This is wrong in so many ways. These clubs didn't just fail through a marginal shortfall, they went spectacularly bust. What right headed organisation would feel it was right and proper to divert resources away from the other 2,000+ hard pressed rugby clubs to assist in the re launch of these parasitical ventures that have previously collectively received many tens of millions of public and rugby monies.

However loathsome and repugnant these proposals from the Executive Management are they may win because of apathy from the Constituent Bodies and their member clubs.

In order to fight against this we need to Understand the Rules of Engagement. This is the only way we can win. I have to confess I only have a hazy idea what these are and where in the RFU's constitutional labyrinth they can be found.

The billionaire owners of the Premiership clubs are in the game for profit......it cannot be right that hard pressed community clubs largely staffed by volunteers get nothing from the RFU whilst the Premiership Clubs get ever greater hand outs from the RFU.

So I am asking Camquin, FLH, Scrumtime, Workerbee and any other knowledgeable Rolling Maul Posters to set out in detail how the RFU's constitution works and what needs to be done to ensure a more equitable allocation of resources. 

If we truly Understand the Rules of Engagement perhaps we can put in place a plan to stop the RFU's hierarchy.

They keep ploughing along with no or little RFU assistance and very little of any proposed changes affect them or so they think. 

Its that base you have to politicise to get change, show them what they may be missing out on. 

Personally I don't understand the workings of the RFU and I have read on here that the council doesn't actually control the Executive. If this is true then we actually have an untouchable unaccountable board running the game in this country.

However, the RFU are terrified of negative publicity, just look what happened with the tackle height farce.

If 1000 club signatures could be gathered to demand an explanation around cuts to grass-roots spending, the breaking of rules around Prem-Clubs parachuted back to Champ level and the gross expenditure by the RFU then news outlets will take notice. The BBC love to kick rugby.

Caldy and I think Ampthill as well, are clubs that know what levels 7 and 8 are all about and neither have been suddenly promoted. Both clubs climbed their way up through the leagues in a sustainable manner.

There will be a lot of Caldys and Ampthills lower down the pyramid that have the same ambition and desire to go as far as they can. The RFU want to deny them the opportunity by skewing the 'playing field' from level to a perpendicular cliff edge that is impossible to surmount..........whilst at the same time giving a truly obscene leg up to 'cowboy' clubs like Wasps and Worcester.........

My brother in law the venerable and fair minded Pete Higgins read about Bill Sweeney's franchise plans for Premiership II in the Daily Telegraph. Pete is a Tranmere Rovers fan and only very occasionally watches rugby..........his judgment on reading the Daily Telegraph Article was both succinct and to the point......."it fu***ng stinks, I thought Rugby was all about fair play and respect .....how can the RFU possibly think that this is fair or reasonable !!!"

Pete went on to say that in his view (whilst knowing nothing about rugby) the RFU had a complete disregard for the clubs outside the Premiership and were obviously only interested in themselves and their elite friends.

Although knowing little about rugby Pete Higgins' was sufficiently apoplectic about the RFU's shenanigans to give an inkling what other fair minded non rugby people would think.

In the end this is all about a non elected untouchable Executive Management using cronyism and patronage to reinforce their own position and those of their cronies and acolytes .......the RFU is a 'rotten borough' that needs to be deeply cleansed!

Richard Lowther wrote: To be honest I don't think 1950 out of the RFU 2000 clubs (approx) give the proverbial about the Premiership or Premiership 2 or splitting National 1 or anything else that gets the posters of this forum hot under the collar. They keep ploughing along with no or little RFU assistance and very little of any proposed changes affect them or so they think.  Its that base you have to politicise to get change, show them what they may be missing out on.

I have to say I agree with what you have said here Richard. I appreciate that I'm not on the list of those who's opinion or knowledge you sought Big Eddie, but the fact of the matter is that the Champ/Prem 2, and even the cascading effects down on to Nat 1 and Nat 2, has very little to do with clubs turning out week in week out at Levels 5 (Regional 1) and 6 (Regional 2), let alone Counties 1 (Level 7) and below, who are truly self sufficient, and have been for decades. There is no question of relying on funding or direction/involvement from the RFU.

I spent most of my playing career (some time ago) drifting between Levels 6 and 8, and I have to say that the RFU, and what they may or may not be implementing in the Prem/Champ, had no bearing whatsoever on my playing experience back then, it was all about the dedicated voluteers/players, or both in many instances, that kept me coming back every Saturday without any thought of 'what could have been' or 'what we may be entitled to'. It was just a rugby club, not a business, that gave me many happy times and I took it for what it was. What might have been just never factored amongst me and my peers, and we got on with it. Naive perhaps, but a lived experience to look back on nonetheless.

I'm not saying this was right, or that we were apathetic, but I am saying that we took it for what it was. I would suggest, as Richard has, that there are circa 1900 clubs out there who are still operating with the same mindset, and to put it mildly couldn't give two hoots as to what the RFU and Big Bill Sweeney deem to be the right path to take in the coming months. It is essentially so far removed (for the vast majority of players, coaches and fans in England) that it doesn't bear thinking about. Whether this is the right or wrong outlook is academic, it's just how it is amongst the majority, and why in all likelihood the 11 clubs at Level 2 may well struggle to harness the support of the masses below to enact lasting change across the board.

Since retiring from playing I have followed Redingensians, now Rams, on their journey from Level 7 to Nat 1, and am torn as to the benefits of progressing (form allowing) onwards to the Champ where the likes of Caldy and, with time, Cambridge, are finding their feet. I would ask, to what end? I've said it before, the Champ is an odd hybrid of Fully Pro and Semi Pro clubs (the only Level this exists at) with a small fixture list, competing each week for what? There is seemingly no promotion (due to the bizarre MSC), but likewise no relegation or any sense of peril or 'do or die' mentality amongst clubs - and thus detracting from the overall spectacle of the entire competition and what league rugby was founded upon. Essentially playing within a vacuum for want of a better word.

Has any of the above assisted you or shed any light on the best way forward for the 11 clubs that make up the Champ/Prem 2? Absolutely not im afraid. However, I'd wager that it captures the general mood amongst the massive silent majority within the RFU ladder, who's week to week fate does not depend on MSC, number of ambulances, amounts of seating, floodlight provision, frost covers and any other such like luxuries. 

That said, as a fellow life long rugby fan I wish you well and good luck, and I will be interested to see if the Champ clubs remain harmonious from 1 to 11 and what the outcome is if they do indeed stick to their guns.

If winning games is neither here nor there then what is the point?

Just last year a bunch of 2nd and 3rd teams were dropped in.

All part and parcel of the community game.

There are term limits for board members, but not for the CEO.

How is that different to the board?

And thanks Camquin. Always informative!

The council is the elected representatives of the constituent bodies, and has almost no power.

The board is appointed, and as all the power.

The council appoints three of the 12 members of the board.

The council is meant to hold the board to account, but without the power to remove members - other than the three it appoints, all it can do is ask questions.

Thank you Camquin and for all the other posters as well. I have been beset by Covid for the 5th time and I am only just recovering so apologies for not following up.

A few posters have made the comment that what happens at the RFU level has little impact on clubs at level 6,7 or 8. I would like to stress that in my view this isn't just about the Championship and Premiership II. I am a Caldy supporter but this isn't why I am affronted and indeed outraged by what is being proposed. 

My distaste and anger is driven by the patronising self serving shenanigans of an unaccountable over paid Executive Management that has the temerity to act as though they have the divine right of Kings to determine what is good for their lowly subjects.......it is wholly unacceptable and would not be tolerated in any other sphere of society.

I hope to be back to full fitness by 6 January

Kind Regards to all

Big Eddie

You need a cause that 1,500 clubs will back.

Frankly, I am not sure that we have one.

Remember that the CEO holds the proxy votes of every club that does not actively vote against him.

And you need a 2 to 1 vote.

Camquin that is a very important detail and is frankly very alarming. Your post almost signals that King Billy does rule with an enshrined divine right. It maybe that adverse publicity may be the only effective tool in the short time we have available.

A few more questions for you.

1. How many clubs are required to vote to call for a Special General Meeting ?

2. I presume the resolutions that the petitioning clubs want to be voted on would need circulated in advance of any Special General Meeting?

3. If we were successful in getting the requisite number of clubs at 1, above would the resolutions be required to be circulated/communicated to all member clubs by the RFU ?

4. Does King Billy also hold the proxy votes for all clubs that do not vote actively against him in the circumstances of an SGM?

I know it is a lot to ask but could you also let us know where in the RFU's constitution the effective clause is that indicates (or words that hold this meaning) that 

This needs to communicated widely so everyone knows the strength of King Billy's hand. This is all very much worse than I thought and should be something every right minded rugby club and rugby supporter should be clamouring to change!

We may just have our common cause......but as ever we need to be on firm ground with this.

John,

Thank you for your information ........this is what makes the RFU a "rotten borough" it is thoroughly undemocratic and needs to be exposed.

Coming from a |Club that has experienced Level 2 and, more recently, Levels 3 and 4 we are usually looking up so are interested in this but find our views are not shared by Clubs at lower levels who have shorter horizons.

It will be interesting to see whether King Billy or Prince Simon blinks first.

http://www.englandrugby.com//dxdam/e0/e05ea00a-66fe-430f-b575-119854d2f104/RFU%20Rules%202023-24%20%28FCA%20Approved%29.pdf" rel="nofollow - http://www.englandrugby.com//dxdam/e0/e05ea00a-66fe-430f-b575-119854d2f104/RFU%20Rules%202023-24%20(FCA%20Approved).pdf

Democracy in action…

Never made sense to me.

Similarly Cambridge University colleges - probably Oxford as well

I served on what was then the First Division Rugby at the time the Championship was set up and minimum standards were discussed. The only time that there was any suggestion that our funding should be conditional was in relation to health, safety and well being. Thus we had to have specified medical facilities, ambulance in attendance, etc.

Around this time Francis Baron was CEO and although he always “drove a hard bargain” he was, in my opinion, always fair and listened to your arguments. It’s interesting to read his observations when he occasionally writes in the Rugby Paper. It might be worth you passing a few of your thoughts past him.

John

Camquin,

Thanks indeed. I will get some more toner for my printer and get that into hard copy.

If we know the ground we are fighting on we have a start.

Thank you to everyone for their contributions. As a first start I am going to put out a poll question on the Clubhouse Chat section. Over the years I have done many of these but often the participation is disappointing. I would ask everyone to encourage members in their clubs to sign up to Rolling Maul and participate.....the greater the participation the more weight the poll will carry with other media and hopefully the RFU

A number of forum members have suggested Poll questions and I will try and ensure we have a fair question or questions with no in built bias .

I will put the Poll Question/s up tomorrow morning

Thank you John. If you have Francis Baron's details could you send me a private message with his contact details. If not I will use my sources to contact him.

The greater weight we have behind this campaign the better. Tomorrow I will also be reaching out to some other senior rugby figures who have already signalled their opposition to King Billy's plan. It is important that we are all singing off the same hymn sheet and not inadvertently running interference for King Billy.