Create a New Forum Admin Login Member Login Contribute to Voyager Search VoyForums Help Desk VoyForums Exchange VoyForums Directory/Categories VoyForums Homepage VoyForums News FAQ - Frequently Asked Questions

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4 ]

Subject: pah! Author: John [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ] Date Posted: "Fri, May 13 2011, 18:03:31 GMT" http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/mobile/rugby_union/13379325.stm [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

[> Subject: The fundamental flaw to his argument Author: rugby lover [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: "Fri, May 13 2011, 19:36:18 GMT" The fundamental flaw to this argument is that it presumes that the clubs which are in the PRL cartel now (which MacGeeghan by implication says) are the best clubs to be there serving the country geographically and potentially. Truth is that they just happened to be in the right place at the right time when professionalism came in and have gained all the benefits such as RFU money, TV, sponsorship since then while others have had very little. They are now so far away that it is almost impossible for other clubs who missed out then to catch up. The PRL cartel clubs do not serve the RFU objectives of providing rugby throughout England. Instead they have hijacked a sport and made it into a product for themselves. This is not for the benefit of the game as a whole. Ringfencing of these hijackers and continuing to give them RFU or more correctly,our money, just because they corralled all the best players and then insisted they have all the England Academies so that they can keep the blackmail that way - will only make the hijack complete. I think the Premiership would better be called the "Somali Pirates" League in honour of the similarity with their East African counterparts! [ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> [> Subject: More Qs than As Author: Gnasher [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: "Sat, May 14 2011, 9:57:24 GMT" Who else meets the PL's stringent ground criteria to make up the 14th team and would relegation from the Championship also be suspended over the same period? If the idea included pumping substantial amounts of money into the Championship and leagues below over say a three year period to allow grounds to be developed then maybe. Otherwise IM's suggestion seems destined just to reinforce the gulf between those fortunate enough to be in the PL when it was formed and everybody else. Didn't hear him saying this when he was working at L Scottish! [ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> [> [> Subject: respect Author: o moseman [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: "Sun, May 15 2011, 0:07:41 GMT" i now put ian m in the same mould of stuart barnes,elitist narrow minded rugby men who have been involved at the top end to long and forgotten their grass roots,the comments are only self serving and destructive to the game below the chosen few,i agree with the other posts here and ian m has lost some respect from me and many others. [ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> Subject: Devil's advocate Author: Bob [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: "Sun, May 15 2011, 17:34:24 GMT" Just to play devil's advocate, hasnt IM got a point when he says that there are only a limited number of clubs below premiership level who are realistically likely to get there in the short term [ok - i dont know why he's picked Bristol]? [ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> [> Subject: but this only compounds the mistake Author: Ben [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: "Sun, May 15 2011, 23:19:57 GMT" No - but there would be if they were given the financial support which the cartel clubs have been given from the start! If you gave many Championship clubs £2 million per annum which cartel teams get from the RFU, sponsorship, TV etc you would find some competitive Chgampionship teams emerging. And don't think these clubs wouldn't have suitable places to play. A number of cartel clubs play in football stadia renting the facilities and some Championship clubs could do the same. Finally just because in the first place the PRL clubs "hijacked" the sport (to use an interesting although probably accurate phrase above)and got themselves into a very strong position, is no reason to compound that error by limiting it to their chums. [ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> Subject: Cecil Duckworth calls for relegation break Author: poor cecil [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: "Mon, May 23 2011, 20:04:16 GMT" Worcester Warriors owner Cecil Duckworth calls for relegation break..................... http://www.sundaymercury.net/midlands-sport/midlands-rugby/worcester-warriors-rfc/2011/05/22/worcester-warriors-owner-cecil-duckworth-calls-for-relegation-break-66331-28738620/?sms_ss=twitter&at_xt=4dda216c7a7891a4,0 [ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> [> Subject: Horses for courses Author: ALE [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: "Mon, May 23 2011, 21:19:17 GMT" Would have been a very different article had Worcester not gained promotion. He is a businessman protecting his heavily personal subsidised asset. I think Worcester will struggle in the AP next season and Mr Duckworth does too. [ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> [> [> Subject: PRL cartel "hijacked a sport and created a business - for themselves" Author: slow learner [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: "Mon, May 23 2011, 23:12:59 GMT" Now I see what the poster on one of the threads above was on about when he made that statement. Duckworth's point is "how can you develop a business" when you have the flawed uncertainty of relegation. This is a primarily a sport Cecil and one highly valued by many, many people.Cecil sees it simply as a business when in fact it is much more than that. [ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> [> [> [> Subject: Clubs as a business Author: BigAde [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: "Tue, May 24 2011, 13:52:37 GMT" There's no getting away with it at this level - clubs are businesses but that doesn't mean we should get rid of relegation. It's just another risk that needs managing. In no other professional sport or industry do you get this sort of ring-fencing and they all have to manage their business with the risks and opportunities they face. For example, how can you develop a business when you have the uncertainty of a competitor coming up with an innovation which takes customers away from you? It's all about having a sound business plan. At least with the threat of relegation being more likely for the likes of Worcester they can factor that into their planning and investment decisions. We need promotion and relegation to maintain the fans' interest, reward progress and maintain the investment (what would be the point of Worcester investing to improve if they know they won't get relegated). [ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> [> [> [> [> Subject: Above should be "away from it" not "away with it"!!(NT) Author: BigAde [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: "Tue, May 24 2011, 13:53:47 GMT" [ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: But both work quite well! Author: BillesleyNomad [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: "Tue, May 24 2011, 16:05:11 GMT" [ Post a Reply to This Message ]