>> Probyn: National One clubs must have parity
Why does rugby always seem to over complicate things and create problems where there really shouldn’t be any?
The idea that the RFU or the Premiership should, or can, dictate the terms under which the National One League is played is wrong. The only clubs who can influence how a league is structured or played are those within the said league.
I have a distant memory of when the leagues structure was drawn up, it included a paragraph that said that if the members of a league voted for some variation it could be put in place only as long as it didn’t affect the integrity of any of the other leagues.
This was to allow a period of development within the league structure so that clubs had some say about how the leagues in which they played were structured and, unless that has been changed, the National One clubs can still insist on change.
I must admit I hadn’t realised that dual contract players were an issue below the Championship, let alone the English Academy Players, who I had assumed would either have played for their academy or were signed to a Premiership club, and were part of the dual contract system.
It does seem strange that a privileged few clubs who have close associations with Premiership clubs have the right to field as many as 13 borrowed players out of a match-day squad of 20, and bring in new players at any stage of the season.
I understand clubs like Loughborough Students have a rapid turnover of players by comparison with a ‘normal’ club because they are students who move on once they have finished their course, but the idea that they can ship in players from Leicester’s academy as and when they need is ludicrous if we are to have any integrity in our league structure.
I thought that rugby worked like soccer where there are defined times when it is possible to sign players for the season and the various competitions like European rugby etc. to stop teams from breaching the integrity of the competition structure.
If Loughborough were able to bring in any number of replacement players throughout the season, it is blatantly unfair to the rest of the teams in that league who don’t share the same access to a Premiership club’s academy boys.
Even at the Rugby World Cup, each nation must declare their squad before the tournament starts and are allowed to bring in replacements only if injury forces the need.
This does raise an issue as most, if not all, of the National One clubs are members of the NCA, who could call on the RFU council to make it a policy that all national leagues must declare all registered players at the start of the season and not add any new ones to the list beyond the mid-point of the season.
This could encourage clubs to create new teams, where practical, to cover for any potential injury crisis later in the season rather than bringing in new players from other clubs.
It is my understanding that the RFU council are not allowed to influence the business of the Union and are purely restricted to a policy-making role, so this is very much an area where they could create a fairer more balanced league system without affecting the business of the Union.
It would also benefit the EAP’s as they would know that they have at least a season playing at a particular club, enabling them to establish themselves as creditable players as they, unlike the dual contract player, are unlikely to be called back to play in the Premiership should an injury crisis occur.
Whatever happens over a season, it is of the upmost importance that all teams competing in whatever league believe in the integrity of that league.
Allowing any clubs to bring the integrity of a league into doubt undermines both the trust in the league structure and the governing body that controls it.
“The idea that Loughborough can ship in players from Leicester’s academy as and when they need is ludicrous”