"Weakened" side against Quins?
This is not Sale's problem, rather one created by the RFU and a ridiculous reward system which they are now complying with.
The very implementation of EQP means a club will regularly have to field an XV that isn't the first selection, so, if Sale leave this to the last game of the season where is the problem?
This is not Sale's problem, rather one created by the RFU and a ridiculous reward system which they are now complying with.
The very implementation of EQP means a club will regularly have to field an XV that isn't the first selection, so, if Sale leave this to the last game of the season where is the problem?
Re: Sale to field home grown talent and face sanction(?)?
Gareth Redux
(IP Logged)
05 May, 2012 09:22
It IS Sale's problem as they knew the rules. It may not be Steve Diamond's problem per se but it most certainly is the club's.
Re: Sale to field home grown talent and face sanction(?)?
PhilHallFan
(IP Logged)
05 May, 2012 09:26
Sorry but what rule is being broken? Aren't clubs free to field weakened sides if they choose to?
They need to average 14 eng qual players over the season to get £80k
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/05/2012 09:38 by CoochieCoo.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/05/2012 09:38 by CoochieCoo.
But, the RFU can't kick up a fuss Gareth, because any team will need to field a weakened team/s to comply during any season.
Every time SD is not starting next season without an injury means Bath are not fielding their best team.
It seems like astute squad management to me with Diamond keeping this "joker" up his sleeve to the last moment ensuring the best possible league finish for Sharks.
Every time SD is not starting next season without an injury means Bath are not fielding their best team.
It seems like astute squad management to me with Diamond keeping this "joker" up his sleeve to the last moment ensuring the best possible league finish for Sharks.
Re: Sale to field home grown talent and face sanction(?)?
Gareth Redux
(IP Logged)
05 May, 2012 09:38
He inherited a low percentage and has to manage that if the club want their £80K, that will be Brian Kennedy's call. What has made me smile is that he's been cheeky enough to name an all English 23 which means if they get punished it'll make the RFU look incredibly stupid.
So SD is 1 player in the match day squad so the club would then have 8 other players who are not EQ to comply with the rule. Think the rule is good as it ensures that the game is not dominated by overseas players.
It is quite cute - but I guess the RFU don't specify how each club should hit their "average" so I can't see how they can criticise Sale. Ultimately the coaches must be trying to improve the results and performance of their teams surely - not developing players for England as a priority?
Maybe the RFU academies should be consistently supplying a higher quality apprentice?
Maybe the RFU academies should be consistently supplying a higher quality apprentice?
Bod you do realise the RFU aren't the ones kicking up a fuss right? In fact no one has yet, not even Premiership Rugby who are the ones who would stand to be p-ed off. The RFU's EQP scheme is working and is good for English Rugby.
Your cluelessness knows no bounds. I know you can't resist drilling what you take issue with into our heads every day, non stop, the same old dull bollox in every post, but some objectivity might help.
Your cluelessness knows no bounds. I know you can't resist drilling what you take issue with into our heads every day, non stop, the same old dull bollox in every post, but some objectivity might help.
Quote:CoochieCoo
So SD is 1 player in the match day squad so the club would then have 8 other players who are not EQ to comply with the rule. Think the rule is good as it ensures that the game is not dominated by overseas players.
I reckon there are indeed well intended reasons for this policy, however CC, when you roll up at the Rec for your entertainment (??OK pushing it a bit this season??) don't you expect to see the best possible starting XV for your money, and the best from the opponents - or should Bath explicitly state on STs etc that the punter should not have the expectation to get best value for money?
Why not designate so many games per season as development games to help comply with EQP and price them accordingly?
Fairly sure they don't have two props on the bench either.
Hope they get absolutely battered.
Hope they get absolutely battered.
Quote:Bod
It is quite cute - but I guess the RFU don't specify how each club should hit their "average" so I can't see how they can criticise Sale.
Not rocket science, in game 1 you play 12 EQ players and in game 2 you need to play 16 EQ to balance. You have the whole AP season to balance the books but if you get too far behind there is a lot of catching up to do. I guess that this would be the Team Manager's job to inform the coaches how far they are behind (or ahead) during the season.
Quote:ballsout
Bod you do realise the RFU aren't the ones kicking up a fuss right? In fact no one has yet, not even Premiership Rugby who are the ones who would stand to be p-ed off. The RFU's EQP scheme is working and is good for English Rugby.
Your cluelessness knows no bounds. I know you can't resist drilling what you take issue with into our heads every day, non stop, the same old dull bollox in every post, but some objectivity might help.
What's up bo? Just discovered the unexpected side effects in your pants from your excessive cider intake last night?
Just keep you bum cheeks taught for a while eh to avoid the embarrasing Farticles?
Why would PR fine Sale for complying with RFU edict?
Clarify my boundless cluelessness and dull bollox for me, and perhaps many others?
But what about if a good % of the EQPs are away at RWCs or 6Ns?
I believe a mix of overseas players and EQ players is good for the game but the balance has to be achieved unlike in footie where certain clubs only field a token Englishman. I go to Bath to watch players of all ilk but would be more entertained if they were home grown and EQ.
Quote:Bod
But what about if a good % of the EQPs are away at RWCs or 6Ns?
The teams that seem to fill the England 6N side don't seem to have a problem like Quins, Saints and Tiggers.
Quote:Ex-BodQuote:ballsout
Bod you do realise the RFU aren't the ones kicking up a fuss right? In fact no one has yet, not even Premiership Rugby who are the ones who would stand to be p-ed off. The RFU's EQP scheme is working and is good for English Rugby.
Your cluelessness knows no bounds. I know you can't resist drilling what you take issue with into our heads every day, non stop, the same old dull bollox in every post, but some objectivity might help.
What's up bo? Just discovered the unexpected side effects in your pants from your excessive cider intake last night?
Just keep you bum cheeks taught for a while eh to avoid the embarrasing Farticles?
Cringe.
Quote:Ex-Bod
Why would PR fine Sale for complying with RFU edict?
Clarify my boundless cluelessness and dull bollox for me, and perhaps many others?
You go on and on and on and on about the same points over and over, never letting up, the same clueless anti-RFU, anti-England, anti-Bath management bollox and you can't admit you were wrong in this and many other cases.
Sale aren't 'complying with the RFU edict', they're looking to make a quick buck with their last game of the season. The RFU might be a bit peeved at the way Sale go about upping their average in their last meaningless game, but Premiership Rugby are the ones who'll be most annoyed given it's their 'product' that's being devalued.
I don't think your endless bollox needs any more clarifying, it's polluted this board for long enough.
Sale aren't breaching any rules, but are they complying with the spirit of the game and the spirit in which the (IMO good) rule was introduced? Clearly not.
It depends on your viewpoint I guess. If you think professional rugby is about winning at all costs, getting away with as much cheating as you can and that the old values of sportsmanship etc are meaningless then you will probably think Steve Diamond is great. Personally I think the game would be better without people like him - and I don't suppose Sarries and Tiggers are too chuffed either!
It depends on your viewpoint I guess. If you think professional rugby is about winning at all costs, getting away with as much cheating as you can and that the old values of sportsmanship etc are meaningless then you will probably think Steve Diamond is great. Personally I think the game would be better without people like him - and I don't suppose Sarries and Tiggers are too chuffed either!
"Bod states "Ultimately the coaches must be trying to improve the results and performance of their teams surely - not developing players for England as a priority?
Maybe the RFU academies should be consistently supplying a higher quality apprentice?"
A lot of the points you raise on ERE you could have discussed with Dave GUYAN
Which RFU academies do you mean Girls or Mens?
Maybe the RFU academies should be consistently supplying a higher quality apprentice?"
A lot of the points you raise on ERE you could have discussed with Dave GUYAN
Which RFU academies do you mean Girls or Mens?
Quote:PhilHallFan
Sorry but what rule is being broken? Aren't clubs free to field weakened sides if they choose to?
The rules of most competitions include a rule that clubs play their strongest available teams.
Stuart
Former ed.
This rule is intended to ensure clubs are incentivised to employ more EQPs in their overall squads, not to control who is in the starting lineup in any given week. If you have more EQPs in your 40 the issue of having weakened line ups to comply doesn't come up.
Stuart
Former ed.
Stuart
Former ed.
The RFU rule seems sensible, the problem comes as the 'strongest' team is a subjective thought. Does our strongest team include Donald or Heathcote?
Re: Sale to field home grown talent and face sanction(?)?
PhilHallFan
(IP Logged)
07 May, 2012 06:45
So it seems Premier Rugby is investigating the Saturday selections of all 12 sides. Under I guess some vague rule that sides must not damage the integrity of the league.
Re: Sale to field home grown talent and face sanction(?)?
PhilHallFan
(IP Logged)
07 May, 2012 07:13
If Premier Rugby is so concerned about the integrity of the league perhaps it should require clubs to maintain squads that are capable of competing during international absences. Wasps were saved from relegation by their try bonus point against Leicester during the WC. It's really a farce.
Re: Sale to field home grown talent and face sanction(?)?
Rucking Carl
(IP Logged)
07 May, 2012 08:17
Sale felt safe in the knowledge that their HC slot was safe as Bath had to get 5 points at Welford Road and therefore played a team that would net them some cash. Like it or not, rugby is a business now. They must have had a pretty decent average for most of the season otherwise they wouldn't have been able to do this for the last match. I don't see a problem with them exploiting a loophole to boost their income a bit. I'm sure this loophole will now be closed.
They had the "worst" average in the league Carl, but only just below the cut off.
Stuart
Former ed.
Stuart
Former ed.
This is what happens when you don't have a ringfenced league.
Quote:
So much for your bollox about the RFU being the ones to kick up a fuss eh>
Re: Sale to field home grown talent and face sanction(?)?
Rucking Carl
(IP Logged)
08 May, 2012 06:35
Quote:TCM2007
They had the "worst" average in the league Carl, but only just below the cut off.
Well in that case Stu, doesn't it prove that generally this cash incentive is working if everyone else is sticking to it properly?
Sale abused it slightly but if there is a loophole that can be exploited you know that the moneymen will find it.
It does indeed Carl.
Stuart
Former ed.
Stuart
Former ed.
PhilHallFan - thought it was Vesty who saved then......
Re: Sale to field home grown talent and face sanction(?)?
Rucking Carl
(IP Logged)
09 May, 2012 08:17
Quote:MikeGC
PhilHallFan - thought it was Vesty who saved then......
Not true PHF, if Vesty had dotted down and cost Wasps the losing bonus point they still would have stayed up on points difference.
Also Newcastle getting relegated is purely down to them being absolutely rubbish until February, you can't really blame another team's player in an (technically) unrelated match.
Re: Sale to field home grown talent and face sanction(?)?
PhilHallFan
(IP Logged)
09 May, 2012 08:26
RC - I didn't suggest it was Vesty's fault. Read my post. I said that if Premier Rugby are so concerned about the integrity of the league they should look at the clubs who can't put out a competetive side during international absences, like Leicester who conceded a try bonus point defeat to Wasps. It's the reason we don't regard the team that comes top of the league as champions. The same applies at the bottom. Newcastle beat Wasps home and away.
Falcolns going down won't change a great deal in the AP next season.
Sorries and Tiggers will be the teams to beat, with hopefully a much more consistent showing from Bath, concentrating of doing the simple stuff very well.
Sorries and Tiggers will be the teams to beat, with hopefully a much more consistent showing from Bath, concentrating of doing the simple stuff very well.
Re: Sale to field home grown talent and face sanction(?)?
Rucking Carl
(IP Logged)
09 May, 2012 12:05
Quote:Sorry PHF, it was MikeGC I was responding to.PhilHallFan
RC - I didn't suggest it was Vesty's fault. Read my post. I said that if Premier Rugby are so concerned about the integrity of the league they should look at the clubs who can't put out a competetive side during international absences, like Leicester who conceded a try bonus point defeat to Wasps. It's the reason we don't regard the team that comes top of the league as champions. The same applies at the bottom. Newcastle beat Wasps home and away.
Sorry, you do not have permission to post/reply in this forum.
