THE HERALD REPORTS

No time for the SRU old guard to make another push for power
KEVIN FERRIE, Chief Rugby Writer June 26 2008
As the Scottish Rugby Union continues its recovery from crippling debt caused by incompetent, committee-run management, it will remain under safe leadership following Allan Munro's agreement to stay on as chairman.

The reappointment of the former Hearts footballer by the SRU board was, as the expression goes, a no-brainer, as long as he felt ready and willing to continue. That was by no means a given, not least since his first year as chairman looked as if it might be his last when he suffered a debilitating stroke.

His recovery not only to health but to a level of fitness that has allowed him to continue to offer firm leadership has been remarkable.


Yet no leader is infallible and it seems there have been what might be described as tactical blunders at best going into tomorrow night's annual general meeting.

Attracting most attention has been the proposal that the Scottish Cup be shut down. It appears to be down to a lack of energy or nous among administrators who should have been capable of working out what needed to be done to accommodate the competition in an admittedly congested calendar.

Perhaps, as has been claimed, this was merely a bid to stimulate clubs into realising that some tough decisions on scheduling must be made. If so, it was horribly clumsy.

Either way, it is by no means as important as another proposal jointly put forward by Munro and George Jack, the out-going SRU president, on behalf of the SRU council to increase the powers of said council.

One independent review after another has made it clear that there should be absolutely no involvement of the council - it replaced the discredited general committee three years ago - in the day-to-day running of the SRU. Consequently, it seems astonishing that two men who should understand implicitly why that is the case are championing this proposal that would result in the council taking over the running of SRU competitions.

An option has been put forward as an amendment which would prevent a change in a council recommendation which might be the thin end of the wedge. It has come about not least because it has been widely noted that many of those involved in the general committee have worked their way back on to the council in the interim.

The organisation has been so much more effectively and efficiently run with the board in control that the last thing it needs is any sort of device through which the old guard can seek to make another bid for power.

Which takes us neatly to the matter of the presidency and Jack's bid to be both out-going president - as he is described on the meeting's agenda - and incoming president at the same time.

There was nothing inappropriate about Munro gauging council members' opinions on whether they would have any problem with Jack standing for a second term, but many are wondering why it is necessary when another candidate is standing.

It was clear when Andy Irvine became the first president to undertake a second term in 2006/07 - he had initially been appointed in the wake of the overhaul of the SRU's governance structures forced by Jack and his general committee colleagues' damaging coup in 2005 - that the circumstances were exceptional. A period of stability was vital following the biggest crisis in the sport's history, caused by its own administrators.

That is hardly the case now.

Jack, a decent man who seemed to be among the misguided rather than the malevolent when that coup took place, has largely recovered his personal reputation after a year as president in which he has done no harm. There is no longer any crisis, though, and he has hardly been a high-profile figure.

Governance reviews have also repeatedly concluded that the president should simply be a figurehead. It is a symbolic role and, in those terms, the sport should perhaps be examining whether the board itself gives the best possible impression of representing the sport across Scotland.

Munro is rightly adamant that the only consideration when appointing board members should be ability. As things stand - albeit non-executive directors Brian Kennedy and Graeme Millar are standing down - nine of the 10 board members, including the president, are either representative of Edinburgh clubs, resident in, or from the capital.

Perhaps it is the case that all Scottish rugby's administrative talent is located in that area and maybe the rest of the country should just be grateful for such leadership.

There may be other views, though. Is it too mischievous to question whether that is why some at Murrayfield are so keen that the agm continues to be held there on a Friday at 5.30pm, making it as difficult as possible for the more dynamic representatives of clubs outside the immediate Edinburgh area to attend?

This article was posted on 26-Jun-2008, 07:28 by Hugh Barrow.