Should amateur days return?

[Wombles]

On the face of it the notion is ridiculous. How could English rugby remain competitive at club and international level should this happen? Players would go abroad en mass or leave altogether.

However it may not be as fanciful an idea. Let us be honest Saracens apart - and I do not want this to become a discussion on the nefarious deeds - no other club really challenges in Europes top tier anymore. Since the last PGA agreement where ?200 million was given to the clubs, our national team has wandered between average to woeful. The RFU Sue Day financial findings are reported to show a ?50 million loss which could raise to near on ?80 million by 2025. The clubs are all losing money hand over fist, and if the next PGA does not give further funds more strife could occur. Add in that a 10 team closed shop of a league hardly inspires & the Premiership rugby cup is a poor event that is poorly supported, which all allied above is unlikely to be catnip to potential investors or sponsors, then suddenly amateurism does not seem so far off. It?s being run in a fairly amateur and increasingly non unified way already, with the RFU, PRL, Championship and grass roots more like individual factions rather than the same family. Sugar daddies prop up clubs, and those without are starting to fall, who?s next? London Irish? But I doubt it will stop there.

Yes amateur status would be a tough pill to swallow, however for those of us who remember the amateur days, it isn?t altogether such a bad notion? More clubs could possibly thrive in an environment that is less about the bottom line, and more about having fun. The top league elitism vs the rest could potentially dissolve overnight. Yes the chances of success international & European club level would be vanishingly remote. But would it lead to a competitive game at all levels domestically? It?s not impossible.

Perhaps the above is extreme and even more unlikely to occur, but one thing is for certain, the game is heading for a cliff edge with disastrous consequences if unchecked. Sometimes extreme circumstances require extreme solutions.

[Neils]

Hmmm I thought we still had a well functioning amateur side. I think it would be a kick in the teeth to them surely.

[Shugs]

Certainly the premiership model is broken. For incomes to start matching expenditure the cap would have to be forced so low that it would be an amateur game. But we?ve got 4-5 clubs who want to keep it high to compete in Europe etc and have wealthy owners to make this happen. Their problem is that they need someone to play. There are 3 options for me. 1) Status quo and teams with no benefactor drop off gradually. 2) Amateur game or 3) Those 4-5 negotiate their way into a euro or uk league of sorts.

[Neils]

Certainly the premiership model is broken. For incomes to start matching expenditure the cap would have to be forced so low that it would be an amateur game. But we?ve got 4-5 clubs who want to keep it high to compete in Europe etc and have wealthy owners to make this happen. Their problem is that they need someone to play. There are 3 options for me. 1) Status quo and teams with no benefactor drop off gradually. 2) Amateur game or 3) Those 4-5 negotiate their way into a euro or uk league of sorts.

Look at the Mail article with Jason Orange's brother. That is how they will go

[jamestaylor002]

Appreciate that this is all fanciful, but could we have both?

Let the sugar daddies have the league they want, which would be the Premiership.

Then everyone else can go off and develop a new league structure which can be amateur. We wouldn't need to re-invent the wheel, we could just restructure from the Championship down.

[NellyWellyWaspy]

Appreciate that this is all fanciful, but could we have both?

Let the sugar daddies have the league they want, which would be the Premiership.

Then everyone else can go off and develop a new league structure which can be amateur. We wouldn't need to re-invent the wheel, we could just restructure from the Championship down.

Then you face the same situation as persisted before the sport went 'professional'. No ACTUAL pay to players. Basic facilities of a club. A few grass pitches, maybe one with lights. A small but basic wooden stand, a car park maybe with gravel, a small rail to separate the spectators from the pitch (to stand at/against). A bar maybe, a small kitchen. Might get travel expenses, might not. Might get some parts of the kit (shirt), but boots, socks, shorts ... well, you get the picture.

Along comes a 'fan' with some money. Builds a decent stand, better facilities. The coach is paid. Travel expenses always paid, and well paid. All kit provided. Regular players are found good local jobs (often with the company of the rich fan). And so one club prospers better than the others, while no club actually pays the players ...

That was how some clubs did better than others. Amateur or pro, there will always be the disparity. It is why I really stopped playing rugby. I wanted to play a game, a sport. But it wasn't/isn't a 'fair' game. No sport with adults is. The poorer clubs are always in the lower leagues, the richer clubs get to the top.

[Shugs]

Certainly the premiership
 model is broken. For incomes to start matching expenditure the cap would have to be forced so low that it would be an amateur game. But we?ve got 4-5 clubs who want to keep it high to compete in Europe etc and have wealthy owners to make this happen. Their problem is that they need someone to play. There are 3 options for me. 1) Status quo and teams with no benefactor drop off gradually. 2) Amateur game or 3) Those 4-5 negotiate their way into a euro or uk league of sorts.

Look at the Mail article with Jason Orange's brother. That is how they will go

Far from sustainable is it. Huge donations to be made or no chance. 10 team league somehow proposed to make more money - not sure how on earth that works.

[Neils]

Certainly the premiership
 model is broken. For incomes to start matching expenditure the cap would have to be forced so low that it would be an amateur game. But we?ve got 4-5 clubs who want to keep it high to compete in Europe etc and have wealthy owners to make this happen. Their problem is that they need someone to play. There are 3 options for me. 1) Status quo and teams with no benefactor drop off gradually. 2) Amateur game or 3) Those 4-5 negotiate their way into a euro or uk league of sorts.

Look at the Mail article with Jason Orange's brother. That is how they will go

Far from sustainable is it. Huge donations to be made or no chance. 10 team league somehow proposed to make more money - not sure how on earth that works.

Deluded

[wasps]

I also don't think it will work, but I can understand some of the arguments for it.... And some of them work in other sports.


Ultimately, the aim is to get more money coming into the game, everything else is secondary.


So, what does a 10 team league give us?
Ultimately it gives us 230 players per week, rather than the current 322 players.
The hope is that we'll be concentrating the talent and seeing better quality players and therefore a better quality game.


If the quality of the game on show is better, and the players themselves are easier to recognise, the more people will watch it and then more sponsors will come on board.
More sponsors equals more money equals job done.


It all makes sense.
However, there's a few different types of supporters out there who are required to increase the viewership.
You've got die hard fans who will always watch their club.... You've got those viewers already.
You've got the older generation occasional viewers who remember arm wrestles on a muddy field dominated by a power game... These people may well enjoy watching a power based game every week.
Then you've got the younger generation of fans, who are arguably the future. They're after fast, exciting, readily consumable media. They want to be able to watch 5 minutes on their phone and see something exciting happening... They won't be captivated by 5 minutes of scrums, mauls or kick tennis