RFU to take control of 20 England players with ‘hybrid contracts’

[Scott1]

I am looking from the outside, living in NE Scotland now, I will not be having a season ticket, so I tend to look at it from a different angle, I certainly don't have any axe to grind, but it seems some do. Due to health issues I will not be able to travel to Leicester, probably for the whole season, so I am just an armchair fan this coming season, so all I will see is the quality of the games on the computer. As a life long Tigers fan my sole concern is the club being a viable organisation that is competing at the top. Jones and the RFU have completely killed any interest I had in the National team, I have watched zero matches in this world cup, I have instead been watching National league and Championship Cup rugby and I am thoroughly enjoying this fare, not too sure all of the sponsors would be happy with financing a team that is shorn of it's key players for even more games than have been. Will the tv companies stump up more money to the PRL clubs for less games with less glamorous ties with the top 20 players in the country missing for a considerable chunk of the season?

Sorry to hear that!

[Rugbygramps]

Tigerburnie I’m really sorry to hear about your health issues.
2 small points you are making a number of assumptions about what is going to happen.
Secondly without this money and the interest generated by a successful national team there will no longer be a professional league to televise.
A point I would make is that if a side had 4 centrally contracted players, it is very unlikely that all 4 will miss all the same games

[Old Hob]

I get the idea, but then there's the paywall.
If anyone can help?

Does this work for you?

https://archive.ph/dMd8t

It does, indeed, thank you. Not sure about the proposal, though.

[Old Hob]

I wonder if this the Irish model and most of the internationals will be at one club, in the same way Leinster have most of the Irish players, that's ok if you are the "main" club and you don't mind going to watch an "A" team a lot of the season.

But, and just a thought, if one club is THE feeder club then perhaps that A team will be pretty good, stocked with players keen to breakthrough?

[tigerburnie]

Tigerburnie I’m really sorry to hear about your health issues.
2 small points you are making a number of assumptions about what is going to happen.
Secondly without this money and the interest generated by a successful national team there will no longer be a professional league to televise.
A point I would make is that if a side had 4 centrally contracted players, it is very unlikely that all 4 will miss all the same games

You are assuming the same tv company has all of the rugby, in the 6 nations England's games are with a different company, losing the 6 nations from free to air has lost a lot of casual viewers. Rugby is a minority sport in England and Scotland and it seems in Wales too. Ireland also does not have the monopoly with Gaelic games having a huge following. This business of rugby has to have a product to sell, this idea is working from the top down, it's the wrong way round. Now I see the same news paper that the RFU are using for their "leaks" has also talked about a program for bringing on the young forwards(does that mean we won't bother training the backs to pass and run and kick?).
There was talk of a total package from the roots up, yet they leak the ideas of how to treat the fruit, the pick of the crop whilst the roots are starving(you can tell I do a fair bit of gardening).

[Old Hob]

"Sigh"
Wasn't life simpler before the money got involved.

[tigerburnie]

I wonder if this the Irish model and most of the internationals will be at one club, in the same way Leinster have most of the Irish players, that's ok if you are the "main" club and you don't mind going to watch an "A" team a lot of the season.

But, and just a thought, if one club is THE feeder club then perhaps that A team will be pretty good, stocked with players keen to breakthrough?

Unlikely though, even if we end up with 4 teams like Ireland, I doubt the London franchise would have the bulk of the players like Dublin has, their provinces have always had a history, they turn out to watch their "B" team in the inter pros. Even if the current crop of teams survive as they are, I reckon with a salary cap and spokesman Care says we need all our top players in England, the top 20 will be spread a bit more, I just hope they don't do what they have done in the past like the Sam Burgess scenario, where players are picked and placed in the wring position with the wrong club. I trust the RFU as far as I can throw the stadium to be any good at man management.

[Rugbygramps]

Tigerburnie I’m really sorry to hear about your health issues.
2 small points you are making a number of assumptions about what is going to happen.
Secondly without this money and the interest generated by a successful national team there will no longer be a professional league to televise.
A point I would make is that if a side had 4 centrally contracted players, it is very unlikely that all 4 will miss all the same games

You are assuming the same tv company has all of the rugby, in the 6 nations England's games are with a different company, losing the 6 nations from free to air has lost a lot of casual viewers. Rugby is a minority sport in England and Scotland and it seems in Wales too. Ireland also does not have the monopoly with Gaelic games having a huge following. This business of rugby has to have a product to sell, this idea is working from the top down, it's the wrong way round. Now I see the same news paper that the RFU are using for their "leaks" has also talked about a program for bringing on the young forwards(does that mean we won't bother training the backs to pass and run and kick?).
There was talk of a total package from the roots up, yet they leak the ideas of how to treat the fruit, the pick of the crop whilst the roots are starving(you can tell I do a fair bit of gardening).

As with my post lots of assumptions, and interest in other than the Tigers??
Until we get confirmation of exactly what is being paid to who and how it affects the clubs, the debate will go round and round.
The one thing I think it’s safe to say is the without a large of injection of cash at the top end the game will struggle to survive professionally and there will cease to be role models and hero’s for youngsters and aspiring players to follow. I personally have no issue with this approach

[trendylfj]

My biggest concern about this suggestion, which I do expect to be enacted, is that if the clubs are stripped of their best players for longer periods than they are at present, regardless of the amount of compensation, will they get as many bums on seats as they do at present? We will see how many actually come to the 1st home prem game against Sale. The Prem Cup attendances have been very low regardless of the amount of tickets sold announcements. I find it hard to believe that any game has had more than 5,000 there even when we turned out what was probably our strongest side against Newcastle.

[Ian Cant]

Having also attended the Premiership Cup games I would personally say there were about 10,000 attending, possibly more v Newcastle!
I agree that if the said contracted players miss even more games it will be extremely hard for the clubs to get fans to attend.
Furthermore, there are now 6 fewer games in the Premiership so the international players should be able to play in a majority of the league games and European games.
All in all, rugby in England ( and Wales) is in a mess and I really do worry about how long The Premiership will continue to be fully professional!

[Tigersunited]

I think we are jumping to conclusions here. This is an RFU friendly article with no detail at all - they are playing this up as a great idea. Can it really benefit both club and country. There are clear benefits for country, but, if you are a club and you only get a player for games that SB dictates, will you bother to renew that contract, or, get a South African you know will be under your control. Look forward to the detail.

[SthrnTiger]

Just one point to add to the conversation from an RFU and player perspective. If the aim here is to keep Englands best players in England. Hybrid contracts will definitely be a cheaper way to do it as it gives those players more certainty and therefore willing to accept overall less pay.

The players that lose out are the England players not in this elite group - and compared with the current situation that could be a significant loss of earnings for them.

[GB72]

Just one point to add to the conversation from an RFU and player perspective. If the aim here is to keep Englands best players in England. Hybrid contracts will definitely be a cheaper way to do it as it gives those players more certainty and therefore willing to accept overall less pay.

The players that lose out are the England players not in this elite group - and compared with the current situation that could be a significant loss of earnings for them.

I think that depends on the detail a bit as well. At the moment, players are getting a full club wage and a sizeable match fee from England. Under a hybrid contract, they are contracted to play for both and so it is assumed that the club wages will be reduced based on availability and it remains to be seen whether the England wage under the contract replaces some or all of the match fee element. I cannot see the players agreeing to be worse off but that could potentially be what is on the table. Are England going to be paying wages to top up the club wages lost and paying a match fee. Are we still paying full wages but for more compensation from England, are other players called up still going to get the match fee only, it is all in the detail.

[johnthegriff]

The devil will be in the detail. At the.moment this is just paper talk but probably based on more than just rumour. It should be specified that not more than one player in any one position is contracted from the same club. Twenty players do not represent a match day squad so how many more players will be required to enable training and what will be paid for them.
It is proposed that the twenty players be selected as the core of the team three years before the next World Cup, does that mean that a developing player in the meantime has no chance of breaking into the squad and therefore decided to move abroad or does it mean that the members of the squad are reviewed each season. If that be the case and a player with a combined club and international salary of say £500K loses his elite status will be expect the club to pay the difference or will be have to move abroad to maintain his standard of living.
Everything seems to be based around mirroring the Irish system and Leinster yet.I do not recall the Irish winning the World Cup and for the past two years European success has gone the way of France. Possibly we are trying to emulate the wrong system.

[Not a jock]

"Sigh"
Wasn't life simpler before the money got involved.

But wasn't money involved to some extent before the game went professional? (the words, 'boots', 'travel expenses' etc come to mind). Looking back to those days of very small crowds (apart from Boxing Day vs Baabaas is pointless unless you expect or hope the whole professional game, worldwide, to implode).

I think pies is a good analogy. We seem to be stuck with the size of the pie so it's all about how to slice it. For example, the international players get a larger slice, someone else gets a smaller slice (eg Championship and/or amateur clubs).

But how to grow the pie? Entice more "casual" fans to become keener on club games? That needs the carrot of more free to air tasters. It also needs a more attractive product that not based on national tribalism. I was out last Thursday evening so recorded Japan vs Samoa to watch later. I started to view it at 21:00 so a full hour after kick-off. I fast forwarded through the build up (45 mins) and all the wasted time such a preparing to kick (has the shot timer just made the kickers more efficient at wasting time?!), re-setting scrums, having a cuddle before a lineout, more than two TMO reviews etc etc. I'd caught up with real time by 72mins on the match clock. That was approximately 21:35 so roughly half or less of the elapsed time was "interesting". This is consistent with the statistics you occasionally see on "ball in play time."

So how to speed the game up and put more emphasis on aerobic fitness than brute strength (an added befit might be fewer serious injuries too). We've already tried injuries assessed by a medic before a sub can be made. Also, who'd want to be an unused sub every week? Perhaps if you're subbed, you can't play in the following game? More players need to be appropriately fit to play 80 minutes. Much less time spent preparing for kicks, scrums and lineouts. Revisit what "ball out" is at rucks and scrums.