Clubs into Europe-the debate continues
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Edinburgh Evening News reports;

There's no threat to Euro cup - rugby chief

BILL LOTHIAN


EUROPEAN Rugby Cup Limited today refused to back claims by interim SRU chairman/chief executive Fred McLeod that the plug is to be pulled on one its three competitions next season.

McLeod made his remarks after contributing to a near-two hour inquiry by the Scottish Parliament’s enterprise and culture committee into the current state of the crisis-racked Scottish game.

He was later pressed by the Evening News over allegations in committee by predecessor Phil Anderton that some clubs had been deliberately cut out of European action by their governing body.

Anderton said: "We should be able to break down barriers on the ambitions of our clubs. The Union (SRU) decided that clubs, some of them who have been in existence for over 100 years, could not be part of the pro set up."

Asked if this was true McLeod replied: "ERC are only interested in pro-team competitions.

"Glasgow Hawks may have expressed an interest in playing in the cup itself but that is out of the question and I would be very surprised if ERC allow their third-tier Challenge Cup to continue."

Such remarks appeared at odds with the view of Norman Douglas, an SRU committee member and ERC representative sitting a few feet away who had responded "we wouldn’t stop them (clubs)" before being hastily over-ruled by McLeod.

Today an ERC spokesman said: "The board of ERC would review the structure of our three tournaments on a yearly basis and particularly at the end. As of now no decisions have been made regarding changing the structure for next season."

That the door remains open to the European Challenge Cup will be a source of relief to the more aspirational Scottish outfits keen to strike out themselves into international competition, although there was a general feeling that they would continue to be hampered.

Some critics believe the issue goes to the heart of the current row because traditional clubs would be more attractive to investors than the SRU’s centrally run teams which are regarded as little more than power-vehicles. The idea of clubs in Europe is something that the hard-liners at Murrayfield just don’t want," said John White, secretary of Edinburgh Academicals and a persistent advocate of widening horizons to create a new vibrancy in the game.

Martin Krajewski, sponsor of Watsonians, said: "One was hoping for a small window of opportunity. Denying the clubs devalues the entire (Scottish League) set-up."

Central to the SRU submissions were promises of further revenue streams such as increased television rights, World Cup monies and an impending sponsor for the Celtic League, a pledge first made several years ago but currently remaining unfulfilled.

However, in revealing that a deal had been struck whereby the Six Nations countries plus the three Southern Hemisphere super-powers and Argentina had been guaranteed £3 million to participate in the 2007 global tournament it was admitted by the SRU that Scotland could walk away with more than Fiji even if their superior ranked South Seas rivals were to win the competition.

Among the MSPs keen to explore the club angle was Mike Watson who asked where the capacity crowds who often attended Scottish international matches went the following week?

That may have been a reference to halcyon club crowds before the SRU organised district rugby as an alternative to the Premiership and McLeod replied: "There are so many other opportunities available on a Saturday afternoon."

Watson also pressed for answers on governance issues to be told by Phil Anderton that he was concerned the working party on governance - expected to announce its format next week - might not be truly independent.

"I am concerned that we will still be here in four years debating why certain people were removed," said Anderton in a reference to a model he claimed had been set-up by deposed chairman David Mackay and himself but rejected because there was insufficient room for general committee members who felt their positions were under threat.

"It (the proposed single body governance board offering full accountability) was derailed by some members of the general committee who believed they were going to lose power. Fourteen members of the general committee do not fit into four places," said Anderton who resigned in protest at the removal of Mackay when emphasising that clubs must be given more opportunities to dissipate long-running rows.

"The reason you have frustration from some of the clubs is that they can’t be part of the pro-game. Under the new system we were saying to the Melrose’s, Watsonians and Glasgow Hawks you can play a part..."

MSPs said privately they would take time to consider what amounted to a plea for increased funding, director of rugby Ian McGeechan in particular going to eloquent lengths to highlight links between rugby and social responsibilities, rightly indicating how some 70,000 primary school age youngsters had recently been given a first taste - and vital exercise - in non combative format.

This article was posted on 4-Mar-2005, 21:37 by Hugh Barrow.