rugbyunion
Latest News:

The COML Message Board

The place for discussion, debate and nonsense about Bath Rugby.

Join our new Facebook Group today!

New visitors please read the house rules before posting

Test your prognostications at our Prediction League

 

opti
Optimist (IP Logged)

Rare mis-step by Rob Baxter?
27 April, 2017 14:40
He's generally full of common sense, but i'm not sure just anyone would get away with some of this on the subject of season length, player welfare.

"The players aren’t being exploited because no one’s making any money out of it."

"Player welfare is important but you’ve got to look at the bigger picture."

"There’s no point talking about the welfare of players who might not be professional players in two years because they’re at a club that goes bankrupt.”

"what are we getting them fit and strong for if Premiership clubs start going bust?"

 
by
by (IP Logged)

Re: Rare mis-step by Rob Baxter?
27 April, 2017 14:54
He does have a good point though.

 
MESSAGES->author
hasta (IP Logged)

Re: Rare mis-step by Rob Baxter?
27 April, 2017 15:10
He perhaps could have expressed it better. Basically the underlying point is - no one's making money, so if players want/need to play fewer games then they'll need to all take paycuts so that squads can be increased for more rotation.

 
opti
Optimist (IP Logged)

Re: Rare mis-step by Rob Baxter?
27 April, 2017 16:27
You could, though, read it as:

Let's sort out the profitability of clubs before we worry about player welfare.

Given the attrition rate (which undermines the appeal of the product); given the fact that rugby players and young men are not exactly renowned for thinking about their own long-term health, that's a very dangerous position for Baxter to be taking.


"The players aren’t being exploited because no one’s making any money out of it."

This is nonsense. The players could be exploited in order to reduce losses.


"Player welfare is important but you’ve got to look at the bigger picture."

Player welfare is important. Period.


"There’s no point talking about the welfare of players who might not be professional players in two years because they’re at a club that goes bankrupt.”

Yes. There, really, really is.


"what are we getting them fit and strong for if Premiership clubs start going bust?"

For the rest of their lives, maybe. For other aspects of their current lives. For their ability to make a living should their current club dispense with their services.

 
Trev's Big Tackle
Trev's Big Tackle (IP Logged)

Re: Rare mis-step by Rob Baxter?
27 April, 2017 17:01
Sky, BT etc make a lot of money from making the players play more games.

 
MESSAGES->author
Which Tyler (IP Logged)

Re: Rare mis-step by Rob Baxter?
27 April, 2017 17:17
Quote:
Optimist
You could, though, read it as:
Let's sort out the profitability of clubs before we worry about player welfare.

Given the attrition rate (which undermines the appeal of the product); given the fact that rugby players and young men are not exactly renowned for thinking about their own long-term health, that's a very dangerous position for Baxter to be taking.


"The players aren’t being exploited because no one’s making any money out of it."

This is nonsense. The players could be exploited in order to reduce losses.


"Player welfare is important but you’ve got to look at the bigger picture."

Player welfare is important. Period.


"There’s no point talking about the welfare of players who might not be professional players in two years because they’re at a club that goes bankrupt.”

Yes. There, really, really is.


"what are we getting them fit and strong for if Premiership clubs start going bust?"

For the rest of their lives, maybe. For other aspects of their current lives. For their ability to make a living should their current club dispense with their services.
http://www.rugbyrebels.co/board/download/file.php?id=267


A man who cannot change his mind, cannot change anything
RAEBURN SHIELD


Beno Obano - 2016-17 adoptee
http://www.rugbyrebels.co/board/download/file.php?id=117

 
Lastofthemohawks
Lastofthemohawks (IP Logged)

Re: Rare mis-step by Rob Baxter?
27 April, 2017 17:20
Optimist

You could read it that way, however he does also say that players will choose to move to the clubs were they are looked after.

In any business that is losing money at some stage the employees get asked some difficult questions and I think Rob is expressing that if player demands put an extra strain on a business they might end up without a club to employ them.

At the end of the day there won't be a debate about player welfare in pro rugby if there is no pro rugby. I think that is more his point about turkeys and xmas.

 
opti
Optimist (IP Logged)

Re: Rare mis-step by Rob Baxter?
27 April, 2017 17:31
I don't think Rob Baxter is a bad guy, or that he doesn't care about player welfare. But I do think the governing bodies have only been spurred into action in order to mitigate future liability. Genuine, meaningful player welfare initiatives seem to go out of the window the minute a lucrative TV contract or a full stadium hoves into view.

 
Bathovalballer
Bathovalballer (IP Logged)

Re: Rare mis-step by Rob Baxter?
28 April, 2017 01:30
Having spoken to Rob Baxter on more than one occasion, I can say he is a very decent, honest, open, thoughtful man who has the true rugby spirit running through his ex farmer's limbs. He is also a realist and understands how the business works and rightly states if things do not stack up financially and is able to sustain itself, like any other business, many present club employees, not just players, will find themselves at the Job Centre.

He knows all clubs need to attract more spectators or raise more revenue just to stand still, and that this needs to happen across the country to have a competitive league. Once the finances are sorted, more player welfare will follow. It is not bad now but could improve significantly given more cash at the clubs.

He also is very strong on player welfare and point blank refuses to play any player who is not fully fit, and will not knowingly play any player carrying a knock. That is why he firmly believes and says it is necessary to maintain and run a large playing squad of good quality players in all positions. His players also know his thoughts on these matters and respect him for it.

 
DownSouth
DownSouth (IP Logged)

Re: Rare mis-step by Rob Baxter?
28 April, 2017 06:59
The Exeter PR machine swings into action.

(bucket)

 
DorsetBoy
Dorset Boy (IP Logged)

Re: Rare mis-step by Rob Baxter?
28 April, 2017 10:49
BoB - so if we watch Exeter this weekend we won't see any strapping or taping on the players except on the thighs of those forwards who are lifted in the lineout? No protective tape on cuts such as Flouw has?

Cloud cuckoo land springs to mind.

 
MESSAGES->author
jayeatman (IP Logged)

Re: Rare mis-step by Rob Baxter?
28 April, 2017 11:09
When it comes to welfare, the players are their own worst enemies, from knowing how to fake HIA assessments to covering up injuries for fear of being dropped. They really do need protection from themselves. Ex-players like Baxter know this. They have to be absolutely steadfast in protecting their boys ahead of results. Easy to say. Very hard to do given the commercial pressures as Baxter's comments seem to show.



BATH supporter since 1975

Adopted players:
2015/6 Tom Homer
2016/7 Matt Banahan

 
cb2
cb2 (IP Logged)

Re: Rare mis-step by Rob Baxter?
28 April, 2017 11:42
Fewer Clubs, larger fuller grounds and an NFL type conference system with just one European wide competion. No Cups or domestic leagues. This would enable you to have larger squads with fewer games. I proposed this ages ago. Base the conferences around local rivalry and then play another conference that year. We could have Exeter, Bath, Glaws, Cardiff, Ospreys and Scarlets in our conference. This would mean 20 games a season with a potential 3 or 4 extra ones for the winner. If 20 is too many, then it could be reduced to 15.

A well-run European conference system would solve a lot of the problems.



http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v248/cb2cb2/rainb03.jpg

 
MESSAGES->author
hasta (IP Logged)

Re: Rare mis-step by Rob Baxter?
28 April, 2017 11:47
Can't see the Prem/Top14 clubs going for that.

 
DanWiley
DanWiley (IP Logged)

Re: Rare mis-step by Rob Baxter?
28 April, 2017 12:21
"larger fuller grounds"

This would seem to be the major sticking point before you even ask the clubs. How do you achieve it?

 
cb2
cb2 (IP Logged)

Re: Rare mis-step by Rob Baxter?
28 April, 2017 12:48
By making the product better and making each of the games more of an occasion. By not playing when your best players are absent or tired and by building better stadia.



http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v248/cb2cb2/rainb03.jpg

 
MESSAGES->author
hasta (IP Logged)

Re: Rare mis-step by Rob Baxter?
28 April, 2017 13:27
Not exactly worked well for Scarlets, Ospreys, Blues.

 
cb2
cb2 (IP Logged)

Re: Rare mis-step by Rob Baxter?
28 April, 2017 17:14
They are not in the right competition.



http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v248/cb2cb2/rainb03.jpg

 
MESSAGES->author
Prarie Dog (IP Logged)

Re: Rare mis-step by Rob Baxter?
28 April, 2017 18:20
Quote:
cb2
Fewer Clubs, larger fuller grounds and an NFL type conference system with just one European wide competion. No Cups or domestic leagues. This would enable you to have larger squads with fewer games. I proposed this ages ago. Base the conferences around local rivalry and then play another conference that year. We could have Exeter, Bath, Glaws, Cardiff, Ospreys and Scarlets in our conference. This would mean 20 games a season with a potential 3 or 4 extra ones for the winner. If 20 is too many, then it could be reduced to 15.
A well-run European conference system would solve a lot of the problems.



Just a farm team from Devon.
We know who we are!

Pawel Vygot.

 
MESSAGES->author
Prarie Dog (IP Logged)

Re: Rare mis-step by Rob Baxter?
28 April, 2017 18:48
Quote:
cb2
Fewer Clubs, larger fuller grounds and an NFL type conference system with just one European wide competion. No Cups or domestic leagues. This would enable you to have larger squads with fewer games. I proposed this ages ago. Base the conferences around local rivalry and then play another conference that year. We could have Exeter, Bath, Glaws, Cardiff, Ospreys and Scarlets in our conference. This would mean 20 games a season with a potential 3 or 4 extra ones for the winner. If 20 is too many, then it could be reduced to 15.
A well-run European conference system would solve a lot of the problems.

Chiefs fan in peace.
As a Chiefs fan through-and-through and season ticket holder part of the rugby experience for me is watching eleven other teams at SP and enjoying their different approaches to the game.
Having eleven different away league venues is also a plus point for the status quo. I know that the lure of games for me would diminish if the opponents were too regular. The proposal is too insular. Succesful teams learn from other opponents, whether in coping with a gameplan or sometimes adopting parts of it. This exposure to other strategies and world class players would be diminished in a conference situation which in my opinion would weaken a players or coaches ability to adapt. Not good for his club or if selected, his country.
Given that, although it's only my view, the prediction of bigger and fuller stadiums is unproved wishful thinking. Clubs are not going to spend millions on developing their stadia on a hunch. However they will, if demand under the current league system suggests greater income.
Just my opinion.

smileys with beer



Just a farm team from Devon.
We know who we are!

Pawel Vygot.

 
Bath Hammer
Bath Hammer (IP Logged)

Re: Rare mis-step by Rob Baxter?
28 April, 2017 22:21
Quote:
Prarie Dog
Quote:
cb2
Fewer Clubs, larger fuller grounds and an NFL type conference system with just one European wide competion. No Cups or domestic leagues. This would enable you to have larger squads with fewer games. I proposed this ages ago. Base the conferences around local rivalry and then play another conference that year. We could have Exeter, Bath, Glaws, Cardiff, Ospreys and Scarlets in our conference. This would mean 20 games a season with a potential 3 or 4 extra ones for the winner. If 20 is too many, then it could be reduced to 15.
A well-run European conference system would solve a lot of the problems.

Chiefs fan in peace.
As a Chiefs fan through-and-through and season ticket holder part of the rugby experience for me is watching eleven other teams at SP and enjoying their different approaches to the game.
Having eleven different away league venues is also a plus point for the status quo. I know that the lure of games for me would diminish if the opponents were too regular. The proposal is too insular. Succesful teams learn from other opponents, whether in coping with a gameplan or sometimes adopting parts of it. This exposure to other strategies and world class players would be diminished in a conference situation which in my opinion would weaken a players or coaches ability to adapt. Not good for his club or if selected, his country.
Given that, although it's only my view, the prediction of bigger and fuller stadiums is unproved wishful thinking. Clubs are not going to spend millions on developing their stadia on a hunch. However they will, if demand under the current league system suggests greater income.
Just my opinion.

smileys with beer

I agree. I don't like that idea one bit.


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
We record all IP addresses on the Sportnetwork message boards which may be required by the authorities in case of defamatory or abusive comment. We seek to monitor the Message Boards at regular intervals. We do not associate Sportnetwork with any of the comments and do not take responsibility for any statements or opinions expressed on the Message Boards. If you have any cause for concern over any material posted here please let us know as soon as possible by e-mailing abuse@sportnetwork.net
 

Bath Poll

Where do you think we'll finish this season?

See results > Submit >>

Who is online?

Total users online:  

Most users online:  

Users on this site:  

Where are they?