Championship Rugby

[Mellsblue]

Doncaster meet msc. They are the only club to do so but were the only team to apply.

https://www.championshiprugby.co.uk/new ... ghts202324

They currently sit fourth, 14 points behind Ealing with two games in hand.

[Mellsblue]

Championship statement:

https://bedfordrugby.co.uk/news/2024/06 ... ship-clubs

[Puja]

Championship statement:

https://bedfordrugby.co.uk/news/2024/06 ... ship-clubs

Can't argue with any of that. The RFU seem to have absolutely no interest in a second tier whatsoever and it's absolutely barking.

Puja

[CunningPunter]

Yes, when they have an RFU executive on the BBC podcast I'd like to see a bit less forelock-tugging and some hard questions on this topic.

[Banquo]

Championship statement:

https://bedfordrugby.co.uk/news/2024/06 ... ship-clubs

Can't argue with any of that. The RFU seem to have absolutely no interest in a second tier whatsoever and it's absolutely barking.

Puja

They would argue they've put 4m on the table for 24/25 and 25/26, reduced minimum standards, and offered self governance to a new tier 2. The pro clubs are holding out for a lot more funding than is currently/allegedly available. The RFU do want a Tier 2, mostly to develop u20's....what they don't want to do is support more than 10 fully pro teams with £3.3m each (which is what is signed off), nor pour money into sides who want to get promoted; a promotion/relegation play off has been approved.

[Puja]

Championship statement:

https://bedfordrugby.co.uk/news/2024/06 ... ship-clubs

Can't argue with any of that. The RFU seem to have absolutely no interest in a second tier whatsoever and it's absolutely barking.

Puja

They would argue they've put 4m on the table for 24/25 and 25/26, reduced minimum standards, and offered self governance to a new tier 2. The pro clubs are holding out for a lot more funding than is currently/allegedly available. The RFU do want a Tier 2, mostly to develop u20's....what they don't want to do is support more than 10 fully pro teams with £3.3m each (which is what is signed off), nor pour money into sides who want to get promoted; a promotion/relegation play off has been approved.

£4m across 12 clubs is a derisory plan though, especially with the only route to promotion being a play-off. Who is going to invest in a Championship club when the only route to the Prem is against a side who is literally given ten times your funding? Especially when, even if they were to win, they would still get Championship-level funding in the Prem and the relegated side would receive Premiership-level funding as a parachute. It's ringfencing by any other name.

Puja

[Banquo]

Can't argue with any of that. The RFU seem to have absolutely no interest in a second tier whatsoever and it's absolutely barking.

Puja

They would argue they've put 4m on the table for 24/25 and 25/26, reduced minimum standards, and offered self governance to a new tier 2. The pro clubs are holding out for a lot more funding than is currently/allegedly available. The RFU do want a Tier 2, mostly to develop u20's....what they don't want to do is support more than 10 fully pro teams with £3.3m each (which is what is signed off), nor pour money into sides who want to get promoted; a promotion/relegation play off has been approved.

£4m across 12 clubs is a derisory plan though, especially with the only route to promotion being a play-off. Who is going to invest in a Championship club when the only route to the Prem is against a side who is literally given ten times your funding? Especially when, even if they were to win, they would still get Championship-level funding in the Prem and the relegated side would receive Premiership-level funding as a parachute. It's ringfencing by any other name.

Puja

Given that before it was 1.6m, much higher mos, no self governance or owned commercial rights, its miles better than before. I agree that its not enough to compete with prem sides immediately, but a start point. Realistically, only about 12 teams can aspire to be fully pro prem style teams, so why would you give me £3m say. But you are correct- the die in the ditch moment is here for Ealing and Coventry. Devil's advocate would say...if you can't afford to be a fully pro team....don't be one- why should the RFU prop up failing businesses (and they all are) save for where would players come from.

What's your solution though, given the invesment needed into the national side, PRL prop up, and the big sums going into women's rugby, in the backdrop of a loss making RFU and 100'sm needed to go into Twickemham.

My point was the RFU DO want a tier 2, but not the rag bag of models there at the moment; you wouldn't start from here, and between PRL and the RFU (and its really PRL who want ring fencing) its been a 19 year failure.

[Puja]

They would argue they've put 4m on the table for 24/25 and 25/26, reduced minimum standards, and offered self governance to a new tier 2. The pro clubs are holding out for a lot more funding than is currently/allegedly available. The RFU do want a Tier 2, mostly to develop u20's....what they don't want to do is support more than 10 fully pro teams with £3.3m each (which is what is signed off), nor pour money into sides who want to get promoted; a promotion/relegation play off has been approved.

£4m across 12 clubs is a derisory plan though, especially with the only route to promotion being a play-off. Who is going to invest in a Championship club when the only route to the Prem is against a side who is literally given ten times your funding? Especially when, even if they were to win, they would still get Championship-level funding in the Prem and the relegated side would receive Premiership-level funding as a parachute. It's ringfencing by any other name.

Puja

Given that before it was 1.6m, much higher mos, no self governance or owned commercial rights, its miles better than before. I agree that its not enough to compete with prem sides immediately, but a start point. Realistically, only about 12 teams can aspire to be fully pro prem style teams, so why would you give me £3m say. But you are correct- the die in the ditch moment is here for Ealing and Coventry. Devil's advocate would say...if you can't afford to be a fully pro team....don't be one- why should the RFU prop up failing businesses (and they all are) save for where would players come from.

What's your solution though, given the invesment needed into the national side, PRL prop up, and the big sums going into women's rugby, in the backdrop of a loss making RFU and 100'sm needed to go into Twickemham.

My point was the RFU DO want a tier 2, but not the rag bag of models there at the moment; you wouldn't start from here, and between PRL and the RFU (and its really PRL who want ring fencing) its been a 19 year failure.

I would be looking at increasing the funding and reducing the size of Prem2 - £8m across 8-10 clubs still isn't the same as the Prem clubs, but it would at least give some chance of competitiveness, especially for ambitious, well-backed clubs like Cov and Ealing. I would also have promotion and relegation as a straight 1-up-1-down, rather than having a playoff in which the whip-hand is always in the Premiership's favour. There would also have to be some way of changing the financing for promoted teams - it cannot work with the same 10 teams assured places at the top table because of P-shares. I would also be looking at clubs entering the Prem 2 based on MSC, rather than league position, as you are right that the ragbag of models would not fly in a properly pro second tier.

But, as you say, we are where we are starting from, and I'm aware that a fair chunk of what I've just written would be bloody hard to negotiate from a lot of different perspectives.

Puja

[Banquo]

£4m across 12 clubs is a derisory plan though, especially with the only route to promotion being a play-off. Who is going to invest in a Championship club when the only route to the Prem is against a side who is literally given ten times your funding? Especially when, even if they were to win, they would still get Championship-level funding in the Prem and the relegated side would receive Premiership-level funding as a parachute. It's ringfencing by any other name.

Puja

Given that before it was 1.6m, much higher mos, no self governance or owned commercial rights, its miles better than before. I agree that its not enough to compete with prem sides immediately, but a start point. Realistically, only about 12 teams can aspire to be fully pro prem style teams, so why would you give me £3m say. But you are correct- the die in the ditch moment is here for Ealing and Coventry. Devil's advocate would say...if you can't afford to be a fully pro team....don't be one- why should the RFU prop up failing businesses (and they all are) save for where would players come from.

What's your solution though, given the invesment needed into the national side, PRL prop up, and the big sums going into women's rugby, in the backdrop of a loss making RFU and 100'sm needed to go into Twickemham.

My point was the RFU DO want a tier 2, but not the rag bag of models there at the moment; you wouldn't start from here, and between PRL and the RFU (and its really PRL who want ring fencing) its been a 19 year failure.

I would be looking at increasing the funding and reducing the size of Prem2 - £8m across 8-10 clubs still isn't the same as the Prem clubs, but it would at least give some chance of competitiveness, especially for ambitious, well-backed clubs like Cov and Ealing. I would also have promotion and relegation as a straight 1-up-1-down, rather than having a playoff in which the whip-hand is always in the Premiership's favour. There would also have to be some way of changing the financing for promoted teams - it cannot work with the same 10 teams assured places at the top table because of P-shares. I would also be looking at clubs entering the Prem 2 based on MSC, rather than league position, as you are right that the ragbag of models would not fly in a properly pro second tier.

But, as you say, we are where we are starting from, and I'm aware that a fair chunk of what I've just written would be bloody hard to negotiate from a lot of different perspectives.

Puja

...increase the funding, how? And by well backed you mean Mike Gooley and Jon Sharp (both hardly in the flush of youth) sticking their own cash into the club both from a capex and an opex point of view ....to the tune of c £15m over the last 3 or 4 years. Ealing get between 800 and 1200 to a game, Cov better at 2-5k. I know Gooley's kids are a bit unhappy about this, and Jon is running out of patience.
The real problem for everyone is that the game doesn't bring in enough spectators to fund what players want, in the backdrop of debt all over the place. Look to France they say.....and they have a point; but there are debt free stadia aplenty, a passionate fan base in the south esp, and a lot of TV money going to the clubs. Elsewhere, pro game is struggling to put it politely.

[Puja]

Given that before it was 1.6m, much higher mos, no self governance or owned commercial rights, its miles better than before. I agree that its not enough to compete with prem sides immediately, but a start point. Realistically, only about 12 teams can aspire to be fully pro prem style teams, so why would you give me £3m say. But you are correct- the die in the ditch moment is here for Ealing and Coventry. Devil's advocate would say...if you can't afford to be a fully pro team....don't be one- why should the RFU prop up failing businesses (and they all are) save for where would players come from.

What's your solution though, given the invesment needed into the national side, PRL prop up, and the big sums going into women's rugby, in the backdrop of a loss making RFU and 100'sm needed to go into Twickemham.

My point was the RFU DO want a tier 2, but not the rag bag of models there at the moment; you wouldn't start from here, and between PRL and the RFU (and its really PRL who want ring fencing) its been a 19 year failure.

I would be looking at increasing the funding and reducing the size of Prem2 - £8m across 8-10 clubs still isn't the same as the Prem clubs, but it would at least give some chance of competitiveness, especially for ambitious, well-backed clubs like Cov and Ealing. I would also have promotion and relegation as a straight 1-up-1-down, rather than having a playoff in which the whip-hand is always in the Premiership's favour. There would also have to be some way of changing the financing for promoted teams - it cannot work with the same 10 teams assured places at the top table because of P-shares. I would also be looking at clubs entering the Prem 2 based on MSC, rather than league position, as you are right that the ragbag of models would not fly in a properly pro second tier.

But, as you say, we are where we are starting from, and I'm aware that a fair chunk of what I've just written would be bloody hard to negotiate from a lot of different perspectives.

Puja

...increase the funding, how? And by well backed you mean Mike Gooley and Jon Sharp (both hardly in the flush of youth) sticking their own cash into the club both from a capex and an opex point of view ....to the tune of c £15m over the last 3 or 4 years. Ealing get between 800 and 1200 to a game, Cov better at 2-5k. I know Gooley's kids are a bit unhappy about this, and Jon is running out of patience.
The real problem for everyone is that the game doesn't bring in enough spectators to fund what players want, in the backdrop of debt all over the place. Look to France they say.....and they have a point; but there are debt free stadia aplenty, a passionate fan base in the south esp, and a lot of TV money going to the clubs. Elsewhere, pro game is struggling to put it politely.

There is also the angle that it's a miracle that there are as many supporters and rich benefactors as there are, given the current setup. It's an impressive set of die-hards to have 2-5k turning up to a second tier club that has no options for promotion and who are constantly being hamstrung by ever more reduced funding. It's even more impressive to have investors willing to throw money at such a club.

I'm not necessarily advocating a complete "if you build it, they will come" approach, but I'm open to, "You'll probably stand a better chance of them coming if you don't constantly impose rules that prevent it from ever being built."

Puja

[Banquo]

I would be looking at increasing the funding and reducing the size of Prem2 - £8m across 8-10 clubs still isn't the same as the Prem clubs, but it would at least give some chance of competitiveness, especially for ambitious, well-backed clubs like Cov and Ealing. I would also have promotion and relegation as a straight 1-up-1-down, rather than having a playoff in which the whip-hand is always in the Premiership's favour. There would also have to be some way of changing the financing for promoted teams - it cannot work with the same 10 teams assured places at the top table because of P-shares. I would also be looking at clubs entering the Prem 2 based on MSC, rather than league position, as you are right that the ragbag of models would not fly in a properly pro second tier.

But, as you say, we are where we are starting from, and I'm aware that a fair chunk of what I've just written would be bloody hard to negotiate from a lot of different perspectives.

Puja

...increase the funding, how? And by well backed you mean Mike Gooley and Jon Sharp (both hardly in the flush of youth) sticking their own cash into the club both from a capex and an opex point of view ....to the tune of c £15m over the last 3 or 4 years. Ealing get between 800 and 1200 to a game, Cov better at 2-5k. I know Gooley's kids are a bit unhappy about this, and Jon is running out of patience.
The real problem for everyone is that the game doesn't bring in enough spectators to fund what players want, in the backdrop of debt all over the place. Look to France they say.....and they have a point; but there are debt free stadia aplenty, a passionate fan base in the south esp, and a lot of TV money going to the clubs. Elsewhere, pro game is struggling to put it politely.

There is also the angle that it's a miracle that there are as many supporters and rich benefactors as there are, given the current setup. It's an impressive set of die-hards to have 2-5k turning up to a second tier club that has no options for promotion and who are constantly being hamstrung by ever more reduced funding. It's even more impressive to have investors willing to throw money at such a club.

I'm not necessarily advocating a complete "if you build it, they will come" approach, but I'm open to, "You'll probably stand a better chance of them coming if you don't constantly impose rules that prevent it from ever being built."

Puja

I don't think the rules are out of line from a sustainability point of view, top of pro sport etc. They are unattainable because you can't generate enough cash whilst paying players.

Again though, how do you provide the funding for the 'building'?

[Puja]

...increase the funding, how? And by well backed you mean Mike Gooley and Jon Sharp (both hardly in the flush of youth) sticking their own cash into the club both from a capex and an opex point of view ....to the tune of c £15m over the last 3 or 4 years. Ealing get between 800 and 1200 to a game, Cov better at 2-5k. I know Gooley's kids are a bit unhappy about this, and Jon is running out of patience.
The real problem for everyone is that the game doesn't bring in enough spectators to fund what players want, in the backdrop of debt all over the place. Look to France they say.....and they have a point; but there are debt free stadia aplenty, a passionate fan base in the south esp, and a lot of TV money going to the clubs. Elsewhere, pro game is struggling to put it politely.

There is also the angle that it's a miracle that there are as many supporters and rich benefactors as there are, given the current setup. It's an impressive set of die-hards to have 2-5k turning up to a second tier club that has no options for promotion and who are constantly being hamstrung by ever more reduced funding. It's even more impressive to have investors willing to throw money at such a club.

I'm not necessarily advocating a complete "if you build it, they will come" approach, but I'm open to, "You'll probably stand a better chance of them coming if you don't constantly impose rules that prevent it from ever being built."

Puja

I don't think the rules are out of line from a sustainability point of view, top of pro sport etc. They are unattainable because you can't generate enough cash whilst paying players.

Again though, how do you provide the funding for the 'building'?

Or maybe you can't generate enough cash because the route to the top has been blocked off? No-one's going to sponsor or invest in a second tier team that can never be in the top tier.

A quick google says that, even with paying off COVID loans last year, the RFU made an operating profit of £4m. They are clearly not a bottomless fount of cash, but they do also make £220m+ in revenue each year (a figure which is likely to increase if the women's internationals keep turning in large crowds). It's not impossible to find £4m of additional funding for the Championship; the issue is the political will to do so. They can find £33m for the Premiership, but not money enough to spend more than £4m on the Champ clubs, suggesting this is a case of priorities, not absence of cash.

Puja

[Banquo]

There is also the angle that it's a miracle that there are as many supporters and rich benefactors as there are, given the current setup. It's an impressive set of die-hards to have 2-5k turning up to a second tier club that has no options for promotion and who are constantly being hamstrung by ever more reduced funding. It's even more impressive to have investors willing to throw money at such a club.

I'm not necessarily advocating a complete "if you build it, they will come" approach, but I'm open to, "You'll probably stand a better chance of them coming if you don't constantly impose rules that prevent it from ever being built."

Puja

I don't think the rules are out of line from a sustainability point of view, top of pro sport etc. They are unattainable because you can't generate enough cash whilst paying players.

Again though, how do you provide the funding for the 'building'?

Or maybe you can't generate enough cash because the route to the top has been blocked off? No-one's going to sponsor or invest in a second tier team that can never be in the top tier.

A quick google says that, even with paying off COVID loans last year, the RFU made an operating profit of £4m. They are clearly not a bottomless fount of cash, but they do also make £220m+ in revenue each year (a figure which is likely to increase if the women's internationals keep turning in large crowds). It's not impossible to find £4m of additional funding for the Championship; the issue is the political will to do so. They can find £33m for the Premiership, but not money enough to spend more than £4m on the Champ clubs, suggesting this is a case of priorities, not absence of cash.

Puja

....the Prem clubs don't generate enough cash, even the top ones with their own grounds and larger fan bases. They all lost and lose money, despite immense subsidies. As an aside, we generate 300k pa of sponsorship, Bedford about double that, and neither of us has top tier aspirations.

And you are right-ish, its an allocation question- they are putting 12m (iirc) into the Women's pro game, because of its growth. Like me though (and I have a chunky vested interest), they don't believe that throwing biggish sums at 12/14 'tier 2' will make for a decent return; they want a couple more aspirants, plus a development sandpit for the u20's. You wouldn't start from here...and an operating profit of 4m on 220m is terrible tbh, with the investments/debt repayments they'll need to make. Maybe if the men's international side continues on an upward path, they'll make more money.. But the RFU continually propping up 22+ clubs doesn't sound the right answer tbh.

[Puja]

I don't think the rules are out of line from a sustainability point of view, top of pro sport etc. They are unattainable because you can't generate enough cash whilst paying players.

Again though, how do you provide the funding for the 'building'?

Or maybe you can't generate enough cash because the route to the top has been blocked off? No-one's going to sponsor or invest in a second tier team that can never be in the top tier.

A quick google says that, even with paying off COVID loans last year, the RFU made an operating profit of £4m. They are clearly not a bottomless fount of cash, but they do also make £220m+ in revenue each year (a figure which is likely to increase if the women's internationals keep turning in large crowds). It's not impossible to find £4m of additional funding for the Championship; the issue is the political will to do so. They can find £33m for the Premiership, but not money enough to spend more than £4m on the Champ clubs, suggesting this is a case of priorities, not absence of cash.

Puja

....the Prem clubs don't generate enough cash, even the top ones with their own grounds and larger fan bases. They all lost and lose money, despite immense subsidies. As an aside, we generate 300k pa of sponsorship, Bedford about double that, and neither of us has top tier aspirations.

And you are right-ish, its an allocation question- they are putting 12m (iirc) into the Women's pro game, because of its growth. Like me though (and I have a chunky vested interest), they don't believe that throwing biggish sums at 12/14 'tier 2' will make for a decent return; they want a couple more aspirants, plus a development sandpit for the u20's. You wouldn't start from here...and an operating profit of 4m on 220m is terrible tbh, with the investments/debt repayments they'll need to make. Maybe if the men's international side continues on an upward path, they'll make more money.. But the RFU continually propping up 22+ clubs doesn't sound the right answer tbh.

I think it's a question of framing what we want out of professional rugby. Do we just want a ringfenced top tier of 10 teams, with everything being limited and centralised around them? If so, that should be what we do. If we actually want promotion and relegation (and the television networks appear to be signalling that they would like it back), then we need a viable second tier and that will cost what it costs.

What is your solution? Genuine question - I've been bloviating quite a bit from my place of ignorance and you definitely have more knowledge on the matter than me. If you were given plenipotentiary authority to hack out a route forward, what would you do?

Puja

[Banquo]

Or maybe you can't generate enough cash because the route to the top has been blocked off? No-one's going to sponsor or invest in a second tier team that can never be in the top tier.

A quick google says that, even with paying off COVID loans last year, the RFU made an operating profit of £4m. They are clearly not a bottomless fount of cash, but they do also make £220m+ in revenue each year (a figure which is likely to increase if the women's internationals keep turning in large crowds). It's not impossible to find £4m of additional funding for the Championship; the issue is the political will to do so. They can find £33m for the Premiership, but not money enough to spend more than £4m on the Champ clubs, suggesting this is a case of priorities, not absence of cash.

Puja

....the Prem clubs don't generate enough cash, even the top ones with their own grounds and larger fan bases. They all lost and lose money, despite immense subsidies. As an aside, we generate 300k pa of sponsorship, Bedford about double that, and neither of us has top tier aspirations.

And you are right-ish, its an allocation question- they are putting 12m (iirc) into the Women's pro game, because of its growth. Like me though (and I have a chunky vested interest), they don't believe that throwing biggish sums at 12/14 'tier 2' will make for a decent return; they want a couple more aspirants, plus a development sandpit for the u20's. You wouldn't start from here...and an operating profit of 4m on 220m is terrible tbh, with the investments/debt repayments they'll need to make. Maybe if the men's international side continues on an upward path, they'll make more money.. But the RFU continually propping up 22+ clubs doesn't sound the right answer tbh.

I think it's a question of framing what we want out of professional rugby. Do we just want a ringfenced top tier of 10 teams, with everything being limited and centralised around them? If so, that should be what we do. If we actually want promotion and relegation (and the television networks appear to be signalling that they would like it back), then we need a viable second tier and that will cost what it costs.

What is your solution? Genuine question - I've been bloviating quite a bit from my place of ignorance and you definitely have more knowledge on the matter than me. If you were given plenipotentiary authority to hack out a route forward, what would you do?

Puja

you lost me on bloviate and compounded it on plenipotentiary!

I would say build over time- to say it will cost what it will cost is to ignore the lack of cash currently in the system; so lets have a progressive roadmap to a 14 team 2nd tier (matchday income is our biggest revenue earner), Tier 2 gets and sells commercial rights, the best u20's are drafted into all 14 sides with proper dev plans (2-3 per team), plus similar for non age group rep loanees, any RFU money goes into improving infrastructure / matchday experience, big drive on sponsorship based on these clubs also using elite platform to drive pathways and participation/dev own playing andcoaching talent. Build up 2-3 clubs over time as Prem ready....say 3 years, where income streams are established and grown, while showcasing and giving game to exciting talent. Top 4 play off for a shot at promotion......
or something like that...a proper roadmap everyone backs.

[Mellsblue]

Morning, gents. It’s probably just best to admit that the great opportunity to grow the top end of the game when the game was expanding after the start of the professional era has been f**k by PRL. They ringfenced every form of competition, either blatantly or by stealth, that might have forced them to improve or self assess. The ring fenced themselves from competition from the Champ clubs (bar the Exeter miracle) by financial means, they ring fenced themselves from competition with French wages by international recognition means, they ring fenced themselves from internal competition via the salary cap and they ring fenced the pathway from academy to 1stXV by ring fencing young players game time. And the RFU just sat there and watched them do it.
And now we’re pretty much f**ked.

[Puja]

This sounds promising: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union ... nship-rfu/

Teams could be promoted to Premiership with stadium capacity of 5,000

Championship clubs have removed one of the main hurdles to promotion to the Premiership after the Rugby Football Union agreed to significantly alter the minimum-standards criteria.

There has been no promotion or relegation between the top two tiers of English rugby since Saracens returned to the Premiership in 2022.

Under the present system, only teams that have a ground capacity of at least 10,001 or who can secure planning permission to increase their capacity are eligible for promotion to the top tier.

In effect this means that only Doncaster Knights, who finished sixth and 25 points behind champions Ealing, could have gone up last season.

However, Telegraph Sport understands that Championship clubs have now won a significant concession following a RFU council meeting on Friday. From the start of next season, teams with a minimum capacity of 5,000 will be eligible for promotion as long as they have a four-year plan to increase their capacity to 7,500 and eventually 10,000.

Play-off against Premiership’s bottom team

Should the Championship’s top-placed side meet this criteria they would then enter a home and away play-off against the Premiership’s bottom team for the right to play in the top tier for the 2025-26 season.

Significant obstacles remain, particularly in relation to funding, but Simon Halliday, the chairman of the Championship clubs, hailed a breakthrough following a long and often fractious period of negotiations with the RFU and Premiership Rugby. “It is a serious shift,” Halliday told Telegraph Sport. “We now have a mechanism which allows teams, for the first time in years, to access the play-off to determine promotion and relegation.

“The fact they have given us four years to reach the 10,000 overall capacity removes some of the capital intensive requirements in the early years which is what we wanted to see. At the beginning of next season, a number of our clubs will be in the mix to go into a play-off and I think that is a material change in what we are looking at now.”

Under the new regulations, Ealing Trailfinders, who have won the Championship in two of the past three seasons, and Coventry would become eligible for promotion in addition to Doncaster Knights. In the long term, Halliday believes that the lowering of the drawbridge will “light the touchpaper for all aspirational clubs” whether in the Championship or the National Leagues.
Rebranded second tier ‘should be should galvanised’

The RFU Council also confirmed that a new Tier 2 board will take responsibility for the governance and commercial management of the Championship, which is likely to be rebranded. Halliday does not pretend that every issue has been resolved but believes that the biggest barrier has been removed to creating a vibrant second tier in English rugby.

“There’s no doubt that the odds are still stacked against Championship clubs but you have got to open the door and then you can see how far you can get once you are through it,” Halliday said. “Of course, you can aspire to getting a lot more things put right but you are dealing with 15-20 years of embedded behaviour at the top end of our game which we are trying to unwind in a short period of time.

“Before it was a meaningless division to be in because you can finish top and nothing happens. Look at this year. It should galvanise the whole of the second tier and below and create some genuine jeopardy for the lower end of the Premiership.”

The RFU Council also rubberstamped the Professional Game Partnership, which includes hybrid contracts for England internationals, with Premiership Rugby and the Rugby Players’ Association.

It's not ideal, but it does sound like people are actually talking to each other and getting some kind of compromise thrashed out, rather than the take-it-or-leave-it brinksmanship that the RFU were threatening not so very long ago. Any thoughts, Banquo?

Puja

[Banquo]

This sounds promising: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union ... nship-rfu/

Teams could be promoted to Premiership with stadium capacity of 5,000

Championship clubs have removed one of the main hurdles to promotion to the Premiership after the Rugby Football Union agreed to significantly alter the minimum-standards criteria.

There has been no promotion or relegation between the top two tiers of English rugby since Saracens returned to the Premiership in 2022.

Under the present system, only teams that have a ground capacity of at least 10,001 or who can secure planning permission to increase their capacity are eligible for promotion to the top tier.

In effect this means that only Doncaster Knights, who finished sixth and 25 points behind champions Ealing, could have gone up last season.

However, Telegraph Sport understands that Championship clubs have now won a significant concession following a RFU council meeting on Friday. From the start of next season, teams with a minimum capacity of 5,000 will be eligible for promotion as long as they have a four-year plan to increase their capacity to 7,500 and eventually 10,000.

Play-off against Premiership’s bottom team

Should the Championship’s top-placed side meet this criteria they would then enter a home and away play-off against the Premiership’s bottom team for the right to play in the top tier for the 2025-26 season.

Significant obstacles remain, particularly in relation to funding, but Simon Halliday, the chairman of the Championship clubs, hailed a breakthrough following a long and often fractious period of negotiations with the RFU and Premiership Rugby. “It is a serious shift,” Halliday told Telegraph Sport. “We now have a mechanism which allows teams, for the first time in years, to access the play-off to determine promotion and relegation.

“The fact they have given us four years to reach the 10,000 overall capacity removes some of the capital intensive requirements in the early years which is what we wanted to see. At the beginning of next season, a number of our clubs will be in the mix to go into a play-off and I think that is a material change in what we are looking at now.”

Under the new regulations, Ealing Trailfinders, who have won the Championship in two of the past three seasons, and Coventry would become eligible for promotion in addition to Doncaster Knights. In the long term, Halliday believes that the lowering of the drawbridge will “light the touchpaper for all aspirational clubs” whether in the Championship or the National Leagues.
Rebranded second tier ‘should be should galvanised’

The RFU Council also confirmed that a new Tier 2 board will take responsibility for the governance and commercial management of the Championship, which is likely to be rebranded. Halliday does not pretend that every issue has been resolved but believes that the biggest barrier has been removed to creating a vibrant second tier in English rugby.

“There’s no doubt that the odds are still stacked against Championship clubs but you have got to open the door and then you can see how far you can get once you are through it,” Halliday said. “Of course, you can aspire to getting a lot more things put right but you are dealing with 15-20 years of embedded behaviour at the top end of our game which we are trying to unwind in a short period of time.

“Before it was a meaningless division to be in because you can finish top and nothing happens. Look at this year. It should galvanise the whole of the second tier and below and create some genuine jeopardy for the lower end of the Premiership.”

The RFU Council also rubberstamped the Professional Game Partnership, which includes hybrid contracts for England internationals, with Premiership Rugby and the Rugby Players’ Association.

It's not ideal, but it does sound like people are actually talking to each other and getting some kind of compromise thrashed out, rather than the take-it-or-leave-it brinksmanship that the RFU were threatening not so very long ago. Any thoughts, Banquo?

Puja

Many

The brinkmanship was not from the RFU though. This deal was on the table give or take since Feb. In fairness the RFU and lots of lobbying got PRL to substantially cede on minimum standards. But didn’t need to be so close to the edge. Big thing is governance autonomy for Tier 2 and marketing rights to supplement the one year ramp up cash for 24/25.

There’s a lot of work to do, but this is better than what looked likely last week, until late Thursday.

[Puja]

Wasps, Worcester, and London Irish all apply for places in a "revamped" and "expanded" Championship for 25/26: https://www.skysports.com/rugby-union/n ... ampionship

So far, can't find much information on what revamped or expanded actually means for the future of the Championship - all of the reporting oxygen appears to have been taken up with the very optimistic pronouncements that the three famous names will be resurrected, despite two of them not having a home and none of them having much in the way of confirmed money.

Puja

[Mellsblue]

https://rfu.widen.net/s/kmlctkpwm7/tier ... est-letter

https://rfu.widen.net/s/dfc8hqc9qk/appe ... standardsY

[Mellsblue]

Some interesting selections for Bedford this weekend if you’re a Saints fan:

Cubitt-Makepeace is on the bench.
George Smith is also on the bench and the man taking his place is Ed Prowse who was last seen for Bedford last season playing at prop.

[Banquo]

Wasps, Worcester, and London Irish all apply for places in a "revamped" and "expanded" Championship for 25/26: https://www.skysports.com/rugby-union/n ... ampionship

So far, can't find much information on what revamped or expanded actually means for the future of the Championship - all of the reporting oxygen appears to have been taken up with the very optimistic pronouncements that the three famous names will be resurrected, despite two of them not having a home and none of them having much in the way of confirmed money.

Puja

14 team league is the signed off ‘direction of travel’, assuming all the existing 12 teams meet mos they then form the first 12 teams in; there is in theory a promotion relegation playoff between prem and champ, assuming again the champ side meets mos.
In theory again, one side could come up from NL1, if they’ve applied, then one side from the applicants. Practically a couple of Champ sides are likely to fail mos - whether that means immediate demotion is not known.


Ie lots of unknowns

[Epaminondas Pules]

Wasps, Worcester, and London Irish all apply for places in a "revamped" and "expanded" Championship for 25/26: https://www.skysports.com/rugby-union/n ... ampionship

So far, can't find much information on what revamped or expanded actually means for the future of the Championship - all of the reporting oxygen appears to have been taken up with the very optimistic pronouncements that the three famous names will be resurrected, despite two of them not having a home and none of them having much in the way of confirmed money.

Puja

14 team league is the signed off ‘direction of travel’, assuming all the existing 12 teams meet mos they then form the first 12 teams in; there is in theory a promotion relegation playoff between prem and champ, assuming again the champ side meets mos.
In theory again, one side could come up from NL1, if they’ve applied, then one side from the applicants. Practically a couple of Champ sides are likely to fail mos - whether that means immediate demotion is not known.


Ie lots of unknowns

Lots of unknowns? Well colour me surprised! I get that things are still in motion, especially with the clubs that went bust, but the basic outline should be know. By now you’d hope. But if someone in your position doesn’t have clarity, then there’s serious issues in play still it seems.

[Puja]

Wasps, Worcester, and London Irish all apply for places in a "revamped" and "expanded" Championship for 25/26: https://www.skysports.com/rugby-union/n ... ampionship

So far, can't find much information on what revamped or expanded actually means for the future of the Championship - all of the reporting oxygen appears to have been taken up with the very optimistic pronouncements that the three famous names will be resurrected, despite two of them not having a home and none of them having much in the way of confirmed money.

Puja

14 team league is the signed off ‘direction of travel’, assuming all the existing 12 teams meet mos they then form the first 12 teams in; there is in theory a promotion relegation playoff between prem and champ, assuming again the champ side meets mos.
In theory again, one side could come up from NL1, if they’ve applied, then one side from the applicants. Practically a couple of Champ sides are likely to fail mos - whether that means immediate demotion is not known.


Ie lots of unknowns

Lots of unknowns? Well colour me surprised! I get that things are still in motion, especially with the clubs that went bust, but the basic outline should be know. By now you’d hope. But if someone in your position doesn’t have clarity, then there’s serious issues in play still it seems.

They have a concept of a plan.

Mind, the fact that they are excited about tenders from clubs who don't have a) a stadium, b) confirmation of enough money to pay off the debts they already owe, let alone run operating expenses going forwards, and c) any players, is probably a guide to the level of hopefulness involved. Who needs details when you have **dreams**?

Puja

[Banquo]

Wasps, Worcester, and London Irish all apply for places in a "revamped" and "expanded" Championship for 25/26: https://www.skysports.com/rugby-union/n ... ampionship

So far, can't find much information on what revamped or expanded actually means for the future of the Championship - all of the reporting oxygen appears to have been taken up with the very optimistic pronouncements that the three famous names will be resurrected, despite two of them not having a home and none of them having much in the way of confirmed money.

Puja

14 team league is the signed off ‘direction of travel’, assuming all the existing 12 teams meet mos they then form the first 12 teams in; there is in theory a promotion relegation playoff between prem and champ, assuming again the champ side meets mos.
In theory again, one side could come up from NL1, if they’ve applied, then one side from the applicants. Practically a couple of Champ sides are likely to fail mos - whether that means immediate demotion is not known.


Ie lots of unknowns

Lots of unknowns? Well colour me surprised! I get that things are still in motion, especially with the clubs that went bust, but the basic outline should be know. By now you’d hope. But if someone in your position doesn’t have clarity, then there’s serious issues in play still it seems.

planning is a challenge for schizz