The game is going back, not forward
COVENTRY, ENGLAND - OCTOBER 20: Jack Willis of Wasps tackles Tom Parton of London Irish during the Gallagher Premiership Rugby match between Wasps and London Irish at the Ricoh Arena on October 20, 2019 in Coventry, England. (Photo by Matthew Lewis/Getty Images)
JEFF PROBYN
A FRONT ROW VIEW OF THE GAME
How things change when money is the main target for doing something.
Over the years, all sports were built on the need for people to take part in a physical activity that didn't involve killing each other but to keep fit and provide entertainment for themselves and the fans.
The challenge was always to be the best and, over the years, people came to watch and support elite sports people at the top of their game who competed in any number of sports in front of packed stadiums. As certain sports became more popular it changed to a business with the better sports players paid to perform for a paying crowd and so modern professional sport was born.
Although all competitors may be professional in their preparation and delivery of their sport, not all sports have the following to be fully professional and pay those that take part in their competition. However, even in those sports that are popular enough to pay players, it is only a tiny proportion that take part in any paid sports.
Soccer is the most popular sport in England with around 1.5 million players but only around 0.3 per cent are paid by their club owners, this is despite massive audiences of over four billion a year.
Meanwhile, the pandemic had a positive impact on Premiership rugby by doubling the average TV audience to a cumulative 14.5 million and seemingly increased the percentage of paid players from 0.5 per cent to 1 per cent.
All this sounds like good news and portrays an image of the game moving in the right direction but sadly it's a case of lies, damn lies and statistics.
In reality, the number of male Rugby Union players has seen a decrease from 340,347 to 195,000, a drop of around 47 per cent creating the illusion of more paid professional players while even their numbers have dropped.
At a time when the game needs as much positive imagery as it can get (after the financial collapse of Wasps and Worcester) this week has been a nightmare with the threat of a strike during the Six Nations thereby threatening to disrupt the goose that lays the golden egg and keeps all UK rugby afloat.
There can be no doubt that professional sport of any kind is not a long-term, or one of the safest jobs you can do. Simply because at any time you could be injured or just get too old to be considered as a long-term option by your employers and be replaced by a younger player. This is why the major sports players are paid more than the average wage as a basic salary.
The Wales players on central contacts are paid approximately three times the national average wage in Wales with those picked as international players earning even more.
Similar sums are paid across the professional game to compensate for the short career earning potential that players have. However, the money paid by the Unions either directly to the players as salary or, in the case of England, to both clubs for player release and players as a match fee, impacts on what is left to fund the rest of the game.
England forward Courtney Lawes is right when he says that most of the professional players don't earn a fortune, but it is still roughly three times the national average wage, with international players at least doubling that sum.
As for the strikes, England's players have already used that option before, by refusing to leave the dressing room at a full Twickenham Stadium unless the RFU increased match fees.
The financial mess that has encompassed the Premiership and Wales is all because of the sums paid out for players' salaries. Unfortunately the game of rugby doesn't attract the number of spectators to afford the level of payments it currently makes, and much of the money taken from the unions is used to pay club salaries rather than develop the game and increase numbers both playing and attending matches.
As an ex player I understand the need to make the most of the games you have whether paid or not, because of that short career and that includes taking what you can wherever the best offer is. However, for the unions' point of view, players that choose to take the money by playing abroad are no longer providing value to our home game and as such should not be picked to play international matches with the accompanying match fee. It also makes it difficult for a coach to judge when a player is playing in a team with multiple international players from around the world how good his form is.
However, I disagree with Courtney's view that retired professional players should be involved in the future planning of the game. This is because most of them have only been involved at one level of the game and don't have a clue as to how the game is run at the lower levels and what those clubs need to survive and flourish.
Sadly, rugby has gone back to the past rather than moving forward in the last few years, to a game where we now have a cartel, similar to how the game was before leagues were introduced, with a group of clubs allowed to limit fixtures between themselves with little or no chance of an outsider gaining access.
This group has deprived the rest of rugby of ambition by closing the door for player and club development. They have collectively overseen the decline of county rugby by closing a pathway to the top for all but their own players, they have now closed access to the top of the league by ring fencing themselves.
Football went professional in 1885 but only started paying players wages above average salaries some 70 years later after successfully growing crowd support and income. Rugby should learn from football and make the professional game self sustaining and not reliant on the Unions to fund their many extravagances.
