Aristotle Armstrong

Aristotle Armstrong
The thrawn, alternative voice of Scottish Rugby

Sunday, 29 April 2018

Tora Tora Tora - All Aboard For Oblivion

I stayed away from Silver Saturday; at my age I can no longer do these all-day affairs, but, my spies kept me informed of events.

 EXCLUSIVE - the original six club representatives line-up at Murrayfield 

Apparently, Stupid 6 could become Stupid 8 by the time the SRU press release hits my inbox on Tuesday. Iain Morrison, in a disappointing non-committal piece in Scotland on Sunday yesterday referred to “rumours of an eight-club set-up”. I am told these rumours will be confirmed on 1 May. Mind you, I hae my doots about the rational for this: apparently the SRU's franchise sifting board were so-impressed by eight of the bids, they felt it would be unfair to not select them all. Aye right!

If they do go with an eight-club set-up, I think the “suits” are opening an even-bigger and messier can of worms than they originally did with Stupid 6. For instance, received wisdom has it that one or two of the 12 bidders whose applications were considered only applied because they felt they had to; their applications had all the reality of some of the hopeless case “Scottish” Labour “paper” candidates who were on the ballot sheet for the last General Election.

I hear for instance the “South” Borders franchise, into which all the Borders clubs except Melrose – who are above that sort of thing – had bought, fell apart after the usual suspects, whom I cannot name, but, they play in green, suddenly decided to go it alone.

One or two clubs didn't fancy the hassle of a six-club set-up in which they were to a degree at the mercy of Murrayfield for some of the big decisions, but, would have applied with a bit more determination and thought, had they known there would be eight places up for grabs.

Again, one or two clubs who didn't apply because only six places were up for grabs, might well have gone after one of eight places. The apparent last-minute SRU change of mind could well open the “suits” to some hard questions come the AGM.

This takes little or no cognisance of the fact, the whole shebang was ill-conceived, inadequately researched, the clubs were never consulted and it was a nonsense from the start. Again going with eight, and I am assured this is what will happen, raises as many unanswered questions as it answers.

As I have said before, with the PRO14 planning this Development League, and the Welsh presumably putting only their four new Regional Under-23 sides to take-on the four Irish Development sides – and these eight sides being full-time professional outfits, there is NO WAY the SRU would have been allowed to enter all six franchises – there is even less chance of them being allowed to put in eight teams. Whaur's yer cross-border games noo?

One of the reasons we were given for Stupid 6 was the perception, the ten-club BT Premiership was: “unfit for purpose” - when it came to preparing players for the PRO14. Spreading the available full-timers, either “professionals” or “Academy prospects” across ten clubs was unacceptable – better to have them across six. (Mind you, originally the Academy players were not going to be made available to the franchises, then they were).

Is an eight-club set-up superior to a six or a ten one?

Eddie Pollock - ahead of his time in pushing for an eight-club league

There again, an eight-club top-flight to the club game has been mentioned before. Stirling County's Eddie Pollock first floated this about 15-years ago. The SRU first started looking at the Premiership back in 2013-14, it came up then, as it did again in 2016. Then, it vanished from conversation, along came Stupid 6, now, suddenly, it is back.

As someone with whom I was discussing this yesterday suggested: “Surely they are making this up as they go along.” Is flying by the seat of your pants such a good idea, given the momentous nature of the changes being made? Any way, enough speculation for now, let's see what Tuesday brings.

I referred above to Iain Morrison's Scotland on Sunday piece, which he led on the uncertainty facing Glasgow Hawks – who, of course, are fighting for their Premiership lives when they take-on Jed-forest, at Lasswade, on Saturday, 5 May.

I like, on a personal level, the Hawks High Heid Yins. These guys have worked damned hard to make their hybrid club work. As originally conceived, Hawks was, as I understand it, an effort to transfer the time-honoured and successful Border “toon” system, best demonstrated back in the days when Hawick were all-conquering, to Glasgow.

As it was, in Hawick back in the day: the “semi-junior clubs (PSA and Albion) fed into the junior clubs (Harlequins, Trades, YM) with the omnipotent “Greens” cherry-picking the best players for their weekly match-day squad. But, changes to the league “pyramid” plus the way the local economy around Hawick has crashed have hurt this model. Just look at the number of Hawick lads playing in Edinburgh for instance.

With Hawks, the grass-roots and community side of the club would be done by Accies and GHK, with Hawks taking the best players to play at the highest level. Only, some backwoodsmen at the two original clubs decided they wanted to see Accies and GHK playing in the national leagues and Hawks have suffered.

If they cannot win Gold, Silver or Bronze, why give them a franchise?

As I have said before, since the SRU publicised their plans for the introduction of “Gold”, “Silver” and “Bronze” level clubs, we have to assume – the six, now eight franchises will surely be required to meet the Gold standard. Hawks cannot possibly meet that standard; not that they are alone, I can think of one or two others among the 12 franchise applicants who could not get near the Gold standard, as outlined on the SRU website.

If a bidding club cannot meet Gold standard for normal clubs, why should they be considered for the special status of a franchise? If that club is as financially-stretched as Hawks are, and has such an inadequate infrastructure behind them, why should they be considered for a franchise?

But, if no Hawks, what happens to Glasgow? It is inconceivable that there is not a Glasgow club involved in Stupid 8, as it now seems to be. And,by the cack-handed way they have handled this whole issue, there is no chance now whereby another Glasgow club could bid for one of the now (we presume) eight places.

The SRU couldnae run a menauge – that's my take.








6 comments:

  1. Matt,it was the full time pros that were not originally going to be involved, the Academy players were always going to be distributed to the clubs.

    If it is to be Super 8, will this mean that the we have 8 second XVs now playing in the National leagues and how many more players will be required to make an 8 team competition work? And with so many of the bidders not having primacy of tenure on their grounds, is the artificial pitch requirement being put on the back burner?

    And, most importantly, if it turns out that the original Franchise information document is nothing but a consultation pack, then the whole thing should be reopened to all clubs with the final terms now confirmed.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Good points, again. Hopefully we get answers at Wednesday's press conference.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Another 70 players magically produced out of thin air, or will they just be removed from the existing Club game.

    Plus another £137,500 * 2 of SRU funds being put into the Performance Rugby department, I wonder which part of the game this will be re-allocated from.

    Next thing we'll hear about is a Super 6/8 version 2, where Clubs aspiring to gain promotion to Super 6/8 in 5 years time can apply to join.

    Remember, "fewer, but stronger", with any strength controlled by Murrayfield - the grassroots game is already struggling - just how is Super 6 and Agenda 3 going to help?

    ReplyDelete
  4. This is getting ridiculous!

    It’s one thing to fly by the seat of your pants. Quite another to take the pi** as well.

    As pegj points out that’s another £1.375M on top of the current plan for super 6

    ReplyDelete
  5. So who do we see getting the franchises, if, as seems credible, there's 8 successful applicants?

    If we take Ayr and Melrose as givens I could see the SRU trying to go for an even geographical split:

    Borders - Melrose, Hawick

    Edinburgh - Accies, Currie

    Caledonia - Stirling, Dundee

    West - Ayr, Hawks - maybe Watsonians in their place as a third Edinburgh side if their bid isn't up to it

    ReplyDelete
  6. My spies tell me the final eight are: Ayr, Currie, Dundee, Edinburgh Accies, Hawks, Melrose, Stirling and Watsonians. But, you can never predict with Murrayfield. All will apparently be revealed this afternoon.

    ReplyDelete