NPR

PlanetGlyndwr wrote: ↑Mon Feb 20, 2023 4:43 pm Why do the Blazers need to go on jollies for?

Could it be a symptom of a mid-life crisis or something

clydecloggie wrote: ↑Thu Feb 16, 2023 12:44 pm There was some talk a few seasons ago of London Scottish becoming the 3rd Scottish pro team. I don't know the specifics of why it didn't happen, but seem to recall geography did play a role and it being questionable if a team could have its base in London under the banner of the SRU.

SaintK wrote: ↑Mon Feb 20, 2023 5:04 pm

PlanetGlyndwr wrote: ↑Mon Feb 20, 2023 4:43 pm Why do the Blazers need to go on jollies for?

Could it be a symptom of a mid-life crisis or something

Because it's been part of the deal for the last 70 + years and we are still stuck in a perks for the boys timewarp

CM11 wrote: ↑Mon Feb 20, 2023 6:19 pm An international strike would destroy any chance of the players getting what they want.

PlanetGlyndwr wrote: ↑Mon Feb 20, 2023 1:41 pmImagine 50,000 members of the public heading to Cardiff
...
these decrepit, putrid, morally and intellectually bankrupt, self serving, out of touch, spineless misogynistic degenerates

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Tue Feb 21, 2023 8:22 am I've always gone on the assumption that a pro rugby team would run on around £10M per year.

However The Top 14 operate on 18M Euros at the low end (Perpignan) to near 44M Euros at the top (Toulouse). The Gallagher Premiership figures say that the salary cap is at £5M, plus allowances for injuries, capped players etc of over a million, plus a couple of marquee players. Then there is the cost of running the team, travel, accommodation, ground costs, medical and other insurances etc, you might get away with 10 to 15 million per club.

Wales will be like Scotland, the SRU runs the entire game from minis up to international. The SRU spent £21M on pro rugby last year, that was over the two teams, we are good payers apparently, but Wales will be looking at at double that expenditure with the four sides, having said that, isn't there private ownership, at least in part, of three of the sides?

Jim Lahey wrote: ↑Tue Feb 21, 2023 5:46 am But, reading some of the articles online recently, you get the sense that pro rugby players have a sense of entitlement that because they are rugby players they deserve stability and job security. I get that rugby as an industry has more going for it than a steel plant or investment banking in terms of its benefits for wider society, but if demand for a product doesn't exist in other industries, then the industry adjusts and cuts its headcount.

Why is rugby being portrayed as different? Its the responsibility of the players to themselves and their families to make sure they have a Plan B for life. If my boss sacks me today, I'll be straight onto the job boards taking whatever I can get to provide for my family. If pro rugby players don't have a Plan B, then they are either extremely thick or incredibly complacent.

robmatic wrote: ↑Tue Feb 21, 2023 9:03 am

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Tue Feb 21, 2023 8:22 am I've always gone on the assumption that a pro rugby team would run on around £10M per year.

However The Top 14 operate on 18M Euros at the low end (Perpignan) to near 44M Euros at the top (Toulouse). The Gallagher Premiership figures say that the salary cap is at £5M, plus allowances for injuries, capped players etc of over a million, plus a couple of marquee players. Then there is the cost of running the team, travel, accommodation, ground costs, medical and other insurances etc, you might get away with 10 to 15 million per club.

Wales will be like Scotland, the SRU runs the entire game from minis up to international. The SRU spent £21M on pro rugby last year, that was over the two teams, we are good payers apparently, but Wales will be looking at at double that expenditure with the four sides, having said that, isn't there private ownership, at least in part, of three of the sides?

Looking at the state of the Welsh region's squads, they shouldn't be spending as much per club as the SRU. They should also have much better income from the regions as well compared to in Scotland - wasn't that long ago when 3k was a good crowd for either Edinburgh or Glasgow.

CM11 wrote: ↑Tue Feb 21, 2023 10:07 am Part of the problem is comparing like with like.

You can't compare, let's say, Owen Farrell's Sarries salary to Sexton's Irish salary. For starters the contracts would be structured differently but it ignores the significant amount extra Farrell gets to play for England.

This is the issue when you separate club and country, you're negotiating two separate contracts. One to play for club and one country.

SaintK wrote: ↑Tue Feb 21, 2023 10:20 am

CM11 wrote: ↑Tue Feb 21, 2023 10:07 am Part of the problem is comparing like with like.

You can't compare, let's say, Owen Farrell's Sarries salary to Sexton's Irish salary. For starters the contracts would be structured differently but it ignores the significant amount extra Farrell gets to play for England.

This is the issue when you separate club and country, you're negotiating two separate contracts. One to play for club and one country.

Does Sexton get "image rights" payments from Ireland/Leinster as well to bolster overall earnings?

Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Tue Feb 21, 2023 9:32 am

robmatic wrote: ↑Tue Feb 21, 2023 9:03 am

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Tue Feb 21, 2023 8:22 am I've always gone on the assumption that a pro rugby team would run on around £10M per year.

However The Top 14 operate on 18M Euros at the low end (Perpignan) to near 44M Euros at the top (Toulouse). The Gallagher Premiership figures say that the salary cap is at £5M, plus allowances for injuries, capped players etc of over a million, plus a couple of marquee players. Then there is the cost of running the team, travel, accommodation, ground costs, medical and other insurances etc, you might get away with 10 to 15 million per club.

Wales will be like Scotland, the SRU runs the entire game from minis up to international. The SRU spent £21M on pro rugby last year, that was over the two teams, we are good payers apparently, but Wales will be looking at at double that expenditure with the four sides, having said that, isn't there private ownership, at least in part, of three of the sides?

Looking at the state of the Welsh region's squads, they shouldn't be spending as much per club as the SRU. They should also have much better income from the regions as well compared to in Scotland - wasn't that long ago when 3k was a good crowd for either Edinburgh or Glasgow.

I remember going up to watch Sarries play Glasgow at Hughenden. That's a club ground, IIRC there is one small stand, a clubhouse on the other side and a step or two of terracing. There were at most a couple of thousand people there. A few years later we came back up for a winner takes all decider in the Heineken Cup where a fan we got chatting to on the way in excitedly told us they'd be opening a second stand at Firhill for the game. Now Glasgow have a proper stadium, respectable crowds and the ability to sell out etc. All this in a city with probably the least rugby tradition of any large British city (open to other options).
Tells you a lot that Wales have failed to do anything similar in a nation where rugby is allegedly the national sport and their sides have been packed with Grand Slam winners.

inactionman wrote: ↑Tue Feb 21, 2023 10:19 am From memory, Irish players get a very attractive tax break from the Irish taxman (which I think is depended upon them retiring there but not sure of details).

It's not pay per se, but it is significant in terms of takehome, but does make like-for-like comparisons a bit difficult to make.

CM11 wrote: ↑Tue Feb 21, 2023 10:27 am

SaintK wrote: ↑Tue Feb 21, 2023 10:20 am

CM11 wrote: ↑Tue Feb 21, 2023 10:07 am Part of the problem is comparing like with like.

You can't compare, let's say, Owen Farrell's Sarries salary to Sexton's Irish salary. For starters the contracts would be structured differently but it ignores the significant amount extra Farrell gets to play for England.

This is the issue when you separate club and country, you're negotiating two separate contracts. One to play for club and one country.

Does Sexton get "image rights" payments from Ireland/Leinster as well to bolster overall earnings?

Not from Ireland/Leinster as such, his image rights would be part of his contract as opposed to a separate payment. His overall salary is topped up privately, I believe, but all part of the same contract negotiations. In other words, I don't believe he's a free agent in that regard. He'd be one of only a couple with this arrangement.

pjm1 wrote: ↑Tue Feb 21, 2023 10:28 am

Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Tue Feb 21, 2023 9:32 am

robmatic wrote: ↑Tue Feb 21, 2023 9:03 am

Looking at the state of the Welsh region's squads, they shouldn't be spending as much per club as the SRU. They should also have much better income from the regions as well compared to in Scotland - wasn't that long ago when 3k was a good crowd for either Edinburgh or Glasgow.

I remember going up to watch Sarries play Glasgow at Hughenden. That's a club ground, IIRC there is one small stand, a clubhouse on the other side and a step or two of terracing. There were at most a couple of thousand people there. A few years later we came back up for a winner takes all decider in the Heineken Cup where a fan we got chatting to on the way in excitedly told us they'd be opening a second stand at Firhill for the game. Now Glasgow have a proper stadium, respectable crowds and the ability to sell out etc. All this in a city with probably the least rugby tradition of any large British city (open to other options).
Tells you a lot that Wales have failed to do anything similar in a nation where rugby is allegedly the national sport and their sides have been packed with Grand Slam winners.

If that was the turgid 6-6 draw in horizontal rain, I was at that game as well (with another English lad, both of us cheering on Warriors). I loved Hughenden in spite of the lack of facilities - it was a proper rugby club setup, but woefully inadequate for stuff like HEC. Scotstoun is completely next level and brings an awesome matchday experience. Also the involvement of local mini/midi rugby clubs is really well done: my lad has played games on the side park pre Warriors match, then been in the middle with flags clapping on the players for the "main event". It's very well set up and executed.

The SRU (for all its many other failings) has managed the player base surprisingly well. With a bucket load of players in England and the odd few in France, they avoid the concentration downside of having just 2 pro teams, but only have to pay for 2 pro teams. The downside of player access is, for me, a red herring... we should not be playing internationals outside of the windows as player burnout is a big enough problem. The downside of not being able to dictate where and how overseas players play is limited because the majority of the squad do actually play for the two SRU teams, so can be actively managed.

The RFU approach is a complete shit-show as well, so not worth learning from... aside from avoiding pretty much everything they've done and continue to do.

The WRU is definitely in a mess and I feel could learn a lot from the SRU approach and what has worked well. PB's point about Glasgow being a non-rugby area is fair, but by focusing on just two regions, they've been able to make the most of the East vs West rivalry and still leave room for the big pro/am clubs (both super six and the rest of the national league structure).

Every institution needs to live within its own means and rugby as a whole has been failing to do that. The English set up is one of the worst examples, in spite of the shit ton of money Twickenham can bring in. The WRU seems to have been guilty of much the same, but with far smaller budgets, player numbers and, frankly, supporter buy-in to the structures created/imposed. The Irish model is working exceptionally well, but I think that is more down to the (fortunate) peculiarities of the school/club setup and support base in Ireland. I'm not as well informed about that, so will just leave it there.

Final point about the players: employers should take a degree of responsibility for ensuring their employee base is somewhat clued up about "life", finances etc. I know my (smallish) firm does, and most of our people are financial types. With so many young players coming straight into the system from school, I do believe the unions, clubs, regions etc. should take it upon themselves to make sure players are educated about financial responsibility, security and the like - especially with such short careers. I suspect some do it well, others less so. Yes, it's ultimately the players' responsibility to make plans and have backups, but they'll only do that if they're either already switched on to that, or educated that they need to get on the case.

Leicester Tigers 157,167 12,090
Saracens 101,441 9,222
Northampton Saints 85,647 7,786
Bath 91,968 7,664
Gloucester 73,430 6,675
London Irish 65,115 5,920
London Wasps 73,719 5,671
Harlequins 51,460 4,678
Bristol 51,024 4,639
Newcastle Falcons 55,065 4,589
Sale Sharks 30,939 2,813
Rotherham Titans 27,963 2,542

Harlequins 258,381 21,532
Leicester Tigers 264,613 20,354
Bristol Bears 214,977 17,915
Bath 167,184 13,932
Northampton Saints 163,436 13,619
Gloucester 140,703 12,791
Exeter Chiefs 146,389 12,199
Saracens 150,058 11,542
Wasps 119,173 9,931
London Irish 103,079 9,370
Worcester Warriors 83,817 6,984
Sale Sharks 71,383 5,948
Newcastle Falcons 64,246 5,840

CM11 wrote: ↑Tue Feb 21, 2023 10:30 am

inactionman wrote: ↑Tue Feb 21, 2023 10:19 am From memory, Irish players get a very attractive tax break from the Irish taxman (which I think is depended upon them retiring there but not sure of details).

It's not pay per se, but it is significant in terms of takehome, but does make like-for-like comparisons a bit difficult to make.

They don't get that while working although you are correct it can't be ignored in the comparisons.

Irish players will generally accept lower pay than they could get abroad to stay in the system and play for Ireland. There is a bit of balancing out in terms of the aforementioned tax refund and a longer career.

Biffer wrote: ↑Tue Feb 21, 2023 11:00 am

CM11 wrote: ↑Tue Feb 21, 2023 10:30 am

inactionman wrote: ↑Tue Feb 21, 2023 10:19 am From memory, Irish players get a very attractive tax break from the Irish taxman (which I think is depended upon them retiring there but not sure of details).

It's not pay per se, but it is significant in terms of takehome, but does make like-for-like comparisons a bit difficult to make.

They don't get that while working although you are correct it can't be ignored in the comparisons.

Irish players will generally accept lower pay than they could get abroad to stay in the system and play for Ireland. There is a bit of balancing out in terms of the aforementioned tax refund and a longer career.

There's something like a ten year time condition on the tax break isn't there?

Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Tue Feb 21, 2023 10:59 am I had in mind it was 3-3, but then it was hard to see the other side of the pitch in the driving rain!

Re: English clubs/learning from the SRU etc, I think it is much more of a mixed bag than you're making out.
Let's use 2000 as a 'year zero' for the sake of argument. Here's the attendance figures (first total then average):

Leicester Tigers 157,167 12,090
Saracens 101,441 9,222
Northampton Saints 85,647 7,786
Bath 91,968 7,664
Gloucester 73,430 6,675
London Irish 65,115 5,920
London Wasps 73,719 5,671
Harlequins 51,460 4,678
Bristol 51,024 4,639
Newcastle Falcons 55,065 4,589
Sale Sharks 30,939 2,813
Rotherham Titans 27,963 2,542

Then the same for last season:

Harlequins 258,381 21,532
Leicester Tigers 264,613 20,354
Bristol Bears 214,977 17,915
Bath 167,184 13,932
Northampton Saints 163,436 13,619
Gloucester 140,703 12,791
Exeter Chiefs 146,389 12,199
Saracens 150,058 11,542
Wasps 119,173 9,931
London Irish 103,079 9,370
Worcester Warriors 83,817 6,984
Sale Sharks 71,383 5,948
Newcastle Falcons 64,246 5,840

The growth is pretty stark. Sorry about the formatting.

This doesn't account for facility improvement either. Just over 20 years ago roughly half the league was groundsharing with a football club, often crap grounds as well, and Rotherham had/have a cricket square on one touchline. Most of the rugby only grounds were pretty dismal places, I remember vividly how dreary the Stoop was with its open stands behind the goal and marquees along one 22, lines of benches at Welford Road etc. Last season there were three footballing ground shares, of which one was Bristol which works very well and is set up for both sports, one was Irish who finally moved back to London to a superb new stadium, and the other, well let's not ruin my point. Wasps were owners rather than renters, in fairness.
Pretty much every other side has put massive investment into its facilities over that same period. Quins have a genuinely superb rugby only stadium that consequently they fill. Leicester have built the second largest single tiered stand in Britain after the Kop and draw 20,000 plus easily. Kingsholm has two new stands and an artificial pitch. Franklins Gardens is an excellent stadium, Sandy Park the same (and recently expanded again). Sarries have made the best of an average situation at Copthall and have continued to improve it.

This is before we talk training facilities which is another story on which pretty much all teams come out looking rosy, or the on field product which is fantastic, or their deal with BT Sport which provides as good rugby coverage as you can get.

Tl;dr - Premiership rugby has had massive investment in the game, and has had a lot of success. Salaries are ahead of where they should be, but the real crisis has come from two dodgy owners and covid, not the whole structure. The Prem has also, as you alluded to, been a major boon for Scottish and to an extent Welsh rugby as well. Certainly Sale in particular could learn from Glasgow, but the Prem has carried a lot of water for the wider British game and to suggest the whole thing is a shitshow requires ignoring a huge amount of good that has been done.

Wales have cancelled the planned announcement of their team to face England as the threat of a players strike continues to loom over the Six Nations clash.
Gatland had been due to announce his matchday 23 for the fixture at 12pm on Tuesday, but will now no longer do so.
The Welsh Rugby Union (WRU) and players are locked in negotiations over contracts for next season, with deals yet to be offered to out-of-contract players.

All professional rugby players in Wales have been invited to a meeting with WRU officials on Wednesday 22 February amid the ongoing issue with contracts, ITV Wales understands.Players have warned they will strike if a resolution is not reached by Wednesday.

inactionman wrote: ↑Tue Feb 21, 2023 10:19 am From memory, Irish players get a very attractive tax break from the Irish taxman (which I think is depended upon them retiring there but not sure of details).

It's not pay per se, but it is significant in terms of takehome, but does make like-for-like comparisons a bit difficult to make.

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Tue Feb 21, 2023 8:22 am The SRU spent £21M on pro rugby last year, that was over the two teams, we are good payers apparently, but Wales will be looking at at double that expenditure with the four sides, having said that, isn't there private ownership, at least in part, of three of the sides?

Jim Lahey wrote: ↑Tue Feb 21, 2023 5:46 am I have a lot of sympathy for the players' cause, and how much of a shit show the WRU seem to have created.

But, reading some of the articles online recently, you get the sense that pro rugby players have a sense of entitlement that because they are rugby players they deserve stability and job security. I get that rugby as an industry has more going for it than a steel plant or investment banking in terms of its benefits for wider society, but if demand for a product doesn't exist in other industries, then the industry adjusts and cuts its headcount.

pjm1 wrote: ↑Tue Feb 21, 2023 12:36 pm
Sorry for not being clearer - I was really meaning the WRU should be looking at the SRU approach and taking the best/working bits of it. Rather than seeking to emulate the IRFU model, which seems to have been their goal?

Interesting to break those attendance figures down a little - Quins rely on big occasions to up their average, two games at Twickenham accounted for nearly half their total attendance, it's a bit disappointing they don't manage to convert some of those fans into regulars at the Stoop. Saracens have similar but smaller effect with 40k in one game at Spurs (and given it's Sarries who knows how many of those were freebies). I'm not for a second saying these sales or attendances shouldn't count, more that it emphasises just how much bigger Leicester are week to week, game to game, than the rest (although I hadn't realised how good Bristol's crowds are, that's great to see).

weegie01 wrote: ↑Tue Feb 21, 2023 2:25 pm

Jim Lahey wrote: ↑Tue Feb 21, 2023 5:46 am I have a lot of sympathy for the players' cause, and how much of a shit show the WRU seem to have created.

But, reading some of the articles online recently, you get the sense that pro rugby players have a sense of entitlement that because they are rugby players they deserve stability and job security. I get that rugby as an industry has more going for it than a steel plant or investment banking in terms of its benefits for wider society, but if demand for a product doesn't exist in other industries, then the industry adjusts and cuts its headcount.

One of my sons played for a Welsh Premier club in Wales. He could not believe the amount of money players got compared to the equivalent in Scotland, but he has also mentioned the sense of entitlement.

The amounts paid at that level inflated the salaries at the bottom of the pro level, and so on up the scale. As far as he could tell, the Welsh players at all levels absolutely believed that they were worth every penny, and if they got more than elsewhere, that was just because they were better.

weegie01 wrote: ↑Tue Feb 21, 2023 2:25 pm

Jim Lahey wrote: ↑Tue Feb 21, 2023 5:46 am I have a lot of sympathy for the players' cause, and how much of a shit show the WRU seem to have created.

But, reading some of the articles online recently, you get the sense that pro rugby players have a sense of entitlement that because they are rugby players they deserve stability and job security. I get that rugby as an industry has more going for it than a steel plant or investment banking in terms of its benefits for wider society, but if demand for a product doesn't exist in other industries, then the industry adjusts and cuts its headcount.

One of my sons played for a Welsh Premier club in Wales. He could not believe the amount of money players got compared to the equivalent in Scotland, but he has also mentioned the sense of entitlement.

The amounts paid at that level inflated the salaries at the bottom of the pro level, and so on up the scale. As far as he could tell, the Welsh players at all levels absolutely believed that they were worth every penny, and if they got more than elsewhere, that was just because they were better.