Crunching The International Numbers - A Sorry Tale

A (HOPEFULLY) thorough review of how the Scottish Rugby Union is run is currently under-way. It is not overly-dramatic to suggest this is the latest, and let's hope defining, campaign in the battle for the soul of the organisation.

We need to stop the in-fighting and set-up a system which sees Scotland continuing to “punch above our weight” in Tier One of World Rugby. This, however, may prove to be easier said than done, because a lot of entrenched methods will need to be overturned; a few wee mini-empires will have to be torn down. And, of course, we must never forget the in-bred conservatism (note the small C) of Scottish life, which, in rugby terms translates as: “Naw Son, it's aye been done this way – and aye will be.”

Currently, the SRU's management model is easily explained. It's a twin stream system – the upper stream is the Professional and Performance arm of the business, run by SRU PLC, who are managed by a board.

The lower stream is club rugby – which is overseen by The Scottish Rugby Council. The Council members are all elected, by the clubs, who are the main stakeholders in not only the Union, but also, SRU PLC. With SRU PLC, the Council's remit is an over-seeing one. The day-to-day running of the business is left to the paid professionals, but, they have to answer to the elected Council reps, who in turn, have to answer to the clubs.

The working model is – those parts of the business which come under professional and performance and run by the Board – are charged with producing a full Scotland team, playing open, attractive, WINNING rugby, in the process filling BT Murrayfield and generating the bulk of the PLC's income.

This income is augmented by such things as TV deals through the Six Nations and the Rugby World Cup, plus the Autumn Internationals. This income will hopefully filter down to subsidise the normal club game and keep it healthy.

The trouble with the Management Model, as outlined in the above four paragraphs is – It isn't working properly. In fact, it hasn't worked properly for years.

Take our record in the Six Nations, since that competition was inaugurated in 2000.

Our finishing positions in the 21 seasons since 2000 reads:

5 – 3 – 4 – 4 – 6 – 5 – 3 – 6 – 5 – 5 – 5 – 5 - 6 – 3 – 5 – 6 – 4 – 4 – 3 – 5 – 4.

That equates to an average finishing position of 4.6

Our match wins in each of these seasons reads:

1 – 2 – 2 – 2 – 0 – 1 – 3 – 1 – 1 – 1 – 1 – 1 - 0 – 2 – 1 – 0 – 2 – 3 – 3 – 1 – 3.

That equates to a wins percentage of 29%

When it comes to collecting silverware, our record is even worse. In those 21 seasons we have failed to win the Championship; we have posted no Grand Slams; haven't won a Triple Crown; have only held The Calcutta Cup in 5 of the 21 seasons (24%); won the Doddie Weir Cup once (50%) and the Auld Alliance Cup twice (67%). Overall, when it comes to collecting silverware, our percentage is 9% (8/85).

I have long maintained, in competitions such as the Six Nations, where it is the same teams competing every year, and there is no promotion or relegation, rather than finishing positions, the truer test is to count, as the North Americans do with their sports conferences: winning seasons – these are, seasons in which your favoured team wins more games than it loses.

In Scotland's case, with the 6N, this is another sorry tale:

We have had a mere four winning seasons since 2000 – 2004 – 2017 – 2018 – 2020. In each of these seasons we won three of our five games. And, while the fact we have posted three of these winning seasons in the last four is encouraging – making such seasons the norm will surely prove difficult.

In only 4 of the 21 seasons – 2001 – 2006 – 2013 and 2018 have we managed to finish in the top half of the table. Quite frankly, had it not been for the introduction of the Italians in 2000, these figures would be even worse. Yet. In spite of such consistently-poor showings in the final table, the SRU is able to virtually sell-out the 67,000 capacity national stadium more-often than there are embarrassing areas of empty seats.

Just think what could be done, if we were winning more. Ticket prices could be put-up and we would be able to (in theory) pump more cash into the grass roots and developing the game.

Let's now look at our record in The Rugby World Cup. Again, to make it as close to like-for-like as we can, I will cover the same time-scale, from 2000.

There have been five Rugby World Cups since 2000, in which Scotland's finishing position has been, starting with the 2003 RWC:

6 – 7 – 10 – 5 – 11. This equates to an average finishing position of 7.8.

For comparison, in the four RWCs in the 20^th century, again starting from the first competition in 1987, our finishing positions were:

8 – 4 – 6 – 5. This equates to an average finishing position of 5.75

(In establishing our finishing position, I looked at how close we came to qualifying for the next stage, and went with points difference against the other sides going out at the same stage. e.g. if the four losing quarter-finalists were beaten by say 8 points, 10 points, 15 points and 25 points, then, in that descending order, they would finish fifth to eighth. I used the same means of separating the third-placed pool teams in the RWCs in which we failed to make the knock-out stages).

In the five RWCs of the 21^st century, from the 2003 competition, we have posted the following wins against matches played:

3/5 – 3/5 – 2/4 – 3/5 – 2/4.

This equates to a wins percentage of 56.5%.

In the four RWCs of the 20^th century, the wins against matches played figures were:

2/4 – 4/6 – 2/4 – 3/5.

This equates to a wins percentage of 57.9%

If we look at our record in the amateur era, which I have extended to the close of the 20^th century and the switch from five nations to six, we get a better picture of how Scottish rugby has failed to cope with the change to the open game, and how we have allowed our closest rivals to edge away from us.

Sticking with the standard measurement I have used above, we find - in the last 21 seasons of the Five Nations, beginning in 1979 and ending in 1999, our finishing position was:

5 – 5 – 2= - 3 – 4 – 1 – 5 – 2 – 2= - 4 – 3 – 1 – 3 – 3 – 2 – 5 – 2 – 2 – 4 – 4 – 1.

This equates to an average finishing position of 3.1.

Our wins per season in each of these seasons was:

0 -1 – 2 – 2 – 1 – 4 – 0 – 3 – 2 – 1 – 1 – 2 – 4 – 2 – 2 – 2 – 0 – 3 – 3 – 3 – 1 – 1- 3.

This equates to a wins percentage of 46%.

In those 21 seasons we posted three Championship wins, which included two Grand Slams and Triple Crowns; we also won The Calcutta Cup four times.

We also posted six winning seasons: 1984, 1986, 1990, 1995, 1996 and 1999.

Therefore, if we compare our international performances in the amateur era with those in the professional one, it is clear that, we are not doing as well as we did then. This reinforces the view, open rugby has been a disaster for Scotland.

Below are comparative, albeit somewhat abbreviated Five and Six Nations tables covering the two relevant periods – 1979 to 1999 for the old 5N and 2000 to 2020 for the 6N:

Cumulative Six Nations Table

Nation	Average Placement	Wins percentage
England	2.5	59.5
France	2.1	54
Scotland	3.1	46
Wales	3.5	39.3
Ireland	3.9	28.6

Cumulative Six Nations Table

Nation	Av. Placement	Win percentage
England	2.1	71.4
Ireland	2.4	65.7
France	2.9	61.9
Wales	3.3	55.2
Scotland	4.6	29
Italy	5.6	11.4

However, I would not say it was as much a case of us slipping back – which we clearly have, as perhaps not going forward in the same manner as our opponents. The international game has moved on, we have not kept pace with this movement.

Certainly, in comparison to Ireland, perhaps our closest neighbours when it comes to doing like-for-like measurements, we have slipped alarmingly. Look for instance, at how the other Home Nations have done in terms of Grand Slams and Triple Crowns.

We have not posted either since 1990. In the Six Nations era, England has won three Grand Slams and another three Triple Crowns. Ireland has won two Grand Slams and three Triple Crowns, while Wales has won four Grand Slams and one Triple Crown.

Some critics will, I feel certain, seize on these figures as proof – we should have left things as they had aye been; stuck with club rugby leading via Inter-District play, into the international arena. I am not buying that one, for the simple reason, I do not think our clubs could afford to fund the level of training and preparation which top-flight international rugby demands.

We might have done better, had we stuck more with Districts, but, I fear we would still have been left behind when the other countries embraced full-time professionalism. Maybe, had we stuck with the four full-time professional teams (or even the three when we went to that), things would have been different.

However, the hard fact is, Scottish rugby cannot financially support four full-time professional teams.

Regardless of how we evaluate these figures and the governance of the game in Scotland, it is clear, carrying-on as we have been is not an option, something needs to change, or we will slip further off the pace.