Rich English clubs want Lions to pay for the privilege
Those in charge of the British and Irish Lions were warned yesterday by top clubs that there was no prospect of the concept continuing in its present form.
Ahead of the Lions’ first test against New Zealand last night, two of the most senior figures in the British game spoke out against rugby’s biggest institution being made a special case in a new global calendar after tour chiefs branded moves to reduce the number of fixtures and length of trips as “insane” and claimed the entire structure could be “killed off”.
The chairman of Premiership champions Exeter, Tony Rowe, said that if the Lions wanted to retain — or even extend — the six-week period in which they were granted access to players for this year’s tour, they should pay for the privilege.
The chief executive of Leicester, Simon Cohen, went even further, calling for the curtailing of future trips come what may amid a battle by tour chiefs to prevent them being cut from 10 to eight games and six to five weeks.
The two club supremos broke their silence on the controversy amid ongoing negotiations between stakeholders to determine the details of the trips from 2021, following March’s agreement in principle that the next three-tour cycle of South Africa, Australia and New Zealand would feature a minimum of eight games under a new global calendar that begins in 2019.
Lions chiefs are adamant that the squad require a minimum twoweek preparation time for each tour but clubs were last night preparing to dig in their heels on the issue.
Rowe, whose Exeter stars Jack Nowell and Tomas Francis, are in New Zealand, said: “We’re in a professional game and it’s about money. No matter which way you cut it, it’s about money.
“And the reality is, the amount of money we get from the Lions is farcical, if you compare that to the product or assets they are actually borrowing. It could well come down to the fact that the English clubs say, ‘Well, no. Unless you’re prepared to pay this amount of money, you can’t have our asset’. ”
Revealing he had just spent £1million ($1,74 million) on a new Desso hybrid training pitch, Rowe said the Lions should be generating commercial revenue “commensurate with the asset” and passing on a fair proportion of that to clubs.
Describing the entire concept as “a throwback from the amateur days”, he added: “Commercially, it does nothing for our club. It does a lot for the player.”
Cohen claimed no amount of hard cash would convince him to support the status quo.
“For me, it’s not about the money. It’s about player welfare. And, in the current set of structures, what’s the longest tour that the game can accommodate? I think it’s considerably shorter than we’re currently playing,” he said.
“It’s unfair on the players to ask what we are currently asking from them. It’s difficult for the clubs, who are the ones that find, develop, nurture, pay players, to expect that – whatever the money – they are to do without their players for a large part of the season.
“The clubs already give the players up to England for significant parts of the season. I think that’s a big ask as it currently stands.” Acknowledging that the Lions was “a fantastic concept”, Cohen nevertheless warned: “The professional game is only 30 years old. Whether the Lions concept will survive 50 or 60 years into the professional game, who knows?
“The Lions would have to look at it differently and, if they’re not prepared to, then of course they run the risk of a conflict and it would be difficult to know who the winners would be in that case.”
Amid what appears to be a lack of unanimity about precisely what its clubs want out of the current talks, Premiership Rugby last night declined to comment on its negotiating position.
The Rugby Football Union, which is represented on the Lions board, also refused to state where it stood on the issue.
A spokesman said: “The core principles of the global season have been agreed and the detail is now being worked through.”