RFU must focus more on rugby than money
“Old county system was aspirational in that players rivalled each other and late developers got another shot”
As Benjamin Disraeli once said: “There are three types of lies; lies, damn lies and statistics.” However, as with all things, it really is about perspective. A recent article outlining the RFU’s unstated aim of quietly disposing of county rugby seems to me to be using statistics to demonstrate a lack of interest in those games as a means to justify their demise.
Those of us with fond memories of the county finals at Twickenham know that the days when it was a guaranteed sell-out are long gone – but there is still an interest which, if handled correctly, could grow.
The death knell for county rugby came when the Premiership refused to release players and insisted no level of rugby should be played between them and the international game.
That lack of vision and an overt sense of protectionism has seen the Premiership miss a golden opportunity to use the county system to blood and develop young players while saving the money wasted on academies.
As only a single club in the Premiership produces more than a third of their players from their academy, surely it would make more sense to close the academies and revert to the similar system the rest of the world use, a meritocracy where players must prove their skills each season in different levels of competition.
The old county and divisional selection system were aspirational in that players rivalled each year for selection and those that were late developers got another shot, whereas in the modern game there is no second chance.
It would also make young players acutely aware that there is no guarantee of a professional rugby career just because you were good when 15.
Instead of being cocooned in an environment that slow-feeds them an illusion of professional rugby heaven, where they could be the next Owen Farrell, Maro Itoje or Jonny Wilkinson, young players would live in the real world, competing every year for a place in the county team as the first step on the ladder to an England career.
The current academy system sweeps up all the young school county players and invests heavily in coaching and preparing them for a future in the professional game but there is an eyewatering attrition rate that sees the vast majority discarded.
With close to two million players (1,990,988 according to figures from World Rugby provided by the RFU), England should always top the table. However, because Eddie Jones is allowed to pick only from just 0.014 per cent (280), the number of EQP’s currently on contract to Premiership clubs, it is a surprise England do as well as they do.
With 131,399 adults males playing the game, which equates to an average of 72 per club (1,809 clubs) and 24,933 female players, adding roughly another 14 per club, there is a massive reliance on youth and mini rugby to make up the extra 1,100 per club of registered players.
The problem of young players not moving to the adult game isn’t restricted to rugby, it affects all sports and the big question is, how to motivate players to keep playing? The answer is simple. All players are aspirational, all want to play at a representative level, if you remove the steps on the ladder to just one, Premiership to England, you remove a big incentive for many of the young players to carry on once rejected by the academy structure.
County rugby offered an alternative route to the top for many and could do so again if allowed.
If the Premiership were to allow their young players to play county rugby with players from lower clubs they could find a new source of talent (all EQP), without having to go abroad and wait three years for them to qualify as well as rebuilding the bridge with the rest of the game.
It may be that there is another reason for the professional RFU’s disposal of county rugby which has nothing to do with playing. Without county rugby, there would be no reason to have county representation on the RFU, effectively rendering the RFU Council null and void, leaving the grassroots with little or no voice.
Although that may sound attractive to some, it certainly would not be to the advantage of the game as a whole.
Already the RFU are more focused on the business of rugby rather than the sport, any further erosion of the checks and balances that the RFU Council provide would probably lead to a split in the game with the professional game taking over all the monies generated by Twickenham with the grassroots left to fend for themselves.
Iagree with Nick Cain’s article last week. Coaches shouldn’t meet the match referee before a game to try to get clarification on a tactical ploy. That could be seen as collusion. In fact they should never meet at all.
Coaches have to ‘up their game’ and should coach their players to think on their feet and adapt to the referee.
Rugby’s laws are complicated and open to interpretation and as the old saying goes: “You don’t play the laws of the game, you play the referee’s interpretation of the laws.”