A Somewhat pissed-off blogger writes

FROM MY long experience in the sports-writing field, I can tell you, while there are the odd friction points between the two sides, in general those of us who write about rugby, get on better with the game's high heid yins, either at club or national level, than do our compatriots who follow the round ball game.

This may be because, the ELECTED officials within rugby have with a remarkably few exceptions, played the game. Club boards in football, in general are composed of share holders, fans with a wee bit of spare cash. Committee members in rugby clubs have nearly all played for that club – and it shows when dealing with the press.

These guys are all highly protective of their clubs. They also, like most sports' officials, tend to be somewhat conservative where change is concerned. This is a trait which has me occasionally musing, maybe the SRU's motto should be: Semper!! Mind you, that single Latin word does not have the same finality and gravitas of the Scottish version: It's Aye Been!!

Given the above, I was not at all surprised at being savaged, from all sides, by the usual suspects, because, yesterday, I apparently wrote something positive about Super-6.

I found it particularly funny, to be attacked by a couple of club officials, whose opposition to S6 was not so profound, when they were submitting their ultimately failed bids to capture one of the franchises. Apparently, it was a good plan – provided they got one of the places, not so good if that place went to a local rival.

Can I – yet again – state this blog's position:

• At best, Super-6 is Option Three when it comes to providing the required high-performance platform on which young talent can demonstrate their readiness, or not, to move up to a full-time, professional contract with Edinburgh or Glasgow.
• Option One should have been Edinburgh and Glasgow Under-23 or A teams, playing against their Irish and Welsh counterparts
• Option Two should have been an Inter-Regional level, where the best youngsters in the club game could have gone head-to-head on a regular basis
• The SRU rejected both of these approaches and went for Option Three – Super-6.
• THAT'S WHERE WE ARE – THAT'S THE REALITY – DEAL WITH IT

A full year passed between TCD unveiling Super-6 at the 2017 AGM and its acceptance in 2018. In that time, those clubs who were against it could have, had they been able to mount a meaningful campaign, scuppered it. They might even have got one of the other two options passed instead of S6 – but, they didn't.

Even when it became clear, S6 was happening, there were partially successful efforts to make life difficult for the six clubs.

OK, I accept, the SRU, with the traditional ham-fistedness of which seemingly only the SRU is capable, managed to fuck-up the whole process:

• Three of the six franchises in Edinburgh is a nonsense which never could and never will work.
• Not having a Glasgow franchise was another mistake
• Not having a franchise further north than Stirling was another huge error.

But, if it works, and we move on to Super-8 and perhaps even Super-10, I am sure these failings will be addressed. For instance, I hear one Glasgow club, which didn't apply for S6, is being “leaned-on” to have a re-think for Super-8, and the early signs of a change of mind are encouraging.

Might the same thing happen with the warring tribes of Angus and the Doric?

One of the hardy annuals I get thrown-in, whenever I mention Super-6, is that the near £5 million which this new level of rugby is due to cost the SRU over its five-year life, is money which is being taken from the clubs budget.

Now, sadly, when it comes to the SRU accounts, even the best accountants struggle to make sense of them. Smoke and mirrors abound. But, here's a suggestion, why don't the clubs grill Andrew Healy at the AGM? If you don't ask the awkward questions, and keep asking until you get a clear answer, then you will continue to operate in the dark.

What I can glean from the accounts is, support for the club game rose by 6% last season, and there are no plans, that I have seen or heard of, to cut this funding. As for where the funding for S6 is coming from, I understand it is from the Performance budget, not the Club one.

If you don't believe this, or if you want clarity – go to the AGM and ASK THE QUESTION, and if you don't like the answer, ask a supplementary, and keep going until you get an answer which satisfies you, or shoots down your argument totally.

We live in interesting and uncertain times in Scottish Rugby. To be fair, given the general economic climate, our commercial figures are good. Our rugby performance is mixed, and we would all wish to see it better.

Governance-wise, we could do better, but, change is afoot. And, while I am on this, have any of the guys out there in clubland, complaining about things below the line on this blog actually taken the trouble to dash off a wee note to:

Sir Bill Gammell,

Independent Review of Governance,

c/o the Scottish Rugby Union,

BT Murrayfield,

Edinburgh. EH12 5PJ.

I am sure Sir Bill will be delighted to receive your views, and I do not see the SRU failing to pass-on any letters they receive.

It's just, I am getting pissed-off by people moaning about Super-6. So, I say again:

SUPER-6 IS HAPPENING – LIVE WITH IT.