Fraser Dingwall after Northampton's Champions Cup semi-final defeat to Leinster Photo: David Rogers/Getty Images
It was too much A big step for both English teams competing in the semi-finals of Europe's premier club competition, the Investec Champions Cup. Northampton Saints' immaculate comeback against Leinster was unsuccessful, with the powerful Irish province given a scare but ultimately emerging victorious 20-17. It was probably exactly what one would expect from Saints, who were a bit out of sorts against Harlequins last week. There is no shame in losing to a team with such high European pedigree.
Things were a little different when it came to the Harlequins visiting another European aristocracy – Toulouse. If not for one of Quins' infamous first halves, in which they missed five tries, they might have won. As it was, their own mistakes were mercilessly punished by Toulouse, especially a yellow card to Jack Walker, and Quins' dominance in the second half meant little.
These gutsy defeats will undoubtedly be painful for everyone associated with English clubs. Well, almost everyone, because there is a small group of people at Saints and Quins who may well have had mixed emotions as they considered the financial implications of moving forward.
Marcus Smith reflects on Harlequins' exit from Europe after losing to Toulouse in Sunday's semi-final. Photo: David Rogers/Getty Images
The current reward structure for participation in the Champions Cup is markedly different from other sports. By comparison, the winners of FA Cup second round matches win £67,000 and they split the gate money, with 45 per cent going to each team and 10 per cent to the Football Association, which is redistributed through the football pyramid. . For the semi-finals and final, the winning prizes are £1 million and £2 million respectively, with the losers again receiving £500,000 and £1 million respectively. When it comes to the Champions League, you are in a different stratosphere. Winners receive around €20 million (£17 million), runners-up €15 million and semi-finalists €12.5 million.
Various sources, including European Professional Rugby, have confirmed that this year's Champions Cup has no prize money, with clubs receiving and sharing revenue from things like travel receipts. This will probably come as a surprise to most rugby fans, and indeed sports fans who assume that progress in cup competitions must necessarily mean accompanying financial success.
The clubs voted on this structure and it was not imposed by EPCR so this is not an attack on the governing body. There are opposing views on this issue. However, the anomalies that this financial structure generates may prompt the parties involved to want to revisit the topic and consider whether it is working as expected.
In the rounds leading up to the semi-finals and final, the competing clubs split the proceeds from ticket sales. This means that both clubs' costs are covered and, in the home team's case, can result in a profit. In the case of, say, Leinster playing at the Aviva Stadium, this could mean both sides sharing the proceeds from the nearly 52,000 spectators. If the game had been played at Croke Park the figures would have been higher as the capacity was 82,000. In many cases, Leinster's opponents will be better off playing away as they will receive more money than playing at home.
Lack of remuneration plays into the hands of French teams
When it comes to the final two stages of the Champions Cup, ticket revenues remain with EPCR, with net profits shared among all teams competing in that year's competition. There is a provision to cover the costs of teams competing in the semi-finals and finals, but there is no guarantee that these will be fully reimbursed and several sources have told me that these costs could be as high as £50,000, depending on where they are to be paid . travel.
This is an almost socialist model of pooling income and redistributing it in this way. At least this way every club gets something, even those who only participate in the very early stages of the tournament. On the other hand, it goes against the natural order of cup competitions, which almost always reward progress and victory. It doesn't seem right that the final four teams and winners could suffer financial losses for their efforts.
The final and perhaps unrecognized effect of this policy is to perpetuate the advantage it provides. the best funded teams, which include most of the top 14 teams. Take for example one of Wales' regional teams, which is known to be in financial difficulties; It's not easy to imagine that a successful cup run and an unlikely cup win could leave them in a difficult financial position. Is it time to rethink?
Recent Comments