Under another thread in Clubhouse Chat I posted a reply to Richard Lowther setting out how I would engage with all 2,000 Community Clubs to prompt action to cleanse the 'rotten borough' that is the RFU. I have reproduced my post in italics below:

I believe that it is time to uncouple the 10 Premiership Clubs and the rest of the elite game from the 2,000 or so other Community Clubs. All 2,000 Community clubs own the RFU but most of the RFU's resources are directed to the elite game and the 10 Premiership clubs.

The interests of the 10 Premiership shareholders and the elite game are vastly different and the RFU is no longer looking after the majority but only the tiny minority.

Dissolve the RFU by selling all its assets and distributing the proceeds proportionately. The numbers and rationale make perfect sense

In any corporate situation where the interests of the shareholders were so diverse......a sale of the assets or the body corporate would be an obvious solution. It is radical but having considered most of the other scenarios I have concluded that any other course of action would just be tinkering and would not address the fundamental issue.

My concern if this radical course of action isn't undertaken is that the 2,000 or so Community Clubs will only see a few crumbs from King Billy's table as most of the resources are syphoned off to the Premiership and CVC. This way each Community Club will get its fair share of the RFU's net assets which will be an equitable outcome.

This would go to a vote of the clubs at an AGM or a Special General Meeting....two thirds would need to approve so checks and balances in place 

No one can fault your clear passion and enthusiasm in opposing the way in which the RFU are running the game, but I'm afraid the suggestion you put forward here is absurd. Coups rarely end well, and there are far too many nuances between clubs in the Community Game (which are those at Level 6/7 and below in reality where no players are paid/enticed/sponsored etc) to simply divvy up £500k each.

A fairly local example of this for me would be between Reading RFC, who run 3 men's teams (Levels 6 - 9), vets, ladies, minis to colts (boys and girls) mixed ability (special needs) and walking rugby teams who, under your plan, would receive the same amount as Berkshire Shire Hall, who play 20 yards away on a neighbouring pitch, but who are a seperate club and run a single men's team at Level 9. 

As you can see, the rugby landscape is so varied and I'm sure this example would be replicated all over the country. How do you actually determine who gets what and under what criteria? A logistical, and even ethical nightmare.

I'm afraid that this is just one flaw of your vision that jumped out at me right away, before I even give thought to the remainder of the proposals. 

I see that you are a Caldy supporter, and so watch Championship rugby. As a passing thought, how do you imagine some of your opponents, the likes of Ealing or Doncaster, as aspiring Premiership-quality outfits, would take to your proposals. Given that they employ full time professional players and staff in the same way that the demonised Premiership clubs do. Again, where do you draw the line.

The other issue is that the armed forces regiments and Oxford/Cambridge are also members.

It would cause chaos in the players market as the community game is levelled with equally funded player salaries and then has clubs going under once they've spent their pot of gold.

Bonus is freedom from RFU and CVC. Perhaps also implementation of transfer fees up into good ship CVC

Having said all this, it's a great idea.

You don't sell your major money making assets without a plan to replace them cheaper but still maintain the same if not higher income. *

If you were proposing selling to rebuild bigger and better ** elsewhere, outside of London, then I could understand your plan but as it stands it is pure madness. 

You would leave the future game having to hire, at great expense, future venues and with none of the ancillary revenue; you would leave the game in the hands of TV men hidden behind a pay wall, withering away from the general public that you need to attract for the future

The last thing I would do is give clubs £500,000. I suspect it would be spent tomorrow with nothing to show for it long term. Every player would scramble for a pay day, every charlatan would be looking for a pay out. 

We've seen this when clubs sell grounds and use the revenue to try and buy success and then struggle to find a new home better than what they've given up. We would see members cash out with no thought for future generations. 

It would kill the game that you are trying to protect. 

* The FA briefly considered selling Wembley and then came to their senses. 

** Football even with billions of TV revenue realises the importance of owning a ground and match day income, that's why the rebuild to include corporate hospitality, ie at the new Tottenham Ground

What is happening at the moment is that 10 Premiership Clubs are getting the majority of RFU resources and will almost certainly continue to do so at the expense of the Community Clubs......who are likely to get nothing or virtually nothing from the RFU ......ever!

Each club (Community or Premiership) have a single share in the RFU......there will be perceived winners and losers amongst the Community Clubs as they will all get the same payout....but it is likely to measure in the £ hundreds of thousands for each club.

The Rules of the RFU and its ownership will proscribe how the proceeds will be divided.....and it will be almost certainly proportionate to shareholding.......just as it should be, not just 10 shareholders scooping up the majority of the resources.

I have no regard for the Premiership clubs, they are owned by very,very rich individuals and have received most of the RFU's money for the last 20 years.......if it is such a great business and such a great investment CVC can bankroll them and let the Community Game get on with what the RFU should have been all about.

Just to provide a little context I am a Chartered Accountant and a Corporate Financier.....I have been advising on and managing such transactions for the last 30 years... generally in the £10s of millions not the £100s of millions (except for one international deal which was of such a size as this transaction could be ).

Big deals such as this are made to work because :

i) It makes real sense for such a transaction as each group of shareholders are freed up to pursue their differing strategic objectives

ii) There is enough in it to galvanise and motivate a very substantial number of small shareholders

iii) the fees  for the lawyers, corporate financiers and accountants are very big and the best firms want to get involved.

Trust me Berksrugby...this could happen!

There was a big number for them in the latest rfu financials.

As the other poster pointed out quite rightly, several 100's of clubs would take the handout and run, with their clubs going under a short time later when the freebie ran out, mismanaged by clubmen who, although well intentioned, on the whole would squander such an amount of capital chasing short term glory. In no small part, unlike yourself as an accountant and numbers man, because they lack a grasp of financial common sense and business acumen.

I'm talking about the sorts of chairman, treasurers, presidents that harbour aspirations of elevating their club 'up the ladder' to fulfil their dreams and, in some cases, massage their egos in the community - I've seen it before, and it can have long lasting negative effects on players, coaches, and the whole fabric of a rugby club.

Like was also mentioned by someone, your idea would erode the actual community game (which in the truest sense is actually some way below the Championship), and in 5 to 10 years time you would have yet more land (formerly pitches 1 - 3 at 'Old Farts RFC') sold off to property developers to build more houses/flats that no one asked for.

This is not a realistic and progressive vision for rugby union in England that I can entertain, if only for the sake of the fact that I would like my grandchildren to actually still have a local club in existence to play at in the next few years.

Berksrugby seems to encapsulate the thinking at HQ. Let the thousands of volunteers at the lower levels of the game work tirelessly to promote, manage and develop the game throughout the country but be sure to keep them in their box because a little funding will mean the egotistical, inept and over ambitious clubman from the low reaches of the game will destroy rugby as we know it. P.S. please keep on buying tickets to Twickenham though

Have you taken leave of your senses rugbychris? Then again, who isn't partial to a free handout now and then.

Berksrugby,

Your arguments do not stand up to scrutiny when you compare it to the status quo:

1. The Community game is currently dying on its feet as many 'sides' fold for lack of numbers. How many clubs now run 4 senior sides as used to be the case 20 or so years ago. I  don't know of many in the North West and I expect it to be the same across the country

2. Currently an unelected RFU board led by an unelected King Billy direct virtually all of the RFU's resources (which are effectively owned by the 2,000 rugby clubs throughout England) to a very tiny majority (about 0.05%)

3. You rubbish the character of progressive club Chairmen, Treasurers  and Presidents painting them as charlatans who will waste the resources provided to their clubs by the dissolution of the RFU. How patronising. 

The Community game is withering on the vine and is being starved of investment by King Billy and his courtiers. Far better to distribute the resources fairly and proportionately whilst there are still resources available and let the Community game reset itself under new leadership solely focussed on the Community game

4. I believe in the right of the clubs to democratically decide how to utilise the RFU's resources rather than let King Billy and his unelected board direct all of the RFU's resources towards the elite game and just 10 clubs

For those who say how outrageous to suggest selling off the family silver, you are mistaken. The family silver is producing no return for the circa 2,000 Community clubs. The returns are going to the elite game and the Premiership and to pay King Billy's salary.

Let CVC buy Twickenham and the rest of the RFU's assets (If they are the highest bidder) and return the proceeds to the 99.9% of shareholders being the Community clubs. Twickenham and its returns can then provide for the Elite game and the Premiership and the Community Game can provide for itself.

Is this a more outrageous idea then letting King Billy and his unelected courtiers reign over the dissolution of English Club rugby by stealth?

The problem is that without the TV contract for internationals, there is no income.

IF you split the sport, the professional game will take all of that.

And the game does need some administration.

As do all the things that the RFU is not currently doing, like marketing and increasing the number of RDOs, etc.

So we need to spend at least £50m a year on club rugby.

And even if all the clubs gave up their share to a new community rugby union - the capital could not generate that sort of money.

Camquin,

Please see my replies to your points in red below

Kind Regards

Big Eddie

Perhaps instead of criticising and insulting others you could offer your solution to the problem? 

Berksrugby,

My answer to your derisory snort is in red below.

Why is it madness? I can give you plenty of examples where large corporate entities have undertaken a transaction/demerger/Management buyout etc to resolve a fundamental shareholder issue.

This is one of these cases.

The Community Game gets very little from the RFU. The whole structure of the RFU is devoted to satisfying the needs of the Professional and the Elite Game and of course keeping King Billy and his acolytes in hugely well remunerated employment.

In any reasonable corporate entity there would be way more accountability and democracy.

The Rules of the RFU are shockingly undemocratic and enable an unelected Executive Management and board to act without oversight to the huge detriment of the Community Game.

Berksrugby, if you can show me how and where there is any effective oversight of King Billy and his courtiers I will be happy to engage with you on this point. However I do not believe you will be able to as I have read the Rules of the RFU and it is clear to me that the RFU Council has absolutely no teeth whatsoever!

King Billy can reign with impunity.......

CVC did not get into Rugby to be a bit player, effective control is what they want and with King Billy at the helm of the RFU, and a supine RFU board and RFU Council, they will get what they want without even putting their hand in their pocket to buy out rights of the Community Clubs .

While CVC and King Billy plot their course the Community Clubs watch with disinterest.

The RFU with its undemocratic Rules and King Billy at the helm is almost the perfect vehicle to control. They can ignore the membership because they never find common cause and even if the Championship Clubs kick up a stink what can they actually do about it?

1) Toughen up. In the 50+ years I have been following rugby, I have come to expect and enjoy the company of those who can handle a difference of opinion without throwing their toys out the pram or crying into their pillow if someone disagrees with them. Leave the Snowflakes to follow other sports with different shaped balls.

2) When I see or hear someone (online or in the flesh) attempting to stir up an idea, ideology, revolution so far detached from reality and (in this case) what the ordinary player/fan enjoys and is content with on their Saturday afternoon, I have always stood up and challenged said propaganda. Who do you think you are talking on behalf of, aside from 6 or 7 semi pro Championship clubs?

3) Please stop referring to the Championship as 'Community rugby'. It is simply not the case. Whilst some of the clubs trying to keep their head afloat in the Championship may once have been true community clubs, those days are gone. Community rugby starts at National 1 and below, as evidenced by the tackle height law changes not affecting the top 2 tiers, which are exempt.

Any league that houses fully pro sides like ET, Donny etc, can't be considered to be playing Community rugby.

4) I have had sight of the '3 polls' you created in a thinly veiled attempt to service your own agenda as a supporter of a club set to miss out when Premiership 2 is borne and semi pro clubs are removed. Quite frankly, they make laughable reading. The number of responses (or distinct lack of) should be all the evidence that you need to finally realise that, not only are you fighting a losing battle, but in all truth, no battle at all. It is viewed as a non-issue by the considerable masses that play and support rugby in this country. Several posters have pointed this out to you in different ways, yet you don't seem to be getting the message. To paraphrase, I think it was Einstein that coined the phrase about madness being the preserve of those who do the same thing again and again, expecting a different result. You would do well to take heed of this.

5) I am not a numbers man, of that I freely admit. You can examine the RFU administrative documents all you like with your background in finances, and then highlight the fine grain detail that fits your agenda to try and justify your discontent and coup d'etat against the RFU; but when all is said and done, it won't make a blind bit of difference. In 6 -12 months time, tell me I'm wrong.

There is nothing more I can add, other than to wish you well, in the hope that you can move on from this slightly unhealthy preoccupation of fighting a battle that isn't there to be fought, and to be at peace with yourself.

WEvans, 

Please refer to points 1), 2) and 4) in my longer post above for an answer to your question. 

No insult intended, but clearly there are some thin-skinned rugby folk out there on this forum.

Dear Berksrugby,

Thank you for the enhanced moniker, as a Liverpool supporter it works rather well and I appreciate your response. I have set out my responses in red under the points you have raised.

That the game of Rugby Union in this country (and others, incidentally) is at a crossroads is not in any doubt. What is not clear to anybody (it would seem) is the best way forward.

Well said Greg. Having read through the reams of back and forth above, it might be time for everyone to move on. 

For what it's worth - probably not much! - I actually find myself agreeing with Berksrugby. Selling Twickenham? Forcibly removing the RFU? Really? That all has a whiff of rabble rousing about it, maybe a march on Downing St or the DCMS next?

The fans and volunteers I see every week are happy with their rugby, why start meddling. After all, and as the late, great, Doris Day said 'Que sera sera'.

Thank you Runitback. This section of Rolling Maul is here to debate issues that are not about the playing of the game.

I believe that the lack of governance of the RFU and the current direction of travel by an unelected and unaccountable Executive Management and board is a matter of upmost concern. I have highlighted a radical but logical alternative which hopefully will make rugby supporters in the Community Game think about is happening to their sport 

However it's a debate.

I am a member of a community club. I go to Saints games every other month and Bedford every other year. Haven't been to an international since 2015.

I have studied your reply and see no answer to my question. Just more insults.

Paul10,

There would be a helluva lot of detail to delve through and understand with the debenture holders being just one part and probably one of the easiest parts. Debenture holders are providers of debt to the RFU and a sale of the RFU would almost certainly preserve their position.

However, as you say this is a debate. My intention in pushing out such a radical idea was to stimulate debate and to draw to the attention of English Club rugby as a whole that they are being disenfranchised by an unelected Executive Management and board of the RFU

Based upon the RFU's reported 2023 profit before rugby investment of £103m and adding back depreciation of £19m arrives at an EBITDA (Earnings before Interest, Tax, Depreciation and Amortisation) number of £122m, I expect a business generating these type of returns to be worth a multiple of between 8 to 10 times and possibly a much higher multiple. Giving a conservative value range of some £976 million to £1.22billion for the RFU and it could be a far higher value particularly if the RFU was better managed.

99.9% of this huge value belongs to the Community Clubs.....at present they are getting very,very little of such value and my fear is that with the current direction of travel by the Executive Management they will in future get absolutely none of this value which may continue to be stealthily appropriated by the Professional Game and its private equity partners CVC.

Do I think this will really happen ?.......I certainly do because the game is so divided and the Executive Management of the RFU is so all powerful and unaccountable as to make this invisible takeover for numpence almost the perfect scenario for a private equity player like CVC

In the interests of not sending other posters to sleep WEvans, I'll keep this very brief.

In order to find and offer solutions to a problem, there must first be an identifiable problem, which in the case of the week to week running of the actual community game, there is not.

That is the way of the world we live in and that is the way of those of sound mind. By virtue of this, that is what is covered in points 1), 2) and 4).

Really?? The game of rugby is in deep trouble on all fronts.

Original post edited - just for absolute clarity, and for the benefit of those finding this all a bit too much to grasp. Apologies Big Eddie, my computer illiteracy prevents me from knowing how to type in your preferred Comrade Red font. 

N.B. I really do think it would be good to move on from this 'back and forth' that someone else described it as. I'll therefore refrain from any further posts on this topic.

As in define the problem to plan a solution

Maybe in Berks we have different issues to others, Bracknell run 4 mens teams in the leagues, Reading 3 + a vets, Rams did have 4 but think they have dropped one through lack of space (they have stopped all further mini and jnr registration. 

We also as a county have no rfu agp at all, we either have to rent the (aging) one at Maidenhead rfc or find a school with one. 

We are a small CB with less travel than a lot and a good mix of teams from as has been said the likes of Shire Hall (the ex Berks county Council social club team that has outlasted the council) via Reading, Bracknell, Maids & Newbury to Rams with other community clubs like Reading Abbey, Windsor and Hungerford as well. 

We also have 2 women's champ teams (Abbey & Newbury) plus Henley a stones throw away with Quins and Trail finders women a short journey away. 

Our issues are more to do with teenagers (both sexes) being siphoned off to colleges/academies with promise of riches, leaving clubs with a smaller conveyor into snr teams

This would never pass a root cause analysis. You are working on a premises that because X has a problem, Y and Z must also have the same problem and therefore if we solve Xs problem we have also solved Y and Z problem.

The fact is there are many problems and different parts of the game have different issues. You are taking the proverbial sledgehammer to crack a nut when sometimes to need to apply a scalpel. 

1.Championship clubs have an issue around the structure of the competition going forward. Almost zero Impact on rest of members clubs, then only those clubs looking at promotion into second tier. 

2.National 1 clubs have an issue about splitting the league. General impact, a reorganisation of the league structure, happens almost every other season and the game goes one. Some would say it's an occupational hazard. 

4.RFU governance/distribution of RFU money to Premiership clubs.  This is a potentially large issue but you are failing miserably to sell the problem to the likes of Old Farts RFC who don't see any effect to them ad they never got any money anyway and most decisions at their level is taken by the County and not the upper echelon of the game. It is these clubs that you need to influence and identify with them and their concerns and I'll tell you now it is not the first two points but you seem to want to lump them together. That's an immediate switch off. 

. 

I accept that there are different problems in different areas and in the case of Berkshire from what Berksrugby and Dad have put forward that County seems to be bucking the trend as far as participation is concerned.

However for me there is one huge problem that affects every club below the Premiership and that is the lack of accountability and democracy within the RFU which is led by an unelected Executive Management which in my view is leading the sport into the hands of Private Equity.

If the RFU acted in the way of a Limited Company (which in its latest accounts it professes that it does) then any significant decision would require the consent of 50% of the shareholders and any really important decision the consent of 75% of the shareholders.

Seismic changes in the way that the game of rugby is structured in England can be passed by the say so of the unelected board. This is what I fervently object to.

If such seismic changes needed a 75% or even a 66% majority of all the clubs in England I would have no complaints because that would be democratic.

I have set out what I believe is the value of the RFU being £1bn + and this is owned by all the circa 2,000 clubs in the UK. At present the very significant majority of this value is used to support the Professional Game and if unchecked I believe all of this value will be ceded for no compensation to the Professional Game and its private equity partner CVC.

If a 75% or 66% majority of the circa 2,000 clubs are content for this to happen who am I to rail against it. In these circumstances such an outcome would be democratic.

That means a simple clearly explained problem/how it affects your club/solution that chimes with lv10 old farts rfc and ambitious Nat1 teams

I don't disagree Dad. However, as others have said there are a multitude of problems and issues that beset the circa 2,000 clubs in differing ways. Until there is a unity of purpose then King Billy is safe in his castle where he reigns supreme because there is absolutely no effective voice that can challenge him.

The one thing that should bind all clubs is that they all own the RFU which I believe is conservatively worth £1bn plus. If the clubs believe that their £500k share of this value is going to be or could be appropriated by the Professional Game and its private equity partner CVC wouldn't that galvanise their thinking?

I don't fundamentally disagree John. 

However, if there is to be a basis for changing the rules and the structures which isn't based on merit put the arguments to the member clubs and pass a threshold which should be at least 50% but more reasonably 66% or 75%

Otherwise let merit decide who goes into Premiership II and it shouldn't include any of the clubs who went so spectacularly bust.

If there is promotion and relegation the playing field will decide on the continuing composition of Premiership II and it should decide on the composition of the Premiership as well

You surely cannot be serious with your highlighted comment but even if you are then you could still stop insulting people who think otherwise.

Also the rights to play games £££

Premiership fan here.

I think this is a great idea and should definitely be on the agenda.  The RFU tries to do everything and therefore fails at everything.

A new settlement where the true amateur participation games looks after itself, as does the nationwide semi pro game & finally the professional game.  If clubs want to pay players they should be regulated differently to true amateurs and if they want to pay them enough to be full time employers they should be stiffer tests again.

Personally I'd perhaps just sell off a stake in Twickenham & retain the amateur clubs owning 60% of it as ongoing income, but yeah I think seperating out functions would be a genuinely good idea.

The game below the Championship is of little or no interest to the RFU which is why it is working so well. There is little reason for the RFU to touch the National leagues as they no longer contribute much to this part of the game.

A properly run top two leagues with decent funding and support will keep the RFU more than busy along with the National team.

This is an old program from rugby special at 30 years old, I tried to get it onto a video editor to give you just the relevant bit, but failed, bit of a luddite here.

Nigel Starmer Smith was talking about the future of the game in the professional era,  right near the end if you want  skip rough the program, someone should send a copy to the RFU.

If you click the "share" button with the video at the point you want it start, then click "start at XX:XX" in the pop up window (it will be below the box with the link in) the link generated will take you to the bit you want.

Thank you, Tigerburnie, for this link. 

I suggest that you all put aside 1 hour and watch the whole programme. For those of us old enough to remember the game over that period it is heartwarming. 

Listen to Cliff Morgan's comments on the style of play he most admired (Cliff, himself, was a wonderful fly half - a predecessor to Phil Bennett, Barry John et al).

The quality of the game then was different but not worse than what we watch/play today. Today, at the top level, the quality of the pitches is better, the players are fitter, the game is faster. Yesteryear the game enjoyed more skilful creativity and less crash bang wallop. Scrummaging took far less time and required the ball to be put in straight meaning that hookers had a proper job to do. 

I'm getting all misty-eyed now so will close.