No protests this time about unequal TV cash!
It’s amazing how time and circumstances can change people’s ideals and position on any number of things, even those that are supposedly ‘cast in stone’. Just around 25 years ago the RFU were removed from the Five Nations Championship on a point of principle that was agreed by the Celtic nations (Wales, Scotland and Ireland) and then after protracted discussions and negotiations, reinstated.
A few years passed and once again the Celts threatened to remove England from the competition but again the RFU were reinstated.
What was all the fuss about? I’ll bet you can guess; money.
For the first time England had undertaken their own television rights negotiation and had agreed a deal with BSkyB. This deal was markedly bigger than any previous deal done between the Unions and their historic chosen partner, the BBC.
The deal offered was similar to a deal struck in the southern hemisphere at the time and was a game changer in the rugby world.
However, by doing the deal, the RFU broke from the usual collective bargaining conducted by the Five Nations committee and then felt the wrath of the angry Celtic nations.
This was not an unprecedented act by the RFU as the French had their own deal virtually from the day they first joined the competition.
It also wasn’t that Sky had exclusively offered the RFU a deal, they had in fact offered all nations far better deals than were on the table from any other television network.
The problem was simply that Sky offered money based on the potential size of an audience which effectively gave England a bigger piece of the proverbial pie.
Despite the fact that the RFU is the biggest union in the world with more clubs to fund and players to manage, the smaller Celtic nations were having none of it and insisted that all money should be split evenly.
Effectively the stance of the Celts broke the potential for a deal which would have seen a massive increase in funding for all and a revert back to the Five Nations on BBC for around £1,000,000 or £2,000,000 per country for the entire competition.
Personally, I was glad the Celts stood their ground so that rugby stayed on terrestrial television that broadcast to millions and created new fans for our game.
The question everyone will be wondering is; why bring that up now when TV deals are now for hundreds of millions and all the Unions are working together?
This week CVC completed their deal with the Six Nations, which saw them invest £365m over five years for a 14 per cent stake in the competition.
That £365m sounds a lot but broken down to five yearly payments (£73m) then split between the Six Nations it does not even equate to money earned from a single match by any of the countries.
This contract was done with the same conditions as the Sky deal, audience share, and so will see the RFU and FFR get around £95m (£19m a year) while Wales get £51m (just over £10m per year), Ireland £48m (around £9.5m per year), Scotland £45m (£9m) and finally Italy with around £31m (just over £6m per year).
Despite these differing sums there has been little or no protest and no threats to banish any teams from the Championship and the principle of equal share for all seems to have been cast aside in the short-term dash for cash – any cash – driven by the pandemic.
From an English perspective CVC now share an interest with both the RFU and the Premiership and may directly or indirectly be responsible for the establishment of the Premiership ring fence.
Despite a minority share holding they have a foot in both camps and will do all in their power to ensure the financial success of their charges whatever the consequences for the other parts of the game. CVC’s investment in F1 made a lot of money for CVC but is said by many to have damaged the sport. If it were to use its influence to direct more RFU money towards the Premiership, the damage to the rest of the game could be irreparable.
Last week’s game was a cracker with an established England squeezing past a young developing French team and showing a level of rugby they haven’t displayed since the World Cup semfinal.
However, why, unlike after the Wales game, has there been no media outcry about the referee’s mistakes, which this time favoured England with Henry Slades’ deliberate knock-on coming as his sliding intervention pushed the ball over the dead ball line to stop Matthieu Jalibert scoring?
A one-handed knock-on is deemed these days as a deliberate offence if there is no prospect of holding onto the ball, so it should have seen Slade yellow carded and a penalty try awarded to France.
Then we have Tom Curry, left, not releasing a minute before the break and receiving a penalty for his troubles, which should have gone to France for an easy three points.
All in all, England rode their luck and as the record book shows England and Eddie Jones got the win they so desperately needed.
However as the old saying goes, one swallow doesn’t make a summer as sadly for England yesterday proved.
“The principle of equal share for all has been cast aside in the short-term dash for cash”