RFU must answer Boag before his idea grows further

COLIN Boag’s article graphically exposes the fault-lines in English rugby.

He writes that ‘he has believed for a long time that a schism between the professional game and the lower echelons is inevitable’.

Thanks to the new Premiership ring fence, such a schism already exists, and if the Rugby Football Union does nothing to rectify the situation, it will become permanent.

For one of the regular correspondents, in probably the most widely read weekly paper in England devoted entirely to rugby, to make such comments needs an urgent response from the RFU before those ideas gain wider acceptance.

Boag doesn’t clarify whether he is referring only to full-time professionals, or on which side of the divide he would put part-timers. Or what would happen if a team contained a mix of full-timers and part-timers.

He refers to the physical risks of allowing players who aren’t fulltimers to play in the same match as parttimers or amateurs. Yet, as far as I know, Boag and his fellow commentators raised no objections at the last World Cup when Namibian and Uruguayan part-timers were involved in matches against the likes of England; nor when Premiership clubs have faced Spanish or Russian part-timers in the European Challenge Cup.

In October 2020, New Zealand captain Sam Cane played for his province, Bay of Plenty – with and against several part-timers – exactly a week before leading the All Blacks against Australia. No reference to mismatches or physical risks, either down under or by the likes of Boag.

Boag’s proposal represents a serious threat to the future of English rugby. If there is to be a second schism, it should be the Premiership clubs who are told to go and form their own organisation.