The 6Nations Is Over, But, Super 6 Rumbles On And On

THIS blog post was supposed to be about the wider implications of Agenda 3, and how it might change life for the great majority of clubs in Scotland – those below the Premiership.

I know this is an important issue, and, honestly, I will return to it soon; however, I find myself side-tracked by one or two comments which came in following yesterday's reaction piece to Tom English's Dodson interview.

The English/Dodson interview can be found here, if you want to check it out:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/43473255

The first comment which caught me eye was this:

“What a very curious interview. Given my more cynical mind - why now?

Two things emerge for me

We have stated ad nauseam on this site that Agenda 3 and Super 6 are huge change initiatives. If I think about those types of projects I’ve been involved with at work there are several things I expect to see:

• A comprehensive set of data, comparisons and research on the 'As is' picture - and the 'To be' one.
• A compelling vision of the future based on the above.
• A strong and capable leadership team to drive through the change with the resources to make it happen.
• Engagement with stakeholders to bring them on the journey.
• Detailed 'road map', risk register, conflicts and dependencies plans.
• Scenario planning on possible outcomes and their consequences.

What do we have? The documents on the SRU web and various confidential meetings with potential franchises; with the odd break-out of a more public forum in Midlands and North.

So none of the typical documents one would expect to see of a project a fraction of this size. (Now maybe they do exist and are: “For your eyes only,” just for the change team inside Murrayfield?)

The other interesting theme for me is the comment: “Don't forget, we have been asked for this," as Dodson said.

"The clubs – in National 1, 2 and 3 - demanded that there was a stop to paying players at that level, it was distorting the whole game.”

“We’ve been asked to do this!” In a sense he is correct. I’ve been at various president roadshows and the like and have done my fair share of haranguing the officials in the state of the game. Clubs paying players being one of them!

Not being from a National league club I can’t comment on what they have asked for.

It would appear that some clubs are more important than others in that the National League ones get what they want and the others will just have to go along with it. My point is: there have been no explicit meetings in Scottish Rugby to discuss and explore future change.

I admire Mr Dodson's drive and tenacity. However he wilfully miss-characterises criticism as coming from 'the old Bufties' that somehow want to turn the clock back to some mythical age.

Let’s hope he hasn’t over-reached here.”

Another commenter, again making valuable points, said:

"'Weakest amateur tier of rugby in the UK.'

'We're falling further and further behind.'

It would be interesting to see the stats he uses for these statements, and when we look beyond "his" stats we do a comparison of the funding the various Unions provide to the amateur tier.

However, the first thing we should do is clarify what he means by the "amateur tier" - there is a great deal of money being spent on compensating people for playing rugby, and I'm sure the quantities the English & Welsh spend on the Club game dwarves what is made available to the "amateur game" in Scotland.

But I suppose the "weakest amateur tier of rugby in the UK" statement explains why his employees have stated they want to see "fewer" Clubs across our game.

I wonder when the cull of the weakest will start (and who will define "weakest").

Kill grass-roots rugby, and you kill the future of the game.”

Both commenters make excellent observations. This whole Super 6/Agenda 3 business has rather crept up on us. Premiership reorganisation has been a talking point for some time, this usually revolves around reducing or enlarging the number of teams. Not that long ago, the Premiership was to be a “Super 8” competition; indeed, while doing my research for pieces on the currently fashionable “Super 6”, I found this – from September, 2014, on the Jed-forest club website:

http://www.jedforestrfc.com/index.php?mact=News,cntnt01,detail,0&cntnt01articleid=34&cntnt01returnid=57#top

That document, IMHO, is still relevant, and gives a lot more detail of Murrayfield thinking than anything we have had from Dodson since he sprung Super 6 on the world.

It is, well-worth a read.

Since he announced Super 6, back in August, aided by a compliant mainstream media, Mark Dodson has had a comparatively easy ride. Now, however, as F (for franchise) Day approaches, and “declarations of interest” need to be turned into actual submissions – the heat is intensifying.

Maybe Dodson thought, with the Board behind him, and a compliant, some would say cowed Council, who will vote as required, when required, he could force through Super 6 with comparatively few problems.

Questions, however, are now being asked, and these questions, such as those raised above, require to be answered, between the end of this month, when the applications go in, and May, when the Stupid 6 turkeys are named. We live in interesting times right enough.

FINALLY, our friends at Scottish Rugby Blog have finally got around to mentioning Super 6 – where have you guys been while some of us have been fighting the good fight?

They have today discussed the implications of Super 6 in a post, which I link to below. Mind you, I don't think the author “Moody Blue” is that much of a Hawks' fan. The story can be found at:

https://www.scottishrugbyblog.co.uk/2018/03/whither-super-6/