Is the Heineken too big for its own good?


By The Barfly
November 9 2004

The first two rounds of the Heineken Cup could, when we look back at the end of the season, turn out to be the turning point of the season. (or maybe just the light of an oncoming train in the tunnel) The change of competition has provided a change of focus away from a Zurich campaign that had come off the rails, and given fresh impetus to the season.

 

However, with the number and quality of matches, not to mention the standard of some of the facilities, I can’t help wondering: ‘Is the Heineken Cup too big? Is it really the elite competition that it markets itself to be?’

The logic behind the present composition of the competition is overwhelmingly logical: take the top six clubs from England and France, and mix and match from the other four countries for the other 12.

The consequence is that while you have full houses, such as at Franklin’s Gardens against the Scarlets, you also have had farcical situations, with matches being played on a quagmire, or in front of 1,000 spectators desperately trying to generate an atmosphere in a stadium built for 60,000.

You don’t imagine the marketing people in the Super 12 head offices quivering in their boots as the quest to be the ‘world’s hardest non-international competition’ heats up.

What benefit is there for the Scottish, Welsh and Italian sides in competing in a competition that they’re not going to win, have their facilities or pulling power shown up, and with the obvious exception of Treviso last weekend, going to get beaten by the better-trained sides of England, France and Ireland?

This is a rhetorical question, of course, because Llanelli and Edinburgh have both reached the knockout stages, and various other sides have derailed the ambitions of their more illustrious counterparts in the so-called ‘big three of Europe’.

Still, shouldn’t there be some sort of criteria for entry, both on and off the field?

Much has been written about the qualification standards, that some sides have less pressure on them throughout the season as their entry into the following year’s European Cup is guaranteed. This also means that, unlike prospective candidates for the Premiership, there is no pressure on these sides to improve their facilities off the field. For example, I was told of the bar area at Hughenden being so small that there wasn’t enough room for everyone, nor were they able to take beer back to their position in the stands. This isn’t going to attract new supporters, no matter the composition of the opposition, particularly when the match is on live TV.

I think that the Heineken is too big, and that it should be reduced down to

16 teams made up from the top four from England and France, top two from Italy, and the top six in the Celtic League.

Make the competition one for the elite, and everyone else can battle it out in the Challenge Cup.

There is another reason why I think this should be done.

As the Heineken takes a break, eyes are now turning towards the autumn internationals, and the ongoing fears of player burnout.

The Zurich gave way to the Heineken, which in turn gives way to a series of matches where the English players will face South Africa and Australia, scenting blood as their hosts restructure after the myriad of retirements.

Back to the Heineken for two games that will make or break a club’s season, and that’s before Christmas.

In addition, the intensity of the Zurich and Heineken are now such that when the Lions arrive in Auckland, the English-based players could end up being carried for the first couple of weeks by those from the Celtic League. Never a good thing, especially if there is a substantial proportion of the squad earning their living in the Premiership.

Elite players in the British Isles work on a two-year cycle. World Cup followed two years later by a Lions tour, then back to the World Cup, all interspersed with the Heineken, domestic competitions, the Six Nations and extra-curricular internationals.

Compare this with the southern hemisphere, where the elite players have the Super 12, Tri-Nations and tours, the World Cup, and the pressured environment of hosting a Lions tour only once every 12 years. Given that the privilege for them is much more, as whole generations of players will miss out on the chance of playing the Lions, is it any wonder that, no matter how good a side we put out, we’ll always be the underdog?

Reducing the size of the Heineken Cup will, at one stroke, enhance its prestige, and allow the players in other squads some time in a less pressured competition, time on the bench while squads are rotated, and ultimately, slow down the steady advancement towards a sport where a player will only have a five year shelf-life. Not to mention enhancing our competitiveness on the international stage.