RugbyRebels

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union ... borthwick/

Thoughts?

Sounds like progress and promising to read that the clubs are playing more nicely with the RFU

Finer details I guess

Danno wrote: ↑Mon Oct 02, 2023 8:25 pm https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union ... borthwick/

Thoughts?

Sounds like progress and promising to read that the clubs are playing more nicely with the RFU

I'm always a bit dubious about the idea of having the EPS on central/hybrid contracts, because it locks in a squad and means that bringing in a form player or removing an out of form player is more complicated because contracts are signed and can't just be broken.

However, this idea sounds like it has merit. 20 players is a very good number and still gives the flexibility to bring players in and out by only contracting the core of the 35-man EPS. We can manage the stalwarts who are close to guaranteed to play 2027 (like Genge, Itoje, TCurry, etc) and use some of them to commit to and drive the development of players we think can be future stars (like Dan, Pearson, WJoseph, etc). I just hope that they won't be wasted on retaining players like Lawes, Youngs, and Farrell who won't make the next RWC - this has to be used as the chance to reset and focus on the players we think will be coming to their prime over the next four years.

Puja

Might have a small side effect of making those French contracts a little less attractive too. You're way less likely to wander off if you're in, or confident of, one of these

Puja wrote: ↑Mon Oct 02, 2023 9:05 pm

Danno wrote: ↑Mon Oct 02, 2023 8:25 pm https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union ... borthwick/

Thoughts?

Sounds like progress and promising to read that the clubs are playing more nicely with the RFU

I'm always a bit dubious about the idea of having the EPS on central/hybrid contracts, because it locks in a squad and means that bringing in a form player or removing an out of form player is more complicated because contracts are signed and can't just be broken.

However, this idea sounds like it has merit. 20 players is a very good number and still gives the flexibility to bring players in and out by only contracting the core of the 35-man EPS. We can manage the stalwarts who are close to guaranteed to play 2027 (like Genge, Itoje, TCurry, etc) and use some of them to commit to and drive the development of players we think can be future stars (like Dan, Pearson, WJoseph, etc). I just hope that they won't be wasted on retaining players like Lawes, Youngs, and Farrell who won't make the next RWC - this has to be used as the chance to reset and focus on the players we think will be coming to their prime over the next four years.

Puja

Yes, exactly. It is a good idea as an integral part of a re-build.

Miraculously the bust RFU finds more money to bung to prem clubs, just in time to sign the PGP (was PGA) and achieve a kpi. Do the maths, and it means no more money for the Champ sides, in fact a bit less.

Overall a positive i'd say.

For all the money the RFU give the clubs you do wonder if they get a fair return from it.

fivepointer wrote: ↑Tue Oct 03, 2023 8:48 am Overall a positive i'd say.

For all the money the RFU give the clubs you do wonder if they get a fair return from it.

Its positive for Prem clubs and maybe for England's senior men's team. The rest of the men's game can go hang, clearly.

My instinct is that the idea that the RFU should have more control over the game is a bad one given how poorly they’ve managed pretty much everything. As Banquo notes, it would mean less money for other parts of game - notably the Champ and community, I’d guess.
Let’s hope the clubs use the spare cash wisely…

The trouble is, however bad the RFU are about things, PRL are even worse - and they're the only alternative.

I'd look to a root and branch restructuring of English rugby, but I've no idea where I'd start - I'm even desperate enough to consider giving SCW the remit of coming up with something.

Banquo wrote: ↑Tue Oct 03, 2023 9:00 am

fivepointer wrote: ↑Tue Oct 03, 2023 8:48 am Overall a positive i'd say.

For all the money the RFU give the clubs you do wonder if they get a fair return from it.

Its positive for Prem clubs and maybe for England's senior men's team. The rest of the men's game can go hang, clearly.

Lots will understand that take on the proposal. IMO, within a decent administration, the national XV's good performance is a vital precursor to the whole game's development and therefore its finances. We are 'celebrating' the 20th anniversary of when it was last a thriving entity. IF, IF, this is a structured, well thought-out part of a new era, maybe backing it is the right response in the hope that other parts of the game can then ride the wave of improvement.

Oakboy wrote: ↑Tue Oct 03, 2023 11:16 am

Banquo wrote: ↑Tue Oct 03, 2023 9:00 am

fivepointer wrote: ↑Tue Oct 03, 2023 8:48 am Overall a positive i'd say.

For all the money the RFU give the clubs you do wonder if they get a fair return from it.

Its positive for Prem clubs and maybe for England's senior men's team. The rest of the men's game can go hang, clearly.

Lots will understand that take on the proposal. IMO, within a decent administration, the national XV's good performance is a vital precursor to the whole game's development and therefore its finances. We are 'celebrating' the 20th anniversary of when it was last a thriving entity. IF, IF, this is a structured, well thought-out part of a new era, maybe backing it is the right response in the hope that other parts of the game can then ride the wave of improvement.

Yes, the long term prosperity of the game fundamentally relies on trickle down from national team's success, of which there has been precious little since 2003. Indeed, its somewhat miraculous how well the RFU has done out of Twickenham and associated revenues. However, continuing to put all your eggs into the appalling PRL structures, and teams going bust despite big subsidies in effect, seems odd. In the meantime, Champ clubs (say) have gone from 750k funding three years ago, to 140k now, and the numbers just published on the hybrid contracts mean that's likely to fall to £125k (though Jersey's probable demise will impact that), when you look at the big increase in allocation to the red roses, and the other RFU costs. That could easily see Ealing, Coventry benefactors pull out, and Pirates go semi pro. There is a good argument for saying don't be a pro club if you can't afford to be- and tbh that's where the likes of Doncaster and Bedford say are- but then extend that argument to the prem and see where it gets you.....


Its a mess- and as Which says, sort of, I wouldn't start from here.

Tigersman wrote: ↑Mon Oct 02, 2023 8:59 pm Finer details I guess

Agreed. On the one hand, it could be good allowing more rest, structure etc. On the other, bunging Sarries 6 of the 20 contracts so they can bring in internationals as "cover" but still have the England players available for crunch knockout games is going to look at bit dodge.

It'll be tough for clubs too, as how can form be rewarded. Like the cricket team it'll be harder to get out of the team rather than in. Sure some fringe players may just go to France after a couple round of not getting a contract. And club's finances could be a bit wobbly if they're expecting RFU subsidies on a contract that then don't appear

Which Tyler wrote: ↑Tue Oct 03, 2023 11:01 am The trouble is, however bad the RFU are about things, PRL are even worse - and they're the only alternative.

I'd look to a root and branch restructuring of English rugby, but I've no idea where I'd start - I'm even desperate enough to consider giving SCW the remit of coming up with something.

It’s very much bald men fighting over a comb but I feel like PR are the least worst. It’s a case of picking your poison, I suppose. Both are systemically flawed but PR seem to be moving in the right direction, appointing a commissioner etc, whilst the RFU will forever be a mishmash of the professional game and the amateur ‘blazers’. In short, I see more hope for the future of PR as a well functioning outfit than I do the RFU.

Mellsblue wrote: ↑Tue Oct 03, 2023 2:09 pm

Which Tyler wrote: ↑Tue Oct 03, 2023 11:01 am The trouble is, however bad the RFU are about things, PRL are even worse - and they're the only alternative.

I'd look to a root and branch restructuring of English rugby, but I've no idea where I'd start - I'm even desperate enough to consider giving SCW the remit of coming up with something.

It’s very much bald men fighting over a comb but I feel like PR are the least worst. It’s a case of picking your poison, I suppose. Both are systemically flawed but PR seem to be moving in the right direction, appointing a commissioner etc, whilst the RFU will forever be a mishmash of the professional game and the amateur ‘blazers’. In short, I see more hope for the future of PR as a well functioning outfit than I do the RFU.

Cor blimey that's the lowest bar in history, just as well, otherwise PRL wouldn't be even close to getting over it. Their behaviour over the PRC has been an absolute disgrace.

Banquo wrote: ↑Tue Oct 03, 2023 4:00 pm

Mellsblue wrote: ↑Tue Oct 03, 2023 2:09 pm

Which Tyler wrote: ↑Tue Oct 03, 2023 11:01 am The trouble is, however bad the RFU are about things, PRL are even worse - and they're the only alternative.

I'd look to a root and branch restructuring of English rugby, but I've no idea where I'd start - I'm even desperate enough to consider giving SCW the remit of coming up with something.

It’s very much bald men fighting over a comb but I feel like PR are the least worst. It’s a case of picking your poison, I suppose. Both are systemically flawed but PR seem to be moving in the right direction, appointing a commissioner etc, whilst the RFU will forever be a mishmash of the professional game and the amateur ‘blazers’. In short, I see more hope for the future of PR as a well functioning outfit than I do the RFU.

Cor blimey that's the lowest bar in history, just as well, otherwise PRL wouldn't be even close to getting over it. Their behaviour over the PRC has been an absolute disgrace.

As I said, it’s bald men fighting over a comb. At least PR seem to be moving the right direction whilst the RFU repeatedly drop the same combs.

Mellsblue wrote: ↑Tue Oct 03, 2023 4:15 pm

Banquo wrote: ↑Tue Oct 03, 2023 4:00 pm

Mellsblue wrote: ↑Tue Oct 03, 2023 2:09 pm

It’s very much bald men fighting over a comb but I feel like PR are the least worst. It’s a case of picking your poison, I suppose. Both are systemically flawed but PR seem to be moving in the right direction, appointing a commissioner etc, whilst the RFU will forever be a mishmash of the professional game and the amateur ‘blazers’. In short, I see more hope for the future of PR as a well functioning outfit than I do the RFU.

Cor blimey that's the lowest bar in history, just as well, otherwise PRL wouldn't be even close to getting over it. Their behaviour over the PRC has been an absolute disgrace.

As I said, it’s bald men fighting over a comb. At least PR seem to be moving the right direction whilst the RFU repeatedly drop the same combs.

Possibly…funnily enough it’s the blazers calling out the board quite rightly. RFU is ungovernable with current structures- have to wait a while before the review completes, given it hasn’t started . Its inevitable that they are a mix of pro and amateur, given that's the game they run, but doing it better has to be a good idea.

‘They want to see Owen Farrell playing for Saracens as many times as he can. So [if] there's ways and structures around to do that, then [I'm] all for it.’ said Care

Don’t we all Danny, don’t we all.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union ... ectacular/

A bullish Bill Sweeney insists that he is the right person to keep leading the Rugby Football Union as chief executive and predicted that the English game is on “cusp of something quite spectacular.”

In little over a year, four professional English clubs have gone to the wall, the grassroots clubs revolted over a proposal to lower the tackle height below the waist before there was a direct rebellion within the RFU council last month over the executive’s leadership and financial oversight.

However, Sweeney was able to see off this direct challenge to his leadership at a RFU council meeting last Friday in what he described as a “pretty cynical” coup from a “small group of people who are no longer in the game or have agendas.” In spite of overseeing the most damaging period in English rugby history, he retains the appetite to steer the union through the negotiations with Premiership Rugby over the new Professional Game Agreement (PGP) which he feels can rejuvenate the elite game.
‘This has been a unique moment in time’

“It’s probably for others to say if they don’t feel I am the right person to do it,” said Sweeney, speaking publicly for the first time in more than nine months. “I personally feel I am, given my experience, given my background, my balance of business and sport, I feel I am the right person to do that.

“I came into this role for one simple reason and it’s because I’m very passionate about this game. There’s probably a large number of my friends and family who would be quite happy if I didn’t do it any longer.

“But I do believe that we are on the cusp of something quite spectacular here. This has been a unique moment in time, because of the financial challenges, because of the working relationship with PRL, our ability to change that relationship around the partnership, to fix the things that have stopped us winning Six Nations championships on a regular basis.

“To have more consistently performing England teams. And I feel that I have the energy, that I’ve got the passion and I’ve got the desire to see this through.”

The PGP, which as Telegraph Sport exclusively revealed will feature hybrid contracts for more than 20 leading players, can be transformational for English rugby, according to Sweeney. Looking back at the past 20 years since England last won a World Cup and captured just four Six Nations titles, Sweeney says the current model is broken, based more on “hope” than anything else.
‘The system has to change’

“We need to fix a number of issues that have been broken for some time,” Sweeney said. “We know how the English game has been structured and how it has gone. There are certain issues attached to that which have been persistent and have been structural which need to be addressed if we are going to get things done.

“We have won four Six Nations and a World Cup in 20 years. That is not what you would expect from us as an organisation. Regardless of what happens at this year’s World Cup, wherever we end up, the system has to change. That takes us on to the Professional Game Partnership.

“Throughout that period we have had successive management teams in place and the critical fundamental issues have not been addressed. The opportunity around the professional game partnership is to bring the elite game together to make sure we can thrive and to make sure we have consistently competitive teams and we don’t have boom and bust periods when it is more based on hope; a great raft of talent coming through the game and we rely on that and we then have a period of quiet and we are unable to maintain that level of consistency. That is a major focus for us in a number of areas, in terms of performance pathways, academy structures and translate the talent through into the men’s game.”

Was just about to post that Sweeney confirmed 25 hybrid contracts in his speech.

He's not wrong in that this is a unique time to reshape the English game, with the clubs at their least powerful and bolshy since before 1996, finally down to the 10 team league that will avoid most calendar clashes, and just about every aspect of the domestic game on the table, available for negotiation. This "relaunch", if done right, could be the opportunity to transform rugby in this country and create something sustainable and powerful and helpful to the England team.

All comes back to whether you trust Sweeney and the RFU as being capable of doing that though.

Puja

Puja wrote: ↑Thu Oct 05, 2023 8:58 am Was just about to post that Sweeney confirmed 25 hybrid contracts in his speech.

He's not wrong in that this is a unique time to reshape the English game, with the clubs at their least powerful and bolshy since before 1996, finally down to the 10 team league that will avoid most calendar clashes, and just about every aspect of the domestic game on the table, available for negotiation. This "relaunch", if done right, could be the opportunity to transform rugby in this country and create something sustainable and powerful and helpful to the England team.

All comes back to whether you trust Sweeney and the RFU as being capable of doing that though.

Puja

If all options are on the table, top of the list, for me, remains removing club/country fixture clashes. Simply taking away the need to employ foreign journeymen to cover international absences is a no-brainer. In practical terms, reducing from 13 to 10 clubs leaves nearly enough space to do it.

Oakboy wrote: ↑Thu Oct 05, 2023 9:06 am

Puja wrote: ↑Thu Oct 05, 2023 8:58 am Was just about to post that Sweeney confirmed 25 hybrid contracts in his speech.

He's not wrong in that this is a unique time to reshape the English game, with the clubs at their least powerful and bolshy since before 1996, finally down to the 10 team league that will avoid most calendar clashes, and just about every aspect of the domestic game on the table, available for negotiation. This "relaunch", if done right, could be the opportunity to transform rugby in this country and create something sustainable and powerful and helpful to the England team.

All comes back to whether you trust Sweeney and the RFU as being capable of doing that though.

Puja

If all options are on the table, top of the list, for me, remains removing club/country fixture clashes. Simply taking away the need to employ foreign journeymen to cover international absences is a no-brainer. In practical terms, reducing from 13 to 10 clubs leaves nearly enough space to do it.

Fairly certain that has already been confirmed.

Puja wrote: ↑Thu Oct 05, 2023 8:58 am Was just about to post that Sweeney confirmed 25 hybrid contracts in his speech.

He's not wrong in that this is a unique time to reshape the English game, with the clubs at their least powerful and bolshy since before 1996, finally down to the 10 team league that will avoid most calendar clashes, and just about every aspect of the domestic game on the table, available for negotiation. This "relaunch", if done right, could be the opportunity to transform rugby in this country and create something sustainable and powerful and helpful to the England team.

All comes back to whether you trust Sweeney and the RFU as being capable of doing that though.

Puja

It is a great opportunity. It’s just a shame the RFU is skint and there’s worries they can’t afford this new deal.

I'm fairly encouraged by what Sweeney has said. Now is the time to deliver. Its crunch time.

Will Sweeney fly?