A Contentious People - And Don't You Ever Forget It

ONE OF the guiding principles of this blog is my belief, Principal Seymour Skinner hit the nail on the head when he told Groundskeeper Willie: “These Scots sure are a contentious people.”

This was in response to one of Willie's rants, in fact this one: “Brothers and sisters are natural enemies. Like Englishmen and Scots. Or Welshmen and Scots. Or Japanese and Scots. Or Scots and other Scots. Damn Scots they ruined Scotland!”

Another literary quote which I have long thought had a basis in fact, is from George MacDonald Fraser's fictionalised memoir on his time as a young officer in the Gordon Highlanders. In the second of these: 'McAuslan in the Rough' Fraser suggests there is a long-standing Ministry of Defence general order, that the Scottish regiments must never all be in Scotland at the same time.

This is not, as some have suggested, to prevent them reforming the Scottish Army, marching on London and, this time, not stopping at Derby, rather, to prevent the threat to the peace of the country which would all but vanish, courtesy of inter-regimental fighting. The belief being, without 'Frogs,' 'Huns,' 'Wops,' 'Ruskies,' 'Towel Heads' or 'Fuzzy-Wuzzies', or in particular the English to fight with, the Jocks would very-happily fight among themselves.

I firmly believe this unfortunate thread in the Scottish character is behind the current unrest in Scottish Rugby.

The ill-feeling was ramped up yesterday, when President Dee Bradbury gave short shrift to the demand, from 38 clubs, that she disband the Task Force she recently formed to take another look at the governance of the game.

Right now, we are sailing in turbulent and uncertain waters. What sort of Scottish Rugby Union emerges from the “All Clear” signal as the pandemic eases and we return to “normality,” well – that's another QI question to which nobody knows the answer.

Rugby will, like most other things, be greatly changed by the time we next take the field – I doubt we will be able to resume as we were before the shut down, indeed, I worry about what sort of game we will be left with.

Governance has been the hottest topic for about the last 18 months, this dispute has seen The Junta, in an effort to lead the rabble of the clubs, come up with the Gammell/Murray Review, an initiative which was perhaps best-described by one of Billy Connolly's more-memorable quips; it was “made as welcome as a fart in a space suit.”

Gammell/Murray is now more dead than another early Connolly invention – the errant wife, murdered and buried in the back close in Glasgow – and no bum is being left above ground as a handy slot in which to park a bike.

As someone close to the Task Force explained to me this week: “The proposal to do away with elections in favour of appointing people to the Council and Board was totally unacceptable. The formation of the Task Force is an effort to preserve democracy within the Union. Sure, we need to modernise and the Task Force is geared towards this.”

There is an acceptance both around the Task Force and the 38 dissident clubs, that teyh want the same things – it's in the direction of travel, and seemingly, in personnel, where there is dispute – another case perhaps of Scot fighting with Scot.

The dissident clubs want Dee Bradbury to stand down and allow vice president Ian Barr, who is due to succeed her at this year's AGM, lead the governance review. The view in the Task Force is that they have to get the review complete as a matter of urgency, and before the AGM, the date of which remains uncertain.

There are suggestions that the current President and VP do not get on. Well that's nothing new, apparently it is almost de rigeur for the top two elected officials in the SRU to have irreconcilable differences.

The problem, according to some shrewd observers of Murrayfield Politics is, what mischief might The Junta being gettig up to, while the elected officials are squabbling among themselves?

It seems fair to see, once the reset button on ordinary life is pressed and we get back playing, rugby, in Scotland and elsewhere, seems certain to be much-altered. The bloated SRU wage bill will surely need to be trimmed to reflect the new reality we will be facing.

I can see one or two of the mini empires within the game being curtailed, with those running these empires asked to defend some pretty hefty salaries awarded to people who some others see as not providing value for money.

As one big fish in the clubland pond said to me this week: “Scottish Rugby has to decide, and quickly, what sort of Scottish Rugby community we will have going forward.” There will be change – because we cannot go on as we have been.

Some are suggesting we could be reduced to one single full-time team playing at the highest level of club rugby. This will, in the medium term, have to be an SRU-owned club. Others are suggesting the Union will stick with two full-time clubs, however, we might see a reduction in the number of full-tme players.

I can see Edinburgh and Glasgow continuing, but, without the bloated 50-plus squads of before the shut down. Perhaps, in the new reality post-pandemic, we will see a centrally-contracted core of perhaps 50 players, spread across the two sides, with the other current players forced to revert to part-time, semi-professional status, across the six Fosroc Super6 franchises.

I can also see strict amateurism being enforced in the club game, and a cut in the number of truly national leagues, from the present four to two.

As I was told this week: “We can expect many businesses to be looking to cut expenditure when they resume trading, so sponsorship income will probably fall. There may be job losses across all sectors, so less spare money going around. A few clubs were struggling to pay players etc before the shut-down, when we resume, a lot of clubs will simply not be able to afford the expenses of the past, so, strict amateurism has to be the way forward for nearly all the clubs.”

Should this be the scenario which emerges at the end of the current lockdown, well, the governance model will definitely be different. In fact, we could well see what a lot of people within the game in Scotland yearn for – a return to something like the old days, with the Council members, as the old SRU Committee were, being elected to serve theinterests of larger areas than the present ten or twelve-club constituencies of today.

That way, we would hopefully see that more-democratic elected body than we have today.

I detect, the Task Force and the dissident clubs would like to reach the same destination, they are merely failing to agree on the best route to take in getting there – and who should be driving the bus.

But, that's what you get when you are dealing with a contentious people like the Scots.

As an aside to the in-fighting, the excellent Hazel Swankie, the Midlands Region Council rep has been appointed to the Task Force, to take the place of the sadly deceased Adam Gray.