the Sunday Telegraph. "Make it more meritocratic and everyone will have to take their leagues seriously."

McCafferty went on to explain how he believes the process should work. "Our view is that Heineken Cup qualification should be based on league form," he said. "There are three of those - the Aviva Premiership, the Top 14 Orange in France and the Pro 12 - and you should take the qualifying teams from the best sides in those leagues. Then it's a completely meritocratic system."

This season the 24 teams in the six Heineken Cup pools are made up of 11 from the PRO12, six from the Top 14 and seven from the Premiership. McCafferty believes it should be eight across the board.

"We've put that proposal on the table but we know there will be a huge amount of resistance to it because it means countries in the PRO12, a league which currently has 10 places allocated to it, might go down to eight. There will be concerns that it could lead to one or two countries not being represented in the Heineken Cup. But the price you pay for that inclusivity is not necessarily having the best against the best."

McCafferty also highlighted what he sees as the Irish sides' ability to prioritise the Heineken Cup over domestic matters. "The real change over the past four or five years," McCafferty added, "is that the Irish sides have become more successful in Europe because of the priority they have put on it.

"After round four of this season's tournament I looked at the starting line-ups of Ulster, Leinster and Munster [all through to the quarter-finals] and only four of the 45 starters in the Heineken Cup were retained for their PRO12 league games the next weekend. Take a model where the top eight clubs qualify from each league and they wouldn't be able to take as many risks. That's the issue our clubs have.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So let me get this straight, you want to handicap the amount of teams in the Rabbo and give 2 additional spaces to English sides to make it fairier? How is it fair that England get to enter 6 teams already? Just because other Unions have streamlined their playing pools into a smaller number of teams to increase their standard and squad strenght.

The biggest issue I have with the guy is that he has completely failed to identify the problem and yet again is looking at it from a English Club increased Revenue standpoint. In truth there are 2 bigger factors at play.

1. Relegation - Its forcing English sides to play cup rugby. Get rid of that and your teams migth stand a better chance.

2. Quality - In truth the quality of squads is no longer available to English sides. French Clubs assemble the squads for the most money so have all the biggest names and the Home Unions to a large degree are keeping their stars at home. As they dont have to split resources by as many clubs as the English do it will make them naturally stronger (with the exception of Scotland). The handicap works against teams too as you have 12 teams bidding for the same player pools. Its understandable why so many buy no name SH imports.

To think this guy is partly responsible in helping English clubs worries me. He clearly has missed the point altogether.

I hope the HC Board laugh him out of the meeting or at the very least counter the argument with "Sure - as long as you will accept 3 places instead of 6".

This bloke is an idiot and his idea of improving English Rugby is to pull other (working systems) down, instead of improving his own.

Maybe he should check to see who the Rabo champions are and who is currently top of the league before spouting rubbish about priorisation.

To be honest England are lucky to have 6 spaces considering how poor some of the sides are.

It's a European tournament and as such I feel there should be representation from all of the top European nations. Just like in the Champions League in football, all major euaropean leagues get to put at least 1 team forward.

If we changed the Pro12 to league placings then you may (or may not) get no Italian teams, or Welsh or Scottish, and I think that would be to the detriment of the sport that we're trying to grow. Remember, the European nations are granted a certain number of places in the HC. Wales has 3 places granted and would still have 3 places granted even if we had 10 teams. We've decided to consolidate our teams so as a proportion we are always going to get a higher % in the HC now, but that does not mean we should lose places. Why should England, who at the moment get double the places of Wales, get even more? Why should one country be allowed to dominate the numbers in a tournament in that way?

To be honest - France and England are already have the best chance per nation to qualify just based on the entry numbers.

If by some freak reason this did actually go ahead I would love to see Scottish, Italian, Irish & Welsh Rugby pull out and try to table a Elite World Competition with the Saffers, Aus & New Zealanders - if only to see who would win

Would require a major shift in season organising but given that the HC is the biggest problem the season schedule I could see NH Rugby accomodating our SH cousins.

I can see it now Leinster vs Crusaders. What a game that would be

Hypothetically if the pro12 only had 8 teams in it, and the league was finished right now Edinburgh wouldn't qualify. Yet they just hammered LI to top their group. Hardly seems fair. Anyway, let them whinge all they like, they won't change anything...

Hasn't our system been pretty much the same for sometime now, including when Wasps on it or Northampton on it or Leicester had back to back wins.

Can't remember hearing anything then.

Mark McCafferty is very well aware that the current ERC distribution of the central pot of money for HC effectively subsidises the smaller Nations at the expense of England and France.

IRFU have stated that they put in about 2m euros worth of TV and sponsorship, and take out about 5m - 85% of the distribution is split equally between the participating teams and 15% is effectively prize money.

In the last ERC bust-up in 2007, this collective negotiation and distribution was retained - McCafferty is highlighting that the environment has now changed, and is ramping up the pressure for each ERC stakeholder to negotiate and retain their own TV and sponsorship income individually. This would result in a larger slice of the pie for his own shareholders, the Premiership clubs, and, arguably, a more equitable one.

This isn't about participation, it's preparing the ground for the next round of ERC stakeholder negotiations.

I have to say, I am sick and tiered of hearing the same old nonsense spouted out from the English rfu. Before anyone starts on me, I am not tarring all English rugby followers with same brush, but to think that the structures of everbody elses system is wrong and not your own is quite arrogant to say the least. O.k there was a time when the English were all conquering in the rugby world and in all fairness England did have the best setup at the time as they were probably one of the first unions up here to go "fully" professional. Now though, it is just a case of everybody else getting better and catching up and in some cases (Ireland) taken over. England now need to get with the time. They need to searously look at their competition and see what regional rugby has done for us celts, they also need to stop blaoting their squads with non English qualified players and perhaps look to their acadamies to cover for international call ups. Only when they take a good look at what they are doing before they spout off about how unfair it all is, will they see an improvement at both club/regional and international levels.

I actually think the Rabbo has massive strengths for the teams particpating.

For Starters - Away games really are away games. Italy, Scotland, Wales & Ireland require teams witin it to be used to the Airplane rides that come with it. Gloucester to Newcastle is probably the longest trip in the Avivia and I doubt they fly to any matches and stay overnight like the Rabbo sides do.

Secondly - It allows teams to be creative, develop players and long terms sustainability.


I dont buy all this "Rabbo is a weak competition" nonsense. Those idiots clearly have not watched Derby games or watched when the minnow sides host the top dogs. There is always pride at stake.

But its more than that. Ulster, Munster and Leinster have seen big gate increases at domestic league level as a result of their successes. The other emulate that amibition and its hoped that increased gates in the Rabbo will fuel the funding that goes with it. Throw in the fact that the Playoff is now a nice earner for the top 4 sides and it goes without saying that people are taking the league seriously.

In truth English Rugby is poor at the moment and no matter how many places they get, unless they improve the quality of their teams and the style of play they wont go far.

The Rabo is a better league with better players and a higher standard of play than the AP... which quite frankly is an overrated league full of overrated English players and overseas journeymen and the teams, quins and Bath being the exception perhaps, play an outdated and ineffective brand of Rugby.

Attritional yer backside some of those AP forwards look like they've never seen a breakdown before and when teams like the Tigers or Saints get bested in the scrum then they have no plan B. The teams tend to struggle badly away from home too. There's very little pride in the shirts from the English players either compared to in the past.

If some people want to bury their heads in the sand so be it but some of the players I've seen getting games for the big English clubs would be playing semi professional rugby in the AIL if they were in Ireland.

I think he should rethink what he's saying.

The qualifaction is Union based not League based as has been pointed out.
In the Champions League (I know some of you won't like comparing it to football, but it is another multi country, European competition, the top club competion) the top 4 leagues get to enter 4 teams and the others enter a number of teams based on the league co-efficent, based on how teams from teh league have done in europe. Some of you may be aware that the German league has overtaken the Italian league and will enter 4 teams in future to Italys 3.

Now taking this and chaning league for Unions, there should be in place something for performing Unions to get Extra spots and those not losing them (not just by winning it to get the extra spot)

IMO if he brings his Idea to teh H-cup organiers that England should get 8 places and so should the Pro 12
I belive the Pro 12 Unions will conter it with trying to introduce the number of teams that each union gets is based on performance, and limited so that each gets at least two entries.

Therefore if we were to change it England would lose out on the number of teams it gets to enter and Ireland would get 4 automatic entries.


Personally I think Ireland should now be getting 4 automatic entries and England lose one to 5, based on recent performances. I don't think anyone would say Ireland don't deserve to get 4 Auto entries.

Great write-up, accurate title and some good responses. Just going to mark this so I can keep in touch.

Just to carry on what I was saying earlier, I do not think English rugby has declined in recent years it just has not moved on. English rugby is still the same in style of play and structure as it was in the ninetees. Look at us Welsh for instance, the national team was always on the wrong end of a hiding, but we were dragged kicking and screaming into the professional era with regional rugby and although there is still a little kicking and screaming, you cannot argue with two grand slams and a world cup semi final. We evolved because we had to, England have never needed to until now. Call it evolution or revolution, but the other nations around you will continue to improve whilst English rugby will stay the same, it is not rubbish it just needs to change, now that everybody else has half decent forwards and no beer belly brigade players England are finding themselves having to work even harder to bully sides, and that is a style that went out with the 2003 vintage.

LordDowlais wrote:I have to say, I am sick and tiered of hearing the same old nonsense spouted out from the English rfu.

What's this got to do with the RFU? They have bigger issues with the PRL than anyone else does.

IMO if he brings his Idea to teh H-cup organiers that England should get 8 places and so should the Pro 12
I belive the Pro 12 Unions will conter it with trying to introduce the number of teams that each union gets is based on performance, and limited so that each gets at least two entries.

It already is [EDIT: partly]. That's why Connacht and Quins are in the competition this year. Leinster won the HEC and Quins won the ACC.

If some people want to bury their heads in the sand so be it but some of the players I've seen getting games for the big English clubs would be playing semi professional rugby in the AIL if they were in Ireland.

Of course they would be. There are only 4 squads in Ireland. They're are about 120 English players starting each week for the Jeff clubs (around 180 involved in total). That around 4 full squads of 30 players starting and 4 lots of 45 players involved in total. This is the main reason for the argument that there are too many forign players in the Jeff. There are plenty of English players getting chances but a load are no where near international level.

And I think thats the real issue.

In Previous years at say Leicester they had 2-3 players for every position. You had a real battle to keep your shirt for the club. Wind forward to today and you see players leaving (Twelvetrees) because they cant secure regular first team rugby. You wont build a championship side without genuine competition for places. Sadly if you English and you've been touted with talent you almost expect to be selected at Club level or move if you dont get it.

At the end of the day I dont believe success can be bought on a rugby pitch. You only have to look at half a dozen French Teams & the Ospreys (in fairness they are changing their viewpoint now). I dont expect Clermont to win the HC this year. They probably have the biggest budget and one of the best squads but I reckon the lack of time gelling will tell when they come up against the best sides.

If England really wants to compete in the HC it needs to reduce its number of teams and limit sides to quality imports only. I just dont see that happening though as fans of the AP would go nuts.

Welshmushroom wrote:And I think thats the real issue.

In Previous years at say Leicester they had 2-3 players for every position. You had a real battle to keep your shirt for the club. Wind forward to today and you see players leaving (Twelvetrees) because they cant secure regular first team rugby. You wont build a championship side without genuine competition for places. Sadly if you English and you've been touted with talent you almost expect to be selected at Club level or move if you dont get it.

At the end of the day I dont believe success can be bought on a rugby pitch. You only have to look at half a dozen French Teams & the Ospreys (in fairness they are changing their viewpoint now). I dont expect Clermont to win the HC this year. They probably have the biggest budget and one of the best squads but I reckon the lack of time gelling will tell when they come up against the best sides.

If England really wants to compete in the HC it needs to reduce its number of teams and limit sides to quality imports only. I just dont see that happening though as fans of the AP would go nuts.

I am a supportor of English rugby but not any club in particular. My favourite competition currently is the premiership simply because all the teams are English and that's where my interest lies. If England ever went towards regionalisation I'd prefer the SA/NZ system. It would require a restructuring of the season so that the competetions ran in series rather than parallel. Have the preimership, then have the players join up in regional teams (probably 6). Have an short inter-region competition in warm up for the HEC then run that to completetion. The clubs would have to have stakes in regional sides, but if the RFU was providing heavy financial support it should be able to put in quota rules based on the funding. This would possibly result in better HEC (although lack of training/playing time could be an issue) and it would almost certainly be better for England.

However I'm not sure if it's workable or would even serve it's purpose.

A reduction in the size of the Jeff would help but what really needs to be looked at is the princple of promotion/relegation - as the coach of a mid table Jeff team, let's take London Irish as an example, where to you put your resources ?
I'd suggest for London Irish the season priorities are:
1 - Not get relegated
2 - Play-off place if possible
3 - HEC qualifiaction for next season
4 - Playing in the HEC this season - better to miss out on the shield comp though - more games to play.
5 - LV Cup if we have to.
Munster on the other hand would be:
1 - Win the HEC
2 - Win the Robocop
3 - Err - that's it.
Maybe a move to the RL (cough) system of franchised places, giving a team a set contract for a number of seasons in the Jeff would at least give the clubs/coaches the opportunity to look at their priorities over again. Equally team that were serious about getting to the top table would have the opportunity to build the infrastructre to enable them to go into the top level when a chance came or if there was room for expansion. Maybe even do this to the Championship as well so there's a safety net for teams who drop down.
An expanded league featuring the current team plus maybe the 2 other London exlie teams, a north Midlands side (Nottingham ?), a south Midlands side (Bedford) a Yorkshire side and a couple of teams from say the South-West- Brizzle/Cornwall way and fixed for five years to bed in ?

You can never negotiate relegation by strategically allowing yourself to lose a game.

Winning games - every one you play - is the motivation for League season from the top ranked side to the lowest. Within that framework then you decide how easy or hard each game will be and risk resources accordingly.

People looking at the bottom and wondering how I'm going to keep off it - well, that coach or those players need sacking. Look at the top and wonder how you're going to try and get there. Winning games is what ball/team sports are about not strategically trying to chase the gold of not being relegated. The English have much too much sentiment for the idea of relegation.

So yes - close the door. Say the door will be closing in five years time - that gives all participants the time to get their act together and fight to be high enough in the League when the time arrives that they'll have nothing to worry about. Then close the damn door. Lock it, throw away the key.

And then allow the team at the bottom, beside what was once a very strong draught, to have an eternity of chances to get to the top. Then the motivation is placed in the right direction, then you might have real pre-planning in the season, and then too AP might get off the back of an external league that is looking after its own no door house

Welshmushroom wrote:And I think thats the real issue.

In Previous years at say Leicester they had 2-3 players for every position. You had a real battle to keep your shirt for the club. Wind forward to today and you see players leaving (Twelvetrees) because they cant secure regular first team rugby. You wont build a championship side without genuine competition for places. Sadly if you English and you've been touted with talent you almost expect to be selected at Club level or move if you dont get it.

At the end of the day I dont believe success can be bought on a rugby pitch. You only have to look at half a dozen French Teams & the Ospreys (in fairness they are changing their viewpoint now). I dont expect Clermont to win the HC this year. They probably have the biggest budget and one of the best squads but I reckon the lack of time gelling will tell when they come up against the best sides.

If England really wants to compete in the HC it needs to reduce its number of teams and limit sides to quality imports only. I just dont see that happening though as fans of the AP would go nuts.

Your last paragraph hits the nail on the head really. Could you ever imagine Leicester playing second fiddle to "their" region. I can here Peter Wheeler starting allready . Seriously though, the current crop of elite English sides carry to much power and they would never allow regionalism to start at the expense of their status in English rugby, and for me that is why I cannot see England reaching the dizzy heights of 2003 any time soon.

SecretFly wrote:And then allow the team at the bottom, beside what was once a very strong draught, to have an eternity of chances to get to the top. Then the motivation is placed in the right direction, then you might have real pre-planning in the season, and then too AP might get off the back of an external league that is looking after its own no door house

I doubt that'll happen. What may happen is a RL-style franchise system where the teams are fixed for 3 years (arbitrary) and chosen based are various criteria (performance in that 3 years, support base, distance to other teams, etc). Even this has issues in League with more successful sides missing out to weaker isolated sides. I doubt the door will ever be shut on the teams in the lower leagues (after all its promotion that's the point, relegation is an unfortunate bi-product).

Dubbelyew L Overate wrote:Mark McCafferty is very well aware that the current ERC distribution of the central pot of money for HC effectively subsidises the smaller Nations at the expense of England and France.

IRFU have stated that they put in about 2m euros worth of TV and sponsorship, and take out about 5m - 85% of the distribution is split equally between the participating teams and 15% is effectively prize money.

In the last ERC bust-up in 2007, this collective negotiation and distribution was retained - McCafferty is highlighting that the environment has now changed, and is ramping up the pressure for each ERC stakeholder to negotiate and retain their own TV and sponsorship income individually. This would result in a larger slice of the pie for his own shareholders, the Premiership clubs, and, arguably, a more equitable one.

This isn't about participation, it's preparing the ground for the next round of ERC stakeholder negotiations.

You are right on the money.
I'd argue with McCafferty that while the IRFU generates less from Ireland through TV and sponsorship than the likes of England and France generate from their markets, the games themselves contain teams from different countries playing each other. Leinster go to Montpelier and it is televised live as a prime fixture by Sky Sports into Ireland, England, Wales and Scotland. Maybe Canal+ (or whatever French TV company also showed it). Munster away to Castre was a prime fixture televised in all markets. In the final weekend of fixtures, all Irish representatives were in the prime fixtures (ie. not on red button or solely highlights). That means that while the English/French market might generate the most cash, some of that it has to be admitted is because their games against the smaller IRFU representatives are interest generators. You only have to look at Saints moving a pool game against Munster to MK Dons, or Saracens moving a Leinster group fixture to Wembley.

Don't the All Blacks demand a fee for playing them? Even though the viewers and attendees will be almost all non-kiwi. It's down to the interest in the All Blacks

The representation thing isn't an English thing. Plenty of non-English posters have mentioned it. I believe Glas was making the comments on the other thread and Red_Stag has said it in the past.

However, just because there is a good supply of idiotic English posters doesn't mean other comments aren't just as idiotic if they're in retaliate.

LordDowlais wrote:

Welshmushroom wrote:And I think thats the real issue.

In Previous years at say Leicester they had 2-3 players for every position. You had a real battle to keep your shirt for the club. Wind forward to today and you see players leaving (Twelvetrees) because they cant secure regular first team rugby. You wont build a championship side without genuine competition for places. Sadly if you English and you've been touted with talent you almost expect to be selected at Club level or move if you dont get it.

At the end of the day I dont believe success can be bought on a rugby pitch. You only have to look at half a dozen French Teams & the Ospreys (in fairness they are changing their viewpoint now). I dont expect Clermont to win the HC this year. They probably have the biggest budget and one of the best squads but I reckon the lack of time gelling will tell when they come up against the best sides.

If England really wants to compete in the HC it needs to reduce its number of teams and limit sides to quality imports only. I just dont see that happening though as fans of the AP would go nuts.

Your last paragraph hits the nail on the head really. Could you ever imagine Leicester playing second fiddle to "their" region. I can here Peter Wheeler starting allready . Seriously though, the current crop of elite English sides carry to much power and they would never allow regionalism to start at the expense of their status in English rugby, and for me that is why I cannot see England reaching the dizzy heights of 2003 any time soon.

But England has sufficient market to maintain 10ish properly professional clubs. The reason Ireland and to an extent Wales went down the regionalism/provincial route was because we don't have the ability to support that many professional clubs (the 4th province in Ireland is a struggle to hold it's own financially!). England shouldn't be anywhere near that.

England has the people, has the potential. The problem/issue seems to be the coaching and ownership. Sides which don't have a proper base structure to survive (look at Wasps without a real ground and how they struggle). Think of Bath and how their problems, regionalism doesn't solve that --they'd need to sort out their ground issues at the Rec, figure out coaching and cut some of the deadwood that they are paying over the odds for. Just using Bath as an example. A good story (at so far) is how Quins have come back with a good structure, coaching, squad from where they were.

Nathan, I'll agree but I'll disagree (just to be awkward)

To be fair, if you just admitted that the Pro12 was inferior to the English premiership then they wouldn't need to go on. You just keep banging on about trophy this year, trophy last year as though it can change the truth.

MM is simply responding to internal pressures regarding the salary cap. The PRL has to state what the options are from an English perspective. The two reasonably successful teams this year have been Quins and sarries who have been able to put out virtual first teams, which has not been possible for the rest because of injuries and the squads do not get exposure to cope with the next level. There are only so many English test players to go around and the options for clubs are either to be like Toulouse and buy them or have central control, with the former realistically the only course.

I would argue the top five from the three leagues plus last years winner is a much better HC competition (well aware Bath probably wouldn't currently qualify) but got shouted down on here for the usual predictable reasons and creates a competitive second tier competition too.

The alternative is for the salary cap to go and all out of contract Rab test players will get targeted by English clubs. I would prefer the cap to stay but at my club the owner has more disposable cash than most Unions and has indicated an appetite to spend and so wild west begins.

thebandwagonsociety wrote:Nathan, I'll agree but I'll disagree (just to be awkward)

deal!

England had seven teams this year in the HC and the South African feeder club is the only one of them to get out of a pretty easy group.

Thanks Kiwi, was getting a bit touchy.

Back to the post. If we assume the purpose of the HEC is twofold;
1. Getting the best teams in one competition across 3 leagues.
2. Allowing representation from all nations involved in those leagues.

Then I think the balance is about right, just because England and France are larger nations with consequent larger TV audiences and income does not mean they should further dominate the numbers in the competition. Further in the English case if they wish to produce sub standard sides because of the way they have chosen to structure their league competition this emphatically does not entitle them to more representatives.

Of course you may not agree with my two premises in which case go run your own competition. As a final thought if it's so tough why do you play the LV?

I would argue the top five from the three leagues plus last years winner is a much better HC competition (well aware Bath probably wouldn't currently qualify) but got shouted down on here for the usual predictable reasons and creates a competitive second tier competition too.

so no Italian representation and little scottish or welsh?

Nope - its good the way it is. we can see the benefits in Italian teams playing in teh rabo and HC now starting to come thru.

viewtothegym wrote:England had seven teams this year in the HC and the South African feeder club is the only one of them to get out of a pretty easy group.

Are you talking about Saracens? Only two South African qualified players staring in the last game. Even at full strength there would only be 2.5 (De Kock and Wigglesworth were on rotation). On top of that you have Smit/Britz and Joubert. Not doing a very good job are they? On the twist of that they started with 6 of the backs as English qualified and 4 of the pack (just for you that's 10 starting EQ players).

No doubt it does come across as quite petty to be looking for someone else to blame for AP's poor performance in Europe. Looking inward is not something that seems to be a strength of the AP or some of its coaches for that matter.

Sport has always been cyclical and no doubt the AP teams will become prominent in this tournament again. Given that the final this year is in Twickenham (all Twickenham finals have been one by AP teams) there's every chance that we could have an AP winner this year.

The AP teams do appear to be struggling with the salary cap, as far as I can see this is primarily down very poor and short sighted recruitment. Most AP teams are now overloaded with S15 failures who are there for nothing but the paycheck, generally when the going gets tough these players tend to go missing. Englands best teams over the years have always been backboned by English players with a few quality foreigners thrown in.

McCafferty should focus on developing the AP in such away that will allow AP teams thrive in the environment in which they operate. That is the primary role of any CEO. If he cannot do that then he should step aside and allow someone in who can.

"S15 failures who are there for nothing but the paycheck" Such as?

And why exactly do the S15 players head to the Pro12? For the superior culture? No, they go for the money and trophy's, exactly the same as everyone else.

Oh and it is very petty and the PRL are extremely short sighted and self centred

The likes of Scott Hamilton, Poff and Nic Berry to name a few. I have the exact same issue with Rabo teams that do the same thing...however I didn't mention the Rabo!!! You really need to stop concentrating on the Rabo, your infatuation with it is slightly strange.

Nor did I say the PRL is self centered, just short sighted. You should pay more attention.

I have no problem with the what Sarries have done - bringing in quality to supplement home grown talent can only be a good thing. Munster have benefited hugely from that approach. But there is a huge issue surrounding the development of young english players, I genuinely cannot count the number of U18 or U20 internationals I've gone to over the last 15 years where I have seen Ireland get their ass handed to them on a plate by England, yet none of this talent seems to be coming through to either club or country - at no point does McCaffery mention this - as I said, short sighted.

As far as Ireland goes, they have put smart people in the right places in the IRFU to make sure that our structures are right for us. They have done that and I applaud them for it. No doubt at times I curse them for some of their actions, I always appreciate the forward thinking vision they showed when they set up the current structure.

If the AP wants to improve it has to fix itself. The first sign of complete incompetence - in any walk of life - is to point the finger somewhere else before first looking inward. Its not the job of the Rabo teams or unions to fix the AP.

Red Right wrote:The likes of Scott Hamilton, Poff and Nic Berry to name a few. I have the exact same issue with Rabo teams that do the same thing...however I didn't mention the Rabo!!! You really need to stop concentrating on the Rabo, your infatuation with it is slightly strange.

So that's three, not really overloaded. The general number of NEQ players in the English squads remained pretty constant at 35% since professionalism came in (so that's around 120 starting English players per week, more than most top nations can possibly put out in their domestic league).

Nor did I say the PRL is self centered, just short sighted. You should pay more attention.

No you didn't. I did. Not sure that I attributed to you either. Perhaps you pay more attention and read what's written rather than what you want/expect to see.

I have no problem with the what Sarries have done - bringing in quality to supplement home grown talent can only be a good thing. Munster have benefited hugely from that approach. But there is a huge issue surrounding the development of young english players, I genuinely cannot count the number of U18 or U20 internationals I've gone to over the last 15 years where I have seen Ireland get their ass handed to them on a plate by England, yet none of this talent seems to be coming through to either club or country - at no point does McCaffery mention this - as I said, short sighted.

Perhaps you should pay more attention then. This myth that young players don't get a chance keeps get pulled out by people who don't actually know what they're talking about. Then someone pulls out the actual numbers (shame Juggler doesn't post on here) and it dies down again. Until the facts get forgotten and it's pulled out again. The best was the excuses from some Welsh fans banded about that the English U20 were more experienced than the Welsh equivalent and then on another article say that the English players don't get a chance in the premiership. They certainly don't get rushed in at international level. Also the potential doesn't seem to get realised (although it's only been 5 years since the academies have been running properly. But it's certainly not down to game time.

As far as Ireland goes, they have put smart people in the right places in the IRFU to make sure that our structures are right for us. They have done that and I applaud them for it. No doubt at times I curse them for some of their actions, I always appreciate the forward thinking vision they showed when they set up the current structure.

If the AP wants to improve it has to fix itself. The first sign of complete incompetence - in any walk of life - is to point the finger somewhere else before first looking inward. Its not the job of the Rabo teams or unions to fix the AP.

Very true.

[quote="HammerofThunor"] although it's only been 5 years since the academies have been running properly. [/quote

To be honest, I thought these had been operational for a lot longer! It could be another few years before these turn into a consistent conveyor.

Since they've been in we've had Corbisiero, Hartley, Cole, Lawes, Youngs and Tuilagi come through them and get into the England squad 'full time'. In the new EPS we've got quite a few more coming in. Whether they make the grade is another issue. There's another full 32 who could be picked if the media switch on a whim.

I lie. The English academies have been in place since 2001. Let that be a lesson to you about believing things you read on the internet

That is the English academy system. Not sure about the club academies

thebandwagonsociety wrote:

LordDowlais wrote:

Welshmushroom wrote:And I think thats the real issue.

In Previous years at say Leicester they had 2-3 players for every position. You had a real battle to keep your shirt for the club. Wind forward to today and you see players leaving (Twelvetrees) because they cant secure regular first team rugby. You wont build a championship side without genuine competition for places. Sadly if you English and you've been touted with talent you almost expect to be selected at Club level or move if you dont get it.

At the end of the day I dont believe success can be bought on a rugby pitch. You only have to look at half a dozen French Teams & the Ospreys (in fairness they are changing their viewpoint now). I dont expect Clermont to win the HC this year. They probably have the biggest budget and one of the best squads but I reckon the lack of time gelling will tell when they come up against the best sides.

If England really wants to compete in the HC it needs to reduce its number of teams and limit sides to quality imports only. I just dont see that happening though as fans of the AP would go nuts.

Your last paragraph hits the nail on the head really. Could you ever imagine Leicester playing second fiddle to "their" region. I can here Peter Wheeler starting allready . Seriously though, the current crop of elite English sides carry to much power and they would never allow regionalism to start at the expense of their status in English rugby, and for me that is why I cannot see England reaching the dizzy heights of 2003 any time soon.

But England has sufficient market to maintain 10ish properly professional clubs. The reason Ireland and to an extent Wales went down the regionalism/provincial route was because we don't have the ability to support that many professional clubs (the 4th province in Ireland is a struggle to hold it's own financially!). England shouldn't be anywhere near that.

England has the people, has the potential. The problem/issue seems to be the coaching and ownership. Sides which don't have a proper base structure to survive (look at Wasps without a real ground and how they struggle). Think of Bath and how their problems, regionalism doesn't solve that --they'd need to sort out their ground issues at the Rec, figure out coaching and cut some of the deadwood that they are paying over the odds for. Just using Bath as an example. A good story (at so far) is how Quins have come back with a good structure, coaching, squad from where they were.

Yes that is all very well, but if you had enough players then the squads in the English set-up would not be bloated out with non English qualified players. I do not buy into this coaching nonsense as the coaches can only work with what they have at their disposal, if you had less teams then you would not need half as many foreigners playing for them as the places would be fought over by all English players. That is what regionalism is aiming for in Wales, it is just, at the time of regionalisation, we did/do not have enough quality players at our disposal (or they were all snapped up by the Ospreys) so we had to introduce some NWQ players, but now with the youngsters we have coming through I really can see Wales reaping the rewards for going into regionalism.

If the English clubs aren't doing well they should adapt their own system instead of proposing that other unions change their system.

red_stag wrote:If the English clubs aren't doing well they should adapt their own system instead of proposing that other unions change their system.

Exactly, the cricketers are doing the same and complaining about the Pakistani spin bowlers. They did the same with the West Indies team.

Damn upstart colonials beating us at our own game

viewtothegym wrote:England had seven teams this year in the HC and the South African feeder club is the only one of them to get out of a pretty easy group.

A pretty easy group? No more easy than that of Leinster's or Edinburgh.

When Saracens did the double over O's they were flying high in the Pro12. Also the O's hadn't been beaten at the Liberty for over 5 years in the Heineken Cup. Hardly an easy feat.

Treviso are no longer the whipping boys. Particularly at home.

South African feeder club? Simply a myth. You're probably just bitter because after the quarter finals there won't be any Welsh representatives left.

I think Saracens are an unpopular club simply as they are one of the few English clubs who are doing quite well at the minute.

I don’t mind Saracens actually, they never put me up or down. And for an English team, that’s saying something.

Ok maybe when Venter was there…

Agree with you Mick. Wish Ashton wasnt headed there. Dont like him.

Unpopular with who red stag?

You Irish should love us. You keep beating us.

To win the HC cup Saracens would likely have to beat Clermont,Leinster and Munster in a row. Ouch!

Coincidentally they are the 3 sides in the competition we have the worst head to heads against.

Home advantage should come in handy though.

I hope the other English fans support us. I can dream can't I?

We could do it couldn't we?

Beshocked, I'm starting up the Dublin chapter of the Saracens supporters club in the run up to the QF's! We're all behind you here. I think you'll win, Clermont are class, but they've not really put in a huge game away from home. Your lot beat them in Vicarage road last year didn't they?

Stag, agree on Ashton. Not likeable.