Shutdown gives rugby union an unmissable opportunity to reset

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/apr/09/shutdown-gives-rugby-union-an-unmissable-opportunity-to-reset?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard" rel="nofollow - https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/apr/09/shutdown-gives-rugby-union-an-unmissable-opportunity-to-reset?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

It's just absurd that local clubs (and that's what most Nat 1 and 2 clubs are), mostly run by volunteers and playing in front of what are really tiny crowds, are paying average players ridiculous amounts of money which they don't have. Many players at levels 3 and 4 are being paid more for training 2 nights a week and a game on Saturday than care workers and Health Care Assistants in hospitals - all doing full time and what are now dangerous jobs. That's just absurd and cannot carry on.

Seriously? Given what we know of the salaries being paid in the Championship, I really don't think so...

Do you know how little Health Care Assistants in hospitals and workers in care homes are paid?  I can also guarantee that many players at levels 3 and 4 are making as much or more. Not opinion - 100% certain. 

Regarding the Championship - there has always been a real problem there in that it is full of Premiership Academy rejects who play there for almost nothing, still chasing the dream and hoping that they'll get picked up again. Many would get the same or more in Nat 1, and if they got a job as well they'd have 2 or 3 times as much money in total. That was the advice that i gave many of them, and some followed it.

Also, I am not suggesting at all that players are not paid at all - far from it. However what I am saying is that it's essential that clubs go back to living within their means.....and players too. If you're playing in front of 100 people a week you can't really claim to deserve a great deal of money - yet many get exactly that as rich blokes use clubs as a means to boost their own egos.

A complete reset needed - of society as a whole and not just rugby to be honest.

I think for some players there wont be a choice. Some clubs were teetering on the edge before the current events, which will only push them further off the cliff edge. 

For them to survive as a club they will stop paying and may end up doing a B&S etc, that is more preferable than doing a Wakefield.

However, CVC are not a charity.

They want their money back.

I doubt they will be foregoing their share of the dividends.

So unless they have sold new rights- the clubs income will be down going forward.

Flawed article in the Grun but the general gist is correct... the model of backers putting money in but it all going to pay players and clubs posting huge losses at end of year as far as their bottom line is concerned has to end 

It would have been interesting to sit in on the discussions between the Premiership clubs and CVC.

Did the Premiership clubs stop listening once CVC promised £Xmillions? Did they understand what they had to give up in return? For me it is was short term gain and long term pain. 

Had they researched the outcome of CVC deal with F1? 

Did CVC understand rugby and its structure is totally different to F1?

It is hard for the Premiership clubs and CVC to grow the game to the extent they believe they will.  TV rights, sponsorship rights (it was a declining market before the current crisis - look at the 6N sponsorship Huckleberry up and then the farce around the Champions cup sponsorship - run by the Premiership clubs and thier European friends!), marketing and spectators are the four sources of income, and to limit wages is the sole source of outgoings. 

I hope the 6N were better prepared. That is a better souce of return for CVC but it comes with all the same peril for the 6N.

Discuss... 

It does however highlight the difference between North and South with regards to Financing the game. From Level 2 down the domination of the South is becoming total at level 3 there will be 4 clubs from the North and 1 from the Midlands .Financing the cost of travel for the Northern clubs will be very difficult in the coming season especially if the RFU continue to deduct £5150 from the their travel allowance Birmingham , last season had a net £900 to cover all travel from the RFU. With many clubs coming out of Covid with zero cash at best I can see major problems. All clubs are now closed for the foreseeable future and perhaps no rugby until October restarting the game in it's current structure will be an issue.   

At virtually all other sports,other than football,players below the top tier are lucky to get their living expenses/travel covered,yet for some reason in union,players even at levels 3/6 seem to think they deserve a couple of hundred quid to play the game.

I regularly go to the Ilkley Tennis tournament,where players outside the top hundred camp in tents,just so they can have a crack at reaching the top level,whilst Championship players want £40/50,000 to play the game infront of a couple of hundred spectators.

.Several of those Colts who put on the shirt then still play for the 1st XV now. The lads who have come through in the interim join a club that has a culture of no payment and so there isn't a history or expectation of being paid. There's no 'Star Player' in the dressing room as a paid player while the others are unpaid. They're all in it together.  It does mean that with some players work commitments come first and they may not be available for a full season and they will obviously be concerned about major injuries impacting of their jobs, but most still turn up for the majority if not all of the season. 

 

There are lads out there who play because they like the game and the camaraderie.  I don't see how some clubs have been continuing to be semi-pro or 'Pay per Play' all the way down to Level 6, especially when some take nothing at the gate and play in front of 100 or far less on some days if the weather's bad.  Is there real evidence of this or is it just an Urban Myth put about by clubs when they get beat..? "yeah well they're all semi-pros". A more regulated structure is needed and payment caps come into that equation on a much reduced sliding scale from Level 3 downwards. If any sort of money is sloshing around in a club that needs to be invested in improving facilities and the M&Js so that there's still a game to play in 10-15 years time. 

If the RFU were to stop these club's applying for International Tickets it might focus a few club committee members minds. But they couldn't do that.......would  they?

I have no idea why they don't introduce 'minimum standards' for the game at all levels - not just the Premiership. For example to play at levels 3, 4 or 5 a club may have to have:

Many other sports operate a similar model. 

A lot of this has merit. For me unless a club has a decent mini junior section it really has no future. Colts is a different matter. Running colts teams can be a nightmare! Conflict with school rugby and the advent of women and booze are just some of the headaches. One route would be, once the players get to 17/18 then filter them into senior rugby via the 3rd/2nd teams as many clubs in our league structure struggle to field regular 3rd teams anyway. For many years our club has had a philosophy on focusing on mini/junior and investment in the club infrastructure as opposed to paying players. The result is respectable Level 5 rugby and a first team that regularly fields 11/12 home grown players in the first team.

A model Waterloo are hoping to follow over the next few yrs, made obvious with the reshuffle. New DOR & new 2nds head coach that has just finished with the colts team he brought through from the age of 4. Evolution not revolution

I can see merits in this but I can also see disadvantages. For example if Club A doesn't have a colts or MJ, but Club B down the road does, how do you stop poaching and disadvantaging the club that have spent years building up a playing infrastructure but may not have the same physical infrastructure as  Club A?

What happens to Club C who are in a rural area or competing against local RL for players and can only field one side due to this? 

There are no easy answers unfortunately.

I see a potential problem with this statement; there are a lot of clubs along the border which could lose players to English clubs still paying for players.  The only way for it to work in Wales is for England to adopt the same rules.

I'm not sure I can see the WRU and RFU coming together to make this happen.

I've been keeping tabs on this thread, but I still don't have a strong opinion either way.  Being fairly young - in Rolling Maul years anyway! - I don't remember how it used to be in the good old days.  One thing does resonate with me is the need for all clubs to be sustainable, no matter what the level.  Paying over the odds for any players is a road to ruin, but I think paying them is here to stay.  

As to how to control the amount you are should be paying at a certain level?  Well, that's the million dollar question. 

Absolute nonsense. Academies are constantly pushing lads to complete their education because there's an understanding that there isn't the money in the game to be sustainable in the short term outside of the Prem and even if you become a Premiership player, you're lucky to get 10 years in the game.

The pressure on wages has entirely come from the community game and is a self inflicted wound.

Historically when the game went pro the pressure on wages was two fold - John Hall wanted Rob Andrew to be his star player but had to pay him what he was earning in his city day job plus rugby money plus move to Newcastle money which vastly inflated the money players started to earn at the top end. 

Added to that a lot of clubs in the community game decided to have a paid player / coach and as they only had to find one set of wages that also inflated the expectations at level 2 / 3.