Rugby union up against it
Rugby union is a strange world sport in many respects. For the majority of those that ‘get’ it, the passion, traditions, ethos and excitement that its raw physicality, camaraderie and perceived elementary proof that that ‘there is no ‘I’ in team’ generate have no match in any comparative game.
At the same time, it is facing huge problematic issues – not least scheduling, organisational, rules changes, ‘difficult’ medical problems such as head injuries and concussion – and, above all else, its long-time ongoing internal disagreements as to how to take its global and commercial development forward against a background in which fundamental clashes between the interests of the domestic forms of the game and that at international level seem both irreconcilable and insurmountable.
Most particularly, the various authorities at the helm of rugby union shows little sign of getting to grips with its commercial realities of life – perhaps crystallised (and with apologies in advance for reheating an old quip) in the underlying truism in the question and answer:
“How do you make a small fortune in rugby …?”
“That’s easy. You begin with a large fortune and then invest it in a rugby union club”.
Without doubt rugby’s problems all stem from money. Compare the fact that the world’s greatest international team New Zealand has a population that only recently rose beyond 4.5 million and yet – overwhelmingly – both the current and hoped-for future money-generating areas of the rugby world (Europe and the Northern Hemisphere being the former and potentially the nations of North America, Africa, India, China and the Far East the latter) are far away.
That’s why some of the best players from the former greats of Southern Hemisphere such as New Zealand, South Africa and Australia – and indeed the Pacific Islands – who are out of favour with their national sides are now playing in Europe, all chasing the big bucks, either as a means of adding to their pensions and/or (more worryingly), recognising that rugby is a short career, ‘passing’ on the sport at international-level altogether and instead setting off in their early-to-mid twenties to ‘make it whilst they can’.
See here for an article by Paul Rees on some of the implications, as appears today upon the website of – THE GUARDIAN
To my mind, rugby union’s biggest failure of all has been its woeful transition from being an amateur sport to a professional one.
In many respects, rugby’s 1895 split into its amateur and professional codes – i.e. Rugby Union and Northern Union (or Rugby League as it became known in 1922) – was characterised by pompous brio and cant on the part of rugby union and the commendable pragmatism exhibited by rugby league.
Rugby union remains in the dock today, guilty as charged for its century-long ‘holier than thou’ attitude towards its league counterpart. The fact is that some of the technical skills and particularly defensive strategies in rugby league are probably superior.
I’m not going to enter the lists on the ‘Which is more attractive and entertaining to watch’ argument here, but suffice it to say that – certainly in Australia – rugby league is by some distance more commercially successful and popular than rugby union.
Many league fans in this country would argue that league wins the ‘entertainment’ debate all over the world and that it is only inherent media and class prejudice that gives rugby union its pre-eminence in Britain.
I wouldn’t go that far – the fact is that, for most people when it comes to rugby, what you were born to and brought up with tends to stay forever primary in your affections – and (frustrating as it might be for its fans) the rugby league heartland in Britain has always been, and will probably remain forever, ‘oop North’ in Yorkshire and Lancashire. In the UK as a whole it remains a minority sport.
Some of rugby union’s problems with the demands of professionalism have persisted long after they should, which is why it is so often dragged, kicking and screaming, into the 21st Century.
In the ‘good old, bad old’ days, the amount of skulduggery going on between the forwards was extraordinary. What went on in the dark recesses of a scrum or maul was best never asked about by those of a sensitive disposition and most of it used to be sorted out on the field by informal kangaroo courts and/or mob violence whilst generations of referees turned their proverbial one blind eye to proceedings and concentrated instead on ensuring the ball went into the line-outs and scrums straight [a concern and indeed law which ironically in the modern game is now routinely ignored].
On of rugby union’s quainter issues these days is how some of its most celebrated traditions move with the times – and/or instead are left to wither on the vine. Let us take that of what might be terms the great ‘invitational sides’ of its amateur era, such as the Barbarians and the British & Irish Lions.
Frankly, and this may be a controversial statement, both are anachronisms in the modern game and should be discontinued. However, vintage much-loved traditions often die hard in rugby union.
For twenty years now the Barbarians club – a brilliant concept born in the amateur era by which the best players around could go off on short little tours and enjoy themselves – has been on life support.
The demands on modern players are continuous and onerous – logically, there is no room at all (in the calendar or otherwise) for the Ba-Bahs, whose by-invitation-only players necessarily spent only a few days together before their games and therefore are at huge disadvantage playing against representative teams. Furthermore, to their main employers (the clubs usually), they are simply off on a silly frolic in which (it being rugby) they are at major risk of getting injured and thereafter potentially may be rendered ‘out’ for months at a time.
It’s ironic that – at a time when (in my view) the Barbarians are a fading glory – the authorities nevertheless see the club as a means of ‘spreading the word in the women’s game’ – see here for a piece by Gerard Meagher as appears today in – THE GUARDIAN
As for the British& Irish Lions, I’ll stick my neck out and suggest they’re not long for this world either.
In the 21st Century – straightforward pragmatic logic demands that (once the proposed global 12-month season, with mid-season breaks to allow players time to recover and rest, comes into effect), it won’t be long before a every two years – or even an annual – ‘three-match-series’ clash between representative sides from the Northern and Southern Hemisphere becomes a reality.
By the time that happens, I’ll make a small wager, the British & Irish Lion will be historical toast.
