What does the future look like for rugby?

[hopwood]

https://inews.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/premiership-rugby-format-changes-central-contracts-two-conferences-1496263?ITO=newsnow


Premiership Rugby: 45 England contracts and 16 teams across two conferences could save English rugby

English rugby union has a once-in-a-generation chance to make a reset for success, to preserve the jobs of its top players, reduce the number of fixture clashes between club and country, and encourage the ambition of those outside the Premiership who want to grow the game.

An increase in the size of the Premiership from 13 clubs to 14 or 16, and playing the competition in two conferences to create a shorter, more focused fixture list, is being discussed at the highest levels.

Crucially, the impetus for change comes at the same time as two interlinked developments: the review of the global calendar and the negotiation of the next funding agreement between the Rugby Football Union and the Premiership. The agreement is due for renewal in 2024 but it is a live topic right now.

This week’s furore over Doncaster and Ealing being blocked from promotion to the Premiership (and Doncaster appealed the decision on Wednesday) is just one of dozens of pieces in the jigsaw puzzle being worked on by Bill Sweeney, chief executive of the RFU, and the other power-brokers in the English game.

There are two big problems that were exacerbated by the pandemic but pre-existing anyway: the top players including spokesman Owen Farrell are increasingly vocal at being burnt out by injuries and too many matches. And their employers at the 13 Premiership clubs, to whom they are loyal, are losing money hand over fist.

For the first time though, there appears to be a collective will to find a way. Simon Massie-Taylor, previously at the RFU, is the new chief executive of the Premiership, with the RFU’s support. Meanwhile, a forum exists for the world’s players and professional clubs to contribute to World Rugby’s discussions of the global calendar.

The theory understood to have at least been shared by Sweeney is “less is more”: play the Premiership in conferences to reduce the number of regular-season matches, while preserving local derbies, and persuade a broadcaster to pay more cash for a more compelling contest.

After all, the theory runs, if more matches mean more money, why are the Premiership clubs annually losing an average £5m each? Crowds have stagnated, there is a lukewarm attitude towards the European competitions, while others want a World Club Championship.

A new deal could allow the RFU to centrally contract 45 players and dictate which club they played for. Some feel the academies should be taken out of Premiership control and linked instead to universities. The structure of the division or two below the Premiership is wrapped up in this. Such are the opportunities – a better word than “threats” – in the next club-country agreement.

The hurdles, as Sweeney is well aware, include unpicking the knots tied round the sport since rugby went open. The 13 Premiership clubs are shareholders in their own league, together with private equity fund CVC.

The free gangway up and down the leagues has gone – more’s the pity, cry the lovers of pure sport.

While the Premiership would welcome a new club in Yorkshire, and possibly Cornwall, to widen the geographical spread – in effect, the market – they will not simply donate a shareholding to give Doncaster or whoever a financial leg up.

But if Doncaster or a third party – a bank or other lender – write a cheque for £25m to buy Premiership shares, and demonstrate sustainability, they might find the arguments over entry criteria disappear.

It is always tempting to gaze towards France, where the TV deal with Canal+ is £100m a year compared to the Premiership’s with BT of £35m, but rugby in France is more popular in relation to football, and also less conservative and ownership-based.

So unless the RFU pursues a nuclear option of smashing the current system, and pouring much more money into non-Premiership clubs, everyone has to try to make it work.

If a programme can be worked out for an English club to play 28 matches a season instead of 40, and at least break even, they may just try.

[NellyWellyWaspy]

No, it won't.

Rugby in any country requires young people to be regularly playing it. And in the UK, they no longer do, except in private schools, and even there the amount of time and resources allocated to rugby/sports is declining, in favour of 'academic rigour'.

Yes, there are community clubs, but there funding and resources are pitiful. It isn't 'cool' to play a cold and muddy game.

[baldpaul101]

Rugby in any country requires young people to be regularly playing it. And in the UK, they no longer do, except in private schools

Not at grass toots its not.
Mini & Junior rugby is huge & has massive numbers playing the game. Girls rugby in particular is booming. The three state schools local to me all play rugby & make the last stages of major comps regularly.
The issue happens at adult level where the numbers drop off considerably. Grass roots clubs that could get out 4 sides regularly now struggle to get out 2.
What is missing is the transferring of mini & junior numbers into paying support at club level. That's never been there & probably never will. I think the idea of a broadcaster paying huge sums for rights to games where there is little interest is unlikely to happen IMO.

[Rossm]

Rugby in any country requires young people to be regularly playing it. And in the UK, they no longer do, except in private schools

Not at grass toots its not.
Mini & Junior rugby is huge & has massive numbers playing the game. Girls rugby in particular is booming. The three state schools local to me all play rugby & make the last stages of major comps regularly.
The issue happens at adult level where the numbers drop off considerably. Grass roots clubs that could get out 4 sides regularly now struggle to get out 2.
What is missing is the transferring of mini & junior numbers into paying support at club level. That's never been there & probably never will. I think the idea of a broadcaster paying huge sums for rights to games where there is little interest is unlikely to happen IMO.

Manage to win the WC a few more times and the interest will come.

[westwaleswasp]

Pretty sure most south Wales comps play rugby as the no 1 sport. Or possibly religion.

[Shugs]

Wow, if that is the proposal to save the game we’re in real trouble. Less games and the inference that local derbies will be maintained meaning a sort of regional set up. No academies and players being “placed”. I carried on reading hoping to find one idea I liked and failed. I do wish articles like this would not make sweeping statements insinuating rugby is in decline or there is apathy for European competition. I’m now seeing increases in the game on terrestrial tv and fans are as passionate as ever.  I don’t pretend to have answers but some things I’d do 1) A 14 team Prem with promotion and relegation. 2) Get rid of the Prem Cup. 3) Go back to a 5 nations 4) Never let the authorities decide who plays for who. 5) Less meaningless international friendlies.