Future of the H-Cup

[tighthead]

If the Rabo teams did give into the English format and then it made no difference i.e. Rabo teams doing well and even winning you can be sure that they would want to change it again.
When the English teams were dominating there wasn't a complaint from them about the format. They just can't stand the fact that they are no longer top dogs.

[Gael]

Yep. It's not actually that long ago that their pressure filled league was the reason why they did so well or so they were ramming down our throats.

[davejohnston]

Personally I think the talk of competitiveness in the Pro 12 is a bit of a smoke screen.
You can definitely argue that teams don't need to worry about qualification, but at the same time the top English and French teams have an advantage in terms of money and resources, so may'be it all balances out ? (I've no figures for the English sides, but I'm led to believe even there salary cap's are higher than the likes of Connacht).

I think the real issue is down to money. The French and English seem to one a bigger slice of the pie. The Celtic teams need to make sure they don't loose out on money. If the Amlin is better promoted, then maybe it makes sense for some of the Pro 12 teams to compete in that instead.

[Jackie Brown]

Hardly a European competition if it's simply full of English and French. Do Exeter, Sale, Castre or Racing add more than Connacht, Treviso, Glasgow or Llanelli? No.

[mikerob]

Do Exeter, Sale, Castre or Racing lose more than Connacht, Treviso, Glasgow or Llanelli? No.

Fixed.

9 wins vs 4 wins in this years competition.

[bazzaj]

Hardly a European competition if it's simply full of English and French. Do Exeter, Sale, Castre or Racing add more than Connacht, Treviso, Glasgow or Llanelli? No.

But under the new format 3 of those 4 teams are still in it.
The comparison JB, should be with Connacht, Cardiff, Edinburgh, Zebre and the Dragons who would not qualify under the new proposed format.
In terms of quality they dont add much but what they do bring is a uniquely different culture and atmosphere to the event which is your point I think JB and a very valid one.
From our view point we do go to those places in the Rabo but as we know there is a world of difference in atmosphere between a league game and an HEC one.
If it was just about finding out the best team you would just play off between the 3 league winners in a round robin.
I have to admit I was undecided about the new format your post has won the argument for me as it reminded me that rugby is much more about just the winning.
Enough of this elitist snobbery, keep it as it all inclusive EUROPEAN competition.

[mikerob]

There needs to be some criteria to decide what teams get into the premier European competition but "uniquely different culture and atmosphere" provided by a team doesn't seem a particularly good one.

"Zebre? We had wild crack there and the food was good so they should get in, but Wasps, that's boring in comparison so they are in the ACC"

In fact, don't bother with how good a team is, just base HEC qualification on Tripadvisor reviews!

It is correct to ensure that all countries are represented but a premier competition needs to have some quality control for the teams taking part.

[Jackie Brown]

Indeed it does Mike, but it is debatable whether more English teams (as an overall percentage) will add to the quality...

[mikerob]

Indeed it does Mike, but it is debatable whether more English teams (as an overall percentage) will add to the quality...

First define what you mean by "quality"

If the HEC is the premier competition, then the extreme view is that it should have the best 20 teams in Europe, whatever the nationality.

One way to assess this is Eurotable given it takes into account both European and domestic results, so from Eurotable the current top 20 teams in Europe are:

ENG 6
FRA 9
IRE 3
ITA 0
SCO 1
WAL 1

With the currently proposed qualification criteria for a 20 team HEC, the representation would be:
ENG 6 / 7*
FRA 7 / 6*
IRE 3
ITA 1
SCO 1
WAL 2
* depending on play-off

That is actually pretty close. It is actually the French who are underrepresented with Italy and Wales being overrepresented.

So it at the moment, it doesn't matter if you pick the best 20 or 24 teams in Europe - it should have about 6 English teams in it.

The issue is more to do with the Pro12 teams who are way off the top 20-24 who are currently qualifying.

Now I think they should have guaranteed qualification for all countries, so there will always be the chance that a team will qualify and they will be a long way behind some others - the question is, how many?

Even with a top 20, there will still be winners and losers and teams coming out of the competition with a 0 6 win loss record.

[Neill_M]

Should make it the top 6 in each of the leagues - Pro12, Prem and Top14 and then an extra spot for each of the leagues which have the winners of the H-Cup and Amlin that season. In the Pro12, there should be no country consideration. That IMO would lead to a strong H-Cup with very few weak sides. The 4 Pro12 sides who currently get into the H-Cup would drop into the Amlin.

[OneMore]

To add to the conversation, I think comparing the Pro12 to the AP and T14 is a nonsense as well. Currently HEC spots are distributed to each country's union (of the countries involved).

In France they distribute their places according to league position in the T14.
In England they distribute their places according to league position in the AP.
In Ireland they distribute their places according to league position in the Pro12.
In Wales they...

The only two unions that are excepted from this (Scotland, Italy) are the weakest ones, but who also have the lowest allocation of participating unions.

If RFU/Premier Rugby/whoever the hell it is organises the AP turn around and say - "Hey, we're going to create a new league. It will contain 6 teams, largely made up by amalgamating existing AP teams. There will be no relegation. These 6 teams will receive the English allocation of HEC places." - they should be free to do this.

I'm sure there's some way of working it out based on ranking points, but my impression is that England are already rightly represented in terms of number of teams versus level of success in the competition. Ireland are allocated 3 places (except when an Irish team wins it of the ACC). Last year 2 of the 3 were in the HEC final. With the other going out in the group stage. This year, 1 made the HEC semi, 1 made the HEC quarters and 1 is in the Amlin final (that's out of a 3 team allocation remember). Last year, 1 English team made the HEC quarters. This year England had 2 quarter finalists and 1 semi finalist - and that's out of a 6 team allocation.

That's a pretty recent history I'm considering there, and perhaps the farther you go back the better it looks for the English, but based on that it seems like the wrong time for the English to try and convince everyone they deserve a bigger slice.

[mikerob]

The English aren't asking for a greater number of teams. The debate is really over the size of the competition. Yes, if the competition size is reduced and the number of English teams remains the same, then their % goes up.

However just looking at a percentage and saying "it has gone up - how can that be justified" doesn't really work. If you were to pick the best 6 teams in Europe, there would be a strong case to have 0% English, Welsh, Scottish and Italian teams!

But as I've pointed out, it doesn't matter if you pick the best 20 or 24 teams, you would be absolutely justified having 6 English teams, just as you would be justified having 3 Irish teams.

The question here is the balance between the HEC being just for the best, and the degree this is relaxed to ensure you have representation from all countries.

Personally I think it is a stretch to say that teams winning 0/22 domestic games (Zebre) should have guaranteed qualification to a premier competition.

If people want to have reduced "quality control" for HEC qualification to favour the weaker Pro12 teams, fine, but then it becomes difficult to justify the difference in prize money between HEC and ACC.

[OneMore]

Personally I think it is a stretch to say that teams winning 0/22 domestic games (Zebre) should have guaranteed qualification to a premier competition.

I think this is my point. Zebre don't compete domestically. If Zebre took part in the Italian league, I'm pretty confident they'd do alright. There's an in-built assumption here that the Pro12 is just like the AP or T14 - it's not. It's the basis of a European Superleague. It's the best teams from a number of countries. The fact that the Irish, Welsh, Scots and Italians have got together and organised a pretty high quality league (considering our individual alternative options) is now being used as a stick to beat us with.

The fact that we don't have relegation or nationality-independent HEC qualification based purely on league position should be a bad thing. There's nothing stopping the English or French doing the same. In fact if the English/French got together and made a league would they, similarly, expect then HEC qualification from the new anglo-french league to be cut to 6 teams, regardless of where the teams are from?

We shouldn't be apologising for the fact the Celtalians have got ourselves organised.

[OneMore]

MR I know my response is a departure from the main thrust of your argument about weaker-country participation versus high quality competition. Apologies - just the bloody English annoy me at times.

[mikerob]

Even if the Italians didn't compete in the Pro12 and were in their own domestic competition, the same argument would apply - how many Italian teams should have automatic qualification to the premier competition?

Clearly in European football, no such right applies and teams from weaker leagues need to go through qualification. I don't think that should be the case with rugby, but equally, should there be no quality control? So it doesn't matter how crap the 2nd Italian team is, they will always get into the HEC?