Is It All About The Money?

BREAKDOWN – The Guardian's weekly rugby blog, had a woeful tale of discrimination this week, as it looked at the state of play in English Rugby. The game in the South is apparently mirroring life in general in the UK, with the rich getting richer, the poor poorer and the gap betwixt the two seemingly growing daily.

The Guardian's suggestion, which I feel has some merit, is that Rugby Union is growing ever-more like football, with a voracious Premiership grabbing every penny it can and leaving the bulk of the game relatively, or in some cases, greatly-impoverished.

The article, in particular reflected on the growing chasm between the Premiership and the Championship, the next level down – where even the best team in that division – this season Ealing Trailfinders – cannot be promoted to the Premiership. There is also the suggestion that the Premiership clubs are attempting to ring fence their competition to deny any clubs they don't fancy the opportunity of joining.

Perhaps the truth is – it's all the fault of the Rugby Football Union, who have allowed a small cadre of top clubs to all but take over the professional game. However, if they've got it wrong in Rugby Union's transition from the great amateur winter team game to its embrace of professionalism – well, the RFU will not be the only union in the dock.

I may be giving the successors to Will Carling's 57 Old Farts more credit than they deserve, but, might it be, the RFU is playing the long game here?

We all know, professional Rugby Union is largely a loss-making enterprise, certainly in this country. The accrued losses of the Premiership clubs over the years are eye-watering. Apparently, the mega-rich sugar daddies who are bankrolling the top teams can still do it. But, what happens when the bubble bursts?

Might the day come when the RFU has to step in to save the clubs from themselves and perhaps restore order and good sense to a management model which has failed? Then, we could see the game rediscover its soul.

In any field of human activity, the cream rises to the top. Take an art form such as opera – the great tenors such as Carreras, Domingo and Pavarotti, “The Three Tenors” could pick and choose their roles and where they sang. One or other might agree to do a short season with La Scala in Milan, The Royal Opera House in London, or The Metropolitan Opera in New York.

However, to get these headliners to perform for them, the management of each particular opera house or company had to ensure they had an ensemble: other leading singers, chorus, orchestra etc who would be able to keep up with the star. It's the same in ballet or in the theatre as a whole.

In sport, where the focus is on the individual – golf, tennis, athletics, etc., the top talent can look after itself. But, if we look at team sports as an art form, things get a wee bit complicated. You might have the best fly-half on the planet, but, if the other 14 members of the team are piss-poor in comparison, you're team is not going to win anything.

In football, a great striker such as Cristiano Ronaldo might make a bit of a difference, able to score off starvation rations, but, if the rest of the team around him is incapable of providing the service he needs – again, you're going to win nothing.

I could be wrong, but, I think the last individual, specialist footballer to turn a good team into a great, title-winning one, was Peter Shilton, when he signed for Nottingham Forest.

So, while a great player in one position can make a difference to a team, in team sports, team-building and team-work are more important than in other fields of life.

In the world of opera, ballet and the theatre in general, talent is discovered at a young age, then hot-housed through the development stage, via specialist schools etc. Sure, you will find amateur opera and theatrical companies all over the place, but, those stars who begin their careers in such amateur companies and eventually make it onto the big, professional stage, are very few and far between.

In football, future stars are being recruited to big clubs' academies at an ever-earlier age; we read of clubs fighting to sign eight-year-olds – why then should rugby hold fast to its amateur ethos, of players being developed via their clubs until they emerge as international stars.

With the money involved, that old system isn't going to work today. We are almost at the stage where if a player hasn't been spotted by 15 or 16, he is unlikely to make it. Even then, top football clubs still have a huge fall-out with pitifully few of the promising youngsters they take-in as full-timers aged 16 making it through to the first team.

What the game then has to do, in my view, is find a means whereby those who don't make it can still enjoy playing the game they grew to love, while those who were never good enough can find their level and continue playing. That, is a difficult trick to pull-off.

I maintain, we are now at the stage where there will be a difference between the elite, professional game, and the amateur – let's just have fun game. This, I know, will not sit well with the traditionalists, but, it's the way the world is turning. We are going to have to learn to live with this.

At the end of the day, the two different forms of the game will have to live and thrive together. The professional game will have to make the money, but, ensure enough of that money is hived off to the amateur game, because, at the end of the day – that's where the future professional players will start off and where they will learn the basics.

We have never yet got that balance right and, if the game is to have a future, we have to sort-out that balance, soon. If we don't, it'll be Disaster for Scotland.