SOMEBODY within the bowels of BBC Shortbread boobed this week. I clicked on an item on the BBC Sport Scotland website yesterday, hoping to read a pish interview by The Limerick Loudmouth – aka Tom English, with new SRU Chairman John McGuigan. I don't know what English was hoping to gain from this, David Barnes already did the business with an in-depth two part interview over a week ago, but, hey, BBC Shortbread noticing Scottish Rugby – mustn't grumble.
What I clicked on, rather than the English interview, was the Sports Department's forward planning chart for the next two weeks or thereabouts, and interesting reading it made.
A total of 216 items were listed, of which a mere 16 – seven and a half percent - were about Rugby. Still, I don't suppose we muddied oafs can complain too-much: that makes us the second-most-mentioned sport. Basketball and ice hockey got one mention (as possible social media items), golf got two items - suggestions that Mr English might interview those current fairway stars Sandy Lyle and Colin Montgomery. Katie Archibald – currently, arguably Scotland's top female athlete – got one mention, as did para-sport tennis star Gordon Reid.
There were nine mentions of Andy Murray, but the vast bulk of the items were concerned with what BBC Shortbread considers SPORT in Scotland – fitba. In broad terms, roughly 90% of the items which BBC Shortbread are planning to cover in the next two weeks are fitba related.
Now, we have to accept, not all of these items will involve a certain two Glasgow sides, but, anyone who listens to BBC Shortbread with any degree of regularity already knows, where it comes to coverage, there are the Bigot Brothers and the Rest.
Are we getting value for money from our licence fee? I think not.
The bigger question, however, is, are the SRU doing enough to ensure Rugby Union in Scotland gets a fairer and more-deserved slice of available broadcasting time? In fact, what is the SRU's over-staffed media and public affairs department doing to get the message out about how much is happening in the game up here?
THE TIMES recently ran a piece comparing French Rugby Union with the game in England. In it, René Bouscatel, the man who runs LNR (The Ligue Nationale de Rugby) which controls France's top two leagues, said: “What has been corrosive within the English game was that the economical product was prioritised over the sport.”
The 77 year-old, who ran Toulon for 25 years before going to Paris, knows what he is talking about and is scathing about how the millionaire “Sugar Daddies” who run the big English club sides have put money in front of sporting success.
Certainly France appears to have much-firmer foundations in place, not least a £98 million per year broadcasting deal, which has a further two seasons to run, and the way the big French clubs are much more-closely aligned to their location, often playing in municipally-owned stadia and with more support from the local authority than is seen in this country.
He admits, France got it wrong, when the top clubs were awash with non-French 'Galacticos' – but, today, each club is required to have 16 France-qualified players in their match-day 23, and if they exceed that number, there are financial benefits.
Of course, with the SRU owning our only two full-time professional clubs in the BKT United Rugby Championship, Scotland is different from England. But, is there not something to be said for the French rule of having 16 home-qualified players in a match-day 23. Should we not be applying that at Edinburgh and Glasgow?
In their last URC games, Glasgow had only 15 Scottish-qualified players in their match-day 23, Edinburgh had 20.
Certainly, it is difficult, notwithstanding Glasgow's good relationship with Glasgow Life, owners of Scotstoun Stadium, to see the Scottish teams enjoying the sort of hand-in-glove relationship with the local authority which is prevalent in France – from long experience, I reckon it's the boys who couldn't play football and the girls who couldn't play netball or hockey at school who grew up to be local councillors; they tend not to get sport in general, or rugby in particular.
But, at least, our elite game is not in the hands of millionaires, so we should perhaps be thankful for small mercies.
I SHOULD applaud the SRU, for aligning the two teams to contest this season's Celtic Challenge Women's competition with our two full-time professional sides.
Obviously, a lot of our international squad members are playing in the English League, so the Edinburgh and Glasgow squads will offer an opportunity for other players to show they are ready for a higher level of play.
However, a regular reader of the blog was in-touch recently to point out how much of a roller-coaster the Women's Premiership is. A look at the results shows an awful lot of one-sided games, with one or two of the clubs having to scratch from away games on a regular basis.
Yes, we have to work harder to encourage growth in Women's Rugby, but, perhaps the money being spent on the Celtic challenge would be better used in getting more women playing and trying to level-up a lop-sided league.
Watsonians are clearly a class apart from the rest of the league. Stirling County are their main challengers, eight points in arrears; then there is a gap to Hillhead-Jordanhill, Heriot's and Corstorphine, with the other three clubs – Cartha-Queen's Park, Stewartry Sirens and Garioch so far behind as to clearly be out of their depth.
This is not a good look for the top league in the country.
No comments:
Post a Comment