The Rugby Thread

Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version Translate Topic

 SuperDave84 wrote:

 pre Madonna wrote:

What is more bizarre is the lack of introspective on it from the rugby media, which I suppose shows how the game propels itself. Even in the days of social media and online cranks(irony alert), you find very few dissenting voices from within the game's media or supporters. Most long-term football fans have a gripe without how the game is run, the money, television and sponsorship, FIFA/FAI/UEFA etc. yet rugby has problems too but much less dissent. it is quite clear that the Lions tour is a massive money spinner, especially for the host country but also for the four 'home' unions and the sponsors, but the only person I have seen to highlight this fact is Tipperary's Gerard Meagher in the Guardian last week. 

There is constant criticism from the English and French about the structure of European club rugby. They threw the toys out of the pram and negotiated their own tv deal beyond the strictures of the European organisation which controlled the competition, until they got what they wanted, a bigger share of a smaller pot. 

That is what the elite clubs in European football threatened on an ongoing basis (setting up a superleague) without ever following through with it. The French and English rugby clubs took the brinksmanship quite a bit further than the football clubs ever did, motivated almost entirely by nothing other than filthy lucre, especially where the reduction in size of the competition did not reduce the number of games played by each club who qualifies.

There was a fair whack of dissent all across the Celtic League nations about that behaviour, and the fact that they were forced to cave as a result of the bully boy behaviour of the big clubs. It is certainly not unique to football, and in certain respects they went further than any football organisation has ever gone.

Now, that's entirely separate from the Lions tour, which I think we can agree doesn't seem to attract the same level of negative voice, but I think that can arguably be put down to the fact rugby does not have the same mass appeal as football. I'd guess the reason that there is little negative said about the Lions is that a number of the more casual rugby fans simply don't care. Football coverage is more all-encompassing and saturating, whereas rugby only attracts mainstream attention a few times a year (Six Nations games, knockout Heineken cup games and the World Cup). Put it like this: the back page of most UK newspapers today will be more concerned with the outcome of last nights Champions League quarter finals, containing no UK teams, than the selection of the Lions squad.

I agree with the last part in particular, especially as football means more to people, no matter how they dress it up.
I think the first point, relating to how rugby in Europe is structured, is very different as it is essentially rugby coming to terms with professionalism. The highest paid players in England and France are on massive contracts with these clubs but they are missing huge chunks of the season, the reason they get these contracts and the reason why people want to go and watch them is down to their international performances. As I mentioned earlier, there is talk of 11 month seasons to spread out games and keep everybody happy with little mention of player burnout. 
It is over 20 years since professionalism and the 2 biggest countries and their leagues are still trying to find a balance, made harder by the fact that most casual fans have little more than a passing interest in the club game.