YESTERDAY'S
blog
post about the cost of S6, elicited some very interesting posts,
which I feel demand further examination.
The
first one I want to touch on was a comment on my Facebook page from a
definite hero of Scottish rugby: Iain “The Bear” Milne, of course
a past president as well as a marvellous player for one of the six
franchise winners, Heriot's.
no caption needed
The
Bear had this to say:
“Firstly
I’d like to make it clear that my opinions are my own and nothing
to do with my club Heriot’s.
It has always been my belief that Scotland needed another tier of rugby between the Premiership and the 2 Pro clubs. My preference has always been for an Edinburgh and Glasgow A teams then possibly Districts. The Premiership clubs did not want these options and tasked the SRU to come up with a solution, this they have done. ( remember the clubs rejected an 8 team league).
The long term benefit of the Super 6 will be the development of more young Academy players fit to play professional rugby, never mind the development of more back room staff.
As professional players salaries continue to spiral it is important that we keep developing young players to play the pro game, the savings will far outstrip any cost of financing the Super 6.
The thorny issue of where the Super 6 teams play is not easy. However the Super 6 clubs have to appreciate they are in a privileged situation and have to work with the other clubs for the betterment of Scottish Rugby. They should not be allowed to proceed beyond the 2nd tier of club rugby for at least 3 years.
My main concern is the dying off of the male adult game. Despite all the money and resources being put in to youth rugby actual playing numbers in the male adult game continue to decline.
Clubs have to work together, start trusting each other and think of the big picture and produce a product that young men want. Less travel, shorter season, fun and and a game that gives them its traditional values of trust, respect, friendship and a game for ALL.
As I’ve said for over 20 years we do not have enough bad players playing the game.
Let’s put self interest behind us, now is a great opportunity to make our game great once more.
Cheers to all true rugby people.
It
is difficult to argue with the big man's reading of things. He makes
an interesting point, one which has perhaps been forgotten in all the
fire and fury of the S6 debate – Murrayfield seized the initiative
in forcing through S6, because, as Iain points out: “The
Premiership clubs did not want these options and tasked the SRU to
come up with a solution, this they have done. ( remember the clubs
rejected an 8 team league).”
I
agree with Ian, option one: Edinburgh and Glasgow A teams, or option
two: Districts are both infinitely-better options than the divisive
S6 template. And, as Iain says, the Premiership clubs rejected an
eight-club league, again, in my view, a better set-up than either the
existing ten-club situation, or the six-club one we will have next
season.
However,
the real meat on the bones of The Bear's comments come towards the
end, when he says:
“My
main concern is the dying off of the male adult game. Despite all the
money and resources being put in to youth rugby actual playing
numbers in the male adult game continue to decline.”
This
is serious, very serious, because, if there isn't a domestic game, if
ordinary guys who will never get close to wearing the thistle don't
keep playing – there will be nobody interested enough in rugby to
want to go and watch Edinburgh, Glasgow or the Scotland team.
Iain
is correct when he says:
“As
I’ve said for over 20 years we do not have enough bad players
playing the game.”
The
professionals, the national squad, the professionals with Edinburgh
and Glasgow, the semi-professionals with the current Premiership
clubs and next season's franchises – they get their strips and
boots supplied; they train in club track-suits, which are supplied.
They
don't buy their own kit, they don't buy the club ties, sweaters and
polo shirts. They are relatively fit, they are not the backbone of
the bar takings, they don't buy the pies after the game – it's the
ordinary club members who keep that major part of the Scottish rugby
economy going.
Where
many, long-established clubs, 50-years go were running six teams, and
even 20-years ago were running four teams, today, they are running
two teams, if they are lucky three. Even at regional level, today it
is all about “performance”.
Very
few people today are playing “Coarse Rugby.” There should have
been a preservation order on that form of the game – if not
invented, then certainly championed by my old Sunday Times
sub-editing mate Michael Green. We badly need, as Iain Milne has
realised, to bring back Coarse Rugby, if mainstream rugby is to have
a future.
But,
the grass-roots do not concern the “suits” at Murrayfield. They
are only concerned about the bottom line – form the professional
and performance arm of the game. Of course, far-too-many of the
“suits” don't have a clue about Scottish rugby.
And,
maybe we, the ordinary club-men and women are to blame, because, from
where I am sitting, while we have a few good men still in-situ, it
seems as if, of late, we have elected too-many “wankers”, to use
the Chewin' the Fat description, to high office.
For
instance, one current Board/Council member has not called a meeting
of the clubs he represents for over a year – other than the
vice-residential hustings, which were called at a time and place
guaranteed to be as inconvenient as possible for them. Yet, the said
senior member of the “Blazeratti” (elected officials are
blazeratti – the
paid executive guys are “suits”) is always front and centre in
the posh seats at PRO14 games.
These
sort of guys are not interested in the people who put them there –
once they have a place to put their snouts in the trough.
Already,
even before the new league season has kicked-off we have seen Bowl
and Shield games forfeited – because clubs cannot raise teams, with
a particular problem in finding front rowers.
Every
season, we see more and more lower league or 2nd
XV league games called-off, but, so-long as the money is coming in to
fund the professional game, the “suits” and some of the
“blazeratti” are unconcerned.
You
have a problem Murrayfield – when are you going to do something
about it.

The Bear is in motherhood and apple pie territory - no one would disagree with his sentiments until you start talking about how we realise what he is suggesting
ReplyDeleteYes we need more people playing. There is no dispute about that. Unless we find a magic player tree then I’m not sure how exactly we go about this. Almost all teams play in some sort of league structure and outside of that there aren’t any spare teams to play against so we have created a vicious circle. Lack of playing opportunities stops players turning up to train and ultimately leads them to be doing different things on a Saturday.
Why don’t clubs trust each other? Begin to answer that question and we will make some progress.
Now for some pop psychology. Effective collaboration requires adult adult conversations. What we have and had is parent child. “Big” clubs having more say that other clubs. The SRU forcing change through without proper consultation. Clubs playing fast and loose with employment law and SRU byelaws. Hardly surprising there is a lack of trust.
For the clubs in an S6 franchise area - what’s in it for them? The betterment of performance rugby and the S6 and their host club isn’t a benefit to them. Will player movement be two way between S6 & it’s amatuer teams with the other clubs? Will there be some coaching benefit through shared sessions? If the S6 approach this in we win you lose mentality then trust is impossible.
"We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them." Albert Einstein who was good at solving problems.
Some excelent points to mull-over there Clubfan.
ReplyDeleteSome good reading and excellent points made here. My only comment is that it’s not just players, good or bad who keep the clubs ticking. Most past players are the guys who run the clubs, spend fortunes in drink, go to Murrayfield. A player will get at most 20 years of playing and then approximately 40 years talking about it and going on trips to Paris and Dublin. So although I see and hear the importance of keeping the ‘bad’ players’ numbers up, it’s also important to keep the majority of the rugby world happy, with either good club games or Pro 14 games or Internationals to watch. It’s too easy just to stay at home and watch it on TV. Personally I prefer going to Murrayfield, Paris, Dublin with my old rugby mates and spending a fortune in the process, which I’m sure helps the STU coffers. It would be interesting to know what percentage of a full house at Murrayfield actually play/still play rugby. I would be surprised if it is above 25%
ReplyDelete