jblee, I believe freely expressing one's opinion is the lifeblood of any forum and welcome it.
However, the ability to challenge another's opinion is of equal value.
Taking offence when someone does the latter adds no value to any argument. Qualifying your views and assertions is a different matter altogether.
London Irish
Re: London Irish
Oh well I tried but my irony meter has broken now!
-
Southstand
- Posts: 11
- Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2026 2:21 pm
Re: London Irish
Meanwhile back in the world of Rugby https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2026/ ... clubs-debt
Re: London Irish
The current direction of Premiership Rugby is an affront to the competitive integrity and heritage of English rugby. Proponents claim that moving to a closed franchise system secures the financial future of the sport, but the reality is that the 10-team Premiership has become an exclusive, hypocritical rich boys' club.
The league's administrators spout rhetoric about meritocracy, claiming that any aspiring newcomer simply needs to "spend at least one season in the second-tier Championship." This is complete nonsense.
The astronomical costs required to entry and the artificial criteria imposed on lower-tier sides act as a prohibitive moat. It is designed to protect underperforming incumbents while forcing ambitious grassroots clubs to break the bank and jeopardize their own financial futures just to get a seat at the top table.
Furthermore, the defense that billionaire investment from the likes of Red Bull, Dyson, and the Black Knight Group signals health is an illusion.
According to the Leonard Curtis report, six of the ten Premiership clubs are balance-sheet insolvent, yet the response is to double down on an owner-funded model that insulates billionaires from the consequences of poor management.
By eliminating relegation, the league removes the fundamental sporting principle that risk cuts both ways. The incumbents want the rewards of professional sport without the jeopardy of failure, building a closed circus that prioritizes corporate bubble wrap over fair, open, and authentic rugby competition.
The league's administrators spout rhetoric about meritocracy, claiming that any aspiring newcomer simply needs to "spend at least one season in the second-tier Championship." This is complete nonsense.
The astronomical costs required to entry and the artificial criteria imposed on lower-tier sides act as a prohibitive moat. It is designed to protect underperforming incumbents while forcing ambitious grassroots clubs to break the bank and jeopardize their own financial futures just to get a seat at the top table.
Furthermore, the defense that billionaire investment from the likes of Red Bull, Dyson, and the Black Knight Group signals health is an illusion.
According to the Leonard Curtis report, six of the ten Premiership clubs are balance-sheet insolvent, yet the response is to double down on an owner-funded model that insulates billionaires from the consequences of poor management.
By eliminating relegation, the league removes the fundamental sporting principle that risk cuts both ways. The incumbents want the rewards of professional sport without the jeopardy of failure, building a closed circus that prioritizes corporate bubble wrap over fair, open, and authentic rugby competition.
Re: London Irish
Eggchaser (Tim)'s podcast on the finance of rugby as a whole, seems to agree with you Rothman. He cites: wealthy owners, fragmented structure (RFU manage England and Prem Rugby manage the Premier ship), the historical roots of how Rugby union became professional (not much we can do about that) and the notion of Niche sport spending like a globally renowned sport (with facilities that are barely used). The seasonal nature of the game and the high level of player welfare also add to the challenges of balancing the books. The English game is in a bad shape with most of the Prem Teams technical insolvent and relying on "passion backing". Our sport also relies heavily on "big Events". Rugby Australia cleared its debt and made a record surplus becuase of the Lions tour. The Prem Franchising is an attempt to mimic the cricket 100 and IPL but with Cricket the IPL is a massive market and this does not exist for rugby yet. We have to grow the sport from grass roots but the return on investment is too slow for big investors. France, have bucked the trend and have a healthy top 14 system. But they have widened their appeal with great promotion and a National team that plays great and reasonably successful rugby. so it falls back to the international shop window and the RFU getting their act together.
Re: London Irish
"Tim from Eggchasers has hit the nail on the head, but his points actually reinforce why the Premiership's franchise model is a house of cards.
Comparing rugby to the IPL or The Hundred exposes the core delusion of Premiership Rugby.
Cricket could shift to a short-form franchise model because it sits on an astronomical, guaranteed broadcast market of over a billion fans. The ECB could sell stakes in The Hundred because they are buying into a globally dominant, hyper-monetised sport with massive digital media rights.
Rugby Union has absolutely none of that infrastructure. Trying to copy the IPL blueprint without the IPL’s market size is pure commercial vanity.
The comparison to France's Top 14 is the ultimate proof that the English executives are looking in the wrong direction.
France didn't build a healthy system by sealing the doors and operating a 'closed circus.' They did it by embracing a fiercely competitive, open pyramid system with promotion and relegation. Because jeopardy exists, small-town clubs and local communities are completely bought into the narrative.
They have genuine grassroots engagement, local tribalism, and massive terrestrial TV audiences because the game belongs to the fans, not an insulated boardroom of millionaires trying to manufacture a niche product.
By killing relegation to satisfy 'passion backers' who don't want to lose their investments, the Premiership is cutting off the very thing that makes European sport special: authentic risk, community heritage, and meritocracy.
If the return on investment from the grassroots is 'too slow' for these big investors, then those investors shouldn't be running our sport in the first place."
Comparing rugby to the IPL or The Hundred exposes the core delusion of Premiership Rugby.
Cricket could shift to a short-form franchise model because it sits on an astronomical, guaranteed broadcast market of over a billion fans. The ECB could sell stakes in The Hundred because they are buying into a globally dominant, hyper-monetised sport with massive digital media rights.
Rugby Union has absolutely none of that infrastructure. Trying to copy the IPL blueprint without the IPL’s market size is pure commercial vanity.
The comparison to France's Top 14 is the ultimate proof that the English executives are looking in the wrong direction.
France didn't build a healthy system by sealing the doors and operating a 'closed circus.' They did it by embracing a fiercely competitive, open pyramid system with promotion and relegation. Because jeopardy exists, small-town clubs and local communities are completely bought into the narrative.
They have genuine grassroots engagement, local tribalism, and massive terrestrial TV audiences because the game belongs to the fans, not an insulated boardroom of millionaires trying to manufacture a niche product.
By killing relegation to satisfy 'passion backers' who don't want to lose their investments, the Premiership is cutting off the very thing that makes European sport special: authentic risk, community heritage, and meritocracy.
If the return on investment from the grassroots is 'too slow' for these big investors, then those investors shouldn't be running our sport in the first place."
-
Cheshire Exile
- Posts: 34
- Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2026 8:49 pm
Re: London Irish
The RFU seem mesmerised by the NFL in the States, but don’t seem to understand the huge TV contract that the league has. They also are missing the astoundingly popular college football leagues, which attract huge crowds and associated TV coverage.