The Franchises Are Being Sensible - Pity About Murrayfield

WE ARE NOW SIX DAYS PAST MID-SEPTEMBER:

WHERE IS YOUR PROMISED REVIEW LESLEY THOMSON?

STILL IT rumbles on – this clusterfuck called Super-6; or, given the way the SRU has managed it – Stupid-6. And I see few signs of peace breaking-out any time soon.

I continue to maintain – Super-6 has happened because BT Murrayfield has shown itself incapable of running professional rugby – for want of a better word: professionally.

• I hae ma doots about Scottish Rugby being financially strong enough to run two professional teams
  
  
• Ideally, Edinburgh and Glasgow would be better run by companies independent of BT Murrayfield and the SRU
  
  
• Perhaps, there is a case for SRU central contracts for our absolute elite Scotland players – Hoggy etc
  
  
• The money/status/performance/governance issues around professional rugby is a very difficult circle to square

I maintain too – it is the SRU's failure to square that circle which has had the knock-on effect, one level down, on S6.

The notion of a “bridging” tier, between the ordinary club game and the professional one is obvious and is accepted by pretty well everyone in Scottish rugby. The question is, how should this be organised and funded.

If the SRU held a multi-choice referendum on the issue, I reckon the result would be something like:

1. Edinburgh and Glasgow A or Under-23 teams, similar to those being set-up in Ireland and Wales
   
   
2. A return to a “District” set-up
   
   
3. Super-6 or something similar

I remain totally-convinced, it is the fact that BTM either can not, or will not, fund the running of this “bridging” tier which caused them to come-up with the idea of franchises.

A wee message here for those clubs and clubmen who are “anti” the sifranchise winners; get over it. The franchise application and awarding process might well have been totally fucked-up by BTM – three of the six in Edinburgh is A TOTAL NONSENSE.

But, THAT IS NOT THE FAULT OF THE SIX SUCCESSFUL CLUBS. Every Scottish club had the chance to apply, twelve clubs gambled on winning one – these are the six who did win.

This being Scotland, of course, the aggro did not end with the announcement of the six successful franchises. To quote Principal Skinner from The Simpsons: “You Scots certainly are a contentious people.” And things have been contentious ever since the six franchises were awarded.

It goes without saying – a wee bit of thought from BTM and most of the aggro could have been avoided.

I keep coming back to this point, but, sadly, it will not go away:

• The whole badly-thought-out Stupid-6 exercise was dreamed-up by someone inside the SRU's Performance Department
  
  
• Leaving aside the lack of explanation for how S6 was arrived at, the fact is, if it was a Performance Department initiative, then the Performance Department ought to run it
  
  
• Giving governance of S6 to the Domestic Rugby department makes no sense
  
  
• It compromises existing SRU bye laws
  
  
• The Performance Department is directly run by the Board and, as such, other than via the SRU Council's statutory oversight obligations, the Performance Department is the Board's baby
  
  
• The Domestic Rugby department's activities are more-closely monitored by the Council, because its activities impact directly on the activities of the clubs and associated unions who appoint the Council members

Under Performance Department management, TFC could say: “Make it so,” and it would happen. Under Domestic Rugby Department management, the other clubs can step in and say: “No, that does not happen.”

Then there are the other awkward questions:

• As I pointed out in yesterday's blog, the question of the governance of the six franchises cuts right across SRU bye law 6, and its various sub-clauses
  
  
• Again, putting the franchises under Performance Department governance MIGHT clarify these contentious points
  
  
• Furthermore – were the six franchised teams classed as “Performance Teams” rather than “Domestic Teams”, it should clarify the highly-contentious issue of where the six “Amateur” club sides play

The clubs want (as was originally envisaged in the franchise offer documents issued by BTM, to place their “Amateur” sides in National League 1):

• The National 1 placement is entirely sensible
  
  
• There is a very good chance injuries will, at some stage in a season, cause the franchise teams to dip into their playing resources in the “Amateur” club's 1^st XV, to fill a gap on their bench, or, occasionally in the starting XV
  
  
• The “Glasgow Hawks Protocol”, if strictly enforced, COULD see the “Amateur” club's 1^st XV forced to go back to the bottom Regional League and work their way up from there
  
  
• But, it stands to reason – that would be too-big a leap for a player to make, from Regional Division Three to the Super-6

One of the ways round this status impasse would appear to be dual-registrations or closer association between the six franchises and other neighbouring clubs.

When I recently spoke with Ayr's Billy McHarg about the impact of Super-6, he was keen to stress this as an approach Ayr are pro-actively adopting. The Millbrae club had arranged a meeting with their neighbouring Ayrshire clubs for Millbrae on Wednesday night. Unfortunately, Storm Ali intervened and there was no power to the Millbrae clubhouse, so the meeting had to be postponed.

However, it will be re-scheduled, while Ayr has also arranged a second meeting, with the Dumfries and Galloway clubs – clubs which have long provided players to Millbrae – George Nicolson, father and son Fergus And Stafford McDowall, David Armstrong, Robbie Smith and Calum Templeton, to name but a few.

“We want to work with surrounding clubs,” insists McHarg. “Us stealing their best players helps nobody – we have to seek co-operation.”

Lorne Boswell of Stirling County is also keen on involving surrounding clubs and County has already had a meeting with nearby clubs, and is planning further get-togethers.

Even the seemingly permanently-squabbling Borders clubs accepted an invitation to talk to Melrose on Wednesday night.

Just this week, in a highly-illuminating article in The Offside Line, Boroughmuir President Stevie Douglas explained, they are intent on going down this route at Meggetland too. So, here too, the franchise is working on the premise – co-operation is better than “Warehousing” - the suggestion the franchises would denude other local clubs of their top talent.

Indeed, in a move which will hopefully be replicated elsewhere, Stevie Douglas offered the prospect of younger Boroughmuir players with Super-6 potential, but not the experience or maturity, being loaned-out to nearby clubs to help their development.

Ambitious players will always want to move up to as high a level as possible; everyone knows this. However, not all will make it, and player movement has to be a two-way rather than a one-way street. This is another difficult part of S6 to pull off properly. It will take a lot of talking to solve, and careful management to maintain. 

So, there are still potential arguments to be overcome, and sticking points to be unstuck, but, things are looking rosier in the great Super-6 debate – because the six franchises are working hard to make it work.

Now, if BTM can only be kept at arm's length and prevented from putting their disruptive boots in – this thing will probably succeed.