A very good listen with two men talking a lot of sense with balanced viewpoints. Good for them speaking up and putting their views of the RFU and what is to come on record. I haven't heard many other clubs doing the same.
Interesting to hear about how Rams and Reading RFC are going to be working together. Will Rams only be running semi-pro/elite sides with Reading offering social rugby then?
Reading used to be a higher level side 20 years ago and it seems like role reversal now with Rams heading on an upward trajectory. Hopefully they have the infrastructure, fan base, players and finances to make it work.
A very good listen with two men talking a lot of sense with balanced viewpoints. Good for them speaking up and putting their views of the RFU and what is to come on record. I haven't heard many other clubs doing the same.
Interesting to hear about how Rams and Reading RFC are going to be working together. Will Rams only be running semi-pro/elite sides with Reading offering social rugby then?
Reading used to be a higher level side 20 years ago and it seems like role reversal now with Rams heading on an upward trajectory. Hopefully they have the infrastructure, fan base, players and finances to make it work.
Reading RFC to offer social rugby Rams RFC to offer semi pro / fully pro (potentially) elite + a vibrant mini & junior section (as that is where some of the players of the future will come)
We think we have the infrastructure, we have shown that “if we build it, they will come” especially if we play home games on a Friday night, players only time will tell, finances we hope so but we’ve risen through the leagues by NOT spending a fortune on players, only time will tell if we need to change our business model ….
We have been blessed with a CEO (with the club for nearly 25 years) & Chairman (joined the club as a colt over 45 years ago) who eat, sleep and drink Rams RFC and supported by large numbers of willing volunteers who see the bigger picture ….
I remember we had rivalries with Reading on our rise through the leagues in the nineties.
I also recall visiting their ground in November 2000 when we were in the Prem although this game was in the National Cup. We won 46-27. They were in National 3 South (then level 4) at the time.
A very good set of well measured answers to highly relevant questions…..don’t throw the baby out with the bath water, sacking the CEO will not drive the change required, decision making and funding needs to be closer to the action.
I note that whenever anyone criticises the council, they always like to say that their own council member is doing a good job.
While the 57 old farts used to run the game., the council no longer has any actual power.
It is the board - and specifically the CEO - that manages Twickenham and negotiates the TV contracts for international matches.
And then decides how to distribute that money - how much to give to the England teams, how much to the Premiership clubs, and how much to the rest of the wider game.
The council do not have any say on any of those negotiations.
They are presented as a fait accompli.
I agree that if you were structuring the council now, you would not start here.
And that we are suffering from poor decision made 100 years ago as well as more recently.
But do not get distracted from who is mismanaging the game now.
I note that whenever anyone criticises the council, they always like to say that their own council member is doing a good job.
While the 57 old farts used to run the game., the council no longer has any actual power.
It is the board - and specifically the CEO - that manages Twickenham and negotiates the TV contracts for international matches.
And then decides how to distribute that money - how much to give to the England teams, how much to the Premiership clubs, and how much to the rest of the wider game.
The council do not have any say on any of those negotiations.
They are presented as a fait accompli.
I agree that if you were structuring the council now, you would not start here.
And that we are suffering from poor decision made 100 years ago as well as more recently.
But do not get distracted from who is mismanaging the game now.
100% right. The Council already contains about 25 people who owe their position on it to BS or his predecessors. They have no power and are not responsible for most of what is angering clubs at all levels. That Rams podcast is just regurgitating the lines Twickenham has been trying to leak out for the past fortnight: 'that this is not a genuine expression of unhappiness but a malicious campaign by a few disgruntled individuals, working in cahoots with the press.'
They either believe that and are totally out of touch with the rest of the game or they don't and have other reasons for saying what they did.
Pressure mounts on Bill Sweeney as 141 clubs call for his sacking
RFU rejects validity of letter, which requests that board terminate chief executive’s employment ‘as soon as practicably possible’, stating it is out of date and lacking appropriate signatures
The scale of the revolt against Bill Sweeney was laid bare on Thursday night as 141 clubs from across England piled unprecedented pressure on the RFU board to sack him.
Sweeney, 67, faces the greatest challenge to a standing RFU chief executive in the professional era, in light of the pay and bonuses scandal which erupted in November.
The rebels who have moved against him, and have already successfully seen off the chairman Tom Ilube, who resigned before Christmas, have gathered in huge numbers to express their disdain for the RFU leadership.
They have far surpassed the 100 member signatures required to call for a special general meeting (SGM). Clubs across several levels of English rugby, from the Championship downwards, and throughout every region of the country have officially signed up, showing the level of anger across the country.
On Thursday evening The RFU received notice of the motion to call for an SGM, which includes a request for the union’s board to terminate Sweeney’s employment “as soon as practicably possible”.
ADVERTISEMENT
The RFU, however, have rejected the validity of this letter on bureaucratic grounds. Their rules state that any call for an SGM must be signed by two leaders of each club — this letter they have received has no signatures, but lists the 141 clubs that support it.
The RFU also say it is out of date, as two of the motions mention Ilube, who has already left. The rebels purposefully did not update the motion they sent to clubs in December, otherwise they would have to restart the entire pain-staking process.
Ilube, the former RFU chairman, departed last month
KIRSTY O’CONNOR/PA
If the appropriate signatures are forthcoming Sweeney will therefore face the music by the end of next month, during the Six Nations.
The RFU board can resist a call from the membership to sack Sweeney. Constitutionally, the clubs can only remove the chairman.
Those that are rallying support for this rebellion have gone public as they want more clubs to sign up. They have been writing to clubs directly since mid-December as they are worried that many have not received their call to join, as their letters have been blocked by some RFU council members who they claim are either staying “silent” or briefing others not to sign up.
ADVERTISEMENT
They cite Sweeney’s pay, “excessive bureaucracy” for registering players, poor financial results — the RFU have lost around £130million over the last two World Cup cycles — the “debacle” of the introduction of a lower tackle-height in community rugby, poor governance and “wasted money spent on sacking England coaching staff” as reasons for their dismay.
Some of the signatories of the motion to remove him have offered a stinging criticism of his leadership, many going public for the first time.
In a statement from the Rugby Football Referees’ Union (RFRU), who have been organising the uprising, and member clubs of the RFU, the union’s administration stands accused of a “failure to find a whole-game solution to the whole-game problems English rugby faces”.
The RFU have been told they are “driven by data, not by empathy” and that there is an “overwhelming” and “universal” feeling they are not doing a good job.
Beaumont has been brought in by the RFU as interim chairman
DAVID DAVIES/PA
The statement adds: “Further resolutions may well be tabled following the publication of the [legal firm] Freshfields review into extraordinary bonus payments made in a year of extraordinary financial losses.
ADVERTISEMENT
“The signatories to the letter now urge other member clubs and constituent bodies who have not been able so far to join — or have not been aware of this mass movement to bring about reform and positive change — to add their weight.”
Much of the ill feeling in the game has coalesced after the RFU published its annual report last year. The Times revealed before it was published that Sweeney was paid £1.1million, including a bonus of £358,000. This was a record pay-packet for the leader of a British sports governing body — excluding pay-offs.
Since those revelations were made public, the pressure mounted on the RFU leadership. Chairman Ilube, 61, was seen as “target No1” for a large, angry faction of the game as he signed off on the award of these bonuses as part of the remuneration committee.
The RFU has always stood by its long-term incentive plan (LTIP), through which Sweeney unlocked his large bonus, although have refused to take questions on it publicly.
ADVERTISEMENT
The governing body installed the LTIP in 2021 to keep a strong executive team together during the pandemic, and reward them for their service in that time, although two of the executive team left before it matured in 2024. The RFU says it was put in after an extensive “external benchmarking” process, yet critics of it feel it was not an appropriate scheme for a sports governing body.
Ilube eventually was convinced to resign in late December, as the Times revealed, and will be replaced as chairman on an interim basis by Sir Bill Beaumont, 72.
Summing up the fury, Paddy McAlpine, the chairman of Chichester RFC from level six of English rugby’s pyramid, said: “Every club I know wants to see change at the top, new leadership and a new approach to taking English rugby forward at all levels.”
Having received the letter, the RFU said: “The letter contains a number of inaccuracies. It does not comply with the relevant requirements and is therefore invalid as a requisition for an SGM.”
QuoteReply Posted: 12 hours 51 minutes ago at 21:40
I heard early last week on the Championship Clubs Podcast that the RFU was going to reject the letter on just these grounds. More proof than ever that they need to go.
QuoteReply Posted: 12 hours 41 minutes ago at 21:50
It's utterly ridiculous. And they have screwed it up. A journalist friend tells me that the organisers of the letter knew that they had to forward to the RFU 300+ emails (2 from each signatory) confirming the club or CB was supporting the motion. Obviously you can't append 300 emails to an email with a letter in it, so they sent the letter with a list of clubs and then started to batch the 300 emails into groups of 6 and forwarded them to the RFU Secretary. Instead of waiting to see what might follow, some clown in the press office leapt on the fact that there were no signature/confirmation emails on the actual letter and declared it 'ultra vires' or whatever Handforth Parish Council would say. So in a couple of days they are going to have to reverse themselves and say the letter is valid and call an SGM. And in the meantime just make themselves look like the pettiest of bureaucrats. Of course in those extra 2 or three days the CEO will have earned himself the price of another sharp suit.
QuoteReply Posted: 11 hours 6 minutes ago at 23:25
One For The Ditch wrote:
A very good set of well measured answers to highly relevant questions…..don’t throw the baby out with the bath water, sacking the CEO will not drive the change required, decision making and funding needs to be closer to the action.
I strongly dissagree, Bill Sweeney is at the top, CEO. He needs to be accountable. The game of Rugby Union is in decline and with rugby teams ceasing to exist he needs to go.
QuoteReply Posted: 10 hours 60 minutes ago at 23:31
No 7 wrote:
One For The Ditch wrote:
A very good set of well measured answers to highly relevant questions…..don’t throw the baby out with the bath water, sacking the CEO will not drive the change required, decision making and funding needs to be closer to the action.
I strongly dissagree, Bill Sweeney is at the top, CEO. He needs to be accountable. The game of Rugby Union is in decline and with rugby teams ceasing to exist he needs to go.
QuoteReply Posted: 2 hours 18 minutes ago at 08:13
Taken from BBC
The crisis at the top of English rugby erupted on Thursday evening as grassroots rebels broke cover to demand Bill Sweeney be sacked, only for the Rugby Football Union to reject a petition for a vote on their under-fire chief executive's future.
The point I was attempting to make was that a whole solution needs to be found, with a method of delivery, that moves the game on from the present debacle….this will not be achieved by just ridding ourselves of the current CEO.
The point I was attempting to make was that a whole solution needs to be found, with a method of delivery, that moves the game on from the present debacle….this will not be achieved by just ridding ourselves of the current CEO.
You are quite right. There are many who are calling for Sweeney's head, but offering no suggestions/solutions/plan for the aftermath. Ranting and raving about Sweeney and Co is all very well, but it's short sighted and simplistic to believe that binning one CEO for another will solve all of English rugby's woes.
There can be little doubt that Bill Sweeney has outstayed his welcome and accrued unacceptable bonuses, but no one has put forward a credible way forward for the whole game. One thing that I think we can all agree on is that it is a mess.
Firstly, denying validity just fuels the fire and demonstrates further ineptitude and just how distanced they are from the Community Game (otherwise known as the "Peasants")
If, and its a big IF, Sweeney does depart it will be interesting to see the job description in the recruitment process. It needs to define clear responsibilities regarding the 2000odd peasants and not just looking after the "Elite" and giving them 99% of the income so that more of them can go "bust"
·Keep International
calendar the same – to keep the purists happy.
·Move National Pro
game to summer - games will be played in better weather, making it more
entertaining – warmer supporters = happy supporters. Amateur players can support
it too.
·Supporters of
other sports can enjoy pro rugby in the summer (better weather potentially
means better skills = less stoppages = more entertaining for new supporters)
·Keep grass
routes as is – I’m amazed at how many kids in this country enjoy playing in the
cold – they can just keep doing it as an adult
·Pro game has
10months of Rugby to sell for TV rights and fewer weekends competing with
international weekends
In Victory, you deserve Champagne. In defeat, you need it
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum