Samoa wants £160K cut

[rowan]

A typically juvenile response from Digby, but I'm not ignoring anything. I'm not actually involved with hosting international rugby teams personally, and if providing accommodation for visiting teams is the responsibility of the host nation, that's news to me. Do they also foot the bill for training facilities, meals, attire and daily expenditure? I'm pretty sure they don't. & the only point I was making was that Samoan talas don't go very far in this respect. Only a redneck would have a problem with this.

Meanwhile, World Rugby have just pledged £20 million support toward the Pacific Islands AI tours for the current four-year cycle, ending in 2019, an increase of 19 per cent. Hats off to them for this initiative!

[Puja]

A typically juvenile response from Digby, but I'm not ignoring anything. I'm not actually involved with hosting international rugby teams personally, and if providing accommodation for visiting teams is the responsibility of the host nation, that's news to me. Do they also foot the bill for training facilities, meals, attire and daily expenditure? I'm pretty sure they don't. & the only point I was making was that Samoan talas don't go very far in this respect. Only a redneck would have a problem with this.

I actually thought it was quite a calm and informative one. There's no need to leap for insults Rowan - we're trying to have a conversation about rugby.

The RFU have already stated that they're paying for all of Samoa's costs for the length of time (including meals, training facilities and rugby-related expenditure) they're in England (as they have done the last eight years when we've hosted a PI) and this year the Scots are following suit. It was in that article that I linked and quoted on this thread, so it's not unreasonable for Digby to expect you to already know that. It's not a responsibility of the host nation, but the RFU are being generous and supportive.

Puja

[Digby]

A typically juvenile response from Digby, but I'm not ignoring anything. I'm not actually involved with hosting international rugby teams personally, and if providing accommodation for visiting teams is the responsibility of the host nation, that's news to me. Do they also foot the bill for training facilities, meals, attire and daily expenditure? I'm pretty sure they don't. & the only point I was making was that Samoan talas don't go very far in this respect. Only a redneck would have a problem with this.

I actually thought it was quite a calm and informative one. There's no need to leap for insults Rowan - we're trying to have a conversation about rugby.

The RFU have already stated that they're paying for all of Samoa's costs for the length of time (including meals, training facilities and rugby-related expenditure) they're in England (as they have done the last eight years when we've hosted a PI) and this year the Scots are following suit. It was in that article that I linked and quoted on this thread, so it's not unreasonable for Digby to expect you to already know that. It's not a responsibility of the host nation, but the RFU are being generous and supportive.

Puja

Actually we are obliged to stump up for hotel costs, Samoa as the visiting team are pretty much only responsible for their inbound/outbound travel. We're also responsible for travel costs once they're in England, and other expenses too quite likely, what is going to be set out in the tour agreement and that I've not seen. This situation would reversed should be ever do the decent thing and tour Samoa, though it's possible we'd want to pay for more than Samoa would make available, just as Clive did in SA all those years ago when he moved the squad into the best local hotel.

[rowan]

But I'm not the one starting with the insults, Puja, and you know it well. Indeed, you are the ones attempting to derail a discussion about the plight of Pacific rugby by starting with the insults. You've admitted yourself that you think juvenile wind-ups are really, really clever - then feign indignation at any similar response.

Anyway, the details of hosting arrangements are academic. The point is there is a great deal of expense involved in touring, obviously, something only a redneck would find contentious, and the Samoan talas aren't going to go far in meeting those costs, are they? So I think it's not unreasonable for them to request assistance, and the response has in fact been quite positive.

[Digby]

But I'm not the one starting with the insults, Puja, and you know it well. Indeed, you are the ones attempting to derail a discussion about the plight of Pacific rugby by starting with the insults. You've admitted yourself that you think juvenile wind-ups are really, really clever - then feign indignation at any similar response.

Anyway, the details of hosting arrangements are academic. The point is there is a great deal of expense involved in touring, obviously, something only a redneck would find contentious, and the Samoan talas aren't going to go far in meeting those costs, are they? So I think it's not unreasonable for them to request assistance, and the response has in fact been quite positive.

You being a numpty started with a list of things Samoa would have to pay for to help build a case for they should get more money, and some of the things you cite aren't things they'd have to pay for as per established rugby protocol. And I'm not averse to the idea Samoa should get more money, nor on the face of it is Puja, we just don't agree on the model which will inform payments of money.

[rowan]

Actually we are obliged to stump up for hotel costs, Samoa as the visiting team are pretty much only responsible for their inbound/outbound travel. We're also responsible for travel costs once they're in England, and other expenses too quite likely, what is going to be set out in the tour agreement and that I've not seen. This situation would reverse should be ever do the decent thing and tour Samoa, though it's possible we'd want to pay for more than Samoa would make available, just as Clive did in SA all those years ago when he moved the squad into the best local hotel.

Silly comments again, Digby. You're not obliged to "stump" for anything. You just don't invite teams if if it's not going to be feasible for them to visit. That's common sense. Everybody knows the situation with the Pacific Islands, and I think most genuine rugby fans also recognize the invaluable contribution they make to the game and its quadrennial showpiece tournament. So the larger and wealthier unions help them out not because they are "obliged" to, but because they understand it's in the best interests of the international game.

[Digby]

What's not feasible about Samoa visiting the UK and France? It's been done many times before suggesting it's very much on the cards, the one big expense they have is travel, and actually a decent number of players are likely based across the UK, Ireland and France, so you're not even looking at long haul return flights in a good number of cases

[rowan]

It would certainly be instructive to have a simple breakdown of their projected expenditure. The players are professionals and will expect to be paid something, I suppose. An increased percentage of the gate, rather than a straightforward 'donation,' would also provide more incentive for them to be competitive on the field (we know teams often only show up to get paid on these tours), while also allowing them a little more self-respect, as the extra income would be based entirely on their own 'marketability.'

[Digby]

A % of the gate for the visiting team isn't uncommon in sports, though it would come with concerns in rugby. Partly it's not been done before, so many sides have invested in stadia in the understanding those revenues would be theirs to disperse as they saw fit, but where my concern would be is that you'd make the RFU still more powerful, you want to play England and get a share of Twickenham gate receipts, then we want your vote on x, y and z, and that sort of process is bad enough already.

[Puja]

But I'm not the one starting with the insults, Puja, and you know it well. Indeed, you are the ones attempting to derail a discussion about the plight of Pacific rugby by starting with the insults. You've admitted yourself that you think juvenile wind-ups are really, really clever - then feign indignation at any similar response.

The first insult on this thread was you responding to JDory asking a question by sarcastically calling him Einstein.

You really do baffle me sometimes Rowan. Occasionally, you seem to be in the mood for talking about rugby and you do know a reasonable bit and keep yourself well informed. Sometimes, there are good and interesting conversations to be had, like this one was. And on other occasions, you randomly decide that everyone's slighting you, throw a hissy fit and call everyone juvenile and cowards, and seem entirely unaware that you're making everyone laugh at you for how little composure you have and, ironically, how immature you're being.

I really cannot work out whether it's worth engaging with you or not.

Puja

[Puja]

A % of the gate for the visiting team isn't uncommon in sports, though it would come with concerns in rugby. Partly it's not been done before, so many sides have invested in stadia in the understanding those revenues would be theirs to disperse as they saw fit, but where my concern would be is that you'd make the RFU still more powerful, you want to play England and get a share of Twickenham gate receipts, then we want your vote on x, y and z, and that sort of process is bad enough already.

I don't know how much of a risk that is - aren't the main fixtures set by World Rugby? The only ones that the RFU get to choose are the 4th autumn international, which we're generally bribing someone for anyway.

Puja

[morepork]

But I'm not the one starting with the insults, Puja, and you know it well. Indeed, you are the ones attempting to derail a discussion about the plight of Pacific rugby by starting with the insults. You've admitted yourself that you think juvenile wind-ups are really, really clever - then feign indignation at any similar response.

Anyway, the details of hosting arrangements are academic. The point is there is a great deal of expense involved in touring, obviously, something only a redneck would find contentious, and the Samoan talas aren't going to go far in meeting those costs, are they? So I think it's not unreasonable for them to request assistance, and the response has in fact been quite positive.

Digby did no such thing. You are talking shit. Again. Pull your head in.

Samoa could try and get back the huge amount of money given by people to the church. No there's a big pool of money badly allocated.

[Digby]

A % of the gate for the visiting team isn't uncommon in sports, though it would come with concerns in rugby. Partly it's not been done before, so many sides have invested in stadia in the understanding those revenues would be theirs to disperse as they saw fit, but where my concern would be is that you'd make the RFU still more powerful, you want to play England and get a share of Twickenham gate receipts, then we want your vote on x, y and z, and that sort of process is bad enough already.

I don't know how much of a risk that is - aren't the main fixtures set by World Rugby? The only ones that the RFU get to choose are the 4th autumn international, which we're generally bribing someone for anyway.

Puja

I was supposing there was a longer term aim of sharing gate receipts across all matches, not just those outside IRB9

[rowan]

But I'm not the one starting with the insults, Puja, and you know it well. Indeed, you are the ones attempting to derail a discussion about the plight of Pacific rugby by starting with the insults. You've admitted yourself that you think juvenile wind-ups are really, really clever - then feign indignation at any similar response.

Anyway, the details of hosting arrangements are academic. The point is there is a great deal of expense involved in touring, obviously, something only a redneck would find contentious, and the Samoan talas aren't going to go far in meeting those costs, are they? So I think it's not unreasonable for them to request assistance, and the response has in fact been quite positive.

Digby did no such thing. You are talking shit. Again. Pull your head in.

Samoa could try and get back the huge amount of money given by people to the church. No there's a big pool of money badly allocated.

Redneck comments from Moronpork. What else would we expect. The guy has a real chip about Pacific Islanders

[morepork]

How's that mate? I know the community gives a LOT of money to the church. I grew up in the culture, remember?

[rowan]

A % of the gate for the visiting team isn't uncommon in sports, though it would come with concerns in rugby. Partly it's not been done before, so many sides have invested in stadia in the understanding those revenues would be theirs to disperse as they saw fit, but where my concern would be is that you'd make the RFU still more powerful, you want to play England and get a share of Twickenham gate receipts, then we want your vote on x, y and z, and that sort of process is bad enough already.

I don't know how much of a risk that is - aren't the main fixtures set by World Rugby? The only ones that the RFU get to choose are the 4th autumn international, which we're generally bribing someone for anyway.

Puja

I was supposing there was a longer term aim of sharing gate receipts across all matches, not just those outside IRB9

Increased share of the gate is the only intelligent solution. It provides incentive. Handouts don't. If all you offer is handouts, don't be surprised if they play like bums.

[Puja]

Is "redneck" the insult of the day? Last week it was "cowards".

Puja

[morepork]

I believe that is this weeks predetermined narrative, yes. Pretty rich from a Palagi of indeterminate origin resident in Turkey, but hey ho.

[Digby]

I don't know how much of a risk that is - aren't the main fixtures set by World Rugby? The only ones that the RFU get to choose are the 4th autumn international, which we're generally bribing someone for anyway.

Puja

I was supposing there was a longer term aim of sharing gate receipts across all matches, not just those outside IRB9

Increased share of the gate is the only intelligent solution. It provides incentive. Handouts don't. If all you offer is handouts, don't be surprised if they play like bums.

We look forward to a brave new world where France, England and Wales tour to France, England and Wales. And those nations with the big stadiums exert political pressure in return for allowing others in. It also begs the question as to whether other nations should share the cost of construction if they're going to share in the returns

I'm all for having a sensible fixture list and even for some sharing of TV monies. I do have an issue with sharing gate receipts given construction and renovation costs.

[Mikey Brown]

I hope this thread culminates in somebody getting banned.

[Puja]

Love you too Mikey.

Puja

[morepork]

So juvenile.

[zer0]

One outs, g.

[rowan]

I see where you guys are coming from on this...

[Puja]

Not exactly tipping the scales towards being worth engaging with here Rowan.

Puja