'We will certainly use 2007 as a reference point... history can inspire us'

Thing is, I think rugby can do better than footballs version. I think for instance I wanted everyone in it to think they can win it, where you're talking about trying to make so the worst teams in it are not giving up when they are so far off the pace that we get really bad scorelines (when that and giving up to concentrate on the league is happening together). I know it's not realistic to think those same exact teams are going to be competitive with a different model but I am inclined to think more competitive teams make it in with another modem. It's a catch 22 of course, you want teams to fight to be there next year, but they don't want to be there next year when theres less interest in it because the results are less interesting than league ones. If you ensure the best 20 possible make it somehow (say currently) each year they quickly change focus when things aren't going well enough and again interest dies. Will you're approach gradually work overtime? With the approach of the French league were a top 6 mega rich Premier League type club system might develop, maybe it will? But what of a model like Englands were its fairly competitive top 8 but orders or performances can jump around quite easily one year to the next? If the England sides are strong comparatively to the rest do they still remain in EPCR despite not consistently dominating in their own league?

So I really like that you could have a way to remedy that, but personally I would want my model to not need that crutch. Some of this is the same problem that football has. I really like the landscape in both the URC and Prem, but Ireland with Leinster specifically, and France, are a problem IMO. In football this has turned CL pool stages in to simply cash cow fixtures for the also ran countries teams who just want to have a Real Madrid or ManC to lose to in their pool for that bumper revenue hit. It's always been a comp that had suffered for real interest until the knockouts as well (they might have changed it in recent years?).

You've got some great principles but I'm not sure it's going to deliver on that hard hitting impact right from the start without the best teams playing in it. I think you might need to think about the most minimal requirement/way/performance, a team needs to execute to stay in the Champions Cup as I was having some thougt about that earlier and had some theory I can't remember. First they could get entry by being a losing quarter finalist in the challenge, then putting all their eggs in the Champions pool play bucket in order to never finish last in their pool, all the while showing the same indifference to their league some show to EPCR rugby now, just to remain in champions. You extrapolate that out and is there ever likely to be more change to the champions cup that the bottom four sides rotate out each year for the 4 challenge teams? Are the leagues ever likely to have the sort of 'flux' required to see some variation? Even a good one like Englands.

I'd love to have a table at hand were you can see all the outcomes, and know how likely any of your top 12 teams are going break into Champions rubyg on th back it it are?

Certainly makes eye contact, and it’s certainly reckless which means he’s facing anything between an 8 - 208 week ban. Which is quite a range!

The biggest issue I had with Cane as Skipper was his absence for nearly 50% of tests played. Through injury. Buck Shelford wrote an article on this very issue in 2021, suggesting Cane should relinquish the captaincy & concentrate on availability when fit.

There's a strong argument that he's working both the eyes. It's his left hand he uses which is furthest from the ball he's contesting. His fingers are also clenched which I don't think is a natural way to try and rip a ball.

"I don't like your model that requires them to reach Semi Final level in the Challenge trophy, given the bottleneck that will be URC with 16 teams playing for only 4 places."

my model would have given SA 3 spots in a 16 team CC this year, which is the same number as they have in the 24 team version that is actually taking place. But yes, if they keep getting worse it would get harder for them to get places. It would also get harder for you to argue that they deserve places though!

"I suggest by giving say Englands two semi finalist first seeds of the english teams, then the next best 4 on the league table as much better (it catches improving teams faster)."

interesting argument, but it doesn't always go that way. Gloucester are improving, but they improved in cup competitions before league fixtures started going their way. The same is true of Sharks, and the same was true of la Rochelle. I think maybe this is just an argument for allowing more teams to qualify via the challenge cup!

"the seasons a so bloatedly that if they can only fully concentrate on one, you're specifically trying to make that the EPCR over their league?" if the CC is the pinnacle of european rugby then teams should prioritise it, or at least EPCR should try to encourage teams to prioritise it. When teams don't prioritise it, it makes the competition worse. When teams do prioritise it I think they should be rewarded.

Overall though I like my idea best because my thinking is, each league should get a few qualification spots, and then the rest of the spots should go to the next best teams who have proven an ability to be competitive in the champions cup. The elite French clubs generally make up the bulk of the semi-final spots, but that doesn't (necessarily) mean that the 5th-8th best French clubs would be competitive in a slimmed down champions cup. The CC is always going to be really great competition from the semis onwards, but the issue is that there are some pretty poor showings in the earlier rounds. Reducing the number of teams would help a little bit, but we could improve things further by (i) ensuring that the on-paper "worst" teams in the competition have a track record of performing well in the CC, and (ii) by incentivising teams to prioritise the competition. Teams that have a chance to win the whole thing will always be incentivised to do that, but my system would incentivise teams with no chance of making the final to at least try to win a few group stage matches.

"I'm afraid to say"

Its christmas time; there's no need to be afraid!

It is specifically why I suggested most of the domestic teams models in the URC as reason to increase (give a comparitive equal share based on entrants) their involvement, I see those teams, SA in particular, as only improving their performances in EPCR.

In a world where your current disposition towards their performances continues (SA'n sides only ever give themselves a shot at winning in home matches), they should do what Jones suggested and just straight kick them out.

Now of course, you have suggested ways to fix some of the problems for SA'n sides, so if and when that happens, I don't like your model that requires them to reach Semi Final level in the Challenge trophy, given the bottleneck that will be URC with 16 teams playing for only 4 places.

It may only be small factors, but I'd at least prefer those teams enter Champions Cup a year or two before that, when theyre good enough, so atleast flipping it and doing what I suggest by giving say Englands two semi finalist first seeds of the english teams, then the next best 4 on the league table as much better (it catches improving teams faster).

But wants the point of bitting the bullet in favour of EPCR? What's to gain simply by shifting incentive from one comp to another?