Bringing back a salary cap is not the answer
Last week was when the Premiership chickens started to come home to roost. From a purely rugby perspective, Worcester Warriors have been the league’s basket case for a very long time, but just when they’d finally got themselves a head coach who might turn that around, things started to become clear about how bad things are at Sixways.
As an outsider, it’s always difficult to know how things are at a club, as what we see happening on the field is the bit that’s above the waterline, and there might be all sorts of desperate scrabbling about going on underneath! In Worcester’s case that’s starting to become apparent, and who knows what might be going on elsewhere.
The Wasps situation regarding their bond is well known, although they seem very optimistic that their existence isn’t under threat, and while the other 11 clubs currently seem OK, it wouldn’t be the biggest surprise if some of them, the ones without mega-rich sugar daddies, are also experiencing very tough times.
During the week there was briefly one of the daftest rumours I’ve heard in a long time, which was that if Worcester went into administration, some sort of salary cap accommodation might be put in place to allow their players to be shared out amongst their rivals! It’s hard to think of anything that would help the situation less.
If there’s one message to come out of this, irrespective of whether Worcester survive, and we all hope that they will, it’s that any talk of the salary cap reverting to its former level at the end of the coming season is for the birds. Rather than let the situation drift, the clubs must announce, as soon as is feasible, that the cap we currently have is the one we’ll have for the foreseeable future, give or take possibly a modest inflation increase.
If inflation really does hit 18% next year, as one bank is forecasting, then the pressure on the clubs will be immense, but this is the time for doubling down on rugby’s version of austerity, not capitulating to a few rich owners. It has become clear that the very survival of elite English club rugby is under threat.
If ever you wanted evidence that under World Rugby’s watch the game is going downhill, you could do worse
than look at the example of Tawera Kerr-Barlow.
He earned 29 caps for the All Blacks between 2012 and 2017, but since then has been chasing the Euro with La Rochelle. Now he has decided that he fancies a bit more international rugby, so has declared that he’s available for the Wallabies. Honestly, you couldn’t make this up.
The All Blacks have a similar rule to England, in as much as players based overseas aren’t eligible for selection for the national side, but Australia has no such rule. Kerr-Barlow was born in Melbourne, but played for New Zealand in the 2010 Junior World Cup before earning his All Black caps – in my book, and I suspect in yours too, that means he’s a New Zealander as far as rugby goes.
I can sort of understand the rationale behind the rule. If a player from a Pacific Island ends up playing for Australia or New Zealand through economic necessity, but once he’s financially more secure wishes he’d been able to play for the land of his birth, then there’s possibly a case to be made. However, when a player from a tier one nation simply fancies a move to another one, then that’s different. Kerr-Barlow could end his lucrative contract in France and head back to New Zealand and fight to regain his international place, but he doesn’t fancy doing that, and is looking for a softer option.
All Black head coach, Ian Foster, commented that it doesn’t feel right, something with which lots of people will agree, but he then added wryly, “that’s the way the game is going”, and for me that’s a telling phrase.
This all comes back to the invidious position World Rugby is in, trying to reconcile the irreconcilable. The northern nations see the world in one way, and those is the south seem to see it very differently and the game is suffering as a result.