THE HERALD REPORTS

Scottish Rugby Union must deal with new level of democracy
KEVIN FERRIE, Chief Rugby Writer June 28 2007
On the basis of the history of the 21st century so far, the combination of presidential elections and Scottish Rugby Union organisation seems like a recipe for disaster.

Throw in the complicating factor of a couple of hundred clubs having to mandate delegates for an unprecedented procedure at tomorrow night's SRU annual general meeting and it only gets more unsettling. History will be made at Murrayfield when three candidates stand for the presidency.

It is only two years since the first presidential ballot when Andy Irvine, as the man seeking to help the sport recover from calamitous in-fighting, easily saw off George Blackie, a member of the general committee that was in the process of being disbanded.

advertisement
In doing so he ended the Buggins' Turn process that had become so bad that when one novice committee member took his post in 1993, he was advised by a veteran colleague that he could look forward to becoming president in 2006.

In democratic terms, and in a week that has brought a ceremonial handover in Downing Street, that change was very healthy. Such was the job Irvine did that when he was persuaded to stand again last year for an unprecedented second successive terms of office, his election was automatic. Now it becomes a bit trickier with three men - it was to have been four until John Thorburn stood down - having thrown their hats into the ring.

As confirmed by Graham Ireland, the SRU secretary, the election process itself should be relatively straightforward. Indeed, it mirrors the procedure for SRU council elections. In the first instance, votes will be cast for all three candidates. If any one of these accrues more than 50% of the vote, he is elected. If not, the one with fewest votes drops out and it will be a straight head to head.

As for which candidate will prevail, if the desire is to follow Irvine with another ambassadorial figure, then Peter Brown is the only choice


Yet how many clubs will have understood that they must mandate their delegates for the possibility of a second vote? They should have told their representatives who their first and second-choice candidates are in the event of their preferred man dropping out in the first round. Any club member who doubts whether that is the case should flag it up now.

As for which candidate will prevail, if the desire is to follow Irvine with another ambassadorial figure whose presence immediately identifies him with the Scottish game then there is no contest. Peter Brown is among the relatively few Scots whose name generates instant recognition and affection wherever the game is played.

He also remains heavily involved in global rugby matters. As recently as this week, he sat on the appeals committee that dismissed Danny Grewcock's bid to have his sentence for foul play reduced.

Yet the election of either of the other candidates, George Jack and Jim Stevenson, could be seen as symbolic in terms of this new era of SRU governance.

In Jack's case it is only too easy to suggest that his election would give solace to those who still delude themselves in thinking that the general committee, of which he was a part, actually meant to achieve what happened in 2005.

The good thing that came out of their attempted coup - they ousted the chairman and chief executive - is that the game's governance will never be the same again. Misguided as that would be, were Jack to be elected could be seen as evidence that the healing process is well under way. Many in the sport believe that he was among those who did not realise just how much damage the general committee was exposing the sport to at that time and he has worked hard since, not least in helping to secure two places for Scottish sides in next season's Heineken Cup as a delegate on the European Rugby Cup Ltd board.

Yet Stevenson's election would be even more significant in terms of signalling how things have changed, because he only really emerged within rugby's political world as a result of the campaign that brought the governance overhaul.

He has established himself as an enthusiastic and popular club representative to the SRU council, has campaigned hard for the presidency and won a lot of friends. Perhaps least known on the global stage, the Cambuslang president has a real chance.

What will also come up will be a bid to resurrect the role of vice-president. Those promoting that have put out mixed messages, saying on the one hand that it is about learning how to be president, but on the other that the vice-president would not automatically step up the following year.

As for lessening the presidential workload, how many clubs would be happy to invite the president to a function, have the vice-president turn up and then discover that the president has attended one at a neighbouring club?

Common sense says that's best left alone, but common sense . . .

the SRU . . . presidential elections? Anything might happen tomorrow evening and at least it shouldn't be as boring as in the past.

This article was posted on 28-Jun-2007, 07:12 by Hugh Barrow.