In my opinion, ring-fencing the Premiership is only a matter of time, as the elite clubs keep looking to push it through with each new proposal more extreme than the previous one. When the idea was first mooted, the Premiership wanted to expand to 14 and then close the shop. now they want to keep it at 12 with London Irish paying the price for their own financial struggles, while Yorkshire Carnegie would be banned too. I have been against ring-fencing the league (and don’t get me wrong; I still am), but by ring fencing the Premiership it could provide a fantastic opportunity for the Championship which could go on to rival the Premiership one day as a parallel league. By ring fencing the Premiership, the Championship could become more competitive as this would remove the team relegated from the Premiership (currently Bristol) that runs away with the league by 20 points or so and whose wage budget is 10-20x higher than the next team. It’s been apparent for quite some time that the Premiership is purely driven by financial self-interest and has little concern for teams in the lower leagues. This can be seen in the Premiership’s most recent attempt to buy the Premiership shares off of London Irish in order to give the league full control as to who comes in. . The possible reforms The Premiership would stay at 12 with mega rich Bristol replacing paupers London Irish with the door being slammed shut. London Irish would then have to get used to life in the Championship for a significant amount of time. This of course would mean cutting salaries as they know they would be unable to go straight back up and it would bring them in line with some of the other teams financially. However, I believe that by the Championship and below getting cut adrift it would be an excellent opportunity for the RFU to reform it (possible expansion?) with different rules in terms of attracting players from across the globe in order to increase revenue streams for the Championship teams, which generally struggle with debt. For example, this may be through having ‘designated players’ which would make a select number of players within each team immune from the salary cap. These may include places such as Fiji, Samoa, Tongo and Namibia. The ‘designated player(s)’ as intended are also designed to raise the profile of the Championship once the inevitable ring-fencing happens, as a lot of the clubs rely on a number of foreign imports to make them competitive. I would suggest that a limit of 3-4 designated players would be acceptable and help set the Championship in a positive new direction. Furthermore, I would possibly suggest expanding the Championship to between 14-16 although this depends if there’s enough revenue to be evenly distributed. If it’s not expanded 12 teams would still be viable and instead the league could introduce a new cup competition (similar format to the football FA Cup) which involves teams from the Championship and below. This way it gives teams extra income as well as bringing the rugby community together, which is something that seems to be decreasing in rugby given the increasing gulf between the rich elite and the rest. Furthermore, this competition would allow teams the chance to play at the iconic Twickenham as I believe the final should be played here. By implementing these changes, I believe the Championship would flourish post ring-fencing and, in my view, would give the RFU the chance to get more involved in the lower leagues as their grip on the Premiership seems to be loosening further. A further (and minor) point in regards to the ring-fencing is that the Premiership is concentrated in roughly six areas of the country with two regions making up for half the teams. A more competitive and deeper league structure would provide an improved geographical spread that could support the wider growth of rugby as a good level is more accessible. However, I can't see the Premiership changing much geographically so there will continue to be an uneven spread of teams, thus outlining how Rugby Union continues to struggle in the North specifically. The Championship would look like this (going by the current bottom placed Premiership side * and the current top Division 1 side **): · Bedford Blues · Cornish Pirates · Coventry** · Doncaster Knights · Ealing Trailfinders · Hartpury College · Jersey Reds · London Irish* · London Scottish · Nottingham · Richmond · Yorkshire Carnegie With the possibility of adding: · Darlington Mowden Park · Esher · Plymouth Albion · Rotherham Titans Overall, I think the reform is damning indictment on the legacy that so far has failed to materialise from hosting the Rugby World Cup in 2015. It seems to me that not much progress regarding the league structure and professional rugby has been made ever since rugby went professional in the mid 1990’s. This is a cause for concern since the distribution of wealth is continuingly becoming even more uneven, so with what I have suggested I hope that the Championship (and below) can embrace the inevitable ring-fencing of the Premiership and flourish as a result.
0 Comments
The analysis brings together the three most popular social media sites which each of the 12 teams use. I have also briefly analysed their sponsors and kit supplier which both have an impact on the club’s brand too as a widely recognised sponsor and kit supplier raises the clubs status as a widely recognised brand. Teams Social Media Kit suppliers / Technical sponsors Sponsors This analysis shows that Bristol has by far the strongest brand with it’s high presence on Social Media accounting for most of it. This is unsurprising given Bristol’s recent presence in the Aviva Premiership and appearance in European competitions, thus giving them greater brand exposure. Regarding their technical sponsor, Bristol’s isn’t a world-renowned brand like Adidas, Nike or Puma, it is there own brand (Bristol Sport) which is the technical supplier for other sports teams in the city. As a result, I see the Bristol Sport brand growing, while Bristol Rugby will grow further if they can establish themselves in the top flight.
Regarding the other teams Cornish Pirates, Nottingham and London Scottish also rack up a fairly strong brand in regard to social media presence where Cornish Pirates have the second highest amount of likes on Facebook, while Nottingham possess the second most amount of both Twitter and Instagram followers. In terms of technical sponsors much like Bristol, Nottingham too have a local one Player Layer (from Nottingham) supplying their kit, while Cornish Pirates have a much more recognisable rugby brand as technical supplier in Samurai. In terms of the weakest brand in the Championship it appears to be Ealing Trailfinders who have the lowest number of likes / followers on the three main Social Media platforms. However, their technical sponsor is one of the most recognisable in the league with Mizuno who have an international presence in a number of sports. I would put down Ealing’s weak showing on Social Media due to their location as they face competition from a number of teams within that area. I’m predicting that the Ealing brand will grow given their constant improvement year on year within the Championship as well as their current position in the league, 2nd behind Bristol. Their placing here is important as being highly placed behind a recognisable brand will only lead to more media coverage, thus extra brand exposure. It’s reached that time again where the Premiership are debating whether to put up a blockade and cut themselves adrift from the rest of the rugby pyramid. This discussion seems to continue to resurface at any given opportunity by the Premiership elite in order to shore up their finances and cut off the danger of ever being relegated…ever again. The reason I think it will be a disaster for the whole game is that while some teams in the Premiership will become stronger, others will still be fighting it out at the bottom of the league, while the rest of the teams in English rugby will be forced to live off scraps. The Premiership is talking about restructuring the league, so the it will become a closed shop but then open the doors every 3-4 season’s (so they say) and may allow another team up. The problem with this is that the team who comes up (if they are allowed) is that they will be at a major disadvantage compared to everyone else in the Premiership. They will have a much weaker squad as well as hugely reduced revenue and budget after missing out on the millions received by the other teams over this period for being in the Premiership. This new policy isn’t too dissimilar to that of a nightclub’s policy on trainers, although they may let you in if they like your brand or colour of trainer. It’s elitism at its finest. I do however agree with the Premiership that the league needs restructuring, in fact the whole English league structure needs reform as on reflection the Championship hasn’t worked out either. All clubs bar Bedford and Richmond (two clubs who don’t want promotion anyway) operate at a loss, thus outlining how ill-thought-out the whole thing is. Most seasons promotion is a foregone conclusion with the recently relegated Premiership side going straight back up 20-30 points clear of 2nd place. Other teams are merely actors in a play just to make up the numbers, some invest a decent amount in their team to try and achieve the unthinkable, while the rest struggle at the bottom with little investment in their team and the club infrastructure as a whole. So, what should happen? In my own view the Premiership should copy what France do with their Top 14 and Pro D2 in terms of having a 14-team league with a two up, two down system which would increase the excitement of the Premiership. If they did decide on this I would predict that TV deals would increase given that the competitive nature of the league would have improved. Further evidence shows that this may well be the case as a TV rights deal signed in 2014 with Canal+ saw the Top 14 receive £60 million (£4.2 million per team/£16-17 million over 4 years) a year compared with the Premiership deal with BT Sport for £152 million over 4 years, equating to £38 million or just £3 million per team. This illustrates the huge disparity between the two leagues and the difference between a fluent, unpredictable, open shop and a rigid, predictable open shop. If the Premiership increased to 14 it could also help increase the popularity of Rugby Union throughout the country as it is currently mainly exists down South with hardly any presence of professional rugby in the North. This would be due to there being more chance of other teams (from the North) achieving promotion, meaning the chance of engaging more people with the sport and growing their subsequent fanbases knowing that promotion could be realistic possibility rather than an unrealistic pipe dream. These are some of the many reasons why I have been passionately arguing for the expansion of the Premiership for many years and feel this is something that needs to be done in order to build on the 2015 World Cup legacy. I believe this would take club rugby within England to the next level with added excitement and more competition amongst teams, while the Championship could reform with teams vying for promotion and teams with no interest of promotion. In return, the Premiership could agree to a FA Cup style competition featuring Championship and lower league sides which would help to distribute much needed money further down the pyramid as well as a chance of playing one of the big teams. With the introduction of this it would of course mean scrapping both the Anglo-Welsh Cup (Premiership) and the Anglo-Irish Cup (Championship) to avoid an increased number of matches. Obviously, all of these changes would be too ambitious for the Premiership who prefer the status-quo and do not expect any to happen. No doubt we will be revisiting this issue again in the not too distant future and will keep doing so until the Premiership flex their muscles and threaten to remove some incentives currently in place for the Championship sides. If the Premiership get their way of a closed shop I fear it could be the end of professional rugby below the top flight as clubs would not be able to sustain losses from declining gates as fans would have little interest in attending games in a league where nothing can be achieved coupled with the declining standard of rugby as players would be put of joining sides where there’s nothing to play for.
This has been the question many fans and rugby figureheads alike have been asking after the controversy surrounding the ending of the Australia vs. Scotland World Cup quarter-final, which saw Australia win it through a penalty with virtually the last kick of the game. The referee at the centre of the controversy was South African Craig Joubert who has been lambasted my some but praised by others, but the question is was he right with that crucial call? That decision The call which resulted in the Australian penalty, that allowed Australia to claim a 35-34 win over Scotland, was given from what I understand as a deliberate offside with Finn Russell (fly-half) catching the ball. However replays show that the ball game off an Australian player last before the catch, which left many to question why the TMO (Television Match Official) was not used. Although according to the rules (which are not that clear) the TMO was not allowed to be used for that phase of play, which former pro Lawrence Dallaglio questioned on Twitter emphasising the point that protocol should not matter when it involves such a crucial decision. I would echo Dallaglio’s point as that if the TMO was used to check that decision would anyone have questioned that? Probably not. Other key decisions I do feel that the outcry mainly from the Scots is not solely on that decision as about a minute earlier Stuart Hogg was crashed into late after kicking the ball, which is something that could’ve and should’ve been referred to the TMO which Joubert failed to do so. Had that happened the next phase of play which Australia were awarded the penalty would not have occurred. Joubert was also questioned over the sin-binning of Sean Maitland for an alleged deliberate knock on which rubbed further salt into the Scottish wounds. Then to top off the game Joubert jogged off the pitch at the end leaving his match officials to face the music themselves. Personal opinion My personal opinion is had Joubert only made the error at the end, to which he did follow the letter of the law then not much fuss would have been made of it and everyone would’ve eventually accepted the decision. The fact of the matter is there was a number of errors in his performance which showed inconsistency in his display and let’s not forget he was heavily criticised after refereeing the 2011 final between New Zealand and France to which he failed to give France a number of penalties. Which brings me on to my final point is that should Joubert have been allowed to ref the game anyway from the point of view that he referee’s in the Super 15 and refs the majority of the Australian’s week in, week out, so he would have a better understanding of their game compared to the Scottish players game, all of which could lead to more leniency. I’m not saying that he would purposely be unfair, I’m making the point that should someone be allowed to ref a game who refs in one of the Country’s national leagues? An equivalent situation in football would see someone like Mike Dean ref an England game. Obviously I know Joubert is South African as opposed to Australian but it may have been more suitable and would’ve saved World Rugby extra grief had they put for arguments sake Frenchman Jerome Garces or Romain Poite in charge. This may be something the governing body may look at in the future and from their point of view you can understand the referee appointments as they want to have the best refs in place for every game. Anyway it will be interesting to see what consequences if any Craig Joubert faces and whether World Rugby change protocol on when the TMO can be used during matches, maybe an exceptional circumstance rule perhaps?
I’ve mentioned this topic briefly before but to me there is not a better time than now to revisit it and for the governing body to make a difference. In a previous blog I touched on how the Premiership were considering expanding the number of teams in the league but with relegation being ring-fenced, meaning that 14 clubs would be handpicked to participate in the Premiership for a number of seasons. Then after a number of years they may reconsider reopening it but only when the promoted teams are too weak to compete. When this idea was mooted last season the Premiership wanted Bristol and Worcester promoted, thus taking the number from 12 to 14 teams, although Worcester did earn promotion last season. My beliefs I agree that the Premiership should be expanded but relegation should remain otherwise the competition would be deemed surplus for the majority of teams in the top flight. Personally I feel the league should copy the French Top 14 format where there are 2 relegation spots, meaning 2 teams would gain promotion from tier 2 which here in England is called the Championship (Greene King IPA Championship for sponsorship reasons). By doing this I feel the English would benefit massively as well as there being huge potential commercially within the Premiership. So who exactly do I think should be the 14 teams to compete, well I believe that all 14 should be there on merit rather than the Premierships idea that they should all be shareholders of the Premiership. So regarding teams being there on merit there should be the 11 teams who stay up in the Premiership with 3 being promoted from the Championship for one season only. Thereafter only 2 teams come up from the Championship (the league champions, then the play-off winners involving 2nd down to 5th), replacing the 2 Premiership who finish 14th and 13th respectively. Benefits of restructuring The reason for writing about this now is down to the success the Rugby World Cup appears to be having across the country and the need to tap into the success and passion of the of the World Cup the league needs restructuring to allow more teams to compete at the top level otherwise season upon season we will keep seeing the status quo with 1 of 4 teams winning the league while Newcastle will keep exiting and re-entering the Premiership at the first opportunity. Furthermore by expanding the league and introducing 2 relegation spots there will now be hope for the teams like Bedford, Moseley, Nottingham and Rotherham etc. who are not the wealthiest of clubs and currently promotions only a pipe dream. In addition there would be more lucrative TV deals meaning clubs would get a bigger share of money plus the various commercial opportunities available such as added sponsorship. Also the league could introduce a new range of merchandise like a sticker book for the younger generation which would follow the footsteps of Top 14 as these are huge all over France in many supermarkets, so that would be something worth considering. Overall the most important thing is for the league to engage the fans and maybe one day we will be competing with France for the best league in Europe title and hopefully we won’t lose all our best players across the pond. The time is now to channel the spirit of the Rugby World Cup and promote change! Summary
What’s the debate about?
It’s an issue that has arisen over recent years about whether the Premiership should be expanded. Previous discussions have involved expanding the league to 16 with the 4 Welsh sides joining but this proved controversial as the Welsh sides would be immune from relegation which didn’t sit too kindly with the Championship sides. The debate has resurfaced as the Premiership shareholders basically want to dissolve more power from the RFU and as a result become richer. Everyone from clubs down the ladder to England head coach Stuart Lancaster have had their say on what would be the best way forward, in an attempt to increase the competiveness of the league without weakening the England team in the long run. However teams below the Premiership must not be neglected otherwise we may end up with a situation pre-professional era! Who are the shareholders? There are currently 14 shareholders in the 12 team Premiership with all of the 14/15 season teams, bar London Welsh holding a share. The other 3 shareholders include Championship trio Bristol, Worcester Warriors and Yorkshire Carnegie, formally Leeds Carnegie. This shareholders system in itself appears outdated and partly explains the gulf between various teams with the 11 Premiership teams with shares at the beginning of this season (14/15) receiving £4 million, while newly promoted London Welsh receive a measly £1.5 million. This is one of a few reason why I ask is the Premiership an exclusive club as this was not the only handicap London Welsh have suffered as first time they got promoted to the top flight (11/12 season for the 12/13 campaign) they faced a battle with both the RFU and the Premiership to get promoted, with the Premiership doing all they could to keep Newcastle Falcons in the top flight. This was down to ground requirements, which is part of the criteria upon on promotion, however as pointed out by other clubs hoping to achieve promotion to the top flight a number of current Premiership clubs would fail this criteria too. So it seems to me a case of the Premiership moving the goal posts to suit themselves, or in this case the sticks! My View My view on this matter is the move to cut off and distance the Premiership from the Championship and below could of a detrimental effect on the future of rugby within this Country. If this ludicrous decision was given the green light I would not think it would be too long after the changes are implemented that we see teams from the Championship and below go out of business. Reasons for this would be due to the lack of funding from above an TV as well as decrease in revenue due to the competition (Championship & below) being deemed pointless with no real objective. However the argument for ring-fencing the Premiership is that it would allow teams to build a sounder future and increase competiveness within the top flight, while teams in the Championship and below would be able to improve their infrastructure with the possibility of one day being allowed into the Premiership. The reality though could well be that the Premiership becomes less competitive, while the gulf between the top flight and the Championship would widen with promotion never being considered again. The main problem though is that the Premiership is run by the Premiership (looking after their own interests) as suppose to the Championship, National League 1 and below who are run by the RFU and whom have to look after a variety of interests. The solution would be to have one entity looking after the entire league structure as this would make funding fairer than it currently is and there wouldn’t be a clash of interests. However I do not see the point I just made ever being considered as the top teams would lose out on some money and we can’t allow that can we! (sarcastic comment). This is especially worrying given that these changes should it happen would take place a year after the World Cup we are hosting later this year, so all the interests clubs lower down the ladder may receive as a result from visitors would slowly diminish. So by the time the 2019 World Cup in Japan comes around we may only be left with about 14 fully professional clubs within this Country which would be an absolute shambles. |